Is it justified to use physical force against physical violence?
By: E. Nguyen
Violence is justified to use against violence because, on occasion, there are no other ways handle violent people. In the 1800s, President Thomas Jefferson stated that “the United States does not negotiate with terrorists” when the Barbary Pirates demanded a ransom. Historically, people believed that physical violence should be used against physically violent terrorists.
Depending on the situation, violent actions are more effective than verbal communication. Sometimes, you have to make the situation worse before it can get better. Bullying is a great example of this. Although some suggest that contacting a trusted adult is necessary to stop bullying, I believe that you need to fight the bully back with violence and show the bully how it feels to be treated that way.
Violence is justified to use against violence because people need to protect themselves, their families, and their beliefs. A common argument against this position is that violence leads to the lost of lives and the destruction of families, societies, and environments from war. But, violence has to occur in order to protect yourself, your families, and beliefs. For example, during World War Two, Americans stood up and fought against Germany and Japan to prevent unjustified violence in concentration camps and the deaths of innocent civilians.
Thus, using physical force is not wrong to use against physical violence when justified or protecting innocent people.