Violence you approve of is still violence.
-
-
Replying to @AnarchistNugget @joe_112 and
I don't consider protective use of force the same as violence since it lacks the element of aggression.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Violence without aggression is still violence.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AnarchistNugget @joe_112 and
The WHO defines violence as "intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, ...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bAbAHAdAd @joe_112 and
...against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, ...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bAbAHAdAd @joe_112 and
...which either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting ...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bAbAHAdAd @joe_112 and
...in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment, or deprivation"
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bAbAHAdAd @joe_112 and
The protective use of force does not fall under this definition.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Yes it does. Protective use of physical force can result in injury, etc.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AnarchistNugget @joe_112 and
It has a much lower likelihood and there is no intent to cause injury.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Like I said, if you want to consider it to be violence that's your prerogative. I still don't.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.