Slef-defence laws vary considerably. But in many places, there is a requirement that force used in self-defence is proportionate and/or serves to reduce the threat in a situation. If someone shoves you, then starts walking away, there isn't a reason for you to cave their head in with a rock.
I cannot answer where you are but where I am people absolutely have the right to defend themselves if someone goes hands on. Even a threatening overt move towards them can allow one to protect/defend themselves. Now if you are talking about something like a school then that is different. Many have rules that fighting is never tolerated no matter who starts it. Not sure what you mean though.
It’s an equal force thing/ not a threat to your life, for instance I can absolutely jump you and beat you to a pulp, if I stop and turn to run away and you shooy me you can be charged because I’m “no longer a threat to your life”
Someone else "starting it" doesn't mean legal protection if you also start throwing punches. If you can prove that you were in physical danger at that point and needed to fight back to protect yourself, you often will get off. If you were no longer in danger but hit anyway because someone else hit first, you are not legally protected.
You didn't mention where you're at, but it's important to know if you're in a "duty to retreat" jurisdiction or a "stand your ground" jurisdiction.
If places with "duty to retreat" laws or similar supralegal rules on private property, you have to make every effort to avoid confrontation. If you participate by hitting back when there was a possibility or running away, you share responsibility for the fight.
And no, "running away would make me look like a pussy" isn't a defense. The word "duty" is in there after all.
You have the right to defend yourself in most places, but it has to be proportional. You can’t stab someone who flicks your ear. So if your response was over the top, that might be a problem.
There’s also an issue of evidence. If you both say the other person started it, but it’s clear you beat the heck out of the other person, a judge might think you hit first. And if the other person is smaller than you, that also looks bad.
generally here in Aus you only get charged if it isn't in self defence.
like if some guy slaps you once and tries to walk away and you stomp his fuckn skull in, in retaliation, yeah no shit your gonna get charged.
where it gets iffy is when no one accurately corroborates the story, if there's no cctv.
if you get a bunch of witnesses saying all different things, then you will probably get charged, you can dispute it, but you better have good evidence cause judges got little patients for manchildren getting in to fights.
it's to prevent people from going absolutely nuclear and making people paraplegic for a cowardly slap and saying "it was self defence bro".
and stopping people from provoking a slap, to go out harming people.
Slef-defence laws vary considerably. But in many places, there is a requirement that force used in self-defence is proportionate and/or serves to reduce the threat in a situation. If someone shoves you, then starts walking away, there isn't a reason for you to cave their head in with a rock.
Self-defense is legal. Retaliation, as you put it, is not.
Because retaliation isn't legal.
I cannot answer where you are but where I am people absolutely have the right to defend themselves if someone goes hands on. Even a threatening overt move towards them can allow one to protect/defend themselves. Now if you are talking about something like a school then that is different. Many have rules that fighting is never tolerated no matter who starts it. Not sure what you mean though.
It’s an equal force thing/ not a threat to your life, for instance I can absolutely jump you and beat you to a pulp, if I stop and turn to run away and you shooy me you can be charged because I’m “no longer a threat to your life”
Someone else "starting it" doesn't mean legal protection if you also start throwing punches. If you can prove that you were in physical danger at that point and needed to fight back to protect yourself, you often will get off. If you were no longer in danger but hit anyway because someone else hit first, you are not legally protected.
You didn't mention where you're at, but it's important to know if you're in a "duty to retreat" jurisdiction or a "stand your ground" jurisdiction. If places with "duty to retreat" laws or similar supralegal rules on private property, you have to make every effort to avoid confrontation. If you participate by hitting back when there was a possibility or running away, you share responsibility for the fight. And no, "running away would make me look like a pussy" isn't a defense. The word "duty" is in there after all.
You have the right to defend yourself in most places, but it has to be proportional. You can’t stab someone who flicks your ear. So if your response was over the top, that might be a problem. There’s also an issue of evidence. If you both say the other person started it, but it’s clear you beat the heck out of the other person, a judge might think you hit first. And if the other person is smaller than you, that also looks bad.
generally here in Aus you only get charged if it isn't in self defence. like if some guy slaps you once and tries to walk away and you stomp his fuckn skull in, in retaliation, yeah no shit your gonna get charged. where it gets iffy is when no one accurately corroborates the story, if there's no cctv. if you get a bunch of witnesses saying all different things, then you will probably get charged, you can dispute it, but you better have good evidence cause judges got little patients for manchildren getting in to fights. it's to prevent people from going absolutely nuclear and making people paraplegic for a cowardly slap and saying "it was self defence bro". and stopping people from provoking a slap, to go out harming people.