Justification of Violence
Violence and the justification of it has been an issue for as long as the world has
been in
existence. There are many conflicting opinions on the subject, many in favor and many
opposing
the idea. I am personally split on the issue; I believe that in some cases, violence can
be justified;
however, I also believe that in others, it cannot be.
In my opinion, the only instance in which violence can be justified is self-defense.
I believe
that if an innocent person is attacked for some reason and their life is put in danger,
they have the
right to fight back to save themselves. How can a person let themselves be attacked and
do
nothing to help themselves survive? It's almost unreasonable to believe that. There are
plenty of
situations that fit this example. One of them is rape. If a woman is being attacked and
sexually
forced to do something she did not consent on doing, she has the right to fight back and
prevent it
from happening. Rape does not only involve sexual assault; there is much physical
assault
involved, also. Many women are held at gunpoint, knife, tied or beaten by their
attackers, and this
is not right. Any woman under these circumstances should fight back and do what they
have to
do to save themselves before it's too late. Other situations which call for justifiable
violence, in
my opinion, are robbery at gunpoint and any other type of unprovoked violence.
Other than self-defense, I do not believe violence should be tolerated at any cost.
Hitting
children when they do something "wrong" is not justifiable. I believe that if a child
does
something their parents don't want them to do, they should be taught not to do it anymore
simply
because their parents don't want them to do it. But, I believe that when you hit a child
when they
do something wrong, they don't repeat the action because they're afraid of the
consequences,
rather than understanding why they shouldn't do it again. It gives the wrong impression
on the
child and teaches them that violence is okay if you're trying to teach someone a lesson,
so they
carry this over into their lives when they get older, and the chain of violence is never
broken.
War, in general, I believe, is ineffective. I think that it totally uses the
wrong reasons for
countries to agree to compromise. It's amazing that before war, countries are totally
against one
another, yet after blowing away half of each other's population, they're willing to talk.
It makes
you think. I think that if countries would talk out their problems in a more peaceful
manner, they
would much easier come up with plans that would include both of their needs and desires.
I think
the world uses war in the wrong way; they're in wars to show their own power and prove
themselves to the world. War is not only bad because of those reasons. It is also
negative
because innocent men and women from the involved countries are killed. Even if they
couldn't
care less about what was going on, they are drafted to fight for their country. And many
of them
die, which is really depressing, because they didn't want to be there in the first place.
The
government declares war, yet the citizens suffer their decision. Why don't the
Congressmen strap
on some uniforms and get out on the field and fight? If they're the ones making the
decision to
fight, they should be subject to the same consequences we are. They are determining the
fate of
millions of people, yet keeping themselves safe. It's unfair.
Though I think that war isn't justifiable, I still hold to my belief that if we must
fight in our
self-defense, then we should. However, I don't believe we should ever provoke another
country
to start a war, nor should we declare war on another country unless they have already
started
attacking and killing our people.
Two acts of violence that I have a split opinion on are both the death penalty and
abortion.
I don't believe that both are either totally wrong or totally right. I think the death
penalty is a
good concept, because I think it might scare some people away from committing any crime
that
would require its use. However, I don't think it's very effective because it doesn't
really teach the
person a lesson; they never have a chance to change. I think a life-long jail term would
be much
more effective, because the person would be forced to live in a bad environment and
suffer and
realize that what they did was wrong, and this is how they have to pay for it. Death
doesn't really
teach them anything. I don't support abortions, but I do understand that in some cases
it is better
to not have the child than have it and let it grow up in bad conditions. Most teens who
get
pregnant consider abortions because they are too young, too irresponsible, and don't have
the
time or money to raise a child. And most of all, they don't want the child. If they
were to have
the child and raise it themselves, it wouldn't grow up in very good care. The mother
wouldn't
necessarily put her child first, and it would probably end up getting raised by
grandparents. I
think having the child and giving it up for adoption is better than abortion in most
cases. It avoids
the violence of abortions and gives the child a chance to live in the world.
Overall, I do not condone violence. However, I do believe that it is justifiable in
some
very few cases, mainly, self-defense. All other times, I feel it is unnecessary and
differences can
be worked out in other ways.
|