NationStates Jolt Archive

In certain situations I do believe that victims of violence have to be blamed as well as the attacker. What I mean by that is, if you live in this world and are aware of how dangerous it is and you have children and a life to protect, would it be your fault for choosing not to learn or do what it takes to defend it if you were ever threatened? If so please explain why you agree with this, as well as if you do not agree.

In certain situations I do believe that victims of violence have to be blamed as well as the attacker. What I mean by that is, if you live in this world and are aware of how dangerous it is and you have children and a life to protect, would it be your fault for choosing not to learn or do what it takes to defend it if you were ever threatened? If so please explain why you agree with this, as well as if you do not agree.


I bet you're kidding, right?

I for one do not agree. It is the right of every person to be able to live life without fear that someone is going to hurt them.

When an attacker harms someone they are infringing on that right, and hence deserve the blame.

Also, not everyone is ABLE to defend themselves, even if they TRY. Like children or the elderly. Are you going to say it is a girl's fault that she was raped because she couldn't defend herself from a 6 '1 attacker?

I bet you're kidding, right?

Not at all. If someone is FULLY aware that they are in a position that can be easily taken advantage of by violent people and have the resources to learn how to combat it, but choose not to and then are attacked and question why they couldn't do anything then how could they not be blamed? Of course it's mostly the perp's fault, but you'd also have to take responsibility for not being able to defend yourself, ESPECIALLY if you have to protect the lives of your family.

I for one do not agree. It is the right of every person to be able to live life without fear that someone is going to hurt them.

When an attacker harms someone they are infringing on that right, and hence deserve the blame.

Also, not everyone is ABLE to defend themselves, even if they TRY. Like children or the elderly. Are you going to say it is a girl's fault that she was raped because she couldn't defend herself from a 6 '1 attacker?

I'm not talking about situations like that. I'm talking about people who choose to live in potentially violent sorroundings and then choose to do nothing to prepare. People who are responsible for the lives of other people, parents.

I for one do not agree. It is the right of every person to be able to live life without fear that someone is going to hurt them.

When an attacker harms someone they are infringing on that right, and hence deserve the blame.

Also, not everyone is ABLE to defend themselves, even if they TRY. Like children or the elderly. Are you going to say it is a girl's fault that she was raped because she couldn't defend herself from a 6 '1 attacker?

she should buy a gun and learn how to use it. thankfully in the United States, if she is not a convicted felon, she can do that (though some cities and other areas, in general, frown on people using guns to defend themselves from attackers).

What if the oppenent is armed or theres mulitple attackers?

I'm not talking about situations like that. I'm talking about people who choose to live in potentially violent sorroundings and then choose to do nothing to prepare. People who are responsible for the lives of other people, parents.
They should never have to.

no it is the right of every citizen to be protected by the state from violence (unless they were asking for it (i.e. racist comments for example)) so any violence is the fault of the state and the person commiting the violence

no it is the right of every citizen to be protected by the state from violence (unless they were asking for it (i.e. racist comments for example)) so any violence is the fault of the state and the person commiting the violence

Isn't that what I was trying to say?

No. You can not use this to excuse the "hit" on Chavez.

Try harder Pat.

Darwin huh...

Ya, that's BS in this world. Infact if you use the 'rape' thing again I'll have to say that girls infact CAN defend themselves and use the 'rape' thing too much.

People can be neglegent in protecting themselves, but no one is guilty of a crime but those who commit it.

People can be neglegent in protecting themselves, but no one is guilty of a crime but those who commit it.

That's a very good way to put it.

In certain situations I do believe that victims of violence have to be blamed as well as the attacker. .


NO NO NONONONONON

only the attacker is guilty and is the ONLY one to be blamed..

soz I was agreeing with you but disagreeing with the original statement

especially not the police killing of anyone

The victim could certainly have contributed to the attack by means of senseless verbiage that is deliberately provacative. They then, try and incite their victim more when the person tries to exert self-control, but the taunting goes too far and eventually this person does somethign stupid and their victim attacks them.

