Pacifists, I have a question.

[spartandude]

i like to think myself a as a pacifist but i will admit im not perfect in this regard, i however go by a couple of rules
1) i only kill animals that i have an intention to eat or to end suffering
2) i could only kill a person if it is assissted suicide and even then i will attempt to talk them out of it

 

[LetalisK]

I'd take the beating and then have my "associate" find him and blow his face off with a sawed off shotgun.

What? I didn't do it, so I'm technically still a pacifist, right?

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

I am definitely not a true pacifist, but if the guy was just hitting me I would probably walk away. Now, and this will be confusing, if it was a friend there if a good chance I would try to beat them senseless as I have dramatically lower inhibitions around friends. I would definitely need more information to determine whether I'd be willing to fight back, but my default answer would be to walk away.

 

[Hisshiss]

Assuming they are indeed within a reasonable range of you in terms of physical ability, I would say you shouldn't retaliate simply because responding to aggression usually just promotes more aggression, if you start fighting back and that guy doesn't back down, that fights gonna keep going until one of you ends up in a hospital.

To add to that, self defense is only really needed in small doses in a civilized world, typically if someone assaults you, it wouldn't be all that hard to get away from them, or get more professional help if it came to that.

Im not technically a die hard pacifist, I can think of situations where fighting back would be both necessary and practical, but I look at it the same way as I do firearm possession, if you go into that situation expecting and preparing to fight back, you typically only stand to make things worse.

Its not really an issue of right or wrong, more of a matter of making things worse. On a final note, if I was actually trained in the proper way of subduing or incapacitating an aggressor without causing severe bodily harm, I would probly do that if need be, those techniques exist for that very reason and serve people well, but in my current state my only real options are back the hell out and avoid a scene, or start flailing my dumbass around in an attempt to hit a guy, which I don't foresee going well.

TLR, if you go into a situation with the intent and preparation to hurt someone, people are gonna walk out of that hurt, and violence is a chain reaction.

Edit: very, VERY loosely related, but mostly for lulz.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipYkuCZ2IYI

 

[Akytalusia]

as some have stated before; though i don't retaliate, i still defened myself.

 

[Section Crow]

As i am still a teen, it became apparent to me that i might get into some fights so i only use grapples if i do get in a fight as it's the only way i find it acceptable to subdue someone as a pacifist.

 

[Fasckira]

If a single person, of the same height and build as you, were to hit you, and continue to hit you repeatedly, would you hit them back?

Too many potential variables - why are they hitting me? Did I do them wrong? Have they briefly lost their mind? Are they angry at something else and just happen to lash out in uncontrolled fury at the nearest person?

If they just started attacking me for no reason then I'd probably hit them back as they'd presumably be needing punched back to end it quickly.

 

[Ieyke]

Okay so I've been lurking around these forums for a while now and there seems to be a fair few pacifists on here so I'd like to ask you all something.

If a single person, of the same height and build as you, were to hit you, and continue to hit you repeatedly, would you hit them back?

If the answer is no due to fear, I'm not interested, if however the answer is no due to restraint and beliefs, could you explain that to me?

If someone is hitting you, why wouldn't you hit back? What gives them the right to hit you? And why shouldn't you defend yourselves?

Let's try to keep this civil people

Jesus... If someone my size and build started punching me it'd be a bloodbath... I'd beat the everloving hell out of him and punching would be the least of his problems.

I'm a pacifist insofar as I'll go out of my way to avoid a fight and don't like war, but the moment I'm attacked, or my country is in a war, the brutality switch flips and I put a violent end to it (and have to try very hard not to end up going overboard).

You attack some guy and it looks like a fairly even fight, meh, whatever.
You attack women/children/innocents/the defenseless and I'll try and stop you.
You attack anyone while I have the people I care about with me and they are in danger of getting mixed up in it, I'm staying out of it and watching out for them.
You attack someone I care about, you will forever believe it'd be nicer if I had killed you.

Does it make sense if I say I'm a pacifist who is always itching for a fight? I'll avoid fights like the plague, but I devote a fair bit of time to knowing how to utterly wreck people...just in case the "opportunity" comes up and I HAVE TO fight.
Yes, that should sound contradictory.

