In my opinion: no it never is. Yes, people should keep their hands to themselves but it will never ever be a fair fight between a man and a woman.I don't particularly believe it is a male/female issue but a "who is the bigger, stronger person" issue.

I immediately think of the Chris Brown/Rihanna situation. The story goes she hit him first. He then proceeded to beat the shit out of her. Was she deserving of what happened to her because she hit him first?

JoeTyler said:

LadyCasanova said:

PJ: "Then, some women feel like they can step up in anger to a man like an equal, but not deal with the consequences."

Yea, I can't get down with this statement. What do you mean "like an an equal?" The last I looked

women ARE equal. Also, just because you "step up," doesn't mean I should hit you. I work with a

lot of men and more than a few get in my face. Do I hit any of them? No. Could I knock more than

a few of them out? Yes.

Also, and this is not ALWAYS the case, the power that a man can deliver behind a punch is usually

greater than the av woman can deliver from the same kind of punch. I think it is pretty much

accepted that when it comes to upper body strength, men have more going there. When you punch someone, size and upper body strength matters.

So, do I feel that men should open up and go full strength woop-ass on a woman? No, I do not.

You don't need to do all that to prove a point. I, as a woman, have never gone full on with another

woman. I haven't needed too. Now, if that woman is the Hulks sister, than I can see why you

would need to put everything behind it.

Now, do I feel that a man should NEVER hit a woman? No, I have been in my share of fights with

boys (as a girl) and men. Have I ever felt that any of them were in the wrong for hitting me back?

No.

Man or woman, if you are obviously smaller than me I am not (unless lives depend on it) going to

hit you like I am fighting someone who is of the same size, strength, or weight as me.

I dont wanna fight, I just wanna

Your posts oftem make me want to with you.

LadyCasanova said:

JoeTyler said:

I dont wanna fight, I just wanna

Your posts oftem make me want to with you.

Stymie said:

In my opinion: no it never is. Yes, people should keep their hands to themselves but it will never ever be a fair fight between a man and a woman.I don't particularly believe it is a male/female issue but a "who is the bigger, stronger person" issue.

What do you mean by "fair?"

I have beaten a male in a fight before. I was bigger than he was and I didn't go full out on him, I

didn't need to. He wasn't a very strong guy, even though he must have thought so when he hit me first.

LadyCasanova said:

Stymie said:

In my opinion: no it never is. Yes, people should keep their hands to themselves but it will never ever be a fair fight between a man and a woman.I don't particularly believe it is a male/female issue but a "who is the bigger, stronger person" issue.

What do you mean by "fair?"

I have beaten a male in a fight before. I was bigger than he was and I didn't go full out on him, I

didn't need to. He wasn't a very strong guy, even though he must have thought so when he hit me first.

I mean size-wise, at least most of the time.

LadyCasanova said:

Man or woman, if you are obviously smaller than me I am not (unless lives depend on it) going to

hit you like I am fighting someone who is of the same size, strength, or weight as me.

True, unless the offending person is one of these annoying, punkass wannabe 'gangstas' trying to impress their friends.

LadyCasanova said:

Stymie said:

In my opinion: no it never is. Yes, people should keep their hands to themselves but it will never ever be a fair fight between a man and a woman.I don't particularly believe it is a male/female issue but a "who is the bigger, stronger person" issue.

What do you mean by "fair?"

I have beaten a male in a fight before. I was bigger than he was and I didn't go full out on him, I

didn't need to. He wasn't a very strong guy, even though he must have thought so when he hit me first.

This is true, people are quick to assert that the woman is 1.)weaker 2.)smaller 3.)fragile 4.)not a fighter

a friend of mine growing up his step father used to get beat up by his mother all the time, she and her sisters were stalky and streat fighters, he was a thin man who just liked to have a drink. Stories of him getting slammed in metal garbage cans were common

Not just gender and size, but what about age? this guy is obviously older(grandfather) and this woman GOT BACK UP after that punch and came at him, so she wasn't all that fragile

If I saw a person(male or female) hit an older person I would intervene, and if I had to hit her I would

Older people tend to have more physical/health issues, hitting a healthy 30 yr old in the chest can be very different from hitting a 60yr old in the chest

Also hitting anywhere in the neck and head area no matter how young muscular or whatever can be lethal

JoeTyler said:

LadyCasanova said:

Your posts oftem make me want to with you.

ummm is this make love not upper cuts??

lol get a room already

JustErin said:

It's not ok for anyone to punch anyone, unless it's legitimate self-defence.

I don't understand the whole it's ok to hit a man but not a woman.

^that

He could have "escorted" her off the bus, or follow protocol by calling metra security to have her escorted off. Even if she deserved to get the crap slapped out of her, the driver, who has been on the job over twenty years, should have handled it better. I do understand that when you deal with the public you run across some incorrigible people, but there are other ways to handle it.

