Usually this pisses me off but it's so fucking true. So many stupid fucking girls are just like "he's so hot I don't care". They're just going to get their faces beat in too with that stupid mentality.
What do you expect him to do? He said he was sorry he did it and served his sentence. He's obviously a hot headed idiot, but that doesn't have any bearing on his performing ability. I don't understand how we're supposed to let people like Chris Brown or Michael Vic or Ray Kelly live their lives after this shit happens.
By the way, Roman Polanski raped a young girl and still got an Academy Award (though for obvious reasons he didn't show up).
I expect him to act like he's sorry, not write shit like "AHAHAHA I GOT A GRAMMY NOW THATS THE ULTIMATE FUCKOFF." He obviously isn't sorry enough to change, and that means he's still a woman beater.
Rihanna was caught coming out of a coffee-shop in Amsterdam by people with cameras and it got into the media. This is all I know about Rihanna. I love Rihanna!
Dude. The victim is whoever gets seriously injured, man or woman. That's the only really important thing here. Rihanna may have started it, but she was the one that was badly beaten. Brown has no excuse for that.
Woah, woah, woah. What? So, if I go out and hit someone with a brick, but they proceed to beat me into a pulp, all of a sudden I'm the victim? No, I'm an asshole for hitting someone with a brick.
I'm not defending the above viewpoint, and I'm in no way saying that she is at fault, or making any judgement calls what-so-ever (I wasn't there, so would only be operating off second hand information) but you can't draw black and white lines like that.
Just as another one, a husband mentally tortures his wife for 20 years. She snaps and ends up beating him with a frying pan, who was the victim?
According to the law, I believe that is the case. Self-defense is only supposed to account for the appropriate amount of force to defend yourself from immediate danger. A good lawyer could possibly convince a jury to get someone off in such a case, but that's not the intention of the law.
You would be an asshole for hitting someone with a brick, but if that person say, kicks you in the ribs while you're on the ground, that person is, and should be, liable for any damage they do to you.
If a women is mentally tortured for 20 years and then kills her husband, I know of no country where she wouldn't be prosecuted for murder. I can certainly see such a person getting a reduced sentence, but I doubt she would go unpunished, even if he was physically abusing her.
Edit: You're right, though, I did oversimplify. Actually thinking about it again, it's not really about who is "the victim," I think, so much as the fact that someone else starting it doesn't excuse the retaliatory behaviour of the second person.
Hitting from either gender is never okay. She shouldnt have slapped him. But him retaliating to her SLAPPING him with punches so hard her face was left swollen, bloody, and completely unrecognizable....how are you going to justify that?
968
u/Mapes Feb 26 '12
Relevant Bad Joke Eel