ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 19th August 2020, 03:07 PM   #281
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 7,533
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Not about to take advice from the communists, either. LOL.
Well if you're going to reject the expertise of the two groups with the strongest interest in the question (the nazis trying not to fail, their adversaries trying to make them fail) then on what basis are you going to draw conclusions?
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:09 PM   #282
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 5,754
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Well if you're going to reject the expertise of the two groups with the strongest interest in the question (the nazis trying not to fail, their adversaries trying to make them fail) then on what basis are you going to draw conclusions?
How about we take advice from folks who defeated both fascists and communists?
__________________
"Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:12 PM   #283
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth
Posts: 12,493
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
It's this which I'm asking about really. Because I certainly do give a **** about what the law says I may or may not do, if it's likely to result in a criminal record and possibly a prison sentence. Those are pretty significant potential personal consequences.
I think this is a case of miscommunication., but I'm not entirely certain. I think that Thermal's view is that he knows it's the law, but he also is okay with making the choice to break that law in some cases when he merits it appropriate to do so. He's also willing to face the consequences of having chosen to break that law.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:13 PM   #284
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 7,533
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
How about we take advice from folks who defeated both fascists and communists?
Such as? And why should we take their advice instead?
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:13 PM   #285
Distracted1
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 4,910
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
How about we take advice from folks who defeated both fascists and communists?
Religious fundamentalists??
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.
Distracted1 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:15 PM   #286
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth
Posts: 12,493
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
T
Yes, some random person (you) has decided to declare that individuals are not "supposed to" do something or "not allowed to" do something or "should" do something. So what? Some other random people have decided to declare something else about that.
Well, realistically it's not some random person just opining. That's actually the laws involved. You're NOT legally allowed to punch people because you find their beliefs abhorrent - even if Hitler tells you to. Legally, you ARE supposed to contact the authorities and let them handle it.

The people declaring that some other course of action is right are, quite literally, advocating for illegal activity.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:17 PM   #287
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 11,667
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
It's this which I'm asking about really. Because I certainly do give a **** about what the law says I may or may not do, if it's likely to result in a criminal record and possibly a prison sentence. Those are pretty significant potential personal consequences.
Ok, but I hit that already, too. I think our break is that I am concerned with consequences, not obedience. To use a more trivial example, I will speed if I think I can get away with it safely, even though the law says not to.

The law says your not supposed to jump people. But I'm not going in a bad neighborhood running my mouth, even if the law says I can. Consequences are the only factor on my radar.

Eta: Emily's Ninja got me more eloquently
__________________
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain

Last edited by Thermal; 19th August 2020 at 03:18 PM.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:19 PM   #288
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 5,754
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Such as? And why should we take their advice instead?
Because mass murderers probably aren't aligned with our own values?
__________________
"Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:19 PM   #289
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 11,667
Originally Posted by Distracted1 View Post
Religious fundamentalists??
Or the US Government?
__________________
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:19 PM   #290
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 15,891
Originally Posted by Distracted1 View Post
They mitigate because it is recognized by reasonable people that it is entirely possible for anyone up to and including Mother Theresa, Ghandi, Albert Schweitzer, or Mr. Spock to be goaded into assaulting someone if the instigators tone and language is sufficiently inflammatory.

I have read that Mr. Steele is declining to peruse charges against the individual who hit him. Is the State going to peruse them? If not, why not? Possibly because both Mr. Steele and the State recognize that the outcome was pretty much the inevitable one, and that that outcome was brought on by the "victim"?

He knows it was his own damn fault.

Maybe he won't be walking around thinking he is King Kong next time he gets loaded. And we can all have a little more civility in our lives.


Fistly, IT WAS NOT "HIS OWN DAMNED FAULT" THAT HE GOT PUNCHED UNCONSCIOUS. I'm tired of explaining why not, frankly.

And secondly, the police and the Crown actually have a responsibility to pursue the prosecution of the puncher (for assault or ABH, I'd adjudge). Punching someone in the face is a crime against the State. What the "punchee" may or may not prefer is of zero relevance in this instance. Why? Because the whole event was captured perfectly on video. The only reason why assault allegations end up not being prosecuted when the alleged victim declines to cooperate is when the victim him/herself is the only witness to the assault, and where there is insufficient other evidence to warrant charges.

