Inspired by Voyou’s topic on the woman who chased after the robber and knocked him out with an ice chipper, and the quote below (don’t know who the source is), I thought I’d ask this and see if any discussion generates.

“Why do we teach children that violence is not the answer, yet have teachers in school teach about all the wars that solved America’s problems?”

What violence do you think is justified, in any scenario? When do you think it’s time to draw the line?

I’ll add my views later, I just want to see if this gets any replies first.

i am sorry but as the father of two kids, if some little bitch breaks into my house, brings his filth into the rooms my kids sleep in, steals the stuff i worked my ass off to afford, and i catch him? I am beating that idiot beyond recogniction.

If someone has to nerve to disrupt my peace when i have done nothing to them, if they have the nerve to possibly put my kids or my family in danger, then they just lost my sympathy and i am going to do whatever i can to that person. I will find anything i can find, and that person is going to be very sorry he decided to break into my house i tell you that.

yes i dont think violence is the answer and i would never teach my kids violence, but at the same time, dont come into my cave and disturb the bear if you dont want to get ##### up. Plain and simple. I do not go out searching for violence, but if it comes to my doorstep and puts my family in danger, then i am sorry for that person.

Would i kill the person? no i would not, i do not believe in killing, but i would def. make them sorry they ever did what they did.

now as far as going to other countries and killing peeps, then no i am not for that in any way, shape or form. It is different if it comes to my doorstep, but i have no belief in going to someone elses doorstep and causing #####.

Justification varies from person to person as far as violence goes but as a family man and a father I very much agree with what Voyou said. I will totally defend my family and would absolutely resort to violence to do it, how far I would go would depend entirely on the circumstances. As for defending myself in a niteclub, bar or on the street I've got no issues giving someone a smack but I do try to avoid violence as much as possible, but sometimes it can't be helped.

As for how I intend to bring up my son, I strongly believe in being able to handle (defend) yourself and I will teach him as much as I know about boxing etc. And I'll be sending him to self defence classes when he's old enough.
So in short I'll aim to teach him that hurting others for the sake of it is wrong but standing up for yourself as a last resort is fine.

In regard to how I feel about him being taught about war in history lessons I'm fine with that and I'll let him make up his own mind about it as I feel he should know what happened in the past and where his great granddad fought(World War 1) and went through - although I would never want him joining the armed forces.

I don’t have a problem with being taught about war, really. The quote was more or less showing the irony of the situation.


Anyway, my views on this? I’m a pacifist. Not sure if anyone can tell or not, but I really loathe violence, unless the cause is just. How do we determine that? Well...Like Cloudycat said, it really varies from person to person.

Hypothetically speaking, if I had a family, I wouldn’t tolerate someone trying to harm my family. However, anger is sort of contradictory, if I may say so. It doesn’t replace real justice. I dunno. Yeah, I’m against violence in all forms (even war, though sometimes it is necessary, because people don’t listen - though that’s for a different topic, I think). I’m not against people defending themselves if they’re attacked, I just don’t quite see how that works out. To me it just seems hypocritical. Not sure how I can really explain that. =(. I’m sure I sound kind of stupid anyway, haha.

Suffice to say, it really depends on the situation (place, people, time, etc.), but ultimately I’m against it. If I had a family and my child was being charged at with a knife, yeah, I would end up fighting whoever it is, but my motive wouldn’t be to hurt them.

I guess that’s really what I was getting at. If you were attacked, would you fight back to protect others (without the intent of hurting the attacker), or would you just fight back without reserve, because it really doesn’t matter anymore? When does it become irrational? When does it become too much?

I enjoy violent media, but I'm not going to go out and beat the ##### out of some poor schmuck because I'm angry. The only reason I would fight is in self defense or in defense of a friend/family member. Then, you know, whoever it is, they're free game. I wouldn't kill them, but I'd hurt them enough to where they would probably wish they were.

My friend's family quote:

"Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice, shame on you. Fool me three times and your family goes down."

it may not be to hurt them, but you better damn hurt them or they are going to hurt you and your family. I never in my life want to hurt or kill someone, but if it comes down to me and my family or some loser kid who wants to take a stab at my happiness, i dont care if he dies, he is not touching my family. I wont "try" to kill him, but if it happens, it happens. Without my family, without my kids, what am i? So ill be dammed if i try to care about the other person in the situation if they come after me

Who deserves what is just one of those things that are different for everyone.

People don't cross me very often, but it doesn't take much. If someone talks too much, disrespects my girlfriend and I, physically harms or approaches either of us in an inappropriate way, sure, I'll knock the ##### out of anyone.

Rather simplistic I know.

