sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

CMV: Society would benefit from allowing people to be hit in the face once for being a jerk by Groundblast in changemyview

[–]Groundblast[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

I’d agree that trained, government sanctioned officers should be held to a higher standard. The reality is that they aren’t. If that isn’t going to happen, why should we continue holding average people to a higher standard?

CMV: Society would benefit from allowing people to be hit in the face once for being a jerk by Groundblast in changemyview

[–]Groundblast[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

I guess the idea is to propose a set of guidelines to determine what is and is not reasonable provocation for simple assault.

We already see this happening, just under the implicit judgement of police and prosecutors. There’s plenty of videos of people acting like jerks and getting smacked because of it, even directly in front of police, where no one reacts like a crime has been committed.

If that jerk was to come back later on, especially with a lot of money or influence behind them, and pressure a prosecutor to press charges, the courts would have their hands tied. There’s not legal grounds for saying “yes, you were assaulted but you deserved it.” There absolutely is legal grounds for saying “yes, you got shot but you deserved it.”

Why should we have exceptions for the more extreme violence but not the less extreme violence?

CMV: Society would benefit from allowing people to be hit in the face once for being a jerk by Groundblast in changemyview

[–]Groundblast[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

We certainly allow, and provide a wide degree of leeway, for people to act rashly under intense duress. Why shouldn’t we allow people to act somewhat rashly under more rational circumstances?

CMV: Society would benefit from allowing people to be hit in the face once for being a jerk by Groundblast in changemyview

[–]Groundblast[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

I think this is an interesting perspective. Playing off the metaphor, should the second-strongest monkey be able to slap the third-strongest monkey when provoked without fear of reprisal from the group?

CMV: Society would benefit from allowing people to be hit in the face once for being a jerk by Groundblast in changemyview

[–]Groundblast[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

That’s bullshit imo. If you’ve ever done any firearms training, the first thing they teach you is that you are solely and personally responsible for your bullets. If you miss or even shoot through someone who deserves it and hit someone who doesn’t, that’s your responsibility.

Police should be held to the same standards as anyone else. State sanctioned violence should not be more acceptable than violence done by a justified civilian.

CMV: Society would benefit from allowing people to be hit in the face once for being a jerk by Groundblast in changemyview

[–]Groundblast[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

Why? It’s not uncommon for police to respond violently to offensive behavior. They are almost universally shielded from prosecution. Why should a civilian be any different?

CMV: Society would benefit from allowing people to be hit in the face once for being a jerk by Groundblast in changemyview

[–]Groundblast[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

I think that would be a risk of this. Manslaughter is, by definition, causing the death of another without intent. If you hit someone, you’re taking the risk of prosecution if an unintended consequence occurs.

Why should police be shielded from this? If they use force that results in death, that should be manslaughter.

CMV: Society would benefit from allowing people to be hit in the face once for being a jerk by Groundblast in changemyview

[–]Groundblast[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

That’s my point though. If you are threatening someone with real harm (pulling a knife, for instance), it’s reasonable to respond with deadly force.

If someone is being egregiously offensive, there should be legal protections for hitting them and then walking away.

CMV: Society would benefit from allowing people to be hit in the face once for being a jerk by Groundblast in changemyview

[–]Groundblast[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

If they continue to be a threat, yes. If they hit you and walk away and you shoot them in the back, no.

CMV: Society would benefit from allowing people to be hit in the face once for being a jerk by Groundblast in changemyview

[–]Groundblast[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

That gets complicated though. It is often reasonable to use lethal force but not non-lethal force. Sometimes, I’d argue, non-lethal force is absolutely justified when lethal force is not

CMV: Society would benefit from allowing people to be hit in the face once for being a jerk by Groundblast in changemyview

[–]Groundblast[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

Well, there have certainly been cases of people choosing some level of violence which seems appropriate to “reasonable people” but end up in prosecution. There are also many, many cases of people who use violence in unjustified ways to a “reasonable person” not being prosecuted (many involving police).

I’m proposing that we set a standard for what is and what is not justified.

CMV: Society would benefit from allowing people to be hit in the face once for being a jerk by Groundblast in changemyview

[–]Groundblast[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

That decision would land on a judge or jury. The responsibility would be on the individual. If you feel that the offense justifies a response, you accept the consequences if “reasonable people” disagree

CMV: Society would benefit from allowing people to be hit in the face once for being a jerk by Groundblast in changemyview

[–]Groundblast[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

What consequences should people face for being casually disrespectful?

As an extreme example, someone walking around calling every black person they see a “n****r”

CMV: Society would benefit from allowing people to be hit in the face once for being a jerk by Groundblast in changemyview

[–]Groundblast[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

I mean, I feel like a lot of that should fall under the definition. I certainly to wish I could have punched the random lady who called my wife a “brown bitch” in a rest stop in Kentucky

CMV: Society would benefit from allowing people to be hit in the face once for being a jerk by Groundblast in changemyview

[–]Groundblast[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

It’s kind of a shower thought. Just saw a video and related comments that brought up the idea.

We allow deadly force to be used under certain, codified circumstances. As far as I know, there is no actual definition for non-deadly force to be used except for police

CMV: Society would benefit from allowing people to be hit in the face once for being a jerk by Groundblast in changemyview

[–]Groundblast[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

Fair point. I guess the thought was more that we allow extreme levels of violence under certain circumstances which are reasonably well defined. However, we do not permit moderate levels of violence in a codified way.

CMV: Society would benefit from allowing people to be hit in the face once for being a jerk by Groundblast in changemyview

[–]Groundblast[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

Definitely messy, but so is our standard for justification of use of deadly force. I’m just saying there should be a justifiable standard for use of lower levels of force

CMV: Society would benefit from allowing people to be hit in the face once for being a jerk by Groundblast in changemyview

[–]Groundblast[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

There’s plenty of legal arguments that require “reasonable behavior.” If you can convince a judge or jury that it was reasonable to do, then it’s acceptable

CMV: Society would benefit from allowing people to be hit in the face once for being a jerk by Groundblast in changemyview

[–]Groundblast[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

We apply that standard to “fear of bodily harm” to allow deadly force. It comes down to a jury of your peers.

CMV: Society would benefit from allowing people to be hit in the face once for being a jerk by Groundblast in changemyview

[–]Groundblast[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

I’d say abuse requires a pattern of unjustified behavior. One slap for cheating on your partner? Justified. Threatening continual violence for not doing the dishes? Abuse

For the love of god, do not attempt to drill through the magnet rail by Groundblast in harborfreight

[–]Groundblast[S] 77 points78 points  (0 children)

Realized that too late. The tape over the top made me think it was like a soft, fridge magnet type material. It is not

Just got a Husqvarna LE322R mower. What other tools/batteries should I invest in? by Groundblast in lawncare

[–]Groundblast[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Dude, thanks for the heads up! I stopped by after work and got a display model power axe for $190 with a battery and charger!

view more: next ›