• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Did this racist deserve to get punched?

Did this racist get what he deserved?

  • Yes

    Votes: 28 90.3%
  • No

    Votes: 1 3.2%
  • Unsure (please explain)

    Votes: 2 6.5%

  • Total voters
    31
Watch the video and judge for yourselves.



Since the start of the confrontation is not in the video, how can anyone actually come to a absolute conclusion on what was happening?

So, he told them to go back to Nigeria. Big deal. What did they say or do that wasn't in the video?
 
Drunken man arguing with kids, it's looks like average comic youtube video, so what should i see in that video? But she's right in something. It's the 21st century and in the 21st century there is no place for drunken people and kids which are walking on streets late night.
 
Here is a guide I will go by before I watch:

1Did the guy who got punched put his hands on or spit on the person who hit him?

If so...yes.

If not? Did he invade their space and make physical contact at all?

Then yes.

If none are true? No.

You can't punch someone for being stupid, racist, or annoying if you have free speech. So you tell me? Was it justified? lol.
 
Alright, just watched the video.

1. The guy who threw the punch was under absolutely no compulsion to stay there. He was perfectly free to move on.
2. The punch was outrageously disproportionate to the push.

The punching man was clearly enjoying the trouble and was happy to escalate as far as he could. Verdict: both racist and punching man qualify for two weeks of community service and to rethink their lives.
 
im curious what people think could of happened before the video started that would negate the assault on the guy causing him to defend himself and punch the guy?

not saying its impossible but i cant think of anythign rational or likely that changes anything
 
im curious what people think could of happened before the video started that would negate the assault on the guy causing him to defend himself and punch the guy?

not saying its impossible but i cant think of anythign rational or likely that changes anything

Based on the video evidence alone, that wasn't self defense. I can't imagine a court in Western Civilization that would agree it was.
 
Based on the video evidence alone, that wasn't self defense. I can't imagine a court in Western Civilization that would agree it was.

it most certainly was self defense :shrug:
I cant imagine a court in the US that would say it wasnt

guy was warned not to get close, then warned not to invade personal space, he ignored those requests and repeated to invade space then initiated force/aggression and assault resulting in him getting free dental work :)

if a person doesnt want punch then they shouldn't assault others
 
it most certainly was self defense :shrug:
I cant imagine a court in the US that would say it wasnt

guy was warned not to get close, then warned not to invade personal space, he ignored those requests and repeated to invade space then initiated force/aggression and assault resulting in him getting free dental work :)

if a person doesnt want punch then they shouldn't assault others

Judge to Punching Man (PM) (you have to read it in Judge Judy's voice): Sir, why didn't you just walk away when the other man was spouting racial obscenities?
PM: I dunno, just didn't feel like it, the dude was funny I guess.
Judge: And why did you involve yourself in this verbal altercation?
PM: The dude was a twat.
Judge: And when he approached you and pushed you why didn't you walk away then?
PM: Walk away? That's a coward thing to do. 'Sides, I was defending myself.
Judge: Defending yourself? Did you fear for your safety?
PM: Uh, no.
Judge: Do you have pictures of any injuries?
PM: Injuries? He just pushed me.
Judge: Right. Baliff, whack both these men in the pee-pees.

Being serious, though, one thing that is stressed very clearly in every martial arts discipline I've ever taken, especially Kenpo which has the potential to do some serious damage, is that when the opportunity to walk away presents itself, you walk the **** away. And this isn't for some schmaltzy Buddhist reasoning...it's to legally protect yourself. So a guy comes up to you and pushes you and you remember all those Kenpo Karate moves you spent thousands of dollars and countless hours exhaustively learning, and you break his right arm, crush one of his testicles, take out an eye and break both kneecaps. Guess which one the cops arrest? The legal jargon will vary, but the concept comes down to disproportionate responses, especially when the ability to safely remove yourself was available at all stages of the altercation.
 
Last edited:
1.)Judge to Punching Man (PM) (you have to read it in Judge Judy's voice): Sir, why didn't you just walk away when the other man was spouting racial obscenities?
PM: I dunno, just didn't feel like it, the dude was funny I guess.
Judge: And why did you involved yourself in this verbal altercation?
PM: The dude was a twat.
Judge: And when he approached you and pushed you why didn't you walk away then?
PM: Walk away? That's a coward thing to do. 'Sides, I was defending myself.
Judge: Defending yourself? Do you have any pictures of injuries?
PM: Injuries? He just pushed me.
Judge: Right. Baliff, whack both these men in the pee-pees.