Sure violence is never the answer, but you could always have the police handle matters like this, but only take the initiative if they use a gun, or some other kind of weapon on you, only do this if they attack you first as the old saying goes from officers "Self Defense, there is no probelm with that."

only wiolence justify wen than pirson sware at mine cousin or one of mine wifes.
than make me sick angry i turn than pail green and attaking randomly .
one tim i in MCDONALD and than waiter spiting on mine wife hair.
i brake than mecca-cola botle on him head and step on his nek. i than draging him blody body to than ocean shore and than pushing him face in watir ontil he aplogizign to mine wife.

It's only justifiable in the mind who commits the violent act. It's a lose/lose scenario.

That is what I mostly believe. Violence is only justified in retaliation or self-defense. Revenge is something that people should not stoop too. I would hope that many people are above that and taking matters into your own hands is never a good idea. It maybe a good movie plot, but a terrible real life solution.

In my opinion, violence should never be an option, it should only be used as a last resort. Examples of situations where you can use violence are:
1,if you get bullied and the bully won't go away even though you've tried every method of getting rid of him

2,if you want to help a friend of yours that is being beaten up, (but then you have to try to protect him by standing in front of him, not by starting to pound to the bully to death if you know what I mean)

3, If you are an authorized person: policeman, SWAT agent, soldier, etc.

I honestly don't believe in "self-defence" sports like kick-boxing, boxing, karate, kung fu, taekwondo etc. because I think your kid should lose its energy and frustrations by playing tennis, football, and other normal sports.

I think this because there are many people who can't control themselves and if they have a moment of mental weakness, and they know a kung fu or kickboxing technique to kill someone in 10 seconds, believe me, they will use it.

So please do not send your kids to fighting clubs or schools because even though you might think so, people can SNAP and when they do, I'd rather want them to NOT be able to break someone's neck with their index finger.

Also something I absolutely hate about police officers, especially in the USA, is their tendency to shoot to kill. For example an armed criminal flees from a building and he's being chased by a policeman, the policeman INSTEAD of tryin to stop him by shooting him in the LEG or hip or anywhere not in the TORSO, shoots him right in the back, INSTANTLY killing them.

This is a wrong action, the criminal could easily have been arrested and disarmed if they had shot him in the arm or leg.

you know those classes teach you how to defend yourself and take down your opponent without hurting them, they teach you take down and disarm moves to possibly get a weapon off someone without really hurting them. But hey people snap, it does not matter if they took kung fu or not, because they can just grab a gun and shoot people just as easily as they could "kill them in 10 seconds with kung fu". Look at all the kids and the school shootings that happen around and how many of those kids took self-defense classes and snapped? Prolly not many, so i dont think thats much of a valid arguement, but its your opinion. I think you watch way too many Chuck Norris movies myself.

if my kid wants to take karate, kung fu, etc. id be more than happy to sign him up, never hurts to know some self-defense while also keeping in shape. Its much better he is in there than out on the streets.

than martial art wery important learn. than lebanese martial art call: nar il-har
it meaning "fire of the battle"
than art teaching than main points to attack ankles.than point about martial art killing people than moot point.
than i seeing one master of than art brake than mans ankle with than swift kick.

than win-win situatsion. one man save live one man go jjail.

I didn't really read the posts, because the answer is simple. For me, the only worthy cause for violence is to protect myself and the ones I love from evil. (And love can be extended to the innocent stranger..) To protect. Only. That is why I fight.

Voyou san, I respect your opinion but answer me what would you do in this situation.

You are 22 years old, you're walking through a criminal neighborhood and suddenly you get stopped by a guy who asks for your money and threatens to kill you. He hasn't got a gun.

I don't know about you but I'd rather want that he doesn't know a martial art, martial arts techniques CAN be lethal, and it DOES make a big difference. If you are a Navy SEAL and you're 'trained' to kill, you make a tougher opponent than when you're a policeman without any training.

This example is unlikely and extreme I know but you can use it for other situations as well. What if your little boy grows up, drops out of school, becomes a gang member and uses his martial arts skills for other purposes? (if you know what I mean.)

I'm against ANY way of arming yourself and when you think about it, being trained in the martial arts is kinda like having an arm, of course not as strong as a gun but still. As for keeping in shape, football keeps you in shape doesn't it? American football as well.

ok lets address this..

If i am dumb enough to take myself into the Criminal Element and WALK, not run, through a criminal neighborhood, then please someone come along and kick my monkey ass all over that place. And on that subject, who in these "criminal neighborhoods" knows martial arts? And if they do, who they hell uses it to rob people? Are Jet Li and Jackie Chan clones walking the streets muggin people with only their fists, feet and cat like reflexes? Honestly now, when was the last time you woke up, turned on the tube and witnessed the horror of a school massacre only to find out that the killer did not use registered weapons, yet he used his DEADLY KUNG FU!!!!!!! ZOMG RUN FROM HIS FISTS OF FURY!!!

but in all seriousness, any decent criminal is going to use a weapon of somekind that is not attached to his body, thats just how it is. Your arguement against martial arts holds less than zero water. I am sorry, but Thank you Drive Thru.

