Was not inferring anything, I asked for clarification because it seemed like that is what you were saying.
This was not a stranger, this was his fiance. So, your 'dangerous stranger' hypothetical is irrelevant and a pathetic attempt to push the blame on the victim. For the third time, I do not have daughters. If I did, would not want them to dress provocatively for a myriad of reasons. Among them is the fact that people might consider it an invitation because she would be 'looking for trouble'. Though, I am not sure what that has to do with the discussion at hand. How would you feel if it was your daughter that Ray Rice dragged out of the elevator? Would you still think she was 'looking for trouble'? On Sep 9, 2014 6:54 PM, "Rick Faircloth" <[email protected]> wrote: > > No, Scott, I'm not saying that. I said only what I said. Stop inferring > from my remarks. > > I said a man has a right to defend himself if attacked by a woman. I > would not even hit > my wife if she were to slap me. However, if a stranger, even a woman, > appeared to me > to be a mortal threat, the stranger would be shot. For instance, if she > came at me with > a knife or a gun, she would be shot. I'm not going to take the chance of > getting killed to avoid > shooting someone. She attacked and provoked a response. What should I > do? Just > allow her to kill me? > > But, concerning dressing provocatively: didn't you say you have > daughters, Scott? > Do you want them to go out in public dressed provocatively? If not, why > not? > > > On 9/9/2014 4:08 PM, Scott Stroz wrote: > > Are you saying Ray Rice was 'defending' himself when he knocked his > fiance > > unconscious? Because..it sure does seem that way. > > > > As has been pointed out in the thread, the issue for most is one of > > proportional response. Would you feel he had a right to defend himself by > > shooting her? According to you , he was being assaulted, and, following > > your 'logic' he should be bale to respond how he sees fit, right? > > > > I know you cannot see it (or refuse to admit it), but by saying 'she was > > asking for trouble' you are blaming her for what happened and in the > > process condoning his actions. Just like when people say, 'look at how > she > > was dressed..she was asking for trouble' after a woman gets raped. > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Rick Faircloth <[email protected] > > > > wrote: > > > >> No, because a woman's right to dress provocatively does not allow a man > the > >> right to rape her. > >> > >> However, a woman's assault on a man does allow a man the right to defend > >> himself. > >> > >> In the same way, a man's sexual assault of a woman entitles her to > >> defend herself. > >> > >> > >> On 9/9/2014 3:10 PM, Scott Stroz wrote: > >>> On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Rick Faircloth < > >> [email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> No, asshole, it reeks of "she was asking for trouble." > >>>> > >>> When a woman is raped would you say the same if she was dressed > >>> provocatively? > >>> > >> > >> > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:372273 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