In this case, however, the police and the Crown already have in their possession cast-iron evidence of the offence. There should be no debate whatsoever over charging the puncher and bringing him in front of the courts, and I think he will be charged promptly if the police can identify him (and that might be a big "if", incidentally......). Likewise, the police and Crown have cast-iron evidence of the criminal racist abuse being used by the "punchee", and I expect that man too to be charged and prosecuted accordingly.


(As an interesting comparator, police (rightly) got severely criticised for standing back when BLM protesters in Bristol a couple of months ago tore down a contentious statue in the city centre and dumped it in the river. In that instance, the context was irrelevant: those who tore down the statue and dumped it in the river committed prima facie criminal damage. I'll re-iterate: regardless of one's beliefs about the man depicted in the statue, and/or one's beliefs about whether the statue deserved to stand in the city or was instead an outrage.... that's STILL no defence to the criminal act of pulling down the statue and dumping it in the river. The police belatedly did their jobs in this instance.)
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:24 PM   #291
RedStapler
Muse
 
RedStapler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Posts: 775
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Fistly, IT WAS NOT "HIS OWN DAMNED FAULT" THAT HE GOT PUNCHED UNCONSCIOUS. I'm tired of explaining why not, frankly.

Oh, it absolutely was.

Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
I'm tired of explaining why not, frankly.
You did not explain anything so far.
RedStapler is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:24 PM   #292
Distracted1
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 4,910
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Or the US Government?
Depending on who is posting, they are Communists and Fascists.
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.
Distracted1 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:27 PM   #293
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 46,298
Originally Posted by RedStapler View Post
Oh, it absolutely was.
.
Prove it.

You have been shown many times that the assault was a criminal act. Nobody deserves to be assaulted in the way this guy was.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:29 PM   #294
RolandRat
Muse
 
RolandRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 544
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
*checks forum description*

This is a critical thinking forum, isn't it?

Or have I fallen down some sort of rabbit hole?
I'm not getting your point.
RolandRat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:29 PM   #295
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 7,533
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
Well, realistically it's not some random person just opining. That's actually the laws involved.
And you have some random person just opining that just because something is the law therefor it should be followed, and passing that off as "critical thinking." That is religious thinking (something is true because this authoritative book says so) and not critical thinking.

Quote:
You're NOT legally allowed to punch people because you find their beliefs abhorrent - even if Hitler tells you to. Legally, you ARE supposed to contact the authorities and let them handle it.

The people declaring that some other course of action is right are, quite literally, advocating for illegal activity.
So what? It's illegal to blow up population registries, doesn't mean it can't be a good idea to do so anyway. That's just the thing with fascists, they change the calculation quite a bit.
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:30 PM   #296
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 15,891
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
I think this is a case of miscommunication., but I'm not entirely certain. I think that Thermal's view is that he knows it's the law, but he also is okay with making the choice to break that law in some cases when he merits it appropriate to do so. He's also willing to face the consequences of having chosen to break that law.

It's the "where he merits it appropriate to do so" that I'm wondering about. Even a speeding ticket (assuming one gets caught when one is speeding) has real consequences in terms of things like increased car insurance premiums.

So in one sense, a very rich person might (and often, apparently, does) think: "I don't care about speeding, because I don't care about being caught speeding, because I don't care about having to pay a fair bit more for my car insurance".

And I notice that Thermal indeed used the "speeding" example in his own reply to my post. But of course traffic offences are a different order of magnitude from criminal offences.

And that is precisely why I wondered what types of laws Thermal might find it "appropriate" to break. Would he ever find it "appropriate" to steal a bar of chocolate from a supermarket? Would he ever find it "appropriate" to make materially false declarations on a mortgage application? Would he ever find it "appropriate" to force himself sexually onto a date after dinner, despite the woman saying no? Would he ever find it "appropriate" to punch in the face someone who was using inflammatory (and criminal) language? And if none of these, then WHICH?

And in each of the above cases, would his decision about whether or not to deem it "appropriate" take into account his perceived likelihood of being caught?
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:30 PM   #297
RolandRat
Muse
 
RolandRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 544
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Prove it.

You have been shown many times that the assault was a criminal act. Nobody deserves to be assaulted in the way this guy was.
It was a criminal act. He totally deserved it. That said, I expect if the police catch the guy who threw the punch they will come to the decision to charge him. I would agree with that decision.
RolandRat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:30 PM   #298
Sherkeu
Graduate Poster
 
Sherkeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Disneyland
Posts: 1,778
We used to have ways of dealing with crazy people on trains.

Mostly just ignore their ranting, do not engage, do not make eye contact - move if you can. They are mentally ill, or at best temporarily on something(or off meds).

Nowadays, people feel not only justified to use violence, but to cheer others on to it?
Just be glad you are NOT insane as the annoying ranter and go report harassment if you feel it is needed.
I have seen crazy preachers yell to me that I deserve to be tortured in eternal fire. Never felt a need to punch one in the face.

People have lost their minds.
Sherkeu is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:32 PM   #299
RedStapler
Muse
 
RedStapler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Posts: 775
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Prove it.

You have been shown many times that the assault was a criminal act. Nobody deserves to be assaulted in the way this guy was.
Watch the video.

Also very telling that you ignore the fact that harrasing people on the train is also a crime.

If the guy (who unfortunately seems to have suffered no brain damage) had kept his dumb mouth shut, nothing of this would have happened.
RedStapler is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:32 PM   #300
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth
Posts: 12,493
Originally Posted by Distracted1 View Post
I have read that Mr. Steele is declining to peruse charges against the individual who hit him. Is the State going to peruse them? If not, why not? Possibly because both Mr. Steele and the State recognize that the outcome was pretty much the inevitable one, and that that outcome was brought on by the "victim"?
I don't know about the UK, but I believe that in the US the state won't pursue simple assault charges if the victim doesn't press charges. Not because the assailant is somehow in the right, but because it's just not worth the effort.

And I would say that Mr. Steele is aware that he was being an *******.

That still doesn't make the assailant's actions legal or acceptable, let alone right.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:33 PM   #301
RolandRat
Muse
 
RolandRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 544
Originally Posted by Sherkeu View Post
We used to have ways of dealing with crazy people on trains.

Mostly just ignore their ranting, do not engage, do not make eye contact - move if you can. They are mentally ill, or at best temporarily on something(or off meds).

Nowadays, people feel not only justified to use violence, but to cheer others on to it?
Just be glad you are NOT insane as the annoying ranter and go report harassment if you feel it is needed.
I have seen crazy preachers yell to me that I deserve to be tortured in eternal fire. Never felt a need to punch one in the face.

People have lost their minds.
You think it is only now that people cheer on violence or feel justified to use it? Really?
RolandRat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:34 PM   #302
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 7,533
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Because mass murderers probably aren't aligned with our own values?
You don't need to be aligned with anyone's values to have a strong interest in getting the answer to a particular question right. Namely the question: what is the weakness of fascists? The fascists having a strong interest as they didn't want to fail, and the communists having a strong interest as they didn't want to be thrown into concentration camps if the fascists did not fail. So until you come up with something better, I'll go by this: It is always justified to punch a fascist.
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:34 PM   #303
Distracted1
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 4,910
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Fistly, IT WAS NOT "HIS OWN DAMNED FAULT" THAT HE GOT PUNCHED UNCONSCIOUS. I'm tired of explaining why not, frankly.

And secondly, the police and the Crown actually have a responsibility to pursue the prosecution of the puncher (for assault or ABH, I'd adjudge). Punching someone in the face is a crime against the State. What the "punchee" may or may not prefer is of zero relevance in this instance. Why? Because the whole event was captured perfectly on video. The only reason why assault allegations end up not being prosecuted when the alleged victim declines to cooperate is when the victim him/herself is the only witness to the assault, and where there is insufficient other evidence to warrant charges.

In this case, however, the police and the Crown already have in their possession cast-iron evidence of the offence. There should be no debate whatsoever over charging the puncher and bringing him in front of the courts, and I think he will be charged promptly if the police can identify him (and that might be a big "if", incidentally......). Likewise, the police and Crown have cast-iron evidence of the criminal racist abuse being used by the "punchee", and I expect that man too to be charged and prosecuted accordingly.


(As an interesting comparator, police (rightly) got severely criticised for standing back when BLM protesters in Bristol a couple of months ago tore down a contentious statue in the city centre and dumped it in the river. In that instance, the context was irrelevant: those who tore down the statue and dumped it in the river committed prima facie criminal damage. I'll re-iterate: regardless of one's beliefs about the man depicted in the statue, and/or one's beliefs about whether the statue deserved to stand in the city or was instead an outrage.... that's STILL no defence to the criminal act of pulling down the statue and dumping it in the river. The police belatedly did their jobs in this instance.)
You have explained why it is "illegal". Or, perhaps more accurately you have demonstrated that it is illegal.

You have not, as you claim, explained how the consequence of Mr. Steeles' actions was not his own doing.

Are you suggesting that he had an intellect so addled by drink or simple stupidity that he could not grok what the likely result of his behavior would be?
Or, that he was compelled by outside forces to behave the way he did- perhaps a loved one was being held hostage to his performance of this act?

The title of this split thread is "the ethics of punching....", not "the legality" of such. Conceded in advance that the two are intertwined.
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.
Distracted1 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:34 PM   #304
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 15,891
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
And you have some random person just opining that just because something is the law therefor it should be followed, and passing that off as "critical thinking." That is religious thinking (something is true because this authoritative book says so) and not critical thinking.

Yeah.... you ought to read up about how/why laws are made (and unmade) in modern liberalised democracies. I touched on the subject in a recent post here (HINT: we're a long way from "tablets of stone" in 2020)




Quote:

So what? It's illegal to blow up population registries, doesn't mean it can't be a good idea to do so anyway. That's just the thing with fascists, they change the calculation quite a bit.

You can't possibly be comparing a) actions during war under illegal occupying forces with b) 2020 in the USA or Europe, can you? YOU CAN?? Wow.
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:34 PM   #305
RedStapler
Muse
 
RedStapler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Posts: 775
Originally Posted by Sherkeu View Post
We used to have ways of dealing with crazy people on trains.

Mostly just ignore their ranting, do not engage, do not make eye contact - move if you can. They are mentally ill, or at best temporarily on something(or off meds).

Nowadays, people feel not only justified to use violence, but to cheer others on to it?
Just be glad you are NOT insane as the annoying ranter and go report harassment if you feel it is needed.
I have seen crazy preachers yell to me that I deserve to be tortured in eternal fire. Never felt a need to punch one in the face.

People have lost their minds.
Black people getting harrassed in a public place and all people care about is the poor guy who got decked. Yeah, people have lost their minds.

Centrism paving the way for fascism. Disgusting.
RedStapler is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:36 PM   #306
Sherkeu
Graduate Poster
 
Sherkeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Disneyland
Posts: 1,778
Originally Posted by RolandRat View Post
You think it is only now that people cheer on violence or feel justified to use it? Really?

No. People have always done that.

I expect a higher standard for this board, and otherwise educated, sane persons.
Sherkeu is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:37 PM   #307
Distracted1
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 4,910
Originally Posted by Sherkeu View Post
We used to have ways of dealing with crazy people on trains.

Mostly just ignore their ranting, do not engage, do not make eye contact - move if you can. They are mentally ill, or at best temporarily on something(or off meds).

Nowadays, people feel not only justified to use violence, but to cheer others on to it?
Just be glad you are NOT insane as the annoying ranter and go report harassment if you feel it is needed.
I have seen crazy preachers yell to me that I deserve to be tortured in eternal fire. Never felt a need to punch one in the face.

People have lost their minds.
The man who got punched was not just ranting. He had picked out three people for special attention and was doing all he could to goad them into a fight.
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.
Distracted1 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:37 PM   #308
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 5,754
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
So until you come up with something better, I'll go by this: It is always justified to punch a fascist.
What is the general moral principle at play here? Is is always okay to physically attack someone whose ideology is opposed to your own? Violently opposed to your own? Calls for violence against those whom you value?
__________________
"Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin

Last edited by d4m10n; 19th August 2020 at 03:39 PM.
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:37 PM   #309
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 15,891
Originally Posted by Distracted1 View Post
You have not, as you claim, explained how the consequence of Mr. Steeles' actions was not his own doing.


"My wife wouldn't stop arguing with me about how I gamble all our money away, so I punched her in the face. She brought it on herself, your honour. I even warned her!"
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:38 PM   #310
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth
Posts: 12,493
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
"If you cannot convince a fascist, acquaint his head with the pavement."

- paraphrazed from Leon Trotsky, 1934


"If you cannot convince a Jew, acquaint their body with the rack."

- paraphrased from Torquemada
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:38 PM   #311
RedStapler
Muse
 
RedStapler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Posts: 775
Originally Posted by Sherkeu View Post
No. People have always done that.

I expect a higher standard for this board, and otherwise educated, sane persons.
Can you please show us your posts where you spoke out against the openly racist people in this forum?

If not, can I assume that you are only upset when a racist gets a nice beatdown?

Last edited by RedStapler; 19th August 2020 at 03:41 PM.
RedStapler is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:39 PM   #312
Distracted1
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 4,910
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
I don't know about the UK, but I believe that in the US the state won't pursue simple assault charges if the victim doesn't press charges. Not because the assailant is somehow in the right, but because it's just not worth the effort.

And I would say that Mr. Steele is aware that he was being an *******.

That still doesn't make the assailant's actions legal or acceptable, let alone right.
It does not make them legal. The rest does not follow.
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.
Distracted1 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:39 PM   #313
RolandRat
Muse
 
RolandRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 544
Originally Posted by Sherkeu View Post
No. People have always done that.

I expect a higher standard for this board, and otherwise educated, sane persons.
Higher standard than thinking some gobby prat got what he deserved? This isn't the downfall of society. The guy will be charged of caught and as I previously said, I agree with that.

It wont change my opinion that the loud mouthed twat got what was coming.
RolandRat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:40 PM   #314
RedStapler
Muse
 
RedStapler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Posts: 775
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post

"My wife wouldn't stop arguing with me about how I gamble all our money away, so I punched her in the face. She brought it on herself, your honour. I even warned her!"
Comparing an arguing wife with a racist heckler.
RedStapler is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:40 PM   #315
Distracted1
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 4,910
Originally Posted by RedStapler View Post
Can you please show us your posts where you spoke out againt the openly racist people in this forum?

If not, can I assume that you are only upset when a racist gets a nice beatdown?
Why ask permission for something you are going to do anyway?
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.
Distracted1 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:40 PM   #316
RolandRat
Muse
 
RolandRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 544
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post

"My wife wouldn't stop arguing with me about how I gamble all our money away, so I punched her in the face. She brought it on herself, your honour. I even warned her!"
Terrible argument.
RolandRat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:40 PM   #317
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 11,667
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
It's the "where he merits it appropriate to do so" that I'm wondering about. Even a speeding ticket (assuming one gets caught when one is speeding) has real consequences in terms of things like increased car insurance premiums.

So in one sense, a very rich person might (and often, apparently, does) think: "I don't care about speeding, because I don't care about being caught speeding, because I don't care about having to pay a fair bit more for my car insurance".

And I notice that Thermal indeed used the "speeding" example in his own reply to my post. But of course traffic offences are a different order of magnitude from criminal offences.

And that is precisely why I wondered what types of laws Thermal might find it "appropriate" to break. Would he ever find it "appropriate" to steal a bar of chocolate from a supermarket? Would he ever find it "appropriate" to make materially false declarations on a mortgage application? Would he ever find it "appropriate" to force himself sexually onto a date after dinner, despite the woman saying no? Would he ever find it "appropriate" to punch in the face someone who was using inflammatory (and criminal) language? And if none of these, then WHICH?

And in each of the above cases, would his decision about whether or not to deem it "appropriate" take into account his perceived likelihood of being caught?
What was appropriate would vary on circumstances, n'est-ce pas? Can't think of a reason to steal chocolate. It's somebody else's stuff, not my business. And I've got serious qualms about violating or hurting someone else, so the date thing is out. My wife frowns on me dating anyway.

Just being a law is not a huge incentive for compliance, although one should generally comply. Avoiding fines and jail and stuff. But the law is not always infallible; frequently wrong, in fact. See federal status of marijuana, for instance.
__________________
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:41 PM   #318
SuburbanTurkey
Philosopher
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 6,078
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
Hmm. What is it that you've done? And what makes you so certain that nobody else has done anything?
Call it a hunch.
__________________
Gobble gobble
SuburbanTurkey is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:42 PM   #319
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth
Posts: 12,493
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Such as? And why should we take their advice instead?
You're asking why we should take advice on how to overcome [problem A] from the people who successfully overcame [problem A] rather than from the people who caused [problem A]?

I dunno, that seems pretty straightforward to me. I mean, I think advice from someone who has successfully cleaned graffiti off of the side of buildings would probably be a better option for how to get graffiti off of walls than advice from the person who put the graffiti there in the first place. But maybe that's just me.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th August 2020, 03:42 PM   #320
RedStapler
Muse
 
RedStapler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Posts: 775
Originally Posted by Distracted1 View Post
Why ask permission for something you are going to do anyway?
Hence the first sentence (that you intentionally ignored) and the "if not"

Last edited by RedStapler; 19th August 2020 at 03:43 PM.
RedStapler is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:55 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.