Effects Of Fighting Words

Provocative words or indecent words that are either harming or might bring about the listener to promptly hit back or break the peace are considered to be the part of fighting words and offensive speech. Utilization of such words is not considered as a "free speech" under the First Amendment. On the off chance that the listener is indicted for such offensive words assault, this may lead to mitigating situations (Dorf & Michael, n,d).

u. Fighting words- words that inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace.

Fighting words are written or spoken words, generally expressed to incite hatred or violence from their target. Specific definitions, freedoms, and limitations of fighting words vary by jurisdiction. It is also used in a general sense of words that when uttered tend to create a verbal or physical confrontation by their mere usage.

In Chapter 2 of Thank You for Arguing by Jay Heinrichs, he discuses how to distinguish the difference between an argument and a fight, and to decide what you want out of an argument. The key point of an argument is to win over the audience to your point of view. In order to win an argument, you need to persuade them. You want your opponent to be persuaded using subtle logical tactics not power and intimidation. Using power and intimidation is the characteristics of a fight. This is when one person takes out his aggression on another, which does not persuade them but initiate’s revenge or rejection. During a fight, the key objective is to win by attacking and belittling your opponent, paying no attention to getting them to change their mind.

Often flows from narrowly defined or rigid goals, and most often produces negative results. Individuals involved become less flexible and assume that the opposing party must suffer defeat. Involved parties can succumb to personal attacks, threats and a general tone of hostility.

Mass incarceration is a major problem in the United States. Since the tough on crime movement that began to emphasize more punishment and creating new policies such as; three strikes law, truth-in sentencing laws, mandatory sentencing, and determinate sentencing, our prisons and jails have become overcrowded. The three strikes law increases the prison sentence of an offender convicted of three felonies or serious crime. Usually the punishment ranges from a minimum of 25 years to life in prison. The truth-in sentencing laws require the offender to serve a substantial amount of their prison sentence (usually around 85 percent) before they are eligible for release on parole. The mandatory sentencing requires a minimum period of incarceration that the offender must serve regardless of the history of the offender or the nature of the circumstance. These get tough policies have implicated longer prison and jail sentences and has reduced the amount of discretion that the judges, parole/probation officers and prison and jail administrators. These actions have consequently increased the prison and jail population, which causes an increase in money spent on jails and prisons.

escalate into fights. There are many pictures going around, this subject has been given a lot of publicity[5] and I think that this debate has gone on for far too long.

    In light of this topic, another portion of the original writing, “...excessive fines” can be discussed. Rather than all acts leading to the same punishment, there are varying levels of severity to each issue. A very common example of this would be tax evasion. (1) Tax evasion essentially means filling out tax forms with knowingly incorrect figures and data. (2) As a direct result of tax evasion, convicted criminals are presented with penalties varying from either 1-5 years in prison or a $100,000 fine maximum. Once again, variables play a tremendous role of importance in this form of punishment. Often times, tax evasion is played off into a fine and while incarceration is still a prevalent issue it is far less more

Police officers are faced with a wide variety of threatening situations on the job every day, they go through an intensive training at the academy to prepare them for the safety keeping job they have. The use of force may or may not be a significant predicament but it should be viewed by the community as well as the police. Often police officers find

Putting the definition into a more simple form, a person or company who breaks the will have to pay the consequence set forth in the law. For example, the law of murdering someone comes with a hefty prison sentence, the prison

This use of metaphors show that even if a beating or fight is called something else, it is still a beating or a fight and is very violent, usually resulting in the injury of

consequences of fighting and that if one chooses to be violent, chances are that they will get hurt.

Fight is characterized by a perceived competition within the group. It occurs when two or more people contest each other’s ideas, aiming for their opinion to essentially win out. Fight can be both functional and dysfunctional. When fight stays at the surface, focusing on only the ideas and not become personal then it can be considered a healthy way for team members to voice their opinions. On the other hand, when fight escalates to a personal level, people go on the defensive, members of the group take sides, and ultimately nothing becomes accomplished.

The use of disparaging or boastful language is considered the definition of trash talking. Everyone has trashed talked at least once in their life. Trash talking would consider on saying how good you are at something or telling someone that they are not good at something compared to you. You could also consider trash talking as threats towards people or to a country. Most threats are sent through social media, text, or by phone. Trash talking is used in different ways, the most common are bullying, intimidation, and threats.

Conflict in the workplace causes a decrease in the quality of care. Conflict creates chaos and a higher risk of poor patient care. Additionally low moral equals poor quality of care. As Sullivan stated, disruptive conflict does not follow any set of rules, and parties involved engages in activities to beat their opponent which causes angry, fear, and stress (2012).