2.)Being serious, though, one thing that is stressed very clearly in every martial arts discipline I've ever taken, especially Kenpo which has the potential to do some serious damage, is that when the opportunity to walk away presents itself, you walk the **** away.
3.) And this isn't for some schmaltzy Buddhist reasoning...it's to legally protect yourself.
4.) So a guy comes up to you and pushes you and you remember all those Kenpo Karate moves you spent thousands of dollars and countless hours exhaustively learning, and you break his right arm, crush one of his testicles, take out an eye and break both kneecaps. Guess which one the cops arrest?

1.)well if we are going to invent stuff i can too :) and yes i know you did that just to try and get me to see your point ;)

Judge to Punching Man (PM) (you have to read it in Judge Judy's voice): Sir, why didn't you just walk away when the other man was spouting racial obscenities?
PM: it was in front of my building and i wanted to make sure my girlfriend and family was safe
Judge: And why did you involved yourself in this verbal altercation?
PM: I didnt he approcahed us
Judge: And when he approached you and pushed you why didn't you walk away then?
PM: you want me to turn my back on somebody that just assaulted and attack me that doesnt seem safe or smart
Judge: Defending yourself? Do you have any pictures of injuries?
PM: visual injuries arent needed for an assault to take place, countless cases tell you that, judge Judy should know better
Judge: Right. Baliff, whack both these men in the pee-pees.
PM: judy thats a poor choice of words (whack) and that too would be assault ;)

2.) that would be a subject moral and ethical decision that i may or may not agree with and would be circumstantial
3.) legally this is sound
4.) they would arrest me for become the aggressor and going past the point of defending myself completely different than one push then one punch

now if the guy would of proceeded to kick the guy when he was down THEN that analogy would hold up but right now its not even close.
 
Last edited:
While the legal system may view the punch as an unequal response,
we live in a free society, where we have the freedom to be an A$$.
Exercising said freedom sometimes has consequences, like being punched in the face!
 
1.)well if we are going to invent stuff i can too :) and yes i know you did that just to try and get me to see your point ;)

Judge to Punching Man (PM) (you have to read it in Judge Judy's voice): Sir, why didn't you just walk away when the other man was spouting racial obscenities?
PM: it was in front of my building and i wanted to make sure my girlfriend and family was safe

This response doesn't work, because the PM actively involved himself in the altercation. Judgy Judy would chew him up and crap him out for that answer.

Judge: And why did you involved yourself in this verbal altercation?
PM: I didnt he approcahed us

Judge Judy, after having chewed him up and crapped him out as described above, would proceed to tie him down to a train track and run him over with a locomotive for this lie: PM verbally involved himself in the altercation at 1:56 in the video.

Judge: And when he approached you and pushed you why didn't you walk away then?
PM: you want me to turn my back on somebody that just assaulted and attack me that doesnt seem safe or smart

This is schoolyard logic, and it tends to work poorly in the real, adult world.

Judge: Defending yourself? Do you have any pictures of injuries?
PM: visual injuries arent needed for an assault to take place, countless cases tell you that, judge Judy should know better

Except that without visual injuries, it supports the idea that the racist's attack was not especially serious, and that the punch (especially in the context that PM was never required to be involved in the altercation) was completely disproportionate to the racist's very real, very visible injuries.

2.) that would be a subject moral and ethical decision that i may or may not agree with and would be circumstantial

Sure, it depends, but I would bet that any cop that comes in here would tell you that in the vast majority of fights they have to break up, it's a case of both parties escalating, whereas if one just walked away most of those fights would have never happened. Consider this: why are there some people who've managed to go their entire lives without being in a fight, but you know this one guy who's always in a fight, and it's always the "other guy" who started it? Clearly, the former group of people don't choose to engage in or escalate fights, while the latter is at least happy to escalate them if not start them.
3.) legally this is sound
4.) they would arrest me for become the aggressor and going past the point of defending myself completely different than one push then one punch

Well sure, I was making the point that the first push doesn't constitute a get-out-of-jail card for whaling on the pusher as much as you like. And keep in mind all of this is in the context of being able to remove yourself from the conflict at all stages of the event. I can't stress that enough.
 
Hey, wouldn't it be awesome if the actual Judge Judy joined the thread right now?
 
1.)This response doesn't work, because the PM actively involved himself in the altercation. Judgy Judy would chew him up and crap him out for that answer.
2.)Judge Judy, after having chewed him up and crapped him out as described above, would proceed to tie him down to a train track and run him over with a locomotive for this lie: PM verbally involved himself in the altercation at 1:56 in the video.
3.)This is schoolyard logic, and it tends to work poorly in the real, adult world.
4.)Except that without visual injuries, it supports the idea that the racist's attack was not especially serious, and that the punch (especially in the context that PM was never required to be involved in the altercation) was completely disproportionate to the racist's very real, very visible injuries.



