Tangent. I find it interesting when people refer to Smith's actions, or similar actions, as "defending" someone. It was not defense. The "offense" (to any extent that it could be called an offense) had already occurred and was over. There was no danger to protect anyone from. The action was retribution. And when you realize that, it changes the color of the situation significantly and makes it really hard to justify it as some kind of noble act.
Most likely this is from my post earlier in the thread.
Defense or defending doesn't just mean physically. I would argue he was defending his wife, does it require physically assaulting someone? No.
I also called this out.
I concur.BTW, I don't think that most women want the men in their life to “defend” them this way.