Wednesday, March 10, 2010

When is violence necessary


I recently heard a story about a group of guys who beat up an intruder to a bloody pulp. I saw horrific pictures of the event; it was graphic and definitely enough to keep me up at night. It had me thinking when is violence necessary?

According to Legal-Explanations.com, self defense is the action by which a person protects himself from any bodily harm arising out of an encounters or attacks from another person either by protecting him or by blocking the opponent’s advancement by a counter attack. Self defense is not a crime so accused may be tempted to show their action as self defense to escape punishment.

I agree that one should use excessive force when protecting your loved ones and belongs but where should one draw the line? Some justify the violence by saying that they are ‘teaching’ the guilty party a lesson – but is that not what our justice system is supposed to do??? I feel that one can detain the criminal and get the police to handle the situation. Then again, I can understand but not condone that people are taking the law into their own hands because our justice system is so pathetic and corrupt.

With the recent news indicating the government grants permission to use deadly force when apprehending a criminal is shocking. The human race has already proved on countless occasions that we are incapable of resisting the temptation to abuse power. Where does one draw the line? Apparently the line is drawn where ever the chalk man has lain.

1 comment:

  1. Very good, a different topic but great insight. When is violence acceptable, is violence acceptable? Truth is, we will do whatever to protect our loved ones.

    ReplyDelete