Violence for thee, but not for me

[griz]

Wyldone

I’ll try another example to illustrate why a pacifist is being hypocritical to get someone to use force for them. I’ll borrow the part of your comment about the police choosing to use violence when necessary.
Person X hates person Y. Person X also finds violence distasteful. X hires person Z to kill person Y. I think you will agree that person X, despite his refusal to use violence, is morally and legally guilty of murder.

Congratulations on your choice to learn more about self defense. It can be an ugly option, but there are times where the only other option is worse.

 

[WyldOne]

Captain Hoek

If you are going to search for truth, how will you know when you find it?

but...that's the ultimate paradox. i have no blasted clue.

but i'd rather try, and risk "failing", than not try at all.

to everyone else, you've certainly given me something to think about for a good long time.

 

[Quartus]

Yes you do, Oh Great WyldOne! I gave it to you.


I'll sign off this thread with my favorite pacifist story:


A Quaker farmer, blunderbuss in hand, confronted a burglar in his home with these words,

"I would not harm thee for the world, my friend, but thou are standing where I am about to shoot!"

 

[Mike in VA]

Thanks, 45King, I was looking for that Ghandi quote. Pacifism, passive resistance, non-violence only work as tactics in societies with a conscience. If you think thse tactics work with ,say, terrorists, well, you get to be fodder.

The ugly truth is sometimes you have to fight, lest you and society perish. Violence should only be a last resort, when all else fails. Unfortunately, there are members of society who won't behave in a civilized manner, won't be reasoned with, and for whom violence is the most convenient, effective way to get what they want, and they won't be stopped by any other means. They have no conscience. Those who will not fight when faced with this reality are, indeed, cowards and parasites.