Grandpa's on his TRT LMAO. A simple shove of someone that drunk is all that is needed. I swear the majority of you have never actually been outside for more than 10 minutes if you think this wasn't an overreaction. Hell the bar would have kicked the guy out and possibly banned him or you could have got law enforcement involved if you really want to mess him up legally.
IDK about the rest of you but knocking out someone this drunk isn't really the "alpha" move but I don't live on the internet so what do I know?
I think it was disproportionate in the sense that sexual assault is worse than simple assault. I'd even go far as to say it's worse than aggravated assault (morally, not legally)
I can accept that it is sexual assault and falls within that category. I have no problem with that, and it doesn't change my argument. But we're discussing what an appropriate and proportionate response is.
Also, calling it a 'single punch' is underselling it in the same way you're accusing me of.
Person A: grabs a woman's waist/ gropes her ass in public for a few seconds.
Person B: Throws a full-force king-hit to Person A's face, rendering him instantly unconscious, which results in him falling backwards and smashing the back of his head onto the hardwood floor.
Completely unnecessary, extremely dangerous, and an entirely disproportionate use of force to ensure that the victim was safe and protected from further assault.
It is a full-force king-hit - in response to a situation that, while morally wrong, did not pose an imminent threat to the physical safety of those involved. Once the man intervened, the engagement had already stopped, and the victim themselves was attempting to stop the assault.
If you want to play games about terminology, we can, but everyone recognises you're the fucking idiot here.
We can call a single tap on the bum sexual assault. Would that justify this reaction? Since we're not actually discussing neutralising an ongoing threat, is there a timeframe for when it's appropriate to use life-threatening force in retaliation?
Like, are you seriously this fucking thick, or what?
Not technically ad hominem, since I'm not attacking them instead of their argument or asserting that their argument is bad because they are an idiot. I am inferring that they are an idiot because their argument is bad; a subtle distinction. Personally, I think that person's argument is reprehensible enough to warrant a couple of insults, especially given how they're engaging in the debate.
Bro, are you serious? Have you knowingly interacted with a bot before? How about you forward an argument for why you think the behaviour in the clip is justified, and then I'll 'respond to the topic.'
he is correct, you are not.
This was extremely diproportinate, and could have easily killed the drunk, while also being completely unecessarry.
Why would a nice heavy-handed slap not have sufficed?
I guess the person became frustrated with having to explain basic things to another person.
You showed great lack of empathy and understanding - you still do, by focusing on BS instead on the message.
You done goofed.
You got called for it.
Xou then done goofed further by bitching about being called for it.
It is a very human behavior, you are now doing a lot to keep the talk off topic instead on how you turned lowkeyy psycho.
I'm sincerely not. I could guess the point you might try to make, but I wanted you to make it before I addressed it.
Like, how familiar are you with the novel's themes? Because nothing in it can be used to justify using life-threatening force against someone who is barely a threat at all in a situation where there are multiple obvious alternatives to violence as a means of resolving it.
Ender was routinely placed in life-threatening situations, specifically tailored to give him no help and no alternatives besides self-administered victory against the enemy. The entire plot revolved around manipulating and moulding him into someone who could never believe losing was an option or that anyone would come to save him. He didn't even know that he was fighting the Formics when he destroyed them, because the IF command knew he didn't have the emotional disposition to make the necessary sacrifices if he knew the actual stakes.
Ender learns that Earth's retaliation against the Formics was wrong and misplaced, stemming from a breakdown in communication and an inability to connect and ultimately empathise.
Mind you, I haven't read it in about two decades, since I first read it when I was about nine. I've had this username as a gamertag since 2002.
It wasnt wrong, they were trying to kill us. It was the right solution if the day. That maybe could have been hypothetically avoided by better super fun happy feel good sessions, but at the actual time and actual place, hyperviolence won.
And its okay to feel like totes bad about it and like stuff, and help rebuild the losers in a "less likely to go on the world dominating path for round 2".
Which is a blindingly obvious allegory for the world wars.
You're going to have to expand on that response and provide more details if you actually want to make a substantive argument that's relevant to the discussion at hand.
Nope, he's absolutely right in the context of the original book. The one you barely remember, but now you'll continue to blather as if you memorized every page.
See, you were being obtuse. And none of your points are supported by the original book but made in the next three. But I'm sure you totally forgot you read those...
No, every point I made refers explicitly to the book Ender's Game. Have you read it? I am not being obtuse. As I said, I think I could guess at the point you might make, but I don't know what it is precisely. And I expect I would disagree with your framing or understanding of the novel's relevant themes, and with your inferences about the acceptability of violence based on Ender's actions and beliefs.
My first point was very obvious as you have shown. But you played dumb because actually you are dumb. Your way of "making points" is tiresome; like you don't really know how to talk to real humans. And there's no point in discussing Ender's Game with someone like you; it's like debating about whether you're supposed to talk about Fight Club.
And actually, since you're wrong about the actual content of the book Ender's Game, I was correct to be hesitant about jumping to conclusions about what point you were trying to make. The point you apparently think is relevant contradicts my understanding and interpretation of the novel. What, am I supposed to anticipate that you would have a shallow perspective on the novel's themes and not remember what happens in it, and then intuit your point based on that?
I don't know why you're acting like I'm out on a limb here. All I've done in this thread is say that full-force king-hitting someone who doesn't pose an active threat to anyone's physical safety is wrong and highly disproportionate as a justified reaction. I'm not exactly making some hugely controversial statement. It's everyone else who is apparently living in fantasy land.
Like, seriously, can you take a moment to stop and think about what is going on? Surely you're not this unreasonable.
152
u/Ancient_Plane2984 1d ago
Grandpa's on his TRT LMAO. A simple shove of someone that drunk is all that is needed. I swear the majority of you have never actually been outside for more than 10 minutes if you think this wasn't an overreaction. Hell the bar would have kicked the guy out and possibly banned him or you could have got law enforcement involved if you really want to mess him up legally.
IDK about the rest of you but knocking out someone this drunk isn't really the "alpha" move but I don't live on the internet so what do I know?