Catholic View on Pacificsm?

  • Thread starter Thread starter College_Girl
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
benidict said:
Its a pretty sad world when someone has sympathy for a criminal who violates another. :mad: Im not packing my bags for your guilt trip, and I think you think your manipulative phrases are actually having an impact. Nope, not here. 😛
Click to expand...
It’s a pretty sad world when one believes that an “eye for an eye” is the best way to go about life…hmm “that mean man insulted me…Jesus says I can beat you up now” sounds pretty Christian to me. 👍 God Bless!
 
benidict said:
Its a pretty sad world when someone has sympathy for a criminal who violates another. :mad: Im not packing my bags for your guilt trip, and I think you think your manipulative phrases are actually having an impact. Nope, not here. 😛
Click to expand...
hmm yes Jesus was all about an “eye for an eye” as well 👍
 
hxcCatholic413 said:
your an M.P. as well? Hopefully US Military doesn’t teach that, but then again (Insert: ridiculously funny joke :D) God Bless!
Click to expand...
Yes this is exactly how we are trained. the level of force is determined by the criminal we are dealing with. This kind of attack is a direct threat to life and limb of the victim. That is why we are able to go to this level of force in this instance. The same if someone is attacking a person with a weapon. That is why people like yourself, cannot do the type of job I do. you will hesitate. We dont. Its no laughing matter from my end. If you think there is anything funny about this, then you are truly a disturbed individual. perhaps you have a criminal past yourself?🤷
 
PPeterson said:
I think it’s important to understand that successfully restraining a violent criminal with “minimal violence” requires that you possess a huge amount of skill, and that all the following are true:

-the criminal is unarmed
-he is significantly weaker/worse at fighting than you
-someone is available to notify police
-police can be there within 1-5 minutes

If all of the following are not in place, then your approach is unlikely to work. Personally,
if you got yourself and my wife/child killed by trying to apprehend their attacker with some goofy mcninja aikido moves i would not be very understanding. nor would i see you as a model of Christian virtue.
Click to expand...
well for me I do possess a lot of skill…I happen to be good at communicating with others…the power of words works wonders. By the way body language and eye contact are also a huge plus.
 
hxcCatholic413 said:
well for me I do possess a lot of skill…I happen to be good at communicating with others…the power of words works wonders. By the way body language and eye contact are also a huge plus.
Click to expand...
Until someone calls your bluff…Then what? :eek: Trust me. When someone is hopped up on coke or PCP, your words or body language wont go far… Trust me.
 
I’m happy that we can delete these posts before the 30 minute deadline otherwise I would have been banned a while ago…especially by some of the replies various posters have said…🍕
 
hxcCatholic413 said:
I’m happy that we can delete these posts before the 30 minute deadline otherwise I would have been banned a while ago…especially by some of the replies various posters have said…🍕
Click to expand...
Feel free to put them in a pm. you cant offend me. 😃 I can take worse than you can dish out. LOL! And I am a firm believer in free speech. Go for it. You wont hurt my feeling. feel free to vent. 😉
 
benidict said:
Feel free to put them in a pm. you cant offend me. 😃 I can take worse than you can dish out. LOL! And I am a firm believer in free speech. Go for it. You wont hurt my feeling. feel free to vent. 😉
Click to expand...
haha feelings have passed…nice profile pic btw 😃
 
starshiptrooper said:
You do realize that when trouble happens, you will have literally seconds to respond. In all honesty, I would rather use excessive force to stope some psycho, rather than risk him harming my loved ones. :nunchuk: :stretcher:
Click to expand...
I should probably have refrained from saying how I hoped I would act. Obviously, no one knows how they would act in a situation like that until happens. I hope that I would act in protection not in anger.

I would not, and I doubt many would, condemn someone who used more force than was actually required to stop an attack. How does one gauge necessity, even from an impersonal distance?

Still, it is disturbing that some plan on using more force, more violence, than is required. It is one thing to say that in the moment a person might lose control, or not know how to respond and respond too forcefully. It is quite another to say, from a distance, that in the situation I would beat the hell out of someone.

I should say that I do not remember who said what, and I am not accusing.

The difference between unnecessary violence and the protection of an innocent is not easily defined. It cannot be argued, however, that they are the same- even if they amount to the same in a given circumstance. Intent, here as everywhere, matters. Is it your intent to protect?
 
Beth_Cecilia said:
I should probably have refrained from saying how I hoped I would act. Obviously, no one knows how they would act in a situation like that until happens. I hope that I would act in protection not in anger.

I would not, and I doubt many would, condemn someone who used more force than was actually required to stop an attack. How does one gauge necessity, even from an impersonal distance?

Still, it is disturbing that some plan on using more force, more violence, than is required. It is one thing to say that in the moment a person might lose control, or not know how to respond and respond too forcefully. It is quite another to say, from a distance, that in the situation I would beat the hell out of someone.

I should say that I do not remember who said what, and I am not accusing.

The difference between unnecessary violence and the protection of an innocent is not easily defined. It cannot be argued, however, that they are the same- even if they amount to the same in a given circumstance. Intent, here as everywhere, matters. Is it your intent to protect?
Click to expand...
that is pretty rationale and makes a lot of sense, i.e. it does not resemble pacifism at all.
 
Beth_Cecilia said:
Still, it is disturbing that some plan on using more force, more violence, than is required. It is one thing to say that in the moment a person might lose control, or not know how to respond and respond too forcefully. It is quite another to say, from a distance, that in the situation I would beat the hell out of someone.
Click to expand...
Actually it depends on a number of factors such as one’s capability to hold back, their strength, their styles of combat etc.

They’re not all talents that can be refined. Some are given capacities. For instance, given my current lack of physical strength and poor eyesight, I can neither be a martial artist or a precision shooter. However, suppose I have a crazy trigger finger. It would seem that I would only have one mode of defense and that is outright offense in the form of close-range shooting. You can imagine though how lethal it is to put too many bullets in a body. Who knows I might randomly even shoot something vital?

I believe it’s not wise to judge people who “plan” to do “more violence”. For all you know, that plan could be the only realistic one to put into action when weighing one’s capabilities. Even in martial arts, there are styles that are more offense oriented and devastating yet those could be the only styles a certain person knows.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top