05-13-2019, 02:03 AM
(05-13-2019, 01:51 AM)blossom Wrote: Depends as in if you are attacked and have no option of retreating, if you are at risk from serious injury, you fend only to stop the attack, with minimal force.
While that is roughly the current norm and a yes and not a maybe as far as i feel, i do have another point to make, why would you, the victim, be assumed to have the responsibility of retreating before you are allowed to respond. In other words, why is the onus of de-escalation placed on the one that receives the situation. So shouldnt the answer be:
"If you are struck you are allowed to strike back until the situation calms or if the other person surrenders you are obligated to stop but as long as the violence follows the initial strike you are not obligated to retreat and have the legal right to defend yourself up to the death of the assailant."
Hmm.
Hard topic.