In other words, the person can talk big but really be a weak fighter and therefore, pay for it by becoming the victim and demonizing the original victim through their cowardice.

I think this is what the original poster is talking about.

In certain situations I do believe that victims of violence have to be blamed as well as the attacker. What I mean by that is, if you live in this world and are aware of how dangerous it is and you have children and a life to protect, would it be your fault for choosing not to learn or do what it takes to defend it if you were ever threatened? If so please explain why you agree with this, as well as if you do not agree.
No, when you carry a weapon, it can be easiely used against you. Carrying a weapon would also worsen the situation, because the attacker would get scarred and would therefore act unpredictable. Maybe this is not true for sex offenders, which allmost ever act unpredictable but would ambush you, so you won't be able to defend yourself anyway.

No, when you carry a weapon, it can be easiely used against you. Carrying a weapon would also worsen the situation, because the attacker would get scarred and would therefore act unpredictable. Maybe this is not true for sex offenders, which allmost ever act unpredictable but would ambush you, so you won't be able to defend yourself anyway.

I'm not talking about carrying a weapon. I'm talking about at least learning some form of heavy duty militarized form of self defense.

YES. Of course you can blame the victim.
The US is to blame for 9-11. Its the USA's fault that billions of despicable hatemongers populate the rest of the world.
See? Its easy!
;)

I'm not talking about carrying a weapon. I'm talking about at least learning some form of heavy duty militarized form of self defense.

Not everyone is capable of pulling that off. I have Crohns, I know I couldn't if I tried unless I wanted to pass out and die from blood loss.

Not everyone is capable of pulling that off. I have Crohns, I know I couldn't if I tried unless I wanted to pass out and die from blood loss.

Then you are exempt from my argument. I'm talking about people are are 100% capable of defending themselves, have the time, and have the resources, yet choose to do NOTHING even though they are responsible for the lives of other people and live in dangerous areas.

Not at all. If someone is FULLY aware that they are in a position that can be easily taken advantage of by violent people and have the resources to learn how to combat it, but choose not to and then are attacked and question why they couldn't do anything then how could they not be blamed? Of course it's mostly the perp's fault, but you'd also have to take responsibility for not being able to defend yourself, ESPECIALLY if you have to protect the lives of your family.

So this is "The bitch was asking for it defense?"

All those children that have been sexually asaulted and or killed have some blame in it. After all they should have taken the responsibility for themselves.

Let's not forget the elderly that are robbed. There is no age limit and they should take responcibility and defend themselves as well.

We live in a society which is supposed to offer some protection against violence, crime, etc. Why else would we form societies?

If we all have to carry side arms and know how to fight hand to hand then you can bet we don't live in a society anymore.

Sorry but your premise is simply blaming the victim for rape, assault, and murder.

So this is "The bitch was asking for it defense?"

All those children that have been sexually asaulted and or killed have some blame in it. After all they should have taken the responsibility for themselves.

Let's not forget the elderly that are robbed. There is no age limit and they should take responcibility and defend themselves as well.

We live in a society which is supposed to offer some protection against violence, crime, etc. Why else would we form societies?

If we all have to carry side arms and know how to fight hand to hand then you can bet we don't live in a society anymore.

Sorry but your premise is simply blaming the victim for rape, assault, and murder.

AGHHHH! Is anyone even listening to what I am saying?!? GEEZE! Read it carefully, I'm ONLY talking about people who are physically fit, have the time, and the resources, and are fully aware that they could be assaulted. ONLY those people. ONLY!!! *rips my own hair out in a fit of rage* :mad:

AGHHHH! Is anyone even listening to what I am saying?!? GEEZE! Read it carefully, I'm ONLY talking about people who are physically fit, have the time, and the resources, and are fully aware that they could be assaulted. ONLY those people. ONLY!!! *rips my own hair out in a fit of rage* :mad:

The problem in todays world is that there is almost no one that can be considered 100%

I'm not talking about carrying a weapon. I'm talking about at least learning some form of heavy duty militarized form of self defense.
Well, at least the last part of my arguement is still valid. When criminals know their victims will know some kind of martial art, they will get armed and no martial art will work against a gang armed with guns.