There's always a better option than violence, and I bet of lot of those hold better results.
Sadly, it does seem to have a higher priority in the mind than some response a slight bit more intelligent and less brutal.

Self defense is the most obvious for me. Though there are one or two exceptions for me, if I see someone hitting a woman - they'll see my closed hand coming their way. Or if I find someone stealing something, i'd break a finger - fair trade in my mind.

you would think violence isn't the answer, but you'd be surprised of how many people won't let go of things until they either beat you up, or you beat them up. at least thats how it works here in the ghetto.

Violence...it's not always with negative emotion. Nothing like a fight during a death metal concert. People all around you, pushing, kicking, punching you, and you them. Then you wake up all sore in the morning. Quite a nice feeling. Also, Russians have an annual festival of sorts, where it is traditional for men to engage in a fist fight. I'd like to participate in one of those. That's all violence without negative emotion. Actually, it takes away negative emotion.

As for other forms of violence, people should be beaten up, simply because they're too arrogant in many such situations. I'd love to go to the end in a fight, to kill the person, but the unjust cage stops me. Another thing, fights should never be broken up or prevented. There are many people who would act all high and mighty because they'd assume that the other people present would not allow the fight to happen. Such a person deserves an incapacitating beating.

Violence is not bad. What is bad is that so many people go around preaching how bad it is and it gets ingrained into feeble-minded people's brains. Kids in elementary school shouldn't fight much, but they should exchange a fist now and then, just to get a feel of it, and to get used to it.

Well for me violence is justified when

A)You are protecting something you care for. Whether it be pride or life.
B)You yourself are being attacked and you need to protect yourself. Not for pride but for your life.
C)You are in an intense death match in a martial arts tournament.
D)Someone is annoying you (for this case just do the punch to the nose and make them faint).

These are the only times I'll ever hurt someone at any place or anytime.

@Vincent, seriously, WHAT THE #####! what barbaric country do you live in? Fist fights to the death? You seriously have an urge to kill someone with your naked fists? my advice is to seek help.
Because in the Civilised World, not Russia or the Baltic States, we solve problems by talking and argumenting. Not through brainless knuckle fights.

If someone annoys you, step 1 is to ignore them completely, if they persist, you should try to make fun of him in front of everyone, then if they still persist, (which is highly unlikely if you and him are older than 18), you can hit him in the face.

I'm not saying I never got into fights when I was in school, but my point is that civilised, developped, educated people solve situations with words, not with fists.

@ Voyou San, I must admit my example was incredible weak and unrealistic so you had the full right to bash it. But I still prefer kids playing basketball, football etc. than doing kickboxing, or other martial arts. You should never turn a person into a lethal weapon, period.

I agree with Dr whippy, and I think Vincent is a psychopath ready to explode.
Russia has just lost another future visitor.

Pffft. Violence has its place and always will. Even doctor whippy up there - says there's always a better alternative, but then somehow comes up with two justified examples of when its ok XD There ISN'T akways a better alternative. There are a whole load of circumstances where violence is necessary to survive, and if you don't protect yourself or fight back, you'll get killed one day. Fact.

for the one that just said fighting in martial arts, that wouldn't just make them faint, if you hit them in the nose right, you can kill them.

I am not a psychopath.

"If you want peace, prepare for war."

When a person comes into your house with any attempt of robbery or threatens you in any way, then as a result, the villain has given up some of their own rights. Break into my house and I swear I will use what is available for me to defend myself accordingly, including the use of arms if I have it and feel the need to use it.

Of course violence is something that should be avoided if at all possible, but it is not wrong to defend yourself. I hate the kind of intolerance and injustice that public school systems in the U.S. practice about violence. I was once suspended in a fight that I did not even throw a punch in just because I was a part of it. They go around from grade 1 teaching that violence is never an answer, and play off some spoof that you will either never get in a fight, or if you do, there must have been ways you could have prevented it, so you are partly responsible. I am not incouraging students to beat up their bullies, I am implying that I have been in situations where violence was the only option I had.

That clearly rules out the possibility of there ever being any civilized, educated human beings on this planet. >.o.



