[wasteland1952]

This may be the most one sided, brutal fight I've ever seen posted anywhere.  I don't care for one sided fights.  I prefer to see two girls go at it in an even contest.  But I'm posting this just in case some of you want to see it.  It is VERY brutal.  It will probably be taken down very soon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXqMqFTSdvs

[T aka Tony]

A hot mom I know posted this on her FB. Another hot mom I know with 2 hot daughters posted the Chuckie Cheese Brawl. These are women posting these fights. lol

[KatFiteFan]

Reason I don't feel bad for the girl getting beat is because SHE is the one who ran up to fight.

[Birdman]

Thanks for the video. Here's a 720p version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUpW7dypISU

[Tiger80]

Thanks Wasteland. Also Thanks Birdman for better quality.

Good teamwork.

T

[wasteland1952]

Tanproduc;

I see what you mean, that the girl started the fight and got her ass handed to her on a silver platter.  But the fight should have been over after a few good punches.  As much as I'd love to see a good fight between two girls, if I'd been present at that location at that time, I think I would have tried to stop the attack.  At least I hope I would.  If the fight had been more even, or if the girl getting beat kept coming back for more, that's different.  But she tried to escape several times only to be attacked again and again.  Enough is enough in my opinion.

[dcdave]

if I'd been present at that location at that time, I think I would have tried to stop the attack.

This confuses me. You wouldn't stop the first woman from attacking - running up and starting the fight - but you feel some moral obligation to stop "the attack"? Maybe if the woman who started the fight got her ass beat she wouldn't go starting fights.

[billyk123]

lol    she opened herself a can of whoopass there

if you smack someone in the face theres a very good chance they are not gonna be too happy about it

[wasteland1952]

Here again, I agree the girl who got her ass beat started the fight.  And if you'll notice, the fight started very quickly.  There wouldn't have been time to stop it before it started, at least by what can be seen on the vid.  As in most catfights you see posted, one girl usually starts or at least instigates the fight.  So if you stop it before it starts, how do you know what will happen?

As long as both girls want to fight, and both want to continue fighting, I say let them go at it.  But in this instance, the girl who was attacked very quickly established her dominance over the attacker.  I mean she immediately was in control of the fight.  After the first girl broke off the fight, and started retreating, that should have been it.  But she retreated not once but several times, and the dominant girl kept after her.

Sorry, but I still think it should have been stopped way before it was.  That's what is great about this forum; we can express opinions on the subject freely.
 

[dinohenry483]

if I'd been present at that location at that time, I think I would have tried to stop the attack.

This confuses me. You wouldn't stop the first woman from attacking - running up and starting the fight - but you feel some moral obligation to stop "the attack"? Maybe if the woman who started the fight got her ass beat she wouldn't go starting fights.

Couldn't disagree more. In fact, I was going to write on this before I even saw your reply.

The initial attacker was clear, but past a certain point, the "attacker" had been sufficiently dealt with. You had a full 30 seconds of unnecessary striking. And it's not like the "attacker" came at the girl with lethal force. She just wanted a fight.

Legal and social protocol affords a person being attacked a lot of leeway in disarming a threat, but let's not pretend not to notice overkill when it's obviously overkill.

[dinohenry483]

If you are attacked, once the person stops intelligently defending themselves...sure, throw in a few extra shots just to make sure. But beyond that, it's not really THAT hard to make a judgement call that it is gone to far. The "grey area" that some people cite in situations like this isn't really all that hard to define.

In other words, there really isn't THAT MUCH ambiguity as to when a person has stopped "intelligently defending themselves".

[dcdave]

This isn't about "intelligent defense", though I'm not sure what that is. This is about some bizarre double standard that it's okay to not stop a fight when it starts but the fight must be stopped after some legal line is crossed.

The attacker crossed a legal line. No one here says stop her from attacking. The victim becomes the attacker, legally, crosses the same legal line as the first woman and suddenly the fight must be stopped. Because laws.

That's disingenuous.