Re: making violence illegal
- --- In WorldCitizen@yahoogroups.com, "ro-esp" <ro-esp@...> wrote:
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: Gary Shepherd <gshepher@...>
> > My understanding is that violence is usually defined as a
> > forceful act undertaken for harmful or destructive purposes.
> That's not a workable definition. It would mean that if you
> kick people for fun, it isn't violence..
> Joe said:
> > The one I prefer is "physical damage for which one may
> > wind up requiring treatment at a hospital emergency room."
> That's a very narrow definition Joe. How would making that type
> of violence (only that type) illegal help us? We could still
> eachother,cheat one another out of our livelyhood, coerce in allThat's preposterous. Something need not be violent for it to be
> kinds of ways... Rich corporations could still buy up so much food
> (for instance to produce agrofuels) that entire nations would go
> hungry.... and if the hungry would break into the corporation's
> store and kick a guard to get to the food - they would do
> something "illegal"
> groetjes, Ronaldo
There is nothing to stop us from making those other objectionable
behaviors illegal without defining them as "violence." And it has
the further benefit of giving us a workable definition of "violence."