[split] PSA: Hate Speech (discussion of video etc)

[pocaracas]

Which the person in the video emphatically did not agree to and, yet, got one against multiple opponents, as a "response".
An agreement of the kind you suggest presents the violence as a mutual understanding, a contract, instead of a response to the sounds.


That a violent response is to be expected, I don't doubt. Emotion runs high with such charged words.
But you then expect the violent party to be responsible for what they did... interesting.
So, if the violent one is responsible, then, when you're saying that (or agree with) the best way to avoid this violence is by not saying the charged words, you are essentially victim-blaming. Is that it?

I didn't say the violent person is responsible, I said that I had no problem with them being charged with assault.  Dunno how it is where you live, but here there's something in the law here called 'egregious provocation'.  The assaulter would need to demonstrate in court that the provocation which led to the assault was, well, egregious (to be fair, it is most often used in self defense cases, which this clearly wasn't).  Anyone who is assaulted, for any reason, should have the right to bring charges against the violent party.

I'm not sure how you make the case for victim blaming.  Could you be clearer?

Boru

If the violent person is charged with assault and proven guilty (as those would be from the video), while you're wanting the would be victim to just not say the thing that led to him being assaulted, then you are blaming the victim for the crime.
It's clear as glass.

They egregious provocation cannot be called for such cases.

---

BRAVO!!!




Tell that to the guy who ends up in the hospital.

I'd never talk to that racist asshole.

Someone in society has to. And society tends to punish such violence with a far greater penalty than it does to some insult.