Will Smith slapped Chris Rock during the 2022 Academy Awards Ceremony. What likely shall, or should, be the aftermath of this incident of public assault and battery?
First of all, let it be said, this was not a school yard incident between six-year-old children. Mr. Smith is a mature adult. Second, although subjectivity is always relevant in matters of humor, it can fairly be said that Mr. Rock’s joke would be considered by most people to be in very poor taste.
But is physical violence the proper response to offensive verbal statements? It is hard to maintain that it ever is, at least not in a civilized society. If anyone deserved a slap for what he did, it was Smith, not Rock. What should Mr. Smith have done after this joke went awry? He should have limited himself to a verbal response. Can anyone imagine Pope Francis or Thomas Sowell or Woody Allen or Martin Luther King, Jr. or Albert Einstein or Justice Clarence Thomas or Congressman Ron Paul or the Dali Lama acting like this in such a context? Of course not: these are all civilized people. None of them would get caught dead slapping anyone upside the head in response to a bad joke.
How should the forces of law and order react to this act of initiatory violence? In one view, crimes concern only victims. There is no such thing as a crime against “society.” Under such a legal code, the reaction would all be up to Chris Rock. He could ignore this outrage, he could sue Will Smith for financial damages for this bodily injury, he could demand physical punishment (a jail sentence) for the aggressor. As it happens, he has declined to press charges.
But we do not live under that law. Offenses such as Smith’s, to be sure, are interpreted as a violation of the rights of the victim. But they are also seen as an invasion of “society.” For this purpose, we have attorneys general. They are able to bring charges against criminals even if the victim is willing to forgive the perpetrator, as has now occurred. From the perspective of the logic of this system, how should the attorney general now act?
Clearly, he should bring charges against Mr. Will Smith for assault and battery. Why? For one thing, this was a public slap. Millions of people watched these goings on at the Academy Award Ceremonies, including impressionable youngsters. If no repercussions are visited on Will Smith, the implication taken away by them will likely be that such behavior is justified, acceptable; is, even, to be applauded. The next time someone says something thought to be objectionable, instead of a verbal reply or even a “cancellation,” physical violence will have been rendered more likely. Is that really the direction in which people of good will would wish our country to move? For another, there is a simple matter of justice. The attorney general is put into place to promote that end. If people may slap each other around without negative consequences ordinary fairness will have been denigrated and disrespected.
Then there is the economics of the matter (that is not a typographical error). A basic premise of this discipline is that demand curves slope downward. The desire to engage in criminal behavior is no exception to this primordial insight. If the “price” is high, we will tend to have less of any given item or behavior; if the price is low or non-existent, then more. What is the price of crime? It is punishment. Will Smith deserves a term in prison for his criminal act.
Mr. Smith will be seen by many as a hero for this unwarranted and despicable behavior of his. After all, he attempted to defend the honor of his wife. That is not the result enlightened people would like to see as the conclusion of this sorry event.
Walter E. Block is Harold E. Wirth Eminent Scholar Endowed Chair and Professor of Economics at Loyola University New Orleans and is co-author of An Austro-Libertarian Critique of Public Choice (with Thomas DiLorenzo).
READER COMMENTS
Jon Murphy
Apr 5 2022 at 11:04am
This discussion is incomplete. Relative costs matter here too. It is true that if the [relative] price of something rises, quantity demanded falls. But if the price of X rises, then the price of Y relative to X falls (ceteris paribus). If the punishment of a slap increases, yes we may get fewer slaps. But the relative costs of worse forms of assault and battery have fallen. Thus, we may get more costly, violent crimes with a stronger punishment.
For example, let’s say that (prima facie) the cost of a slap is a fine of $10 and the cost of a punch is a jail term (assume the jail time is equal to lost wages, so pretty much the cost of going to jail > $10). Ceteris paribus, the criminal will prefer a slap to a punch.
But, let’s say that in an effort to punish slappers, the cost of a slap becomes equal to that of a punch (i.e. an equal jail term). In this case the criminal is indifferent between a slap and a punch! If the price of slapping goes even higher, then the criminal will prefer a punch to a slap.
On the margin, criminals will move toward punching. The absolute number of crimes may fall, but the more violent crimes will become more prevalent.
Depending on various factors, we may not want to punish the slap with a jail term even given all the reasons you laid out if the relative costs of other crimes will fall.
(As an aside, the reasoning here is part of the reason I oppose “Zero-Tolerance” legislation as well as why I believe forgiveness is so important. Forgiveness essentially lowers the relative costs of minor crimes and violations while increasing the relative costs of major crimes and violations).
Mark Barbieri
Apr 6 2022 at 6:28pm
The choice to slap with an open hand instead of punching with a closed fist was not made based on the differences in how the acts would be punished. It was a tactical decision based on the well known fact that paper beats rock.
Jon Murphy
Apr 6 2022 at 8:07pm
Touché
Mark Brophy
Apr 7 2022 at 6:27pm
Punching with the heel of the palm avoids injury while punching with an open fist risks breaking the knuckles.
Henry
Apr 5 2022 at 4:11pm
I’m commenting without reading this article. This subject is like the romantic entanglements of the Kardashians; something I find too small for notice. I know that one can’t always be thinking of only weighty things. It is spring, and there are lots of things being born. I saw the cutest pinto foal with his pinto dam in a pasture. There was no good pull-out for me to stop for a photo. More pull-outs on rural highways is a public good we should support.
Michael Rulle
Apr 6 2022 at 10:03am
My perception of the slap.
I did not watch live——I have read that they blocked out some of the action due to triggering their time delay. So my perception comes from YouTube. It did not look remotely real. It did not even look like he was hit. It looked completely planned and practiced. The sound of the slap seemed artificial——like a boxing punch in a movie. If I knew nothing and was given a true false test——I would not have thought more than a few seconds before declaring it “not real”.
I have no idea of course about it—-just describing my perception. I have no theory as to why they would do a fake slap. I also have no theory why Smith would do a real slap.
However, what is without doubt true, is the reaction was enormous. Since Hollywood is where illusions are made to look real, anything is possible.
Plus, the story itself—the actual event—not just the telling of the event—-has incredibly long legs. Apologies, expressed sorrow, huge demand for Rock’s stand-up, and so on.
I never find Hollywood inside stories interesting——except for this one. So whether fake or not——-they got attention they always strive for.
Martin Fox
Apr 7 2022 at 8:31am
I certainly agree with Mr. Block’s analysis bit I also agree with the above comment that implies this was all fake. Academy Award ratings are in free fall. This is Hollywood’s solution. Gratuitous violence. It could have been a live revival of Basic Instinct.
Steve Brown
Apr 7 2022 at 11:19pm
Much ado about nothing. Two men engaging within a mutually understood domain that allows for physical violence within also mutually understood limits. Are we really to believe that every last human dispute must end up in the hands of the authorities? Are we now all such shrinking violets that any and all manifestations of basic instincts give us the vapors? How many more police, how many more lawyers will be needed in a society so helpless and incapable of managing rudimentary disputes without an appeal to the state? Chris Rock should be praised for not pressing charges, and he is probably taking that approach because he knows he somewhat deserved what he got. Is what happened an example of ideal behavior? No, but it doesn’t warrant even a fraction of the attention and hysteria it has produced.
Comments are closed.