Justifiable Violence (Karin presents)

Justifiable violence
Refers to using force in specific situations where it's considered a necessary and morally right response to an imminent threat or to uphold a greater good, most commonly seen in self-defense, defense of others, law enforcement protecting public order, or in "just war" scenarios, requiring proportionality and necessity. Key elements involve responding to actual harm, preventing severe crimes, acting in defense of legitimate interests (like life, property), and ensuring the force used isn't excessive for the situation.
The Concern
What constitutes “justifiable” is often determined by the law. The law has been problematic in that it’s not applied equitably in all situations. What seems to be justified may not be judged as justified for a variety of reasons including race, gender, social status, immigration status etc.
It feels like the world is exploding around us. This just makes the issue worse. I have a series of questions for you and then a video at the end with an example from TV.
Questions

• Does the law have to say a violent action is justifiable for it to be justifiable?
• Is there difference between the law and a justifiable violent action? Is there a correlation?
• If you felt the need, would you perform a justifiable violent action? Even if you knew the law would make you pay?
• How do you define “justifiable violence?”
• Where is the line where you no longer “turn the other cheek?” (There have been some calls to violence on social media lately)
• Are there groups of people for whom you would engage in justifiable violence?
• If someone stated they were going to kill your children, and the law could do nothing, what would you do?

Bones
Bones is one of my favorite shows. On FOX, sue me. I love it because it’s a detective show with a theme of exploring polarities. Liberal/Conservative, Atheist/Religious, whether a dog that kills a human should automatically be put down even if it’s a justifiable kill to save a human, anything that has several sides. 12 years of it. Every episode has a different theme. I highly recommend it.
One very agonizing episode involved an FBI agent who told the father of one of the leads and her brother that he was going to kill both of his kids. There was nothing the father could do about it. The FBI agent IS the law. The entire episode was attempt after attempt on their lives and nothing they did worked. Not even the other lead could do anything, and he was an FBI agent. No one would believe them. The father couldn’t save them within the law.
This was his solution:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsJLrH6X0T0
Gives me chills to even think about it.

Symptom-free people with the capacity to listen considerately to diverse viewpoints are invited to attend after successfully RSVPing.

We begin the discussion at 1:00 pm sharp in the mezzanine above the lobby of the Graduate Hotel. Feel free to come up to 30 minutes early and hang out with us beforehand.

From the front Hotel entrance go to the right around the corner to enter through the north valet entrance. If the valet questions you just say you're here for the philosophy group. Go straight to the main lobby and turn right behind the large bookshelves before the elevators. Go up the stairs to your left and through the first door you encounter to enter our meeting room.

OPENING ROUNDTABLE FORMAT (ORF):

1. The topic presenter begins the discussion by explaining why they are interested in the topic and some introductory thoughts on it.
2. Each participant in turn going clockwise from the presenter describes their general thoughts on the topic.
3. If one is not ready to speak they can just say “pass” and the next person speaks.
4. After we've gone around once anyone who passed will get a second chance to comment.
5. Once everyone has given opening remarks or passed twice, Opening Roundtable is completed and the meeting shifts into its main format.

TIMED DIRECTION FORMAT (TDRF>5):
If there are more than 5 people present we will use the format below.

1. We will divide up the timed direction discussion time by the number of participants plus one (for a buffer). A timer will be set for this amount of time.
2. Each participant in turn will become a Discussion Director and lead the group discussion.
3. If one is not ready to direct they dimply say “pass” and the next person becomes the Discussion Director.
4. Anyone who arrives after step 1 (above), may participate but will not get a turn as Discussion Director.
5. The Discussion Director can make statements or ask questions, or interrupt or redirect the discussion at their discretion.
6. The discussion participants can state their own opinions only when asked by the Discussion Director, not Interrupt others and accede to the Discussion Director’s interruptions or redirections.
7. When the timer goes off the person speaking finishes their thought and then the next participant clockwise becomes the next Discussion Director.
8. After we've gone around once anyone who passed will get a second chance to direct.

At the end of the meeting, participants will have an opportunity to vote on the topic and format for the following meeting.