Do you accuse without proof?
2007-08-13 14:32:13 · 25 answers · asked by Breezey is saying HAPPY BIRTHDAY 7 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Polls & Surveys
No, generally don't accuse people, just gossip behind their backs.. (just kidding)
I have accused someone with what I thought was proof, only to find out (like Colin Powell) that truth is only as good as the source that provided it.
Yes, you should have proof, but better yet, more than one piece of evidence.
And anytime I've ever accused anyone of anything, it's been to their face, out of the public's eye.
Peace
2007-08-13 17:06:30 · answer #1 · answered by zingis 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
People who accuse without proof also use flimsy proof. They think that they already have the truth and they refuse to believe that they may be wrong.
I remember back when a friend was falsely accused of something. I brought solid, irrefutable evidence that the person making the accusation was wrong. Did my friend get an apology? No. The accuser said, "I don't have to consider any evidence I don't want to look at."
Some people are just jerks.
2007-08-13 21:47:15 · answer #2 · answered by angry 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yes, you should at least have some proof. But do people ever have proof when they accuse? Nooooo. I get accused of crap all the time and there's no proof at all and the accusers don't care. They just accuse for the shock value it creates.
2007-08-13 21:35:50 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Oh, hell-yes! Otherwise it's gossip at best, slander/libel at worst! On here (Y!A) is it libel? I mean it's cyber-print....Hmmm.
I don't accuse. I think people who go around irresponsibly "accusing" others out of boredom or just-plain-meaness are the very worst. Ahem. I take this opportunity to point out TROLLS....
At the very least when someone accuses someone else; they should be able to direct their "audience" to the source/proof; or take the time to point out that's it's the way they "feel" or whatever their reasoning is. That way the person being "informed" has the opportunity to make his/her own decision. (Nobody had better have been accusing YOU of anything..that would be way beyond stupid.) }:>
2007-08-14 18:14:11 · answer #4 · answered by Ja'aj };> 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I have never accused any one in public over anything...and no I would never accuse without proof...Did I miss something?
2007-08-13 23:48:56 · answer #5 · answered by ♥Saw Dust♥ 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In a perfect world I'd say yes, unfortunately that's not usually the way things happen...and to be honest I have done so before and been both right and wrong about what I was saying. But most of when I did was when I was much younger and blame ignorance of youth for it..as an adult in my 40's I know better until proof says it's so!
2007-08-13 21:45:05 · answer #6 · answered by G=ME 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Of course. If you accuse anyone, anywhere you should always have proof. And I have never accused anyone in public I always wait until were alone.
2007-08-13 21:34:31 · answer #7 · answered by Angel Eyes 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I never accuse people of any thing! Even if I had proof ~ I keep my mouth shut and take it the the LORD!
2007-08-14 18:01:18 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
If you accuse anybody, public or not, you should have proof. And I never accuse anybody unless I saw it with my own eyes!
2007-08-13 21:35:10 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't accuse anyone of anything unless I've got solid proof - I don't want to insult anyone who's innocent, and I certainly don't want to look like an ignorant, hateful fool.
2007-08-13 21:37:29 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