Posted on 09/09/2014 11:09:33 PM PDT by This Just In
As so many in the general public have witnessed, I watched the video involving Ray Rice and his fiance (she is now his wife), Janay Palmer, and the assault which occurred at an Atlantic City, New Jersey casino.
There are two facts which I find disturbing surrounding this case. After viewing the video I read some of the comments in response to the footage.
A number of ppl actually blamed Ms. Palmer for the altercation, or stated that she "had it coming" due to her supposed drunkenness. How they came to the conclusion that Ms. Palmer was drunk is beyond me. Apparently staring at a grainy video for a few seconds is proof enough to determine whether or not an individual is intoxicated despite the fact that the woman isn't stumbling about with a bottle of brew in her hand while singing '99 Bottles of Beer'.
Let us say - for the sake of argument - that Ms. Palmer was drunk. Would that fact justify Ray Rices assault of Ms. Palmer? Mr. Rice spat on the woman at least twice before they entered the elevator. While in the elevator, he spits on her yet again when she finally responds to his behavior. He then cold-cocks her.
The kind of "logic" which leads ppl to believe that, "Hey, she was drunk, so she had it comin'" is the same type of logic which leads this country to further moral depravity.
Secondly, why did it take a video before the Ravens fired Ray Rice? A two game suspension for assault?! I guess money and wins trumps assaulting a woman. The only reason the Ravens decided to fire Ray Rice was because they knew the public backlash would be tremendous.
A players contributions to the team and a winning season should never trump a players criminal behavior. The NFL as well as the Ravens should be ashamed for perpetuation such behavior by players committing crimes against innocent ppl.
This incident is a shining example of one reason I have less interest in a lot of professional sports.
What say you?
Yep! Its their team they can have on it who they want...
Hi TwelveOfTwenty,
If you read my initial thread followed by the dialog carefully in context you’ll clearly see what I am referring to.
Yes. It’s a business, and as long as there was no public furor, a two-game suspension for a key member of their team was fine by the organization, until it was swept under the rug. Once Rice became a massive liability due to public outcry, they decided to accept losing more games as opposed to the negative PR.
It’s just business.
Ray Lewis was implicated in ****ing MURDER, for crying out loud, but because there was never any direct evidence made public, he got to finish a career and retire as a “beloved hero”.
However, the statement that I replied to, "Furthermore, no man is justified in striking a woman unless his life is in immediate danger.", clearly expands the context to involve self defense where the man's life may not be in danger.
The quote you cited was in response to a comment by another Freeper.
And how does that change the meaning from how I interpreted it?
Yes.
Release? Why isn’t he in jail or out on bail?
Your interpretation, or more accurately, your false interpretation makes all the difference in the world. You failed to read the conversation in context.
My fellow freeper and I were discussing the fact that there is NO justifiable reason for a man to strike a woman unless his life is in clear and present danger. If - by performing some defensive maneuver involving physical contact - he is able to remove the immediate threat, his actions are justifiable. Otherwise, there is no legitimate reason for his actions. We have a Constitutional right to protect our person when our very life is in danger.
OK, I’ll buy that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.