"so you declare me to be presumptuous, and then you once again go on to ASSUME that such a beating would be for the sake of satisfaction? then you label it as "general", as if MOST who would do it thinks this is justification.
and i have to ask you, how do you know this? if such an action is such nonsense and far beneath you, then how can you presume to know the motives of someone who thinks its fair?"
A) I never assumed the beating would be because of satisfaction. I'm saying that if subduing/stopping the person is your aim, then beating them after doing so would be satisfaction or something other than needed.
B) Because people have stated their motives on here and I'm going by what I have seen and heard, in general. I'm not speaking on behalf of every single person. Way to accuse me of assumptions then do it yourself.
"however, you are assuming way too much as well."
No, I'm not. As explained. You are just interpreting what I've said, wrongly.
"its about justice"
Like I said, unless you're the authorities, it isn't your place to be dealing out such. That would be taking the law into your own hands.
-AC