It's not justified in a cheating scenario, but we might be -sympathetic- to the person who lost their temper, and lack sympathy for those who triggered the outburst.
Violence is justified more often than not. At one time in Texas if a person caught their husband/wife in bed with someone else, they could kill both of them and suffer no consequences. In fact one was considered trashy if they didn't.
As a concept, it's true, but sometimes it's just a matter of what each people see as self defence. And what people see as a treat or aggression. Since these notions vary greatly from person to person, it may not be so black and white as you described.
@mikemx55 of course it is. If I feel I'm in danger, i may choose violence. In choosing it, I feel justified in choosing it. Of course if the law is involved they'll decide whether it's justified in the eyes of the courts.
Human Sacrifice in the following places: Carthage, Mexico, India, Germany. Attempted conquests all over the world. Attempted murders all over the world have been stopped by people being violent. Attempted crimes of all types can often be stopped by people willing to use violence to defend themselves and innocents around them.
Anytime somebody violates the Non-Aggression Principle (NAP).
1
0 Reply
Anonymous
(30-35)
+1 y
violence can never be justified unless you're fighting a war and there are weapons involved. Also if self defense, or someone is trespassing or has a weapon. Kidnapping etc. But other than that- even cheating doesn't justify it. if someone cheats then walk away
0
2 Reply
myTake Owner
+1 y
"violence is only justified if you're fighting a war with weapons involved..."
What? Many a country send young children to war with weapons, to fight because it's easy to indoctrinate them into the act of killing or force them to fight if their families are being threatened... doesn't make it anymore justified b/c they have a weapon if you look at why they actually have a weapon in hand in the first place.
If someone is standing there with a gun pointed to your head, you have a right to self defense. Weapons for self defense are justified. If there are 100 men with guns firing away, a country has the right to fire back with guns instead of standing there while they get shot
Individuals may tout honorable causes such as the liberation of a people in danger from an outside threat, but to be clear, countries who claim altruism as motives for violence are not. No country goes in, risks the lives of it's men in women in a war... for the good of anybody. They go in for the motives of profit and power, which you can usually see in the form of (insert countries) political influence on that country in future and the little trail of Wal-marts left behind when they "leave." Is it then wrong to kill people for money, yeah, but on tv, it looks good if you're pulling toddlers from crumbling buildings for the camera and not showing the innocent parents you gunned down just off to the side.
@ThisDudeHere Well if someone has kidnapped and harmed a person, if I have to hurt the kidnapper, I won't hesitate. Defending others is a noble cause to me and I'm ready to use violence if and only if it's necessary.
For him there is a reason. My point being is that honor is subjective and not defineable. What may be useless violence to you may be honorable to someone else.
@ThisDudeHere There are things that we can all agree justify violence and I already gave an eample. No need to push things to the extremes. You're missing my point there.
@ThisDudeHere I understood your point from the start, you know. It's no use repeating it to me again and again. There are just some situations here violence is just the best solution. Of course there will always be that one guy that says I disagree, but there is no better solution in that situation.
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
42Opinion
It's not justified in a cheating scenario, but we might be -sympathetic- to the person who lost their temper, and lack sympathy for those who triggered the outburst.
If someone harmed my child in any way (adult not child), I think it's justified. Especially paedophillia.
I believe that violence is only justified in cases of self-defense or in defense of others if someone else is being attacked.
Its apart of human nature. Something we will never get rid of unless we like become jelly like blobs with a neck and a working head. xD.
no. it never can. www.girlsaskguys.com/.../a34558-why-we-live-in-a-culture-of-violence-part-3
Only in self defense and protecting someone else
Even when cheating is involved, still not justified
It would only be justified in self defense, If somebody is attacking me I would rather protect myself so I attack him... or her... or whatever it is
I think violence is only justified to either defend yourself from violence, or to defend another from violence
Violence is justified more often than not. At one time in Texas if a person caught their husband/wife in bed with someone else, they could kill both of them and suffer no consequences. In fact one was considered trashy if they didn't.
