Yesterday I watched part of the men’s finals of the French Open tennis tournament. At one point, some idiot ran onto the court with a burning flare to protest same sex marriages in France. This protest had nothing to do with the match or tournament.
When the guy ran on the court, Rafael Nadel (one of the participants in the finals) quickly retreated to get away from the danger. The good news is security reacted quite quickly and defused the situation in a timely manner and play resumed shortly afterwards (although both players seemed to be distracted during the next two games).
What would have happened if Nadal had reacted differently? He is a world class athlete, with a racquet in his hand and had to be worried that he was in danger. Would anyone have blamed him if, instead of retreating from danger, he confronted the intruder and swung his racquet to protect himself? I have no doubt that someone with Nadal’s strength and speed could do some serious damage with a racquet if he felt he had to protect himself. Would anyone blame him if he had injured or even killed the intruder?
What about the people who run on a baseball field during a game. If they got close to the batter, would anyone really blame the batter for protecting himself with his bat?
These people who interrupt events (and the two examples I have given are athletic related but it’s true in many other situations as well) obviously feel they are entitled to their moment of fame. Sadly, they get a lot more attention on news stations and online than they deserve. Hopefully they understand that at some point one of them will get seriously injured, and possibly killed, because the people they are interrupting might truly feel the need to defend themselves and when that happens, I certainly hope the legal system recognizes that people do need to defend themselves.
I am truly opposed to violence but in a situation such as yesterdays tennis match, I would much rather the intruder be injured, than other innocent parties.
Have a great day!