Violence In John Brown's Case Study

681 Words3 Pages
Violence should never come first in trying to make your point seen or heard. Social change such as an agreement without the use of violence can always be an option because no one can ever get hurt. Yet there 's also a line that should not be intersected. If someone uses violence on you, should you be able to use it back? Yes, but it only should be used to defend yourself such as if someone is threatening you and takes action physically you should too. As a child I asked myself many times if it were okay to defend myself from bullies by using violence. It came to a certain point where I had enough and had to use violence to show them I wasn’t their toy that they could pick on. Using violence was a good method to me because it got the message across to the bullies, that it wasn’t right for them to pick on someone. The only reason I used physical action towards the bullies was because talking to the bullies and telling them to stop was like talking to the wall. The selection…show more content…
As he says in his last speech it was never his intention to get people hurt as he did. The people that opposed to what John Brown was doing never gave him the opportunity to let him speak his mind. By speaking his mind he could have said that there had already been occasions where he had saved slaves without the use of violence. The effect on not letting him do so was that he felt using violence was the only was he could help save the slaves. Although John Brown knew that violence was not the way to back up his actions because he had saved many slaves without anyone getting hurt he did so anyway. The raid on Harpers Ferry was an event where John Brown and a few of his followers used violence for a cause that could benefit them. They tried to take items that could help form a slave rebellion. John Brown didn’t overuse the control of violence, he only did it to try and help the save get the freedom he thought they
Open Document