*is unsure where exactly the boundaries for the definition of "pacifist" lie*

 

[Eamar]

I'm amazed at the number of people who say they wouldn't fight back at all I swear it'd be an instinctive reaction for me (assuming I couldn't run away first). Maybe I'm just a more aggressive person than most people here.

Also I'm genuinely curious- all you true pacifists out there, what if someone was trying to sexually assault you, or actually trying to kill you? Surely you'd fight back then, right?

 

[Rawne1980]

They say violence never solves anything.

I disagree.

Someone attacks me, I hit them, they stop .... problem solved through casual violence and everyone can go home happy .... apart from the guy rolling round on the floor whining about a broken nose.

 

[HardkorSB]

Okay so I've been lurking around these forums for a while now and there seems to be a fair few pacifists on here so I'd like to ask you all something.

If a single person, of the same height and build as you, were to hit you, and continue to hit you repeatedly, would you hit them back?

If the answer is no due to fear, I'm not interested, if however the answer is no due to restraint and beliefs, could you explain that to me?

If someone is hitting you, why wouldn't you hit back? What gives them the right to hit you? And why shouldn't you defend yourselves?

Let's try to keep this civil people

You can learn some Aikido grabs and when he's about to punch you, twist his wrist and make it impossible for him to move without pain.
Aikido was specifically created to get out of these kind of situations without hitting your opponent.

 

[Ieyke]

Okay so I've been lurking around these forums for a while now and there seems to be a fair few pacifists on here so I'd like to ask you all something.

If a single person, of the same height and build as you, were to hit you, and continue to hit you repeatedly, would you hit them back?

If the answer is no due to fear, I'm not interested, if however the answer is no due to restraint and beliefs, could you explain that to me?

If someone is hitting you, why wouldn't you hit back? What gives them the right to hit you? And why shouldn't you defend yourselves?

Let's try to keep this civil people

You can learn some Aikido grabs and when he's about to punch you, twist his wrist and make it impossible for him to move without pain.
Aikido was specifically created to get out of these kind of situations without hitting your opponent.

Or you could go with what I learned, use their punch to cripple that arm and leave them in a heap on the ground in a matter of seconds. They won't be punching anything with that arm for a good long time after that.
You'll probably be saving some people the trouble of dealing with that asshole again down the line.

Guess there's a reason we're not allowed to take part in fighting competitions... <_<

 

[Durgiun]

Well, it all depends on context. But for the sake of simplicity, let's say the person started hitting me without good reason. I'd do my damndest at first to block the blows and try to talk some sense into the bastard. Only after repeated attempts failing (or if they landed a hit, whichever comes first) would I start hitting back. Self-defense and all. Fuck running, if there's only one I have a chance at winning.

 

[asinann]

Here's something for you pacifists to remember the next time you want to say violence solves nothing: violence has solved more problems throughout history than any other method.

 

[somonels]

No, I don't believe in violence... but then again I don't consider taking a life as violence, I see it as making someone a favor.

 

[manic_depressive13]

No, I would not. I have been taught to fight and can hit quite hard, but when it comes to a real fight, I can't bring myself to put any force behind my punches. I just can't. Even if I hate them, I can't bring myself to do it. It just seems too aggressive and far too extreme. I would think it's justified if somone else wanted to defend themselves, but as far as I'm concerned my only options are to block, run or die.

 

[Syzygy23]

Because fighting solves jack shit and I avoid it at all costs. If I win a fight, I could get jumped by his friends and be savagely beaten. I stay on peoples good sides and avoid fights.
If I was attacked I'd fight back but If I can avoid such fight, I will.

Or you could beat the guy up and then go buy a gun/knife just in case he has mates. Problem solved.

 

[necromanzer52]

Here's something for you pacifists to remember the next time you want to say violence solves nothing: violence has solved more problems throughout history than any other method.

I don't try to claim that violence never solved anything. Just that there are better alternatives.

OT: I'd block/dodge his punches, while talking to him. If I can't get him to stop with my words, I'll fight back, but I really prefer not to.

My philosophy is not to refuse to be violent, but only to use it as a last resort.

For more on these ideas see trigun.