I just read the thread you referred to above. I thought it was very interesting. I might have been to narrow in my above thinking about first attack. here is what I posted there. If I had researched better I would not have started this thread! My error.
"Very interesting thread. A lawyer friend once told me "I don't care what the answer is as long as I can choose the what the question is."
Another told me "I don't care what words are used as long as I get to choose the definition."
And " if you want to change the meaning of the document, don't try to change the words in the document. The other side will challenge it. Just change the definition of the words."
I was raised in the central northern part of the United States. In that region the general rule in state laws was the fight begins with the first punch. An English northern European concept. You were expected to endure everything else before striking. The guy who threw the first punch was legally the aggressor and would likely face legal ramifications.
Later, I moved to the antebellum southern part of the United States where one's honor was highly valued. French and Spanish traditions. Dueling was a respected response to a verbal insult. One was expected to respond with violence to the least insult. Killing someone in a duel was not a criminal act but was justified. The concept was included the the criminal code of the state in which I had moved. It was called the "fighting words" statue. If you insulted someone and they punched you, the punch was considered self defense, even if thrown as the first punch. The belief was the insult was the start of the fight because the expected response was violence. I no longer live in the south and my understanding is the fighting words statutes have been repealed.
Anyway, the issue in no first attack is what is the first attack? Is it the first physically violent act or perhaps the act that the justifies the the physical response? e.g. I am 5'7" when I was much younger I pissed of a violent street gang member who had several trips to prison and was about 6'4" tall. (It was an accident on my part.) any way he was about 6" away yelling he was going to rip my head off. I believed him. If I had thrown a punch. When did the fight start with his actions or my punch? In societies that value honor as justifying violent responses, the answer may be different than in societies that believe violence is less acceptable.
Perhaps the first punch is not the first act of the fight.
[a typical lawyer's response? A few years ago we here in the US had a President, who was a lawyer by training, and accused of sexual abuse of a young woman. His defense included "it depends on the meaning of the word "is."]
I now see that There is no first attack in Karate is not as simple as I first though.
Thanks all."