OldFriends4Sale said:

JoeTyler said:

ummm is this make love not upper cuts??

lol get a room already

I don't mind an upper cut from JoeTyler as long as he aims that stroke in the right place

I like to be a part of these conversations but a little teasing is also fun, helps to keep things less

heated so these conversations can be positive and thoughtful without turning into war/insulting etc.

OldFriends4Sale said:

LadyCasanova said:

What do you mean by "fair?"

I have beaten a male in a fight before. I was bigger than he was and I didn't go full out on him, I

didn't need to. He wasn't a very strong guy, even though he must have thought so when he hit me first.

This is true, people are quick to assert that the woman is 1.)weaker 2.)smaller 3.)fragile 4.)not a fighter

a friend of mine growing up his step father used to get beat up by his mother all the time, she and her sisters were stalky and streat fighters, he was a thin man who just liked to have a drink. Stories of him getting slammed in metal garbage cans were common

Not just gender and size, but what about age? this guy is obviously older(grandfather) and this woman GOT BACK UP after that punch and came at him, so she wasn't all that fragile

If I saw a person(male or female) hit an older person I would intervene, and if I had to hit her I would

Older people tend to have more physical/health issues, hitting a healthy 30 yr old in the chest can be very different from hitting a 60yr old in the chest

Also hitting anywhere in the neck and head area no matter how young muscular or whatever can be lethal

Yeah some women are much stronger physically than people would think. We can't link them all into one box and think they're the "weaker sex". Same with men. There's strong ones and then there's those who are tiny. Both sexes are actually matched similar but the way you have some people tell it, men have an "unfair advantage".

OldFriends4Sale said:

LadyCasanova said:

What do you mean by "fair?"

I have beaten a male in a fight before. I was bigger than he was and I didn't go full out on him, I

didn't need to. He wasn't a very strong guy, even though he must have thought so when he hit me first.

a friend of mine growing up his step father used to get beat up by his mother all the time, she and her sisters were stalky and streat fighters, he was a thin man who just liked to have a drink. Stories of him getting slammed in metal garbage cans were common

Not just gender and size, but what about age? this guy is obviously older(grandfather) and this woman GOT BACK UP after that punch and came at him, so she wasn't all that fragile

1) That is so fucked up.

2) Ummm, that guy sure the hell did not deliver that uppercut like he was a "grandpa." People

also confuse being older with being weaker. I know plunty of old people who can still beat the

shit out of someone. Him being old is not an excuse.

3) My mom got back up everytime her boyfriend hit her, that didn't mean he didn't do damage and

it sure the hell didn't mean she wasn't fragile.

cfunk said:

He could have "escorted" her off the bus, or follow protocol by calling metra security to have her escorted off. Even if she deserved to get the crap slapped out of her, the driver, who has been on the job over twenty years, should have handled it better. I do understand that when you deal with the public you run across some incorrigible people, but there are other ways to handle it.

"Incorrigible"? You're being too kind. Some of these folks are downright trash. It got so bad here in NYC(with bus drivers getting assaulted, stabbed and shot) that now you get up to seven years for this shit. 'Bout time.

LadyCasanova said:

OldFriends4Sale said:

ummm is this make love not upper cuts??

lol get a room already

I don't mind an upper cut from JoeTyler as long as he aims that stroke in the right place

I like to be a part of these conversations but a little teasing is also fun, helps to keep things less

heated so these conversations can be positive and thoughtful without turning into war/insulting etc.

damn!

love and sex could heal the world

TD3 said:

I not going to watch this because I already know how this is going to go down and I know it involves"us". I don't want hear any silliness because I'm Black. The level of violence, the knee jerk reaction to insults or folks talking shit gets a lot people killed in our community. Before this silly women ever spat on this bus driver or laid a hand on him, he should've called into dispatch to document what was going on and sought the assistance of law enforcement. Unless his life was in danger — and I doubt it — he should kept his mouth closed and allowed this woman to rant and rave until power authorities came. Riding public transportation isn't a right it is a privilege.

This all could've gone horribly wrong for both parties. When he hit her , she could've fallen and struck her head on an object or the blow of his hit could've caused more serious harm. Self-defense is allowed only when your life is immediate danger, I doubt his life was. Spitting, slapping anyone for any reason is about the lowest form of depravity, I can only imagine his outrage. Instead of some people recording this they should 've been using their phones to call law enforcement. Pathetic.

===============================

[Edited 10/23/12 2:07am]

I do remember feeling some sense of outrage for the driver initially, but I'm glad you put this into perspective.

LadyCasanova said:

PJ: "Then, some women feel like they can step up in anger to a man like an equal, but not deal with the consequences."

