Stop being hung up on the example I used. Say someone is about to cut off my finger and I somehow know he will stop there.

The point of my response was to highlight that you can't talk about what is ethical without consideration of choices (which are not fixed over time)

Beyond that sure in general self-defense is ethical. Reasonable force is a good standard.

If some villain has been spitting in your face every single day of your life and will continue to spit in your face every single day for the rest of your life and the only way to prevent him from spitting in your face every single day for the rest of your life is for you to kill him and I make it onto your jury I’ll vote not guilty.

Then you are worse than me.

Sure but not by much.

Spitting in someone’s face is criminal battery; the villain is going to jail; as soon as he gets out he’ll reoffend; rinse-and repeat for life in jail. So society is okay with sending a habitual spitter to jail for life, which depending on how you look at things isn’t all that much worse than the death sentence I was okay with. (Jury nullification may or may not be an issue depending on the common law system we’re working with.)

A business opportunity! Develop a ‘Sane-Ometer’ app so you’ve got a defense at your trial!

John that is one of the better things I've ever read on this site. ****ing hilarious buddy

Few people are sane. I'm sane. BTM2 is sane and Howard Beale is half sane. That's two and half men. The other 7 billion plus on the planet are insane. This explains why everything is the way it is. For a full expository just see the 2+2 Politics Forum.

No further explanation(s) are necessary.

Half sane's pretty good, I'll take it, tyvm!

Don't worry you can get over it.

Until then drink still helps deal with reality

I do not need to get over anything you Wog! And there is no reality but drink.

Having fun in the pig pen over in Politics?

What sort of life are you leading that your daughter is having naked pics of her posted online and you are getting fingers cut off?!?

Maybe the hypothetical you did something hypothetically bad that has caused these negative things to happen to you.

naked photos only feel like they would kill her. this is a slippery slope to be sure. some people would say not having the best table in a restaraunt is equivalent to starvation... does this mean everyone must snap to it to prevent this clear and present inhumanity?

Only feel like? A broken leg is probably not fatal either. It only feels like pain because of the transmitters of the leg sending particular signals to the brain. A breech of privacy, modesty, and body ownership sends signals to the brain too. It’s not that slippery.

Now we're referencing Patrick Bateman, I like it.

"How Much Harm Can You Ethically Inflict To Stop A Threat of Harm?"

If someone wants to inflict harm on me for no or wrong reasons, Id like to think that I defend myself when trying to prevent the harm.
But the wording of your questions, would assume that my "self defense" = "inflicting harm".

Or in other words, Id like to clarify if harm = harm.

To me it appears as if there is a distinct differnce between someone wanting to harm someone and someone who accidentally does harm.

Say someone accidently steps on your shoes, saying "oh... Im sorry... are you alright?".
Say someone provocantly steps on your shoes going "**** your shoes!".

You cant tell me, eventho the harm inflicted was the same, you treat both scenarios the same.

Then there is also the issue of potential, which no one can predict.
You get punched in the face, doctor puts you in the tube, finds a treatable tumor which wouldve killed you soon if untreated.
Was the punch harm, was it kindness, gods will, happy accident...?

Are you fetishising violence?

It's not clear from your example a few things:

1) If you have the opportunity and ability to break legs, is it not therefore true that you have the option to take other action which may be as effective (more?) and less violent?

2) How is breaking his legs going to actually stop the posting of pics?

3) How do you know to what level of harm your daughter will feel as a result of the pic posting?

You may complain that this is focusing on the example instead of the concept. But you would be gravely wrong. These details are at the heart of all "use of force" circumstances.

I believe you are an ardent anti- self-defense extremist from reading prior postings of yours. It has been my experience that folks of this philosophy have a poor understanding of the legal aspects of "use of force" issue -- and this stems from a poor ethical foundation.

The fact is, you are contriving an example in that you are proposing the use of force under a circumstance where it isn't even clear that the action proposed will be effective in preventing the alleged harm.

If an action cannot be shown to have even a minimally reasonable expectation of efficacy, can it be ethical? Is it not merely wanton violence?

How much harm can they take?

Assume as much as necessary. Make sure to have at least a small hammer. A sledgehammer or axe may be more useful.

Prison time preparation books are more useful too. The law doesnt exactly understand but he would post them if i didnt...

It's learned behavior but not necessarily good. Ideas about modesty arent't universal like a broken leg... not to suggest that non aggression is. but do we really need to protect modesty as a virtue?

The only proper position about sex is to recognize it biologically and chemically (emotionally etc are derivatives) for what it is, to have no pseudo puritanical taboos, to be open about anything and not force people into things they dont like or to exploit their naivete and lack of maturity when very young but at the same time to be scientific about it all too and not through careless, callous, irresponsible behavior open the door to endless havoc with all kinds of terrible outcomes like unintended pregnancies in tough situations, venereal diseases, facilitating breakdown of marriages and families, addiction, drugs, etc.

So yes old fashioned ideas about sex and modesty etc are not very reasonable always but you have to respect other people's principles and attitudes about their own body and overall well being so anyone that behaves like that to shame them is an ahole that deserves a strike if a logical interaction cannot solve it. However the strike is also illegal and can be also unethical depending on size of action and possible outcomes. So they may deserve it but you may not deserve it to go that way if you know what i mean.

That said anyone that extorts other people over sexual issues is a total mfer that needs to be destroyed to pieces and reframed again as a human with dignity finally. So screw these losers that cannot protect the privacy of the people they once had relationships with. They are true scumbags.

masque is usually right and I don't pretend to be smarter but here is my 2 cents.

what about like bezos' prick pics though? shouldn't we evolve at some point... nobody cares about bezos' rumored drunkin' prick pics...

I think it depends.

modesty varies widely between cultures too... a woman without a burka could be considered immodest...

Bezos and the "milf" "slut" he is after deserve each other and he proved destroying his marriage a total loser with a woman that has been using men all her life to climb higher. Without wanting to minimize her value as a professional and other skills she has, she appears to have used men for decades and his family deserved better from him.

Whoever leaked such personal images is a loser and so is the idiot that gave it to them (Bezos) knowing full well that you take nothing personal of that nature with your smartphone because it is always finding a way out by hackers and all kinds of bs "accidents".

But a woman that has done nothing but share nude erotic and not clearly pornographic images with a lover in private, although probably not thinking wisely at the time (unless she doesnt care at which point we do not have an issue), was simply participating in an affectionate, erotic or even small time exhibitionist teasing behavior but within the barriers of the relationship while celebrating her sex appeal and youth. It must be seen as a precious experience between the people that shared it if it is for people to trust each other and open up and have such freedoms of expression of intimacy with each other without fear. As such she must be protected and privacy must be permanently expected even if the woman betrays you unless she engages in activity that exposing her other side becomes important for a greater non selfish reason. Even then probably the strong and mature position is to continue to respect the privacy but remind her to cut the hypocrisy.

As for the burka its part of a stupid backwards marching cultural aspect of that other culture which has also other horrible positions that prove massively more insulting and exploitative of women than the mere image of their clear face and hair. They will grow up and join the adults in the room one day. Of course what on earth do the young people raised in such environments have done to deserve such brain washing. They will revolt against all the superficial bs one day and i also hope we too evolve away from our immature position towards sex and a more reasonable understanding of the human condition.



Feynman said it best about sex and science;

Science is like sex. It is useful but this is not why we do it.


Ps: Even if the images or videos a woman made available are pornographic they still deserve privacy because in that sense all memories of sex you have of her are also pornographic/x-rated so the recording and release of the entire activity is still an invasion of privacy and intimacy that was not meant for others but only those involved. There is probably a higher chance that such person doesnt care vs the simple nudity case. Both deserve privacy though and exploiting it is indicative of a true loser person.

To me, I think we need to draw a distinction between protecting someone's modesty, and protecting someone's indiscretion. Teenagers can't exactly decide for themselves so if a teen takes a prick pick it's very different than Bezos' prick pick. A production team making a porno deserves to have their work protected even if the actress changes her feelings about it after, but obviously hidden cameras and invasions of privacy are wrong. My thinking is that with civilization comes industry, and the health of industry is a real question. But, we have to ask ourselves with Bezos though where the fault actually lies... the consumers of pornography? Bezos? or the people inbetween, and why.