@Vilagen: If the robber gives up his/her rights when he/she comes in to rob you, what happens to you when you decide to pick up arms against them? Does that not make you forfeit your rights as well, because you are picking up a weapon with the intent of harming them?

nope, you have a right to protect yourself. You are taken up arms against that person because its you or its them, and it better be you. Cause if you dont take up arms and want to play this "peace" thing, then ill be reading about you on the news, dead. I am a big believer in peace and I do not like to fight at all, but if you come up in my house acting a fool and trying to take what is dear to me, then i am so sorry and i hope whatever you believe in can help you, cause i am doing whatever i can to ##### up your world, end of story. Better get your praying out of the way and make amends with your jesus before you ##### up and come into my house, cause i am gonna bring hell on your ass.

and forcy, anyone is a weapon. With the ability to buy a weapon everyone is a weapon. People who played football growing up, or were in band, they are all just as much a killer as the kid who took karate.

Nicely put.

then what did you do, bite?

You sound like a textbook sociopath from what I see.

No, because I am picking up a weapon to defend myself, which is an entirely different concept than what you are suggesting. The intent is not to harm the criminal, but instead to protect myself and anyone or anything in the household from the criminal. If any harm happens to come to the criminal due to my act of self defense, well, that may be sad, but I am protecting myself against a person who has forfeited their rights due to them invading mine. There is a staggering difference between the villain and victim.

Then you've never had a good fight.

ah, very touchy subject.

though violence is "never" the answer.
I think you have to fight back when provoked.
what if we didn't fight goto war against Hitler, because we wanted to solve the matter with words?..
I don't think we'd be living the lives we are today if that were the case.

on a smaller scale tho.
I still think Violence isn't okay.
but, it's just the way things are
I don't like hurting people, or seeing people get hurt. but if someone punches me, then I'm going to hit them back

Iunno.. violence sucks ):

Violence is only necesary when in self-defense. Because those who do not fight will always be subject to those who will, and will be dominated until they can fight back (Survival of the fittest idea).

i used to think violence was the answer to things, but its definitely not, understanding is.

But if you solve something through "understanding", there is that feeling that something is left unfinished. Because of that, the same altercation or dispute will reemerge later on, no matter what the understanding was. If you have a fight with that person, then the victor decides how the "understanding" will be, and that makes the understanding permanent. Violence is a faster and more effective way to solve things. If you sit down to discuss a dispute with a person, it will take so much time, and even if you come to terms, it's not really solved. People simply have their beliefs and will not yield in a discussion. Violence makes the weaker yield. Violence succeeds where words fail.

Sorry but I just cant agree with that at all. To me that is a very childish and ignorant way of thinking, but thats just me.

Nono Vincent's right that thats how it IS. But does that mean Violence is JUSTIFIED? not at all

if everyone dropped the idea that violence solves anything, then nobody would turn to it to solve anything lol. But because people still know that its the law of the world, then they will always use it as a way to get what they want

well just because there was violence does not mean the conflict wont reemerge later on.. Just a very barbaric, crude way of thinking that the only way to solve anything is through violence....The right words from the right person can bring the same force as a punch.

as ive stated earlier.. self defensive violence i think is just, as in the end it really is either you or him, and it better be you.. but violence for the sake of violence is just pathetic..

Look, I take a more republican stance on violence:

If someone's ##### with me, then I'm gonna ##### with them. I read your guys' posts on 'diplomacy' and 'working it out' peacefully, but understand that SOME PPL CAN NOT BE REASONED WITH. Some people are incapable of solving conflict with words and emotional assurance. SOME PPL ARE JUST HEARTLESS, HATING BASTARDS THAT WILL TRAMPLE YOU IF GIVEN THE ADVANTAGE! If you are not smart enough to discern a person's rationality, and you believe that everyone is 'fixable', you yourself will become a victim. Because, the only way to handle the warped, sick and twisted induviduals in this world is to FIGHT BACK.

If you don't learn to hold your heart for those that DESERVE IT and make a BALLSY STAND, you will NOT HAVE A HEART LEFT TO SHARE. STOP BEING PUSSIES AND FIGHT INJUSTICE WITH WHATVEVER VOILENCE IS NECESSARY. Only a ##### coward pats his enemies on the back. If people must die in wars to defend what is right, then so be it. SOMEONE HAS TO DO IT OR WE WILL ALL SUFFER.

Look at the bigger picture here and ask yourself what is really IMPORTANT. When your liberty is at stake, what matters most to YOU?

Personally I hate violence. But even I have to admit that sometimes it is necessary. But only if you have to protect your own life or someone else's. Otherwise I'm against violence because most of the time people fight over stupid and unnecessary things.

Violence is part of human nature. It is part of our primal instincts. My biggest problem with violence is that it will surely be our own undoing. I wonder how much longer the human race has before it wipes itself out. I also think that if some ignorant primitive tries to attack you, you attack them right back. It is clear that diplomacy is not on their mind. If you resort to violence because there is no other option, that is extremely understandable. I strongly believe that we are still the same as we were 500 years ago, the only difference is that we've become more efficient at eliminating competition.