Should beating up an annoying jerk be legal?

[zen101]

*Originally posted by El_Kabong *
**

Quite simply, because assholish behavior is in fact punishable under the law, and is not the same level of violence as a punch. It just isn’t.

**

Cite? I’m not one to demand cites for readily obvious stuff, and maybe you are thinking of some penal code that either does not exist in my nation/state or it just slipped by me. Regardless, can you tell me what the law on asshole behavior and it’s consequences are?

**
The ‘journalist’ was not specifically asking for a poke in the eye. He was, obviously, attempting to get a hostile reaction from Aldrin, but that is not the same thing.**

Why not? The guy should have know better. Mayeb it’s society’s fault for not correcting his assumption that his behavior was okay, but Aldrins punch seems a minor corrective action toward the greater good.

**

As for Aldrin, he was in a public setting with dozens of people present. He could have asked for assistance, and certainly could have requested that someone get the police, or withdrawn to a place where person harassing him could not follow. **

Not Aldrin’s responsibility. He was not the one in the wrong. He was minding his own business. And why should he be required to ask for assistance which may or may not come? He seems to have been able to handle the situation perfectly well, and in a manner that most every respondant I haver see seems to agree with. I’d say folks at large, at least the ones who bother to post are in favor of judicious punching.
**

Failing to punch someone you consider rude is not ‘accepting rude behavior’, it is simply behaving in a civilized manner. The law provides means to prosecute persons for harassment. For example, if Aldrin felt truly threatened by this person on the basis of past behavior, it should be no problem to obtain a restraining order.**

Failing to stop a crime can be viewed as the actions of an accomplice under some “Good Samaritan” laws. While I may not agree entirely with those laws, they do carry a principle which I agree with. So long as we all tolerate casual rudeness and the unwarranted infliction of abuse on others we are all diminished.

**

Wow, got a few issues there, don’t we?

** Duh.

** In any event, I disagree that our society is necesarily bcoming more of a ‘crap-hole’. Prove that it is with some hard facts; then maybe I’ll give a bit more weight to your moaning. Or maybe not.**

Assault on educators. The dramatic rise in pre-teen and teenage murderers. The common fear that many people have to leave their homes at any time, or for entering some neighborhoods. The rise if the public and casual use of coarse or foul language and demeanor. Vandalism. Litter. Etc. You need to ask for cites for the obvious and I’m unwilling to play that game. Remove yourseilf from the isolation chamber and take a look at the world. Maybe you are too young to have any frame of reference, maybe you grew up someplace already spoiled by the phenomenon I refer to or maybe the opposite is true and your portion of Atlantis is free of urban sprawl, or maybe you just want to argue a point. I dunno.

**

Look, it shouldn’t be so hard to understand; what you personally deem unbearably offensive may not match the views of people in general, and you are not the best arbiter of punishment, especially if you are making your decision in a state of emotional agitation.**

I think I mentioned a jury to determine if the action was appropriate. Any official arbiter could decide this. As for personally deeming right and wrong, I beg to differ. Collectively the entire voting populace does this to some small degree, or we attempt to. Our legislators are supposed to respond to the collective societal ideal, why not in this matter as well? (albiet many of them would be recipients themselves and therefore I could see a conflict of interest)
**

Examples:

1. Getting sprayed with cologne earns a punch in the stomach, in your view? Seems a bit extreme for something that can be washed off if you don’t care for the scent.

2. Say the cologne sprayer is a pregant woman, and your retaliatory punch causes her to lose the baby. Her tough luck, in your view?

**

You mean like the way I’m responsible if she drives drunk and runs in to me while I’m driving sober? Bad choices affect people and those near to them. It’s called reality. Besides, I see no reason to tolerate being sprayed by anything. Can I piss on you? It just washes off? I don’t have any diseases, and your less likely to get a rash from my piss than you are from most colognes/perfumes out there (not to mention my pee usually smells better than anything Hugo Boss is currently charging $50.00 for three ounces.)
**

I’m simply appalled that some of the resondents to this thread seem to have not the slightest idea how the law works, and why it is set up that way. I strongly urge the you to do a bit of resarch, as if you would act out any of the scenarios you suggest, some of you folks are likely to be facing assault charges at one point or another. **

Okay, enlighten us. I’ll be the first to admit I’m no attourney. Then again I don’t think laws as the apply to the common citizen should be beyond the grast of that citizen, even shoud he/she disagree with the intent of said laws.

Start with how acting an ass is punishable by law as you implie previously.

[zen101]

*Originally posted by David Simmons *
**Here is someone who wants to “improve society” at least partly because crude language grates on his ear.
and who also
And here are a few words and phrases gleaned from the writings of the same individual. The SDMB isn’t a “public conveyance” exactly, but it is public.

“an occasional nut kick”

“women shoud have just as equal an opportunity to get punched in the tit”

“assholish behavior”

“turding on the seat or pissing on the hand towells”

“crap-hole”

“dipshit” **

Ostensibly this board is for adults and adults only. You also have the option to cease your reading, unlike being on a bus or waiting for one.

I also noted that I do use objectiable language and terms, and did so as a child but that I had the wit and decency to at least fear punishment for it.

the SDMB is somewhat consequence free and anonymous and therefore outside my scrutiny, as well as being completely optional as noted before.

Funny that you should manage to quote me partially and so carefully and completely miss any salient point of your own.

[Walloon]

*Originally posted by Phoenix Dragon *
**A seventy-some year man being harrased by another man half his age, nearly half a foot taller, and some 70+ pounds heavier (IIRC), trapped against a wall, and being prodded roughly by a book while the person spouts off rantings **

I’ve seen the video clip, and none of that seems to be true. The above is Aldrin’s spin on the story to justify his actions. I think Aldrin should be charged with assault and battery.

[David_Simmons]

*Originally posted by zen101 *
**

Funny that you should manage to quote me partially and so carefully and completely miss any salient point of your own. **

In my view, your salient point or points was so outlandish that it wasn’t worth a response.

[Tuckerfan]

The jerkpunch is a form of communication and as such, protected by the First Amendment to the US Constitution.

Mr. Aldrin, in addition to being the second man to walk on the Moon, is a West Pointer. Having known a few West Pointer’s in my day, I can say with confidence that had Mr. Aldrin wished to do so, he could have snuffed out his attacker’s life with the same ease that he administered the jerkpunch. Being unable to communicate with the parts of his attacker’s brain that deal with higher order thinking, Mr. Aldrin shifted the conversation to his attacker’s reptile brain in hopes of making some progress. What Mr. Aldrin was saying with his jerkpunch was this: I find this method of communicating distressful and if you insist on continuing this conversation in the manner in which you are presently so doing, I feel that I will have no choice but to inflict bodily harm to you. Do you wish to continue this conversation? Obviously, the answer was, “No.”

The jerkpunch can be defined as follows:
1.) The puncher has attempted to use verbal communication with the punchee to no avail.
2.) The puncher attempts to seperate him/herself from the punchee prior to landing the blow.
3.) A reasonable person would find the actions of the punchee to be offensive and/or threatening.
4.) The puncher does not use lethal force.
5.) After adminstering the jerkpunch, the puncher waits to see what the punchee’s reaction is. If the punchee continues to behave in the same manner as before the jerkpunch was administered, the puncher has the option of administering another jerkpunch or a standard punch with the stated goal of inflicting as much physical damage as possible, including death.
6.) The jerkpunch is administered at the time the conversation becomes distasteful/distressful to the puncher and not at some later date.

If a person’s actions fail to meet all of the above criteria, then the person is guilty of assault and should be accordingly punished. However, if the person’s actions do meet all of the above criteria, then no punishment should be given.

However, in the case of Mr. Aldrin, I think that his attacker’s actions go beyond mere “jerkdom” and, in all honesty, form the basis of his application to resign from the human race. Think about it, as the rest of the world was preparing to remember those who died a year ago in a series of acts which demonstrate the worst aspects of human behavior, Mr. Aldrin’s attacker was bent on accusing an individual who exemplifies the best of human behavior of being corrupt. Accepting for the moment, and I do mean the moment, the possibility that NASA might have faked the Moon missions, the fact that Mr. Aldrin and the other astronauts never used their fame to create a new oligarchy. (Do you think that either political party could have successfully fielded a presidential candidate if he had to go up against a Armstrong/Aldrin ticket, backed by the other astronauts? Assuming A/A did well, they could have followed it up with an Aldrin/Collins ticket and probably done equally as well.) One would think that if the astronauts were going to agree to spend the rest of their lives repeating a lie, they would have gotten more in return than what they have so far. (After all, if you can fake a Moon landing, rigging an election should be child’s play.)

So not only was Mr. Aldrin’s attacker accusing Aldrin of being a fraud, he was saying that humanity itself was a fraud. Thus, what Mr. Aldrin administered was not a jerkpunch, but a Darwinianpunch which states: “You’re so far out of line, you’re endanger of becoming an extinct species.”

[greck]

here’s the problem with beating up a jerk who deserves it:

mike tyson

he could walk into a room, popping his gum

flick a cigarette butt on the floor

empty all the trash out of his pockets onto the counter top

take a call on his cell phone and proceed to speak loudly

walk into the bathroom and use the urinal directly adjacent to another man even though they are the only two in the room

give everyone in the room a “wet willie”

spit (loogey style) on a chair

sing “the star spangled banner” and get all the words wrong

bite his nails and spit them on the person next to him

adjust himself

change the channel on the tv to “Jerry springer” without asking anyone

and drink tea without lifting his pinky
and who’s going to unleash their fury on him?

[msmith537]

*Originally posted by greck *
here’s the problem with beating up a jerk who deserves it:

mike tyson

he could walk into a room, popping his gum…
…
and who’s going to unleash their fury on him? **

Lennox Lewis?
El_Kabong: I find it a little ironic that someone whos nickname is derived from a cartoon character who clobbers people in the head with a guitar is arguing against the “jerkpunch”.

[Rhum_Runner]

When accompanied by a hostile aggressive act I believe that abusive language my be considered a challenge to a fight, and thus constitute consent.

If anyone touches you, sprays you, splashes you, or otherwise intentionally comes in physical contact with you without your permission (accidently getting bumped in a bar does not count, sorry) that is “assault” and you have every right to unleash the fury.

Actually I think that is battery. Assault is the threat of violence and/or unwanted touching, or an incomplete battery. Battery is the actual intentional offensive touching. For example, if I throw a knife at you and miss, that would be assault. If I hit you with the knife, that would be battery.

[ElJeffe]

Well, I haven’t seen the videotape of Buzz meting out some good ol’ five-knuckle justice, but the accounts I’ve read seem to make it morally justifiable, if not legally justifiable.

I think that assault laws should pretty much stand as they are. If you punch someone, without being assaulted yourself, that should be illegal. That being said, I think that we, as a society, should recognize that some cases of assault should be “more illegal” than others.

If, for example, my wife calls me a jerk, and I punch her in the face and break her nose, that should obviously be a punishable offense. I should go to jail, do not pass Go, do not collect $200. But imagine the following scenario: My wife dies in a horrible accident. Some person comes up to me, in the midst of my grieving, and tells me my wife was a cheap whore and that she screwed the entire neighborhood. Now, is my safety in question? Not really. I have no reason to believe this man wants to harm me in any physical fashion. Would punching him be understandable, even justified? I’d say yes.

If I were a judge, and that case were presented to me, I would do everything in my power to get it thrown out. If I was forced by existing laws to prosecute the grieving husband (I’m no legal expert, and I don’t know how, exactly, such a case would be handled), and he was found guilty, I would make his punishment a $5 fine, or something, in order to make the point that I see little condemnable in his behavior. He was provoked, the guy deserved a punch, case closed.

In general, I think assault laws should be kept as they are, in order to more easily prosecute the guilty, but that our legal system should be able to recognize shades of gray. Some people just deserve to be punched, and maybe that should always be technically guilty of assault, but the level of punishment, if any, should reflect how much the guy who got clocked was asking for it.
Jeff

[gex_gex]

I’ve got a better idea. Posters who can’t spell properly get a good stomp on the face. First up, Zen “attourney” 101.

It would return us to the good old days when everyone could spell properly.

What? My idea is anarchic, dim-witted and promotes violence? Disrupts society? Holds up the courts? Childish? Idiotic? Really has no place in a forum such as Great Debates?

Zen101, does your frathouse have a debating society?

[El_Kabong]

El_Kabong: I find it a little ironic that someone whos nickname is derived from a cartoon character who clobbers people in the head with a guitar is arguing against the “jerkpunch”.

Well, those who know me know I’m all about irony. But I’ve got no problem with the above, because to my knowledge, my namesake has only ever struck other cartoon characters, and as we all know, cartoon characters are never permanently injured by such acts.

As for Zen101 (speaking of irony), relax, already. Geez, you seem so angry; bet you’d like to hit me, wouldn’t you? For ‘assholish behavior’, read ‘assault’.

All I argued was that Aldrin could and should be charged with battery. Chances are that if the case goes to court, he’d be acquitted, or the charge reduced due to the harassing nature of the ‘journalist’s’ actions. Fair enough. Notwithstanding, I cannot accept your argument that lashing out with violence when in an agitated, unreasoning state is justifiable punishment for behavior you disagree with. Aldrin is a public figure and as such, and sadly, is probably no stranger to the sort of harassment that he experienced the other day. The fact that he may be a national hero, however, does not and should not give him a free pass where the law is concerned. How about the incident where Jean Chretien assaulted a heckler and was never charged? Was this justifiable?

Anyway, I’ve discussed this all I care to; I’ll leave it to others continue the argument if they wish.

[Tuckerfan]

Originally posted by greck
here’s the problem with beating up a jerk who deserves it:

mike tyson

he could walk into a room, popping his gum…
…
and who’s going to unleash their fury on him?

Sam Colt or Lou Slugger. Possibly Mack T. Knife as well. “A well armed society, is a polite society.” Robert A. Heinlein.

[samclem]

If you haven’t seen the video, then you are probably talking out your ass here.

I watched it and IMHO, Aldrin could be charged with something, just because he threw a punch. He was certainly not in fear of his safety. He was annoyed. He was frustrated. I would probably have done the same, being provoked by that jerk.

The jerk could certainly have been charged also. IANAL, so I don’t know what you call it. But I’m sure he’s liable for something legally. Aldrin certainly did everything he could to avoid a confrontation.

Aldrin would certainly be found innocent by a jury. The video would convince any reasonable person that he had gone out of his way to avoid the jerk. He didn’t use unreasonable force given the situation. But not using unreasonable force doesn’t mean that he is legally off the hook. Just that it may get him off. If he had a gun, and had drawn it and/or used it, he would have over-responded.

[zen101]

gex gex: Wow, I never thought of it that way before. I tuess you must be right, if I misspell something I must be wrong about everything else. Please forgive me. I expect you to also check anyone who agrees with you for spelling errors to invalidate them as well?

Although I don’t see why you think jerkpunching would hold up any courts. Prosecuting people for punching jerks, would certainly take up court time but leaving well enough alone wouldnt. But maybe you meant someone else or perhaps you were too busy finding spelling errors to think up a decent argument.

El_Kabong: So you assume anyone in favor of selfe defense want to just hitp people they argue with? Or are you crediting yourself with some special arguing prowess that you feel must have been so effective as to have gotten under my skin? Wrong on two counts. I don’t want to hit you, but I do find you confusing.

On the one hand you seem to favor Mr.Aldrin, OTOH you also are in favor of prosecuting him. Now my OP wans’t specifically about ALdrin, just inspired by his situation, but I’m curious why you want someone dragged in to court over something you don’t regard as an offence on his part? Why disregard your own opinion in this matter? Isn’t your opinion worht listening to? And if you don’t want to listen to your own opinion on that matter, why shoud anyone else reagrd your opinion on other matters with any weight?

samclem: The OP was inspired by discussion on this Aldrin in the Pit, but if you read it you can note that I’m talking about general circumstances. It could be you I refer to, or me, ir anyone. There is no specific video to cover this topic at hand.

greck: No plan is perfect, but there is always someone capable of beating someone else. Still I don’t know if that applies, as aside from joking I intended my argument for immidiate distribution of the jerkpunch. But I can’t see how anyone can do anything about Tyson now, so it wouldn’t be, IMHO, a step back from enforcing civility even if Tyson or others of his stature were routinely exempt form retribution.

[robertliguori]

*Originally posted by Tuckerfan *
**

“A well armed society, is a polite society.” Robert A. Heinlein. **

Really.

“Have you ever been in one of those bars where everyone goes armed? Sure, everyone’s polite for the first twenty minutes or so, but then someone drinks out of someone else’s mug and you’re picking noses out of the beer nuts.” Terry Pratchet, Discworld.

[samclem]

zen101 (to distinguish you from the other, more respectable zens who post here, I really wasn’t replying to you or your OP. I assumed you were just posting fluff for efect.

If you truly meant to post questions such as "Why is punching people so bad? " or "Short of shooting people, wouldn’t our society be improved by the judicious application of an occasional nut kick or broken nose? " then I missed it as humour. Were you serious? Maybe the forumn was mis-chosen? Maybe you were funnin’.

[zen101]

samclem: meaning I’m not respectable. Okay, I have your number now. Nice chatting with you. Clarify that or let it stand, your choice.

Not respecting me is fine. Actually flexing your fingers to demonstrate how I’m unworthy of your respect is a bit more, now isn’t it?

Without further clarification of your intent, I’m afraid you don’t get any further response from me. IMHO there is no point in explaining things to folks who demonstrate disrespect.

[samclem]

zen101. My problem is that I think you are trying to make a comment, but it’s too fuzzy. You tried to restate your basic theme by saying

What I mean to say is, why is assholish behavior tolerated but punching someone for assholish behavior not tolerated?

Which is as merky as your OP thread title. And your OP.

Why is assholish behavior tolerated? It is, only if someone chooses to let it slide. If you want to prosecute it, you usually can.

Now maybe the best way to decide this is to change the laws to allow a jury to decide if the punch-ee had it coming rhather than just deciding if the punch-er did do the punch-ing.

Of course it isn’t. As others have posted, it isn’t.

Short of shooting people, wouldn’t our society be improved by the judicious application of an occasional nut kick or broken nose?

Of course not. As others have posted. You either wilfully ignore the fact that you are trying to debate a stupid position which only expresses your opinion of some fanciful world which you would love to see, or you just don’t want to deal with living in society of laws. Else, why would you say…

Why? Peing punched in the face is also unpleasant. But why shouldn’t someone get a poke in the eye if he or she is asking for it?

Please don’t feel that you have to respond to me, just because I acknowledged you. Please.

[Tuckerfan]

*Originally posted by robertliguori *
**

Really.
**

Really.

I may not have been learning much about foreign policy, but I was learning something about free trade and quite a lot about Second Amendment benefits. Unlike every other place in Asia, there’s only a modicum of begging on the North-West Frontier, and that very dignified. There’s no wheedling or importuning at all, and never a flutter of street-urchin fingers in your wallet pocket. The only cheating is that ancient and mutual kind known as business. “An armed society is a polite society,” said Robert Heinlein.

–P.J. O’Rourke, Parliament of Whores pgs 161-162.

[gex_gex]

originally posted by zen101
gex gex: Wow, I never thought of it that way before. I tuess you must be right, if I misspell something I must be wrong about everything else. Please forgive me. I expect you to also check anyone who agrees with you for spelling errors to invalidate them as well?

I think mispellings could be worthy of a similar punishment as ‘being a jerk.’ Your spelling errors are incidental to your argument, which I believe I summed up effectively in my frathouse question.

Although I don’t see why you think jerkpunching would hold up any courts. Prosecuting people for punching jerks, would certainly take up court time but leaving well enough alone wouldnt. But maybe you meant someone else or perhaps you were too busy finding spelling errors to think up a decent argument.

You proposed dismissals for those who assault people who are, in your opinion, true “annoying jerks.” Dismissals take up court time.