What if the frat boy had called Hill or his friends the word? Does that make him less of a thug? What if he had groped or inappropriately touched a woman that Hill and his group were with? Still the bigger thug?

What if the frat boy had called Hill or his friends the word? Does that make him less of a thug? What if he had groped or inappropriately touched a woman that Hill and his group were with? Still the bigger thug?

 

How about researching it and seeing what you can come up with?

What if the frat boy had called Hill or his friends the word? Does that make him less of a thug? What if he had groped or inappropriately touched a woman that Hill and his group were with? Still the bigger thug?

 

So NOW we're using circumstances and not just the act itself?

Looks like the guy had been harassing Hill all night about his previous "legal" issues....Not a valid reason, but still pales in comparison to beating your wife like Rice did IMO.

So NOW we're using circumstances and not just the act itself?

 

Isn't that what you've been doing this entire time?

Isn't that what you've been doing this entire time?

 

Yes. You haven't. That's my point. You looked at one thing: woman got hit. Ignored the why or the human aspect of it.

Yes. You haven't. That's my point. You looked at one thing: woman got hit. Ignored the why or the human aspect of it.

 

No I haven't, not at all.

 

She was hitting him. He had a plethora of options other than beating her unconscious. He chose to beat a woman. There is nothing more despicable than that.

I think what Rice did was worse but I understand what/why Rice probably did it.

 

Why is it just assumed Rice was "defending" himself and that his fiancee "instigated" the assault? It seems just as plausible that he was the "instigator," she resisted (some reports say she spit on him), and he knocked her out.

 

The responding officers charged both with misdemeanor assault, but after reviewing the video that hasn't been released to the public the prosecutor dropped the charges against her and changed the charge against Rice to a felony. Obviously, there could be some politics with a high profile case going on there. But, I'm wondering why it's being presented across the board as though Rice was "provoked" into making an unfortunate decision when we seem to lack the details that led up to her being knocked out.

Why is it just assumed Rice was "defending" himself and that his fiancee "instigated" the assault? It seems just as plausible that he was the "instigator," she resisted (some reports say she spit on him), and he knocked her out.

 

The responding officers charged both with misdemeanor assault, but after reviewing the video that hasn't been released to the public the prosecutor dropped the charges against her and changed the charge against Rice to a felony. Obviously, there could be some politics with a high profile case going on there. But, I'm wondering why it's being presented across the board as though Rice was "provoked" into making an unfortunate decision when we seem to lack the details that led up to her being knocked out.

 

Clyde asked a pretty simple question and I did my best to answer it.

Why is it just assumed Rice was "defending" himself and that his fiancee "instigated" the assault? It seems just as plausible that he was the "instigator," she resisted (some reports say she spit on him), and he knocked her out.

 

The responding officers charged both with misdemeanor assault, but after reviewing the video that hasn't been released to the public the prosecutor dropped the charges against her and changed the charge against Rice to a felony. Obviously, there could be some politics with a high profile case going on there. But, I'm wondering why it's being presented across the board as though Rice was "provoked" into making an unfortunate decision when we seem to lack the details that led up to her being knocked out.

 

You are correct that in my scenario he was not the instigator.

 

If he "started it" and she reacted which caused him to get upset then it changes it dramatically for me.

I get the thinking that Rice's was worse.

 

I can, though , make the opposite argument.

 

Yes, it's TERRIBLE and uncalled for to strike a female especially your wife. But can we rationalize it/understand how it POSSIBLY happened? It wasn't premeditated. Story is he was struck by her. He reacted without thinking. In some people getting struck or having a punch thrown AUTOMATICALLY causes them to respond without thinking.

 

Hill: Premeditated. Unprovoked. Hit him while he wasn't looking. Did it in a group where he had support and approval.

 

I can't rationalize that even with alcohol. While not condoning Rice's punch I can SOMEWHAT understand it.

 

Only way I can rationalize Hill's punch is that he's a grade A punk/loser. No redeeming value. No values at all.

 

 

I think that the 'unprovoked' part is debatable. I wouldn't think Hill just goes around sucker punching people, especially just sucker punching drunk frat boys. There was probably a reason he picked the guy he did, who doesn't really look sober himself. Aside from the fact that there's no reason to hit a girl and it's worse than hitting a guy to me, then that's another difference for me.

Would you punch a woman that was trying to stab you?

 

No. I'd probably punch her twice.