Violence is generally viewed as harmful and counterproductive; however, some argue that it may be justified in specific contexts, such as self-defense or to resist oppression. In extreme cases, it can serve as a catalyst for social change when peaceful means have been exhausted. Additionally, proponents might contend that the threat of violence can deter aggression or maintain order in certain situations. Ultimately, the justification for violence is highly contextual and often controversial.
Children shouldn't be allowed to see, do, or be around anything that has any involvement with violence. That will give them the impression that violence is what they are suppose to do.
Children should not be allowed to see movies with graphic depictions of violence.
Yes. Comics are literature and art. Violence breeds empathy.
Violence is only allowed in self-defense, or to fight against oppression.
No, Never should he be allowed to. San Andreas has too much violence, bad language, and sexual scenes. Never should a 11 year old be allowed to play it.
If you are looking for violence in games that are not M rated you should get Final Fantasy games. If you are allowed to play M games you should get Manhunt, Bioshock, or any of the Halo games.
to sue in federal court
He believed that all people should be allowed the same opportunities reguardless of color. But the emphasis was always on 'peaceful' protests. He deplored violence.
Violence should only be used on a teddy bear
Discouraging violence is advisable.
There are truly no reasons as to why FaceBook should not be allowed.
== == Yes, otherwise the dirty players will rule. By knowing that they WILL get hurt when they play dirty, the cheap shot guys will be made to pay for their actions.