I have been punched in the face a few times by different people in my life. It’s not something to crow about, it’s a predictable outcome for a person who has lived as long as I have and known the type of people I ran with when younger. I only mention it because unless you have personal experience with this you might miss a key moment you never forget after the black eye forms.
There is a moment in time when the yelling and swearing and threats keep going, but the stance of your adversary changes. The stance tells you violence is not only imminent but likely unavoidable. No one moves like that unless they are about to hurt you and don’t want to be hurt in return. This is called ‘stepping to’, ‘squaring up’, and loads of others.
So as an onlooker you see two assholes yelling and then one threw a punch and that’s who you tattle on to the cops. But if you were in that conflict the person striking first might well know for certain violence is going to happen and in an act of true committed self-defense strikes first. The posture told him it was going to be a fight and no one needs to wait for the broken nose.
The issue is it was only words until that stance told him it was going to be a fight to begin with. Regardless of morality this is how humans behave, is this in any way defined in the law code?
Some jurisdictions define assault separately from battery, and in doing so define assault as a credible threat of battery. If you’re faced with an assailant who closes the distance between you and adopts a fighting stance, you might make the case to the cops that that’s a credible threat of battery. An inexperienced bystander might not notice the stance and might not say anything about it, unless prompted by the cops (“…yeah, I guess he did have his knees bent and his fists up and ready, just a couple of feet from the guy who punched him…”). Whether the cops would accept the punchee’s fighting stance as an assault on the puncher (justifying a preemptive self-defense by the puncher) is not something I could answer.
1: A person who “squares up” is committed to definitely starting a fight.
2: A person who believes that a fight is definite should throw the first punch.
But these two premises are contradictory. If this person was truly committed to fighting, why did they waste time with the “squaring up”, instead of punching immediately like you did? Or if squaring up is a necessary precursor to throwing an effective punch, how is it that you were ready to punch before they were, unless you also squared up before they did?
All you know about that posture is that they’re ready to throw a punch. But that could also be them readying themselves for the punch they expect you to throw. All you know is they’re prepared to trade punches, not that they’re going to assault you.
The one thing you know for a fact is that the square-up is not a pursuit posture. So when you see it, that’s your cue to step back and leave. If you withdraw and they still come after you, then you’re justified in striking. Not before.
But if I haven’t “squared up” - if I haven’t postured for a fight, haven’t placed myself within striking distance - they would have no reason to expect me to attack.
Squaring up simply enables one to be in a better stance where they’re prepared for action. Period. It could be for either defense or offensive purposes. I don’t think you can draw more intent from it on its face than that.
If squaring up can reasonably seen as an imminent threat and there’s no opportunity to walk away then throwing the first punch might be seen as self defense.
Considering this at all means you have a credible witness or video of the incident. Otherwise the only thing for you to decide is whether you want to fight or run. If you get charged with anything you’ll say he threw the first punch no matter what happened.
If there are witnesses or video and you want to fight best to goad the other guy into acting first. Even better is running away because then you won’t get your ass kicked and you don’t have to worry getting charged with a crime. No matter how it starts if the guy gets seriously injured or dies even as a result of freak circumstances you are going to regret not running away.
That doesn’t change anything I said. All you know is they’re getting ready to throw a punch (or maybe block one), for whatever real or imagined reason.
If you have time to notice that, you have time to withdraw from the altercation. If they keep coming at you, then it becomes assault, and you have a credible self-defense claim.
It seems to me the obvious thing, if you are familiar with “squaring up” (Never encountred that term) then is to be prepared to block the first punch. Then, your assailant is guitly of assault by thowing the first punch. I would hope blocking or deflecting punches is a component of good fighting. The best component is backing off. Then moving aggressively toward you is further evidence of intent.
Regardless, the law (and the assailant’s friends) don’t have instant replay when the cops arrive. You takes your swing and you take you chances. Generally, throwing the first physical hit is evidence of assault. (But then, Han Solo did shoot first - what’s more important, winning right now or worring about legal consequences?)
I doubt changing one’s posture is defined so strictly. The analysis would be whether one moved in a manner that increased the perceived threat. Did you move towards the other person, raise your hands, clench your fists, etc. For example, I can yell at you from 5 feet away and not be an immediate threat to hit you because I’m too far away. But if I get right in your face…
I’m not entirely sure what you mean by “squaring up.” I trained a lot of martial arts/streetfighting. Sure, I would assume a stance across from another boxer. But if I wanted to hurt someone/defend myself, I would do my best to not telegraph my intentions.
In my limited experience, when guys are up in each others’ faces jawing, that’s more likely a good indicator that neither really wants to fight.
Indeed, I would think that getting “right in someone’s face” just leaves one vulnerable to a quick headbutt or other dirty move or even a really dangerous strike.
I think the fundamental flaw is that we’re assuming that “squaring up” is basically firing the ICBMs, and that you’re in a “launch on warning” mode, so you start punching.
I don’t think that would hold up too well in court- you could argue that “squaring up” is just a form of posturing intended to intimidate and cause the other guy to back down, not a sort of irrevocable escalation. And by punching when they squared up, you were the person who escalated, not the other guy, and that’s likely what it’s all about- who escalated to the point of blows.
If your intention (as the person who is squaring up) is to intimidate the other guy, how is that not assault? From the link (bolding mine):
Additionally, assault is a criminal act in which a person intentionally causes fear of physical harm or offensive contact to another person. Assault can be committed with or without a weapon and can range from physical violence to threats of violence. Assault is frequently referred to as an attempt to commit battery, which is the deliberate use of physical force against another person. The deliberate inflicting of fear, apprehension, or terror is another definition of assault that can be found in several legal systems.
People absolutely try to pick fights via verbal and physical posturing, but are you supposed to oblige them, or just get out of there? Seems clear which is the more reasonable option, unless you are into bar- or street-fighting with strangers.
[If the other party were a gentleman (or woman), you could demand satisfaction, say, pistols at dawn, but that is probably not the case.]
Probably depends on the intent of the intimidation- if the idea is to take a page from animals and make yourself look big to scare the other guy off, that’s different than making a fist and pulling your arm back and threatening to hit them.
I have. And i opened this thread wondering what it meant in the thread. Because I’m a square dancer. We square up at the start of every dance. And I’d be shocked if the law has any precedent recognizing that, because, why?
Anyway, I’ve never been punched in the face. But I’ve fought with people who started by taking an aggressive stance, as a kid. (I used to fight with my brothers a lot.) I often chose to engage, but at that point, i would expect you could ordinarily run rather than fight. I certainly could.