Is violence acceptable as long as "bad" people are being targeted

[cali]

and the "good" guys are perpetuating it?

[LeftishBrit]

1. I put No, but I would make an exception for real self-defence

But I don't agree with vigilante justice, even toward nasty people.

[ccharles000]

29. I agree

[Juche]

2. Define violence

Every police force in the world is entrusted with the ability to engage in kidnapping, criminal confinement, stalking, harassment, intimidation, assault, battery, disorderly conduct etc. when it is necessary to uphold the law.

[eShirl]

3. NO!

"Let's perpetrate violence against those BAD _____________!!!!!!!"

[Kerrytravelers]

4. Is this about the KKK ralley in downtown LA yesterday?

They had a permit to be there. Forty klansmen showed up. They were outnumbered by hundreds by the counter-protesters. Physical violence is not only giving these racists something to hang their hats on for their supporters and sympathizers, but it is also dangerous for the counter protesters. When I think "klansmen" I don't think "cuddly teddy bear."

The other point is that under our current understanding and practice of the Constitution, they have the same righy to voice their opinions as the counter protesters. They applied for and received the proper permits. As much as their opinions make me sick, I wouldn't want them to get physically violent against
Me when I am voicing my opinion in a legal and Constitutionally way.

And, one other thought: What if the one of the klansmen was actually an undercover cop or federal agent? They infiltrate us. The klan is likely infiltrated, too, especially with the racial and violent rhetoric against Obama.

[Altoid_Cyclist]

5. I said no, but I really have no idea what I would do in certain situations.

I'm pretty much a pacifist to the core. However, having said that, I don't know what I would do if I saw a man hitting a woman or child. I would also include someone being attacked by a group. Basically, I detest hate and intolerance and have always tried to play the peacemaker if I could.

I think that in some circumstances, I could snap and un-pacify myself in a hurry since I'm only human.

To be honest, I probably would not intervene if I saw Darth or shrub being pummeled.

[Zipp]

6. One group attacking another

Shows hate and intolerance.

Tolerance can't be a one-sided deal.

[SoCalDem]

7. Who get to define "bad"?..n/t

[WonderGrunion]

8. I approve of violence against Hitler

Godwin's Law for the win.

[Odin2005]

25. I think going after the Nazis would fall under "self-defense".

[meow2u3]

9. Only violent self-defense

Violence is acceptable only when the "bad" guys land the first blow and the "good" guys are forced to repel the aggressor.

[Fla_Democrat]

10. It's not the what, it's the who

always has been, always will be.

[stray cat]

11. is it wrong to arrest someone if they refuse to go quietly and willingly?

[aikoaiko]

12. If you mean self-defense or defense of others, then yes, of course.

If you mean situations where "bad guys" are using provocative words and the "good guys" can walk away, then no.


However, I am sympathetic to a situation where the good guy and the bad guy are confined together and the "bad guys" won't be respectful and are tormenting the "good guy".

[ThomThom]

13. Who decides who is bad? When GWB decided, innocent people died.

Are pot smokers bad? Is violence ok against them. How about gay people? Maybe we should go "roll some queers". Violence is not a solution. And what should be the punishment when a mistake is made. Innocent people are injured all the time by such well meaning foolishness.

[bemildred]

14. Acceptable to whom?

Information about when it is legal to bust someone's chops would be more useful.

[slackmaster]

15. Only in a war

Other than that, it's vigilantism.

[Ohio Joe]

16. Yes

Beating up a nazi is ok.

[cali]

17. no, it's really not.

it's not legally ok and it's not morally ok. and mobs are witless critters that often harm those who are innocent.

sickening to see the kind of endorsement of violence that some of you are engaging in.

[Ohio Joe]

19. I never said anything about mobs, I speak only for myself

I also don't care about it's legality.

I'm sorry my morals sicken you, but Ohio Joe does not allow anyone to provoke him and then turn the other cheek. You want to let nazis do their nazi shit, thats your business but my morals say stop them.

[uppityperson]

34. "Ohio Joe does not allow anyone to provoke him and then turn the other cheek"??? wtf?

If someone provokes you, if you allow yourself to get irate at them, then it is ok to be violent? It is their fault for provoking you, not your fault for allowing yourself to be provoked?

Huh. That reads rather like men who rape women and claim they were provoked because of the clothing the woman had on.

[Ohio Joe]

39. Non-sense

When someone attempts to provoke another they take a direct and willful action, nothing at all like your rape comparison. If you think people that do provoke do so without knowledge of what they are doing and clear intent, you are very wrong. If you are comfortable being pushed around well... good luck with that.

[uppityperson]

42. Naw, I just take personal responsibility for my reactions. Thanks though.

[Ohio Joe]

44. As do I

You wish to make it though I am blaming one who might provoke me for the ensuing violence but again you are very wrong. I do not deny my part. Please, tell what you do when a nazi thug comes up and starts provoking you... Walk away and let him go on to terrorize someone else? Enlighten him with your moral superiority? You think people like that stop with words? You think they can be reasoned with? Again, good luck with that.

[depakid]

18. Acceptable or not- Neo Nazi's marching around 1st and Spring St. in LA

is asking for a lot of trouble.

Apparently, a couple of people found it.

Color me surprised.