Yea, I can't get down with this statement. What do you mean "like an an equal?" The last I looked

women ARE equal. Also, just because you "step up," doesn't mean I should hit you. I work with a

lot of men and more than a few get in my face. Do I hit any of them? No. Could I knock more than

a few of them out? Yes.

Also, and this is not ALWAYS the case, the power that a man can deliver behind a punch is usually

greater than the av woman can deliver from the same kind of punch. I think it is pretty much

accepted that when it comes to upper body strength, men have more going there. When you punch someone, size and upper body strength matters.

So, do I feel that men should open up and go full strength woop-ass on a woman? No, I do not.

You don't need to do all that to prove a point. I, as a woman, have never gone full on with another

woman. I haven't needed too. Now, if that woman is the Hulks sister, than I can see why you

would need to put everything behind it.

Now, do I feel that a man should NEVER hit a woman? No, I have been in my share of fights with

boys (as a girl) and men. Have I ever felt that any of them were in the wrong for hitting me back?

No.

Man or woman, if you are obviously smaller than me I am not (unless lives depend on it) going to

hit you like I am fighting someone who is of the same size, strength, or weight as me.

Take it in the context of which we speak.

In the case shown on this video and the McDonald's case of which I mentioned, the women stepped up to the dudes as equals, with the same anger and antagonism that you'd show an equal.

Now...I have NO PROBLEM with pulling punches. That's not what I'm getting at, and I think that my reply to Dave1992 should've cleared that up.

What I am getting at is that if you - as a "weaker" woman (which is what is being portrayed) - get in some dude's face as an equal and get treated as such (get punched in the face just like a dude would) then you can't hide behind the code of conduct from 50 years ago. Otherwise it's a double standard.

...now...what's this with getting stroked by Joe!?!? He and I need to "step outside" now??? (old-school 1950's style ?)

PurpleJedi said:

LadyCasanova said:

PJ: "Then, some women feel like they can step up in anger to a man like an equal, but not deal with the consequences."

Yea, I can't get down with this statement. What do you mean "like an an equal?" The last I looked

women ARE equal. Also, just because you "step up," doesn't mean I should hit you. I work with a

lot of men and more than a few get in my face. Do I hit any of them? No. Could I knock more than

a few of them out? Yes.

Also, and this is not ALWAYS the case, the power that a man can deliver behind a punch is usually

greater than the av woman can deliver from the same kind of punch. I think it is pretty much

accepted that when it comes to upper body strength, men have more going there. When you punch someone, size and upper body strength matters.

So, do I feel that men should open up and go full strength woop-ass on a woman? No, I do not.

You don't need to do all that to prove a point. I, as a woman, have never gone full on with another

woman. I haven't needed too. Now, if that woman is the Hulks sister, than I can see why you

would need to put everything behind it.

Now, do I feel that a man should NEVER hit a woman? No, I have been in my share of fights with

boys (as a girl) and men. Have I ever felt that any of them were in the wrong for hitting me back?

No.

Man or woman, if you are obviously smaller than me I am not (unless lives depend on it) going to

hit you like I am fighting someone who is of the same size, strength, or weight as me.

Take it in the context of which we speak.

In the case shown on this video and the McDonald's case of which I mentioned, the women stepped up to the dudes as equals, with the same anger and antagonism that you'd show an equal.

Now...I have NO PROBLEM with pulling punches. That's not what I'm getting at, and I think that my reply to Dave1992 should've cleared that up.

What I am getting at is that if you - as a "weaker" woman (which is what is being portrayed) - get in some dude's face as an equal and get treated as such (get punched in the face just like a dude would) then you can't hide behind the code of conduct from 50 years ago. Otherwise it's a double standard.

...now...what's this with getting stroked by Joe!?!? He and I need to "step outside" now??? (old-school 1950's style ?)

But her whole point is that women ARE equals.

And my whole point is that no anger or antagonism warrants a violent response - regardless of gender.

Again, this whole dudes can respond in a physical violent manner and it's totally acceptable is what is fucked up.

I don't care what the person is doing to piss you off, you lay a hand on that person you need to be charged with assault and pay the price for your actions.

And to respond to what Stymie said about Chris Brown. My understanding is that they were both hitting each other and I think it's pathetic that only he was charged. They both should have been charged with assault, not just the person that threw a meaner punch.

JustErin said:

PurpleJedi said:

Take it in the context of which we speak.

In the case shown on this video and the McDonald's case of which I mentioned, the women stepped up to the dudes as equals, with the same anger and antagonism that you'd show an equal.

Now...I have NO PROBLEM with pulling punches. That's not what I'm getting at, and I think that my reply to Dave1992 should've cleared that up.

