i'm not twisting anything
you twice mentioned he had tatts and was scary you f**king homo
Oh and the neck tatts- Yeah I guess most these guys are really into there art.
Unfortunately men lose status in the eyes of many for things like this.If the scenario you outlined was in fact how you state then he probably should have called the cops on her in the past and/or taken an AVO out against her.
100%. Well said mate.I don't disagree. Probably wouldn't but it should.
I don't care who it is really, DV cases need to be taken far more seriously than they are.
Sure but does that make what they did wrong? Why is only some revenge ok? If someone punched somebody you loved and then you went looking for them and punched them you have also committed a crime.Then they get charged and arrested, for instigating physical violence in a non-physical situation.
Life is indeed a great leveller but if you're breaking the law to give someobody 'what they deserve' you are still breaking the law.I believe that people get what's coming to them, and that there are situations where people deserve to be punished for their actions...and that life is a great leveller.
Right. But now you're 25 and have had a couple of years to think about it, you claim you'd do it again.At the time, the decision on what was fair revenge was made by a 22 year old male who was face to face with the asshat that had used a 42kg, 4'11 woman as a punching bag and was living with no regret.
Correct, obviously.If someone punched somebody you loved and then you went looking for them and punched them you have also committed a crime.
Which (physical) revenge is ok/not a crime?Sure but does that make what they did wrong? Why is only some revenge ok?
FFS CasperI have tatts.
Whats tatts got to do with jury duty and being a nut. KE is an imposing figure. If he lost his shit i wouldnt provoke him. Id curl up in a ball and hope he quietly left.
Id feel intimidated. Id maybe even leak a little urine.
Do you kill ants/spiders or shoot animals?
Do you let a plant finish its cycle before removing it from the ground?
Who made the rules that you follow in this life?
Well some people believe in an eye for an eye. Most poeple don't believe that everything that is illegal is wrong, nor that everything that is wrong should be illegal.Correct, obviously.
Which (physical) revenge is ok/not a crime?
Well some people believe in an eye for an eye. Most poeple don't believe that everything that is illegal is wrong, nor that everything that is wrong should be illegal.
If you won't back your opinion then you have to accept people will question its validity. We learn very little without having our opinions challenged.If you're looking for one of your pedantic arguments, you'll have to play my part as well from here on in, though. I'm not arguing philosophy with a bloke whose philosophy is arguing.
I blame whoever packaged the New Testament (for Christians) with the Old (for Jews). Sure it's good to see how things have changed but as is stated in the second epistle of Peter, going back to what didn't work is like a dog returning to its vomit. Ironically, this phrase is copied from Proverbs in the Old Testament.You can't blame people for being confused. The Old Testament tells us to go for the 'eye for an eye' approach, but the Sermon on the Mount tells us to 'turn the other cheek'. I guess you could do both, but it would be tricky.
If you won't back your opinion then you have to accept people will question its validity. We learn very little without having our opinions challenged.
Just stick with the chilled out new testament and what a man called Jesus Christ said. The old testament is just filled with violent fables.You can't blame people for being confused. The Old Testament tells us to go for the 'eye for an eye' approach, but the Sermon on the Mount tells us to 'turn the other cheek'. I guess you could do both, but it would be tricky.
Well some people believe in an eye for an eye. Most poeple don't believe that everything that is illegal is wrong, nor that everything that is wrong should be illegal.