5 ms·
Certainly, you make a good point. When we talk about someone “in crisis” it’s very likely to have them appear quite violent. And all people threatening suicide
by LeonB 5y ago
Certainly, you make a good point.
When we talk about someone “in crisis” it’s very likely to have them appear quite violent. And all people threatening suicide are threatening violence.
====
edited to add (as stated below)
What I'm intending to say, quite badly as it appears, is that even if someone in crisis appears to be "violent" -- or if a person threatening suicide can be interpreted as threatening "violence" -- that is no reason to withdraw them from eligibility for a caring response.
- temp8964 5y agoNot only the moment “in crisis”. Some have violent history. Burglary / robbery is not uncommon among drug users.
- jdavis703 5y agoBurglary is not a violent crime, it’s a property crime.
- temp8964 5y agoUpdated my text.
- throwawaysea 5y agoI feel any crime involving physical force (such as breaking and entering) constitutes violence, whether it involves a person or property. From the American Heritage dictionary (https://www.wordnik.com/words/violence https://www.wordnik.com/words/violence): > Behavior or treatment in which physical force is exerted for the purpose of causing damage or injury.
- alisonkisk 5y agoUsing intentionally ambiguous language to misdirect is only temporarily convincing until people cotton to your game.
- throwawaysea 5y agoI am not sure whether your claim is that my use or the GP's use of "violence" is ambiguous. My point is that most property crimes are violence by the most common and widespread definitions. The attempt to recast property crimes as non-violent is very recent, pushed by progressive activists to play down widespread property crime in places like San Francisco or to play down crimes committed during riots throughout 2020. A non-violent crime would be something like identity theft, not someone using physical force, like a hammer to break a car window or whatever else.
- rhizome 5y ago>My point is that most property crimes are violence by the most common and widespread definitions Don't be coy, which definitions? When someone in a coffee shop goes to the bathroom and their laptop is gone when they come back to their seat, where is the violence? Actual violence, not abstract "they murdered my trust in society" stuff. I think if you're honest, you'd say that you prefer property crimes to be treated as violence.
- throwawaysea 5y agoI linked a definition above in my earlier comment. Violence involves exertion of physical force to cause damage or injury. The recipient of the violence (be it property or a person) is not relevant. Would I consider your example violence? No. But I would consider someone forcefully breaking into a car or someone committing arson to be violence, due to the unusual exertion of physical force. > I think if you're honest, you'd say that you prefer property crimes to be treated as violence. I have the opposite perspective, that most people have a wider definition for violence than just harm against a person. I feel activists who want to excuse low level crime or rioting tend to be the ones who prefer to narrowly define violence. But such a redefinition wouldn’t make sense - we already have terms like “assault” for narrow cases like harm against a person. Violence is something broader.
- rhizome 5y ago
- rhizome 5y agoYour estimation of "very likely" here is entirely made up, imaginary, based on nothing but your own preconceived notions.
- LeonB 5y agoWhat I'm intending to say, quite badly as it appears, is that even if someone in crisis appears to be "violent" -- or if a person threatening suicide can be interpreted as threatening "violence" -- that is no reason to withdraw them from eligibility for a caring response.
- rhizome 5y agoDaniel Shaver was interpreted as threatening violence. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/12/08/graphic-video-shows-daniel-shaver-sobbing-and-begging-officer-for-his-life-before-2016-shooting/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/12/0...
- LeonB 5y agoYes - a person who has been drinking and who is being shouted at by officers, reaches down, probably to pull up their pants, and it is interpreted as a life threatening act to those officers. (And a jury goes on to uphold the reasonableness of this interpretation!)