The problem in todays world is that there is almost no one that can be considered 100%

Quite true, but I'd say that people who are in the 70% to 90% range have no excuse. The first duty of any parent is to protect the lives of their children at all costs, if you are capable of doing that yet refuse to enhance your defensive capabilities, that to me is inexcusable, especially in this day and age when you know how tough the world can be.

Well, at least the last part of my arguement is still valid. When criminals know their victims will know some kind of martial art, they will get armed and no martial art will work against a gang armed with guns.

Well I have a story but I'm sure nobody is interested in hearing, but to make things short, I've been training in Kali since the age of 5 and let's just say someone has put a gun in my face before and they got fucked up (I was really stupid and young when this happened, and I feel like an idiot getting involved with people like that).

Well I have a story but I'm sure nobody is interested in hearing, but to make things short, I've been training in Kali since the age of 5 and let's just say someone has put a gun in my face before and they got fucked up (I was really stupid and young when this happened, and I feel like an idiot getting involved with people like that).
How many someones at the same time?

AGHHHH! Is anyone even listening to what I am saying?!? GEEZE! Read it carefully, I'm ONLY talking about people who are physically fit, have the time, and the resources, and are fully aware that they could be assaulted. ONLY those people. ONLY!!! *rips my own hair out in a fit of rage* :mad:

You assume that people are untouchable. You can still kill a 9th degree BlackBelt if you shoot him when he is not looking. You still have a chance to smack him with a blunt weapon if he didn't see you.

Chance comes into play at times.

It would be time to toss the goverment if our courts started "I'm sorry but your folder says you are a trained shooter and know self defense; case dismissed."

The fact a person is fit and trained does not exclude him from the full protection of the law.

AGHHHH! Is anyone even listening to what I am saying?!? GEEZE! Read it carefully, I'm ONLY talking about people who are physically fit, have the time, and the resources, and are fully aware that they could be assaulted. ONLY those people. ONLY!!! *rips my own hair out in a fit of rage* :mad:

No. Even then, they are still not guilty of anything for having a crime committed against them. It's a ridiculous theory.

How many someones at the same time?

Well there were two guys, one was flashing his gun in my face and the other dude was armed but he had his weapon "holstered". I took down the first guy and got his gun away from him and while the other guy was reaching for his I took him down and got his weapon away from him as well, and that's when I proceeded to run for my life.

The reason for the fighting is one of my friends (well he's not anymore thankfully) stole some drugs from these guys and I was hanging out with him and they came looking for him and tried to intimidate him into either giving the drugs back or paying to make up for it, so being the stupid, young, irrational, testosterone fueled boy I was, I felt obligated to stand up for my friend.

Quite true, but I'd say that people who are in the 70% to 90% range have no excuse. The first duty of any parent is to protect the lives of their children at all costs, if you are capable of doing that yet refuse to enhance your defensive capabilities, that to me is inexcusable, especially in this day and age when you know how tough the world can be.

Does this thread only apply to people who have others to protect? I am non-violent (I wouldn't call myself a true pacifist because sometimes someone just needs a good ass-kicking) and do not know any form of martial arts. I also have had no formal weapons training. I do not plan to get training in these areas.

However, if, say, I'm walking in downtown T.O. (that's Toronto for those who don't have maple syrup in their veins) and am attacked by a group of hoodlums, I will most definately try to defend myself, even though I will probably become horribly maimed in the process.

What I'm trying to say is: even if the person is a victim of a violent crime, they more than less likely tried to defend themselves to the best of their ability. A victim cannot be held accountable just because that ability isn't on par with someone with formal training.

