| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
 Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:21 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| By the way, "Don't taze me bro!" comes to mind. Where were the campus police? |
I have to say that given the choice between a taser and a cream pie, I'd happily opt for the latter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The point is not about self-righteous assertions about, allegedly, the Gestapo and their evil tasers, but rather to ask where were the campus police when this occurred?
I understand that Kerry rates heavy police presence. But I also understand that anything dealing with high-profile speakers on (a) environmentalist issues and/or (b) the Arab-Israeli Conflict and/or Middle Eastern affairs ought to require some kind of presence as well. For one thing, these affairs sometimes degenerate into accusations and shouting matches (remember "Don't taze me bro!'s" "questions" re: Skull & Bones and the 2004 elections?). For another, now we have this incident as precedent.
No one apparently saw these two suspects walk in with pies in their bags and/or behave suspiciously as they prepositioned themsevles to strike. That tells me zero security measures in place. That ought to change. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 11:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| You'll be gratified to know that it is an assault (provided the victim sees it coming). And if it hits, its a battery. |
And if he doesn't see it coming, it's what? A bad surprise? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 11:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| It is not assault if the victim does not see it. If the suspect follows through and strikes the victim then it is battery whether the victim sees it or not, correct, Kuros? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
djsmnc
Joined: 20 Jan 2003
Location: Dave's ESL Cafe
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 5:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| It's not assault if it has whipped cream on it |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-Ta Boy wrote: |
You'll be gratified to know that it is an assault (provided the victim sees it coming). And if it hits, its a battery.
And if he doesn't see it coming, it's what? A bad surprise? |
Well, if he doesn't see it coming, and it doesn't hit him, what's the harm? An assault is when the actor puts another into imminent apprehension of a harmful or offensive contact. You cannot have apprehension of something if you do not sense it in some way.
| Gopher wrote: |
| It is not assault if the victim does not see it. If the suspect follows through and strikes the victim then it is battery whether the victim sees it or not, correct, Kuros? |
Right. Its battery if its a harmful or offensive contact. I think its an easy argument that a reasonable person would be offended by pie in the face while getting ready to speak in front of a large audience.
--------
The individuals are unlikely to be prosecuted. The above are civil definitions of the offenses. As Gopher mentioned, a pie is not a deadly weapon. I'm positive the University is angry at them, however. I think the University may also have a claim re: compensation for whatever they lost when Friedman chose not to speak after the pie attack. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Czarjorge
Joined: 01 May 2007
Location: I now have the same moustache, and it is glorious.
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Riddle me this...
If I sneezed and some of the accompanying mist hit you, would that be battery? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 8:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Czarjorge wrote: |
Riddle me this...
If I sneezed and some of the accompanying mist hit you, would that be battery? |
That's a tough one. Maybe it would be a battery. But assault and battery are intentional torts. So you would have to intentionally sneeze upon me.
In some jurisdictions particulates are considered 'vehicles' for battery. If you intentionally blew smoke in my face, it might be a battery, depending on the state.
The answer would depend on the circumstances and the jury. But I doubt I'd collect more than nominal damages, i.e., $1. Punitives for an intentional sneeze? Very hard to get. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 8:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
Not, only that, it's likely to backfire, as people will tend to sympathise with the victim.
Poor show. |
Exactly. That's why the two of them aren't that bright: this action is 100% counterproductive to whatever it is they're arguing for/against. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stillnotking
Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Location: Oregon, USA
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 2:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| stillnotking wrote: |
| Well, the pie-throwers are idiots (they wanted to "open a dialogue"? Really?) but Friedman's well-deserving of a cream pie to the kisser. |
Why?
His works on global economics are fantastic. |
Not really; he's no economist, and from my reading of his columns, he seems to get most of his data from anonymous taxi drivers. I suppose he's OK as a sort of Globalization for Dummies.
The problem is that he has written a lot of Imperialism for Dummies, too, hence the just desserts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 2:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| The answer would depend on the circumstances and the jury. But I doubt I'd collect more than nominal damages, i.e., $1. Punitives for an intentional sneeze? Very hard to get. |
I imagine we could bring "biological warfare" into the mix, if that were the intention. Depending on the disease, the damages could theoretically be quite high. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 2:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| The answer would depend on the circumstances and the jury. But I doubt I'd collect more than nominal damages, i.e., $1. Punitives for an intentional sneeze? Very hard to get. |
I imagine we could bring "biological warfare" into the mix, if that were the intention. Depending on the disease, the damages could theoretically be quite high. |
You'd have a serious causation problem. Was the disease given transferred through the sneeze?
| stillnotking wrote: |
| Not really; he's no economist, and from my reading of his columns, he seems to get most of his data from anonymous taxi drivers. I suppose he's OK as a sort of Globalization for Dummies. |
Lacking a source, I'm going to put that accusation of gathering data from taxi drivers down on the level of baseless slur. As for your opinion, well, yes, globalization for dummies is an interesting term for a book described as one of the four best comprehensive descriptions of the post-Cold War world. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 3:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Well, if he doesn't see it coming, and it doesn't hit him, what's the harm? |
I suppose if the pie didn't hit him, then it would just be littering, but that wasn't what I was asking about.
My question was about being hit in the back of the head by a flying pie. (It's the 'if he doesn't see it coming' part that puzzles me.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 3:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thomas Friedman probably wouldn't be a bad president. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 3:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Confusion may result from language. The tort "assault" and the sexual crime "sexaul assault," for example.
The tort only deals with threats and intimidation. Raising a fist at someone to make them flinch, for example. The victim must see this and feel the threat and the intimidation for an assault to occur.
If someone hits someone else with that fist, whether they see it or not, now we are talking battery, which involves violent contact. And there are many degrees here. Touching someone who has not given you permission to touch them can be battery, too, I understand. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
