Lock them up. Drinking should not be an excuse for violence. They're muslims and they are not use to drinking? Lock them up for longer, as they should know not to drink!
Well it's worked for me anyway. Your mates will get targeted because they're bouncers, not because they're big. Nobody likes bouncers for a start, and it would be seen as an achievement for some to attack one, a proof of their bravery. I reckon that small bouncers are attacked more to be honest. The assailant still gets the kudos from having a go at a doorman, but feels he has more chance of winning (probably wrongly most of the time).
I dont know about this random stuff, I would say 95% of the time there is some sort of reason, even if the victim is random, dosent mean the attack is random. Take the Ukranian Maniacs for instance, they murdered 21 people in 15 days in what would look like random attacks. They actually had their reasons for doing it and the victims were not chosen at random, they waited for the easy opportunity, people alone and who did not look strong, so nothing random about it.
Why did he not do something at the time though? Rather than going home first and getting a weapon? It suggests that his own safety is more important than protecting his mother from violent insults. That is cowardly too. There's no point going back later, just a meaningless gesture by that point. It was to protect his mum. As I said she was crying and upset. I thought this was the bit which he did very well. Not sure I would have been as calm Then to go looking of rth guys on his own and battering them. I think they got the message. Each to there own but from my point of view kudos to the lad What's the point of fighting if it's not going to be fair anyway? Unless you're fighting in self-defence (or physical protection of others), any fight is unnecessary and avoidable. It's more a case of 'making a point', ie I am better than you. But if it you have to use a weapon, you're not really proving anything are you? In fact, you're proving that you're scared of fighting without one. Is there such a thing as a fair fight? If you really believe the above you are IMO naive at best. The purpose of any fight for me is to not get battered/end up in hospital. If the only way to do thta is to use an available weapon so be it. arguing bravery/cowardice i can do on an forum. It's like the diving/simulation debate in football. The perception abroad for years is that you do whatever you have to in order to get an edge. Unfortunately that is becoming more prevalent over here too. But what is the point winning a game if you have to cheat? The same with fighting with weapons imo. Unless someone's physical well-being is at stake, fighting is just a game. This is where we differ. There is no 'game' in fighting. unless you are a boxer fighting in a ring. Look at some of those youth who attacked and killed a man. If a baseball bat would have meant he be alive he was silly not to use it I suppose we'll never know. The point is, random violence does happen, there doesn't have to be a spark. I disagree. There is always something. Well it's worked for me anyway. Your mates will get targeted because they're bouncers, not because they're big. Nobody likes bouncers for a start, and it would be seen as an achievement for some to attack one, a proof of their bravery. I reckon that small bouncers are attacked more to be honest. The assailant still gets the kudos from having a go at a doorman, but feels he has more chance of winning (probably wrongly most of the time). which is what I am kind of saying. there is a 'spark' and being who they are IS seen as bravery making them a target. same with a big fella
Nah, random violence happens all the time in city centres at closing time. There are people out there who like nothing better than a scrap when they're drunk. They may instigate something petty or small to get that scrap going but the intent was already there and the victim randomly chosen.
Exactly. It's all very well to say "there's always a reason for anything" but in the case of attacks on strangers in the street the justifications are very often more than a little tenuous. The real reason it happens is because some people enjoy getting involved in mindless and spontaneous thuggery. The side issues (he was wearing the wrong shirt, he caught his eye wrong, she was wearing the same dress as her assialant's mum wore the day she failed her dirving test etc etc) are, in my view, totally irrelevant.
OK so the victim happened to be there, but the actual violence isnt random. It doesnt just happen without a spark even if that spark is alcohol and enjoying a scrap
This, seriously TFWNN how many weekends out have you spent in a city center at pub closing times etc its ****ing terrible.
The starting point is not the tenuous link, the starting point is someone wanting to scrap. That is not random IMO anyway.
I am not disputing that city centres are hectic/****ed up etc In fact I remember doing a study at uni and reading a report by the roundtree trust, where the focus was on riots (brixton etc) and they used city centres as evidence of violence on our streets every weekend which is neer reported on I have worked in city centres at night as a student etc, also worked in the field of community safety. I have yet to come across a random act of violence