In the case of a robbery, where a person may cough up their belonings just to remain unharmed, if the victim is beaten senseless even while he complied with his/her attacker's orders, he can't be blamed. If a person is going to beat a defenseless person even after aquiring their valuables, that person is 100% accountable and also deserves a severe ass-kicking. Preferably one that ends in being sodomized by a 400 lb mountain man named Jethro.

Well there were two guys, one was flashing his gun in my face and the other dude was armed but he had his weapon "holstered". I took down the first guy and got his gun away from him and while the other guy was reaching for his I took him down and got his weapon away from him as well, and that's when I proceeded to run for my life.

The reason for the fighting is one of my friends (well he's not anymore thankfully) stole some drugs from these guys and I was hanging out with him and they came looking for him and tried to intimidate him into either giving the drugs back or paying to make up for it, so being the stupid, young, irrational, testosterone fueled boy I was, I felt obligated to stand up for my friend.
Well, they tried to intimidate him. If they would have known that you learned martial arts, they maybe would have shot you outright to lessen the danger and intimidated your friend afterwards. The supprise worked in your favour. I wouldn't count on it to often. A society where everybody referce to violence would only breed a climate of paranoia.

The perp is always to blame, never the victim. Jsut becuase you can take something form someone by force doesn't give you the right to.

Attitude counts as much in a combat situation as training. I don't care how well you are trained, attidude matters. That is why two seperate soldiers, or any other trained personel, can recieve the same training, face the same situation, and one lives and the other dies. I've seen soldiers who were being shot at unable to pull the trigger.

This is one of the main reasons that many experts say that less than 10% of american males are fit for frontline combat duty. It has less to do with physical ability and more to do with the will to do what needs doing.

When dealing with criminals, remember a few things. Most criminals are lazy and cowards. They are looking for the easy way out. Bullies are a great example of a coward, they intentionally target those who don't seem to be able to stand up for themselves. So if you present yourself with confindence or they know that you have training, they will most likely go after another target.

I'm licenced to teach self defence, both armed and unarmed. One of the first things that I teach? How to walk.

I think that defense should be encouraged (by both government and media/society) though one should not be punished for being unable to defend themselves.

People should learn how to defend themselves. However, people everywhere (especially America) reserve the right to be dumbasses.

I think Wesley Snipes in Demoltion Man said it best:
"Look man, you can't take away people's right to be assholes."

A woman is walking home down a dark alley around midnight and gets attacked.

Should she have some means of self-defense: YES
Should she choose a better path home: YES

We as a free people reserve and hold dearly the right to be stupid.

People should learn how to defend themselves. However, people everywhere (especially America) reserve the right to be dumbasses.

I think Wesley Snipes in Demoltion Man said it best:
"Look man, you can't take away people's right to be assholes."

A woman is walking home down a dark alley around midnight and gets attacked.

Should she have some means of self-defense: YES
Should she choose a better path home: YES

We as a free people reserve and hold dearly the right to be stupid.

only too true, but we also have the right to live free of fear from shitbags.

I'm sure there are situations where the victim of a violent act brought it on themselves through personal weakness. The example that springs to my mind is when you've got somebody going hysterical for one reason or another, and they are too "weak" to get control, and somebody smacks them to snap them out of it.

A woman is walking home down a dark alley around midnight and gets attacked.

Should she have some means of self-defense: YES
Should she choose a better path home: YES

Do either of these things in any way reduce the culpability of the assaulter? HELLS NO.

Yes, everybody should be able to defend themselves. But NOBODY has the right to assault, rape, or murder another person, no matter how "weak" that other person may be. I don't care if the woman was walking down a dark alley naked holding a bag of money...nobody has the RIGHT to hurt her.

I don't care if the woman was walking down a dark alley naked holding a bag of money...nobody has the RIGHT to hurt her.
Can I at least take a picture? :p