165
This happened in Louisville, Kentucky (cdn.imgchest.com)
submitted 1 week ago* by to c/crazyfuckingvideos@lemmy.world
286 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -8 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Not siding with him, it seems likely he was in the wrong. But regarding your comment. Hypothetically, let's say he is the recipient of constant abuse. Both verbal and physical, and this was him finally snapping and giving it back. Let's say he has been on the receiving end of his fair share of kicks whilst down. Let's say he previously never wanted to fight back because he isn't violent.

I am not saying that is what happened. But i am saying you cant say "there isn't acceptable context" when it took me 5 seconds to think of some.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago (3 children)

    He is still responsible for his actions. Previous abuse does not excuse assaulting this woman multiple times in this scenario.

    Why are you playing devil's advocate for this man?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] -4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    Sorry, i wasn't clear enough.

    As far as we can tell this man is at fault. He has assaulted this woman.

    I was only pointing out that your blanket statement that there is no context in which this is justified is incorrect. And frankly the attitude is dangerous. Is there any context where the woman can pick up a glass bottle to use as a weapon? Considering the level of harm a glass bottle would cause? Perhaps the justification is she is being attacked by a man that is apparently much stronger than she is? Does that justify it? Or does it only work one way?

    Again. I agree. Given all available evidence, it seems this man has unjustly assaulted this woman. But your attitude towards this is just basic.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    Self defense.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 week ago*

    The order of events.

    Man picks up drink. = normal with no context

    Woman tries to take it = odd with no context

    Man splashes drink in her face = bit of an over reaction with no context

    Woman goes to attack man = dramatic escalation, but no context

    Man pushes woman away = self defence

    Man kicks woman whist she is down = awful. Terrible thing to do. Still no context.

    Man goes to leave = should have just left

    Woman grabs bottle and some words are exchanged = escalation/self defence depending on the context

    Man pushes women down again and leaves. = self defence followed by de escalation.

    I still think it is more likely the man is in the wrong. But given what actually happened you cant claim self defence when you started the fight.

    At least thats how it looks with no context.

    Would you feel the same if she had actually managed to hit him when she tried to attack him. Would him pushing her down seem more justified in your opinion? Or is there really no way you could view this any differently?

    AGAIN! i am on her side. I am just not on yours.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent