Obviously we all know that if a situation develops where someone’s definitely going to hit you, it’s better to hit them first. Here’s the question though: can you ever be completely sure that striking first is justified? Can you ever know for certain that it is the right thing to counter violence that you may have incorrectly anticipated? Does striking first, even when it is justified, make you an asshole?
I’ll clarify that I’m not talking about someone coming up to you in an empty car park and threatening to rob you, because obviously you either give them what they want, run or sock them and you’d be justified in doing any of those things. I’m talking about a situation where a guy is in your face, maybe talking smack, maybe threatening you, maybe threatening your friend, maybe posturing as if he’s going to try and hit you, or something similar. Basically, in a situation where you can’t be completely certain that someone is going to hit you, (which is most conflict situations) is it justifiable to throw the first punch?
Note: I know that to onlookers, the guy who hits first is always the asshole!
Submitted February 02, 2021 at 02:12PM by AMGSlam https://ift.tt/36BfJyA
No comments:
Post a Comment