Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nope, she’ll do it again. It may sound “racist” or whatever, but black women have a hard time controlling themselves when they get angry, and many of them think they have the right to get in people’s faces. I’ve seen it many many times.
They had to get in your face, huh? What were you doing?
Another thread fail as the Statists don't understand the non-aggression principle.
The woman initiated contact first. Violation of the NAP.
Game over. Goodnight. Good luck.
You need to take a nap on this nap stupidity. Just because it's something that you believe in, it don't mean ****. Not to mention that you don't even seem to know how to judge it properly.
The woman broke no law, but the ******* did.
Defending a ***** who sucker punches a mother in front of her kid. Typical Libertarian nonsense.
Just wanted to see if there was a limit here. Apparently not as long as done in the moment.
Well, as you can see from not only this thread but all the others on this board when you have a situation come up and the non-Statists chime in (me, Volobjectarian, rebeldor, T0103E, Gungir, Frank) we line up about 99.9% of the time.
Since the Statists are so keen on democracy and collectivism (one in the same) shouldn't that give you a hint that this principle is vastly superior in moral and logical consistency than statism? You folks are always nearly 50-50 in your votes (just going by elections).
Then after the decision one side enslaves the other in your system. Here, if you aren't attacking me your opinion can be as popular or unpopular as it is without having any impact on your life. I want you to leave me alone as much as you want to be left alone.
You need to take a nap on this nap stupidity. Just because it's something that you believe in, it don't mean ****. Not to mention that you don't even seem to know how to judge it properly.
The woman broke no law, but the ******* did.
Defending a ***** who sucker punches a mother in front of her kid. Typical Libertarian nonsense.
Game over. Goodnight. Good Luck.
Um, she hit him.
No wonder you guys need the government to take care of you. You can't even see straight.
What's a shame is that blacks have no desire to open stores... anywhere, not even in their black neighborhoods. Why is that?
You find it a shame that blacks don’t want to open stores in their own neighborhoods? Really? What’s such a ‘shame’ about it? They don’t own many stores for the same reason that YOU don’t own one!
I mean, I’m black and I have no interest in owning a store either. For what? What’s the appeal in it? You have to work yourself to death for tiny profit margins and sell products at damn near twice the price that they can be had at Walmart, which does you no favors in the popularity department. Convenience stores are a headache no matter where you open them. Why bother?
The point is that a retail opportunity is there for Asians that Asians don’t have in their own neighborhoods or in white neighborhoods. Many a black neighborhood has helped put Asian merchants in the middle class. It’s a relationship of mutual benefit. Asians have something to sell, blacks have the money to buy it. It works fine. But instead of highlighting the positives of this situation, you’d rather use it to bludgeon black folks and put them down in order to make yourself feel better since you’re Asian (although you don’t own squat).
No wonder you guys need the government to take care of you. You can't even see straight.
Any man who would claim that he got 'hit' in that situation would be laughed out of any room he's in.
The woman while walking away, with her back to him, put her hand up backwards. She just happened to glance his shoulder.
Your whole belief system is absurd. it just goes to show why it isn't followed anywhere on earth except hippy communes.
If she violated the NAP, what did Trump do when he physically shoved that guy out of the way at G8(?) last year? A clear violation of the NAP, where was your outrage then?
In the moment, no, not really. Did the initiator of force choose a kitten, sheep, dog, wolf or rabid badger as prey? They'll find out the moment they initiate force, and in that moment, each animal will respond to what its instincts tell it ends a threat. In front of an OK store, the initiator gets punched in the moment. In a FL parking lot, the initiator gets shot in the chest, in the moment. The moment differs between people, places, times, etc. But in the moment, whatever the victim of the initiation of force chooses to do to defend themselves, well, that's up to them.
Also, a lot of your (and others) examples of reductio ad absurdum require a "time out, hold right there while I go find some gruesome device of murder/torture with which to exact my vengeance upon you" component. In the moment, the chances of anyone having a running woodchipper, shotgun, nuclear weapon, galactic star killer neutron beam or whatever, are slim at best. Chances are good an assailant will be punched, threatened with a brandished firearm, or shot with a firearm, as these are things a victim would reasonably have in their possession at the time of an initiation of force.
So your most feasible extreme example would be that lady putting her hand on dude's neck and him pulling a pistol and shooting her in response. Would that be justified? Yes. I wouldn't do it, but I wouldn't have punched her either. Doesn't mean it wouldn't be justified under proper defensive response to a violation of the NAP in the moment.
Humans are supposed to have the ability to discern the level of threat and the appropriate way to address it.
The lady in the video did not threaten to strangle or break his neck. In fact, the point at which you and your buddies were claiming initial violation of the NAP was before the mother even got involved: when the little 5 year old took the keychain.
If the shop owner immediately shot the 5 year old the moment he walked out the door with the unpaid merchandise, would you really think that's justified?
Pretty sickening, no excuse for punching a woman like that in front of her son.
For sure there will soon be very vocal protests and possibly boycotts against asian owned salons across the country if this continues. These people are shooting themselves in the foot with this kind of physically hostile behavior against customers.
National protests against all Asian nail salons as if they're what? Related?
Also not sure why you refer to them as "these people" and no, don't cop out and say you meant nail salon owners because you already designated the problem as "Asian owned salons".
Pretty ugly article on yahoos part designed to stoke racial divisions because two people got into an altercation. But hey, at least they made their $$$ with click bait.
None of the screenshots in the Yahoo article show what this screenshot shows, namely the woman's hand on (or extremely close to) the man's chin. It certainly seems like Yahoo is slanting their coverage to engender sympathy for the woman at the expense of the man. To me, at least, it looks as though the man is defending himself against an angry woman who either assaulted him, or at least came menacingly close to doing so.
None of the screenshots in the Yahoo article show what this screenshot shows, namely the woman's hand on (or extremely close to) the man's chin. It certainly seems like Yahoo is slanting their coverage to engender sympathy for the woman at the expense of the man. To me, at least, it looks as though the man is defending himself against an angry woman who either assaulted him, or at least came menacingly close to doing so.
You need to play the video again. It is not a screenshot, it is a video. 0.06 shows that her BACK was facing the man.
Based on the video, I am seeing a woman walked away. She was very upset, yes. It looks like she used a lot of body language and hand gesture, however, it does not seem to me that she had any intention of hitting the man. Her hand touched the man's shoulder, yes, but I believe it is an "accident".
Maybe others are seeing something else. Earlier I am being accused of making excuses for the woman, I don't think I am. I am simply reporting what I see.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
