Moderated Using wrong pronouns= violence??

[lobosrul5]

Actually to Thermal.. But yea battery is usually physical.

Legal arguments are really hollow without specifying the country and the laws you go by.

Assault in most laws is not Assault&battery - that is just one subset of assault, might have aggravated assaults and such. For all I know, some country might have Verbal Assault listed as well. But for USA - Assault&battery is definately NOT the only variation of assault there is.

Assault, and Battery are defined in separate statutes in my (US) state of residence.

Its very common that someone is charged with both "assault and battery" but its not necessary to do so. I've also checked that they are current, and valid, not historical.

 

[Darat]

Assault can be merely verbal. Assault & battery, must include violence being done upon a person.

Oh I see you have changed your stance:

Kindly show us a recent court case where mere words were viewed as and prosecuted as criminal assault, or where "fighting words" were considered legal grounds for physical self defense or detaining a suspect.

Violence, is not petty.

However I must ask: how much violence are you willing to tolerate in order to defend someone's honor against insults? 5 punches? A few kicks to the groin?

What about jumping on someone's head? Where do YOU draw the line between justifiable violence due to verbal provocation, and criminal assault?

 

[Thermal]

Do you believe there is any context in which the use of the wrong pronoun should be considered assault & battery?

And if so, please describe said context.

Thanks.

Bro, no one...not the OP article students, not a poster here...no one is arguing that pronoun usage would constitute assault and battery. You are having an entirely imaginary argument with non-existent adversaries.

Come on, man. There is a legit and interesting discussion to be had here but not if we take a ride on the argumentative Crazy Train.

 

[Hercules56]

Bro, no one...not the OP article students, not a poster here...no one is arguing that pronoun usage would constitute assault and battery. You are having an entirely imaginary argument with non-existent adversaries.

Come on, man. There is a legit and interesting discussion to be had here but not if we take a ride on the argumentative Crazy Train.

I am trying to clarify people's beliefs here, and make sure we all agree that using the wrong pronoun cannot be considered assault & battery.

 

[Darat]

That's why I asked.

What did they say in response?

 

[Hercules56]

What did they say in response?

I asked the forum.

 

[Darat]

I asked the forum.

So what did their forum say? Or can you at least supply a summary of the comments they made on their forum?

 

[Thermal]

I am trying to clarify people's beliefs here, and make sure we all agree that using the wrong pronoun cannot be considered assault & battery.

There is no need to clarify things that don't exist. You're turning an interesting discussion into a joke.

 

[sarge]

I am trying to clarify people's beliefs here, and make sure we all agree that using the wrong pronoun cannot be considered assault & battery.

Why? Why are you attempting to clarify a position that no one, anywhere has taken.

Are you now clear that you were mistaken about the various definitions of violence? If so, then we can move on in good faith. As posted above, this is an interesting topic with ample nuance to allow for sincere differences in opinion. The potential for discussion is risked if you are simply attempting to substitute the criminal charge of ‘assault and battery’ for your mistaken contention that the use of words can never constitute violence.

 

[Hercules56]

Why? Why are you attempting to clarify a position that no one, anywhere has taken.

Are you now clear that you were mistaken about the various definitions of violence?....

I agree with Merriam-Webster, Oxford English Dictionary and Britannica, that violence against persons or objects must include a physical component.

Shall we move on???????????????

 

[lobosrul5]

I agree with Merriam-Webster, Oxford English Dictionary and Britannica, that violence against persons or objects must include a physical component.

Shall we move on???????????????

1
a
: the use of physical force so as to injure, abuse, damage, or destroy
b
: an instance of violent treatment or procedure
2
: injury by or as if by distortion, infringement, or profanation : OUTRAGE
3
a
: intense, turbulent, or furious and often destructive action or force
the violence of the storm
b
: vehement feeling or expression : FERVOR
also : an instance of such action or feeling
c
: a clashing or jarring quality : DISCORDANCE
4
: undue alteration (as of wording or sense in editing a text)

No, you may as well ask me to believe that "Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia". We can agree to disagree on opinion but not on facts.

You'd do better arguing that Merriam-Webster is mistaken than claiming that a link to their website says something that it very clearly doesn't.

 

[Darat]

So what did their forum say? Or can you at least supply a summary of the comments they made on their forum?

Duh.

Just realised Hercules meant he’d asked this forum. Shows how once your mind goes down one path you can end up in the wrong place.

Hercules56 - isn’t it a tad off topic?

 

[Upchurch]

The one, single, solitary use of the word "violence" has a clear context and plenty of people have provided appropriate and widely used definitions for non-physical violence. At this point, suggesting that CU Boulder meant otherwise is merely stubbornness or bad-faith arguments.

I agree with Merriam-Webster, Oxford English Dictionary and Britannica, that violence against persons or objects must include a physical component.

Shall we move on???????????????

Look. We get it. You've proven my point many, many times now. You don't need to prove it any more.

 

[Darat]

I agree with Merriam-Webster, Oxford English Dictionary and Britannica, that violence against persons or objects must include a physical component.

Shall we move on???????????????

Since they don’t say that you don’t agree with them.

 

[Lothian]

I agree with Merriam-Webster, Oxford English Dictionary and Britannica, that violence against persons or objects must include a physical component.

Shall we move on???????????????

If you take that definition then using wrong pronouns is not violence and this thread was pointless. May I suggest that to continue your faux outrage at trans people you entertain the idea that your quoted definition is not the only one.

 

[sarge]

I agree with Merriam-Webster, Oxford English Dictionary and Britannica, that violence against persons or objects must include a physical component.

Shall we move on???????????????

It has been demonstrated that these dictionaries provide definitions for violence that does not require physical contact. It is not credible that you still believe otherwise. Therefore, you are lying, presumably to avoid having to admit an error. That does not preclude you participating in good faith going forward.

 

[quadraginta]

Give us an example of a context in which mere words should lead to a charge of assault & battery.

How about where they actually do lead to a conviction for Involuntary Manslaughter. With the defendant receiving a 2 1/2 year sentence* after the verdict and sentence were upheld by the State Supreme Court, and the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the appeal?

And this wasn't even about insults. The defendant (claimed they) thought they were helping the victim.

Words can have consequences. Even legal consequences.

ETA: (They were only to serve 15 months actually behind bars, with rest of the sentence suspended, and they got out after a bit over 11 months with time off for good behavior.)

 

[Hercules56]

Using the wrong pronoun is not an act of physical violence and therefore can never justify a criminal charge of assault. There are no laws on the books that would allow such a thing.

....for now.

 

[Darat]

Using the wrong pronoun is not an act of physical violence and therefore can never justify a criminal charge of assault. There are no laws on the books that would allow such a thing.

....for now.

Hard to even keep focus on the number of moves you make with goal posts.

 

[Samson]

Using the wrong pronoun is not an act of physical violence and therefore can never justify a criminal charge of assault. There are no laws on the books that would allow such a thing.

....for now.

Fee paid student is trespassed from Canadian campus.
He turns up and is arrested by the police.
What was his sin?