WRONG GYM

no it isn't

oh so now it's not attempted murder

yes, the bully got a dose of his own medicine


i find your posts lacking substance and critical thought
When you stomp and soccer kick someone's head like we saw in the video, you are potentially killing them with every blow. People have died from single strikes and far less than what occured in the video, with the perpetrator going to jail for murder or manslaughter.

Assault causing bodily harm or something along those lines is what this guy would be facing from a legal matter I would assume.

That was more like an overdose of medicine. We have laws in place and nobody has the right to be judge, jury and execution in our society, especially when the crime is on video. Otherwise we would have utter mayhem.

You can disagree, but you're reasoning so far has been vague and immature in my opinion
 
When you stomp and soccer kick someone's head like we saw in the video, you are potentially killing them with every blow. People have died from single strikes and far less than what occured in the video, with the perpetrator going to jail for murder or manslaughter.
and if the bully signed the waver? what then? what if a single blow kills a fighter in the octagon?

Assault causing bodily harm or something along those lines is what this guy would be facing from a legal matter I would assume.
sign the contract big boy...

That was more like an overdose of medicine.
Are you a doctor?... i'd argue it was the perfect amount of medicine

We have laws in place and nobody has the right to be judge, jury and execution in our society, especially when the crime is on video. Otherwise we would have utter mayhem.
hence why we have laws in place to afford certain physicalities within a martial arts gym that would otherwise be deemed criminal in the public context

You can disagree, but you're reasoning so far has been vague and immature in my opinion
And in my opinion your reasoning has been overly prescriptive and obtuse
 
yeah and UFC 1 also had an octagon and Jim Brown commentating

there was a camera man who would've stepped in


"sometimes you have to fight fire with fire"

if you admit that the receiver may have deserved it, then the beating's severity is condoned
You're sounding a bit dumb dude. You need to learn the difference between maybe/definitely and condoned/justified.
 
You're sounding a bit dumb dude.
you're sounding really dumb

You need to learn the difference between maybe/definitely and condoned/justified.
i understand it quite well...you are unable to follow the parallels and trajectories of your own logic
 
*yawn*

you see a perspective that you don't agree with and all you can muster is name calling...discuss the issue at hand...if you dare
I already did and your slow mind couldn't grasp what I explained. The possibility that big guy might have deserved it doesn't mean that he necessarily did. That and there are also appropriate levels to the severity of one's response that vary depending on circumstances.
 
I already did and your slow mind couldn't grasp what I explained.
i easily grasped it and responded and all you could retort with was "that's dumb, etc"

talk about the pot calling the kettle black

The possibility that big guy might have deserved it doesn't mean that he necessarily did. That and there are also appropriate levels to the severity of one's response that vary depending on circumstances.
hence why early on in this thread the entire discussion centered around the need for more context in order to better establish one's perspective...it seems that you overlooked that part
 
i easily grasped it and responded and all you could retort with was "that's dumb, etc"

talk about the pot calling the kettle black

hence why early on in this thread the entire discussion centered around the need for more context in order to better establish one's perspective...it seems that you overlooked that part
You already said that you believed that he deserved it, then tried to defend your asinine opinion even though there isn't enough context to make a rational argument either way. Now you're back peddling..
 
You already said that you believed that he deserved it,
yes, i do believe that he deserved it based on the video evidence...could i be wrong? absolutely if we had more context...but, alas, we don't

then tried to defend your asinine opinion
back to the name calling...a tell-tale sign of a small mind who cannot discuss the issue at hand

even though there isn't enough context to make a rational argument either way.
if you want to go down that path...there will never be "enough" context to make any type of argument

"the problem with rationality is that man is unable to distinguish between appearance and reality"

my perspective acted as a direct contradiction to the "off-hand" comments that the big guy was the victim merely based on the video

Now you're back peddling..
not at all...this was stated from the start...you didn't put in the effort to read the thread from its onset (or perhaps you did but you chose to side step it)...and rather chimed in midway about how it's not like UFC 1 because there's no ref...as if one variable can discount the entirety of the comparison
 
yes, i do believe that he deserved it based on the video evidence...could i be wrong? absolutely if we had more context...but, alas, we don't

back to the name calling...a tell-tale sign of a small mind who cannot discuss the issue at hand

if you want to go down that path...there will never be "enough" context to make any type of argument

"the problem with rationality is that man is unable to distinguish between appearance and reality"

my perspective acted as a direct contradiction to the "off-hand" comments that the big guy was the victim merely based on the video

not at all...this was stated from the start...you didn't put in the effort to read the thread from its onset (or perhaps you did but you chose to side step it)...and rather chimed in midway about how it's not like UFC 1 because there's no ref...as if one variable can discount the entirety of the comparison
You have autism
 
back to the name calling LOL
Just admit you dug yourself too deep a hole and can't climb out of it. Your reasoning sucks and no one likes people who can't admit they're wrong. It's ok to compromise or go back to the drawing board to improve your argument. No one is fooled by your futile attempts to appear like you had a gameplan all along lol
 
Just admit you dug yourself too deep a hole and can't climb out of it.
what is this hole that you speak of? my arguments hold up under examination

Your reasoning sucks and no one likes people who can't admit they're wrong.
please explain how my reasoning "sucks"

It's ok to compromise or go back to the drawing board to improve your argument. No one is fooled by your futile attempts to appear like you had a gameplan all along lol
if there are any errors in my logic or reasoning, please point them out...we are here to have a meeting of the minds

to reiterate, based on watching the video, quite a few people see the big guy as the victim

when i watch the video, i see the big guy as the perpetrator who got what was coming to him
 
the stomps seemed a bit much but I can only go by what I 'think' led up to this which is some kind of attempted gym invasion, big guy lights up bjj guy hence the cut) and bjj guy then has to subdue him after being rocked, he wears out his attacker then fucks him up (a bit too much but adrenaline is a mfer) to make sure he's not going to get assaulted again and this seems to resolve it because they give each other a pound

being 'merica they could've shot big guy and they gone and got a wendy's...or something
 
Back
Top