Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Joker" data-source="post: 5263529" data-attributes="member: 826">Thanks for the quick and helpful replies.&nbsp; Those links have succinct descriptions of what I was trying to learn.This thread was sparked by a discussion on the use of violence with regards to self-defense and defense of others.Without going into specific politics the discussion is translated from Dutch and went like this:Person A:&nbsp; While I abhor violence, I do feel that in some cases where an immediate solution is needed to protect one self, proportional violence is justified.&nbsp; It may very well be the least desirable response, it is unfortunately the only morally responsible course of action when faced with a threat to your life or the lives of those around you.Person B:&nbsp; No, that's not true.&nbsp; Violence breeds violence and it doesn't solve anything.&nbsp; Look at all the people in the world suffering from violent regimes or in history that have lost their lives because of violence.Person A:&nbsp; The discussion at hand is about the right to protect your physical body from harm.&nbsp; It has nothing to do with the plight of other people.&nbsp; I am dumbfounded to be honest that I have to defend this school of thought.Person B:&nbsp; Where two people fight, two people are to blame.&nbsp; It's that simple.&nbsp; If you are faced with someone that wants to hurt you, you have the obligation to solve the conflict in a non-violent way.&nbsp; Like Gandhi.Person A:&nbsp; ...The discussion degenerated fairly quickly after that.&nbsp; Person A was a bit stumped and couldn't find the words for a proper rebut.-Tymon</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Joker, post: 5263529, member: 826"] Thanks for the quick and helpful replies. Those links have succinct descriptions of what I was trying to learn. This thread was sparked by a discussion on the use of violence with regards to self-defense and defense of others. Without going into specific politics the discussion is translated from Dutch and went like this: Person A: While I abhor violence, I do feel that in some cases where an immediate solution is needed to protect one self, proportional violence is justified. It may very well be the least desirable response, it is unfortunately the only morally responsible course of action when faced with a threat to your life or the lives of those around you. Person B: No, that's not true. Violence breeds violence and it doesn't solve anything. Look at all the people in the world suffering from violent regimes or in history that have lost their lives because of violence. Person A: The discussion at hand is about the right to protect your physical body from harm. It has nothing to do with the plight of other people. I am dumbfounded to be honest that I have to defend this school of thought. Person B: Where two people fight, two people are to blame. It's that simple. If you are faced with someone that wants to hurt you, you have the obligation to solve the conflict in a non-violent way. Like Gandhi. Person A: ... The discussion degenerated fairly quickly after that. Person A was a bit stumped and couldn't find the words for a proper rebut. -Tymon [/QUOTE]

Verification