[quote]Professor X wrote:
If that were all guys, no one would be batting an eye at this.[/quote]
I’m going to call bullshit on that. I thought it was a guy being beaten watching the video and it wasn’t until I read comments that I realized it wasn’t. My disgust at the violent overreaction is the same. (My disgust isn’t blame–just a normal reaction to excessive violent.)
[/quote]
What overreaction? All you can see in the vid is two women attacking, jumping behind the counter and then the fight ends on the ground OUT OF SIGHT OF A CAMERA. You don’t know what the fuck they were dong back there or how many times they tried to get right back up and keep coming at him.
His life was in danger.
He ended the threat.
If you don’t want your ass beat, don’t hit someone.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
If that were all guys, no one would be batting an eye at this.[/quote]
I’m going to call bullshit on that. I thought it was a guy being beaten watching the video and it wasn’t until I read comments that I realized it wasn’t. My disgust at the violent overreaction is the same. (My disgust isn’t blame–just a normal reaction to excessive violent.)
[/quote]
What overreaction? All you can see in the vid is two women attacking, jumping behind the counter and then the fight ends on the ground OUT OF SIGHT OF A CAMERA. You don’t know what the fuck they were dong back there or how many times they tried to get right back up and keep coming at him.
His life was in danger.
He ended the threat.
If you don’t want your ass beat, don’t hit someone.[/quote]
Yes he ended the threat and then kept going long after any person could have gotten up again. That’s how it looks to me. You only have as much information as I do so don’t pretend you have any extra insight on what was actually going on. For all you know they were unconscious after the first hit.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
…and I will say this again, that whole fight started because women think guys can’t hit back…so they hit and expect no retaliation.
That means our own self righteousness is causing violence.
Stop that shit by not allowing any more generations to think that is ok. [/quote]
And exactly what causes male on male violence? Or is that something that doesn’t exist?
Yes he ended the threat and then kept going long after any person could have gotten up again.[/quote]
??
You mean the same women who after being hit two times by a guy kept rushing him and cornered him in the back by the frier? They PROVED that if he didn’t knock them out they would keep coming…so he knocked them out.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
…and I will say this again, that whole fight started because women think guys can’t hit back…so they hit and expect no retaliation.
That means our own self righteousness is causing violence.
Stop that shit by not allowing any more generations to think that is ok. [/quote]
And exactly what causes male on male violence? Or is that something that doesn’t exist?[/quote]
Not this shit because guys know they can get hit back.
See the damn difference?
You are now defending two attackers because the ATTACKED hit them harder and knocked them out.
You would be applauding this if this were a woman being attacked.
She would be on Oprah telling her story of survival at the hands of two evil STRONG MEN attackers. Hell, she might get a movie deal out of it.
Yes he ended the threat and then kept going long after any person could have gotten up again.[/quote]
??
You mean the same women who after being hit two times by a guy kept rushing him and cornered him in the back by the frier? They PROVED that if he didn’t knock them out they would keep coming…so he knocked them out.
Problem solved.
[/quote]
In the absence of any facts on the medical condition of the attackers, I’m going to stand with ho wit looks to me and that is that they were down neutralized and he kept going.
I think he’ll get charged. I don’t hope so because he didn’t ask for the situation but I think that’s how the law will see it.
That situation wasn’t neutralized until he could be sure they would not get right back up and attack like they had TWICE BEFORE AFTER INITIATING THE DAMNED CONFLICT.
Like I said, if this were a woman against two guys, she would be called a hero.
That fucking sucks…and nothing you can write will change that.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
…and I will say this again, that whole fight started because women think guys can’t hit back…so they hit and expect no retaliation.
That means our own self righteousness is causing violence.
Stop that shit by not allowing any more generations to think that is ok. [/quote]
And exactly what causes male on male violence? Or is that something that doesn’t exist?[/quote]
Not this shit because guys know they can get hit back.
See the damn difference?
You are now defending two attackers because the ATTACKED hit them harder and knocked them out.
You would be applauding this if this were a woman being attacked.
She would be on Oprah telling her story of survival at the hands of two evil STRONG MEN attackers. Hell, she might get a movie deal out of it.[/quote]
Don’t tell me what I do and don’t applaud or defend. You clearly have no idea have no idea what I think. Those two chicks got what they deserved but the difference between you and me is I know the difference between what vengeance I want and what is fair and just in the eyes of the law.
X and lewhitehurst, I would agree…mostly. HOWEVER, that is not how the law sees it. My brother knows sometimes I have a hot head and being a cop and him having a Criminal justice masters degree he’s always warning me about going too far since I’m a belted martial artist and blah blah blah. But you have to take in to account the reaction of the dudes fellow employees who at one point tried to stop him and say enough was enough. The reaction of his employees made me believe the threat was neutralized. Otherwise if they had kept coming at him, I agree with you, continue to whoop that ass.
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
X and lewhitehurst, I would agree…mostly. HOWEVER, that is not how the law sees it. My brother knows sometimes I have a hot head and being a cop and him having a Criminal justice masters degree he’s always warning me about going too far since I’m a belted martial artist and blah blah blah. But you have to take in to account the reaction of the dudes fellow employees who at one point tried to stop him and say enough was enough. The reaction of his employees made me believe the threat was neutralized. Otherwise if they had kept coming at him, I agree with you, continue to whoop that ass.[/quote]
They already kept coming at him. That means until they quit coming at him, the threat was not neutralized…and since we can’t even see if they were trying to get back up, you can’t fault him for it at all.
Cochran would have had that dude at home by dinner.
The real question is going to be can a jury prove that he was in continous danger for his life or was the threat neutralized after intial point of contact? Unless his employees cite otherwise, he’s going back to jail unfortunetly. The fact that he has a past record for killing his classmate ten years ago doesn’t help his case.
But you can argue that he was in threat/fear for his life because he was attacked by multiple persons in a place that they had restricted access to. Woman or not you will get put down like a lame horse if it were me, but I would draw the line, I mean you have to somewhere.
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
The real question is going to be can a jury prove that he was in continous danger for his life or was the threat neutralized after intial point of contact? Unless his employees cite otherwise, he’s going back to jail unfortunetly. The fact that he has a past record for killing his classmate ten years ago doesn’t help his case.
But you can argue that he was in threat/fear for his life because he was attacked by multiple persons in a place that they had restricted access to. Woman or not you will get put down like a lame horse if it were me, but I would draw the line, I mean you have to somewhere.[/quote]
Quit defending those entitled heifers you Oprah loving man hater!
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
The real question is going to be can a jury prove that he was in continous danger for his life or was the threat neutralized after intial point of contact? Unless his employees cite otherwise, he’s going back to jail unfortunetly. The fact that he has a past record for killing his classmate ten years ago doesn’t help his case.
But you can argue that he was in threat/fear for his life because he was attacked by multiple persons in a place that they had restricted access to. Woman or not you will get put down like a lame horse if it were me, but I would draw the line, I mean you have to somewhere.[/quote]
Quit defending those entitled heifers you Oprah loving man hater!
[/quote]