Sure, it depends, but I would bet that any cop that comes in here would tell you that in the vast majority of fights they have to break up, it's a case of both parties escalating, whereas if one just walked away most of those fights would have never happened. Consider this: why are there some people who've managed to go their entire lives without being in a fight, but you know this one guy who's always in a fight, and it's always the "other guy" who started it? Clearly, the former group of people don't choose to engage in or escalate fights, while the latter is at least happy to escalate them if not start them.


Well sure, I was making the point that the first push doesn't constitute a get-out-of-jail card for whaling on the pusher as much as you like. And keep in mind all of this is in the context of being able to remove yourself from the conflict at all stages of the event. I can't stress that enough.

1.) legally that doesnt change anything if thats in front of his place and its his friends or family or he thought someone was going to get hurt
theres nothing to chew, judy is smarter than that
2.) see #1
3.) actually its common sense smart logic. Id be a complete moron to turn my back on somebody that just pushed me. turning your back on a threat is what works poorly lol
4.)and that idea is nothing more than your subjective opinion that doesnt change the fact the drunk guy "assaulted" the other, initiated force and was the aggressor
5.) like i said i dont disagree i simply said its circumstantial , in some circumstances id walk away in some i would not
6.) i agree but i didnt understand bringin it up since thats not what happen nor was sugeest
 
if you're going to act like that when you drink, don't drink. i hate violent, argumentative drunks. it's supposed to be a nice time. get off of my ****ing cloud.

i've seen some of the worst bar fights you could want to see, and i've seen a lot of them. they always start the same way : someone starts acting like an idiot. my advice : don't talk to the idiot. remove yourself from the situation, and possibly even the bar itself.

another rule of thumb : when it's later than midnight, pay attention to which table the tequila shots are going to. and then stay the **** away from that table.

i should make a pamphlet : Helix's guide to a night out without all of the bull****.
 
Watch the video and judge for yourselves.



A single punch to the mouth to a loud mouth ass, then done....that's fine. Sometimes people deserve a pop in the mouth.
 
regardless of who he was, he committed assault and got punched for it.,

Oh come on, the guy who was pushed didn't have to be there. He could have just gone on his merry way and enjoyed the rest of his evening sans drunk asshole, but no, he had to stop and enjoy the spectacle. And not only did he just have to be there, he also had to verbally involve himself. And look at the video again: the very instant he was pushed, it was like his birthday, Christmas, and New Years all rolled into one and he instantly took the shot. There was no "Oh crap, this drunk asshole is shoving me!" just instantly decking him as hard as he could. The guy who threw the punch was clearly looking for trouble, found it, escalated it and enjoyed every moment of it -- he wasn't innocent, being a part of that incident was his choice. Both those assholes should do community service for being idiots for contributing in their own little way to dragging the human race down.

Saying that guy was "defending himself" does an incredible disservice to actual innocent people who are just trying to mind their own business and are assaulted anyway.
 
Last edited:
Watch the video and judge for yourselves.



The man was acting in an aggressive manner, he several times advanced threateningly on the woman and then the black man. He shoved the black man, initiating an assault.

Were I on a jury, he walks: self defense, he was protecting himself
 
Oh come on, the guy who was pushed didn't have to be there. He could have just gone on his merry way and enjoyed the rest of his evening sans drunk asshole, but no, he had to stop and enjoy the spectacle. And not only did he just have to be there, he also had to verbally involve himself. And look at the video again: the very instant he was pushed, it was like his birthday, Christmas, and New Years all rolled into one and he instantly took the shot. There was no "Oh crap, this drunk asshole is shoving me!" just instantly decking him as hard as he could. The guy who threw the punch was clearly looking for trouble, found it, escalated it and enjoyed every moment of it -- he wasn't innocent, being a part of that incident was his choice. Both those assholes should do community service for being idiots for contributing in their own little way to dragging the human race down.

Saying that guy was "defending himself" does an incredible disservice to actual innocent people who are just trying to mind their own business and are assaulted anyway.

It's public space, the dude had a right to be there. The other man did not have the right to put his hands on another. He did, he got punched in the mouth for it, done and done. Don't be a loud mouthed jackass if you don't want to get popped in the mouth.
 
It's public space, the dude had a right to be there. The other man did not have the right to put his hands on another. He did, he got punched in the mouth for it, done and done. Don't be a loud mouthed jackass if you don't want to get popped in the mouth.

That's all a very nice thought, but nothing you said disputes the video, which clearly shows that the guy who threw the punch made a conscious choice to involve himself in a volatile situation. He had every available opportunity to walk away and chose not to. And with his girlfriend there too. Jerk.
 
That's all a very nice thought, but nothing you said disputes the video, which clearly shows that the guy who threw the punch made a conscious choice to involve himself in a volatile situation. He had every available opportunity to walk away and chose not to.

So did the other dude. A guy cannot be faulted for occupying space in a public place. There's no law against that. The initiator of everything was the loud mouth who got his just deserts.
 
Back
Top Bottom