[awoke_in_2003]

20. no. nt

[DerekG]

21. You don't always need the quotations

There are some bad numbers out there who need to be beaten until their piss runs red.

[cali]

22. ugh. violence doesn't solve anything.

[DerekG]

30. Sure it does. Puts bullies in their place.

It's a noble endeavor, turning fear against those who prey on the vulnerable.

[Zywiec]

31. Should we torture known terrorists?

I mean there are some bad numbers out there who need to be beaten until their piss runs red, right?

[DerekG]

41. I'm thinking closer to home

There's a few vicious criminals around my neighborhood who should be on the receiving end of a few sturdy baseball bats.

[Odin2005]

23. NO! Violence not done out of self defense (or to help others defend themselves) is wrong.

[hyphenate]

35. Tell the guards and FBI at Gitmo this

Red runs often there, and few of us can stop it.

[zorahopkins]

24. I'm Conflicted About This

I am really conflicted about this.

The US Civil War was terribly violent.

But if the North had not engaged in violent conflict, the South would have left the Union.

And if that had happened, slavery would have continued for a much longer time.

As I said, I'm really conflicted about this subject.

[proteus_lives]

26. Too vague.

[Zywiec]

27. Last week I had people condoning the ass kicking of a 14 year old girl

:crazy:

[canetoad]

28. Would have to say 'depends'

The only situation I can imagine using physical force is to, say, defend a child, animal, old or weak person from violence when there is absolutely no alternative.

Was actually put in a situation a while back. In a small supermarket in a poorer area a woman seemingly high on meth or ice was trying to hurt a teenage boy as well as smashing up the shop. I grabbed her hands and held them with all my strength behind her back. She was amazingly violent and eventually broke free and ran away. I'm glad my gut instinct told me to restrain her but not hit.

[slampoet]

32. "I like to pour acid on puppies, but i make sure it is only naughty puppies."

- the voice of rationalization

[Odin2005]

37. Great pic! what a cute doggie!

Here, Pongo!!!

[The Straight Story]

33. Yes, and wars are ok as long as our side is in in power, and choice is bad when we don't like it

;)

[Dreamer Tatum]

46. + infinity

[woo me with science]

36. Obviously it depends

on the situation.

[Truth2Tell]

38. no nt

[DireStrike]

40. Is something that is neccessary neccessarily acceptable?

I'm not sure.

[MrSlayer]

43. I'm a proponent of street justice.

If, for instance, you decide you want to walk around in a Klan outfit and someone kicks your ass, I'd say you were asking for it. If you decide to protest funerals and declare your happiness at the person's death because god hates them and someone kicks your ass, I'd say you were getting just what you were asking for. Others may disagree but I'm in the camp of kicking the asses of people who deserve it.

[ZombieHorde]

45. I voted "depends," I am fairly passive except on the issue of self defense.

I think people have the right to kill those would rape them, kill them, kidnap them, etc.

[Unvanguard]

47. No, but violence is acceptable in self-defense, and in justified wars. n/t

[G_j]

48. take it from a wise man:

www.thekingcenter.org /

Derived from "Pilgrimage to Nonviolence" in Dr. King's book Stride Toward Freedom, Harper & Row, 1958.

Martin Luther King- Six Principals Of Nonviolence

Six Principles of Nonviolence

--Nonviolence is a way of life for courageous people. It is active nonviolent resistance to evil...

--Nonviolence seeks to win friendship and understanding. The end result of nonviolence is redemption and reconciliation...

--Nonviolence seeks to defeat injustice, not people. Nonviolence recognizes that evil doers are also victims.

--Nonviolence holds that suffering can educate and transform. Nonviolence willingly accepts the consequences of its acts...

--Nonviolence chooses love instead of hate. Nonviolence resists violence of the spirit as well as the body. Nonviolent love is active, not passive. Nonviolent love does not sink to the level of the hater. Love restores community and resists injustice.

--Nonviolence recognizes the fact that all life is interrelated.
Nonviolence believes that the universe is on the side of justice. The nonviolent resister has deep faith that justice will eventually win.

Six Steps for Nonviolent Social Change

--Information Gathering: In order to understand and articulate the issue, problem or injustice facing the community, you much first research, investigate and gather all vital information that will increase your understanding of the problem. Know all sides of the issue, including the other party's position.

--Education: It is essential to inform others about your issue. This minimizes misunderstandings, and gains you support and sympathy.

--Personal Commitment: Eliminate hidden motives and prepare yourself to accept suffering, if necessary, in your work for justice.

--Negotiation: Using grace, humor and intelligence, confront the other party with a list of injustices and a plan for addressing and resolving these injustices. Nonviolent communication does not seek to humiliate, but to call forth the good in an opponent.

--Direct Action: Used to morally force the opponent to work with you in resolving the injustices, direct action imposes a "creative tension" into the conflict.

--Reconciliation: Nonviolence does not seek to defeat the opponent, but to seek his/her friendship and understanding. It is directed against evil systems, forces, policies and acts not against persons.
------------------------

[KonaKane]

49. Only a fool is against violence in principle.

There may come a time when you actually have to employ it to defend your life or the lives of your loved ones. To simply say it's never right is a sign of extreme naivete or stupidity.

The point is to avoid it wherever possible, and try to live a life not predicated on it.