Aside from self defense or defense of others, Not really
As a concept, it's true, but sometimes it's just a matter of what each people see as self defence. And what people see as a treat or aggression. Since these notions vary greatly from person to person, it may not be so black and white as you described.
@mikemx55 of course it is. If I feel I'm in danger, i may choose violence. In choosing it, I feel justified in choosing it. Of course if the law is involved they'll decide whether it's justified in the eyes of the courts.
Only in self defense. Violence against anyone regardless of gender is wrong though.
Violence is never justified but we can't survive without it
Switzerland?
Violence solves all kinds of problems. Anyone saying otherwise is full of crap.
Do tell, what problems has violence solved?
Human Sacrifice in the following places: Carthage, Mexico, India, Germany.
Attempted conquests all over the world.
Attempted murders all over the world have been stopped by people being violent.
Attempted crimes of all types can often be stopped by people willing to use violence to defend themselves and innocents around them.
Anytime somebody violates the Non-Aggression Principle (NAP).
violence can never be justified unless you're fighting a war and there are weapons involved. Also if self defense, or someone is trespassing or has a weapon. Kidnapping etc. But other than that- even cheating doesn't justify it. if someone cheats then walk away
"violence is only justified if you're fighting a war with weapons involved..."
What? Many a country send young children to war with weapons, to fight because it's easy to indoctrinate them into the act of killing or force them to fight if their families are being threatened... doesn't make it anymore justified b/c they have a weapon if you look at why they actually have a weapon in hand in the first place.
If someone is standing there with a gun pointed to your head, you have a right to self defense. Weapons for self defense are justified. If there are 100 men with guns firing away, a country has the right to fire back with guns instead of standing there while they get shot
Self-defense and defense of honorable causes like liberties are the only reasons I would be violent.
The definition of what's honorable is pretty grey.
Individuals may tout honorable causes such as the liberation of a people in danger from an outside threat, but to be clear, countries who claim altruism as motives for violence are not. No country goes in, risks the lives of it's men in women in a war... for the good of anybody. They go in for the motives of profit and power, which you can usually see in the form of (insert countries) political influence on that country in future and the little trail of Wal-marts left behind when they "leave." Is it then wrong to kill people for money, yeah, but on tv, it looks good if you're pulling toddlers from crumbling buildings for the camera and not showing the innocent parents you gunned down just off to the side.
@ThisDudeHere Well if someone has kidnapped and harmed a person, if I have to hurt the kidnapper, I won't hesitate. Defending others is a noble cause to me and I'm ready to use violence if and only if it's necessary.
Sure but some guy you so much as peeking at his girlfriend is reason enough for him to "defend" his or her honor by beating you up.
@ThisDudeHere No, it's harming nobody. There no reason to use violence there
For him there is a reason. My point being is that honor is subjective and not defineable. What may be useless violence to you may be honorable to someone else.
@ThisDudeHere There are things that we can all agree justify violence and I already gave an eample. No need to push things to the extremes. You're missing my point there.
" we can all agree"
No. There will always be people who disagree heavily.
@ThisDudeHere In France you can be punished for not assisting a person in danger so...
That is irrelevant to my point about how one will see a reason for violence where you don't see one.
@ThisDudeHere I understood your point from the start, you know. It's no use repeating it to me again and again. There are just some situations here violence is just the best solution. Of course there will always be that one guy that says I disagree, but there is no better solution in that situation.
I legalized backhanding girls
So they know you're in charge
Dancing and sniffing coke
Slapping and beating hoes
OUR violence IS ALWAYS justified.
OTHER violence can NEVER be justified
Hmm. Good point!
Yes. For example, if someone breaks into my house, he is leaving in a body bag.
lets put it this way, if it were not for russia, and the u. s. getting involved in europes affairs, we'd probably be under nazi control right now
oh, wait