Bitter Clinger wrote: ↑Mon Apr 15, 2019 3:10 pm
Again, we never get the full story initially or a complete understanding of who / what started it. The media seems to conveniently forget those details.
Just like the Deep Ellum incident where we saw the woman being beaten, they neglect to tell us what preceded. In the Deep Ellum incident the woman was drunk, driving the wrong way down the street, blocked the car of someone who had been working long hours, and the woman was clearly belligerent and she struck the male first. Does that justify the beating?
Here the man / woman backed his / her vehicle into another person's car and then early on we saw footage of him / her prancing about and apparently acting the fool. Does that justify the beating?
How's that go? Don't write a check with your mouth...
Both of these incidents seem to have been compounded by the so-called victim. Its really not so simple.
I strongly agree. Entrance into an interpersonal dispute requires that you take a side or oppose everyone. If the threat of death or lasting harm is so great that you must get involved, you're not going to Wyatt Earp the mob back to civility and order. That leaves you at minimum opposed to a minority of the participants in an ongoing act of violence, and possibly facing down all of them. The cops have the muscle and authority to break a few bones to remind folks of their manners, whereas you're likely outnumbered and have recourse only to a sidearm and an argument for self defense.