It’s not about self defense. As long as you match, and don’t exceed the aggressor’s energy, you’re within your rights. If someone punches you, you can punch back but you can’t pile drive the guy, but you can hit back just as hard.
The punch the FedEx driver threw wasn’t meant to be fatal and was an acceptable retaliation after being verbally abused, then physically assaulted. It’s not his fault the aggressor was glass Joe.
[…] verbally abused, then physically assaulted […]
Agree, just a note: the verbal part was already assault. The physical part was battery, a separate offense that often isn’t required for a charge of simple assault. Any act that causes reasonable apprehension of harm is assault. Verbal threats with hate speech would easily qualify.
Info worth passing along I think, since many don’t realize physical contact is in fact the second criminal offense, and aggressive behavior itself is the first.
It’s not about self defense. As long as you match, and don’t exceed the aggressor’s energy, you’re within your rights. If someone punches you, you can punch back but you can’t pile drive the guy, but you can hit back just as hard.
The punch the FedEx driver threw wasn’t meant to be fatal and was an acceptable retaliation after being verbally abused, then physically assaulted. It’s not his fault the aggressor was glass Joe.
Agree, just a note: the verbal part was already assault. The physical part was battery, a separate offense that often isn’t required for a charge of simple assault. Any act that causes reasonable apprehension of harm is assault. Verbal threats with hate speech would easily qualify.
Info worth passing along I think, since many don’t realize physical contact is in fact the second criminal offense, and aggressive behavior itself is the first.
Ender in shambles.
Retaliation is not self-defense.
Retaliation has a meaning that does not have bearing here; mens rea for that cannot be established under the circumstances.
Level of reciprocity in force has always mattered; at least we’re not under Hammurabi’s anymore.
The prosecutor’s office in the referenced discussion disagrees with you and you are making claims and not arguments.