What I am getting at is that if you - as a "weaker" woman (which is what is being portrayed) - get in some dude's face as an equal and get treated as such (get punched in the face just like a dude would) then you can't hide behind the code of conduct from 50 years ago. Otherwise it's a double standard.

...now...what's this with getting stroked by Joe!?!? He and I need to "step outside" now??? (old-school 1950's style ?)

But her whole point is that women ARE equals.

And my whole point is that no anger or antagonism warrants a violent response - regardless of gender.

Again, this whole dudes can respond in a physical violent manner and it's totally acceptable is what is fucked up.

I don't care what the person is doing to piss you off, you lay a hand on that person you need to be charged with assault and pay the price for your actions.

And to respond to what Stymie said about Chris Brown. My understanding is that they were both hitting each other and I think it's pathetic that only he was charged. They both should have been charged with assault, not just the person that threw a meaner punch.

That goes for both MEN and WOMEN, correct? Both ways.

PurpleJedi said:

JustErin said:

But her whole point is that women ARE equals.

And my whole point is that no anger or antagonism warrants a violent response - regardless of gender.

Again, this whole dudes can respond in a physical violent manner and it's totally acceptable is what is fucked up.

I don't care what the person is doing to piss you off, you lay a hand on that person you need to be charged with assault and pay the price for your actions.

And to respond to what Stymie said about Chris Brown. My understanding is that they were both hitting each other and I think it's pathetic that only he was charged. They both should have been charged with assault, not just the person that threw a meaner punch.

That goes for both MEN and WOMEN, correct? Both ways.

Guy, seriously? Have you not been reading what I've been writing?

Even right under the part you bolded, I talk about that.

JustErin said:

PurpleJedi said:

Take it in the context of which we speak.

In the case shown on this video and the McDonald's case of which I mentioned, the women stepped up to the dudes as equals, with the same anger and antagonism that you'd show an equal.

Now...I have NO PROBLEM with pulling punches. That's not what I'm getting at, and I think that my reply to Dave1992 should've cleared that up.

What I am getting at is that if you - as a "weaker" woman (which is what is being portrayed) - get in some dude's face as an equal and get treated as such (get punched in the face just like a dude would) then you can't hide behind the code of conduct from 50 years ago. Otherwise it's a double standard.

...now...what's this with getting stroked by Joe!?!? He and I need to "step outside" now??? (old-school 1950's style ?)

But her whole point is that women ARE equals.

And my whole point is that no anger or antagonism warrants a violent response - regardless of gender.

Again, this whole dudes can respond in a physical violent manner and it's totally acceptable is what is fucked up.

I don't care what the person is doing to piss you off, you lay a hand on that person you need to be charged with assault and pay the price for your actions.

And to respond to what Stymie said about Chris Brown. My understanding is that they were both hitting each other and I think it's pathetic that only he was charged. They both should have been charged with assault, not just the person that threw a meaner punch.

I can respect your views on this.

LadyCasanova said:

OldFriends4Sale said:

a friend of mine growing up his step father used to get beat up by his mother all the time, she and her sisters were stalky and streat fighters, he was a thin man who just liked to have a drink. Stories of him getting slammed in metal garbage cans were common

Not just gender and size, but what about age? this guy is obviously older(grandfather) and this woman GOT BACK UP after that punch and came at him, so she wasn't all that fragile

1) That is so fucked up.

2) Ummm, that guy sure the hell did not deliver that uppercut like he was a "grandpa." People

also confuse being older with being weaker. I know plunty of old people who can still beat the

shit out of someone. Him being old is not an excuse.

3) My mom got back up everytime her boyfriend hit her, that didn't mean he didn't do damage and

it sure the hell didn't mean she wasn't fragile.

lol actually those old school grandparents were/are strong, they come from a different time

I'm not saying old = weak, the same way I don't say female = weak,

But I still would not go at an older person that way, and there is another youtube video of this and he was driving for a long time, looked like they were in a green area and you can hear the part where she spit on him, and he still didn't do anything, she was after him for a long time, then you see the 2 handed shove or whatever she did and he finally popped her, her hair piece came off and he threw her off the bus, then threw her stuff off, but she came back onto the bus swinging

that hit would have taken me out, but she came back fighting

He said "If you want to act like a man I'll treat you like a man"

I wish I knew how this started,

I after talking about this, I see a touch of hypocracy in me

I thought about if this was a dude who did the same thing and got hit the same way

and I feel more sympathy for the woman, just a touch more

Stymie said:

JustErin said:

But her whole point is that women ARE equals.

And my whole point is that no anger or antagonism warrants a violent response - regardless of gender.

Again, this whole dudes can respond in a physical violent manner and it's totally acceptable is what is fucked up.

I don't care what the person is doing to piss you off, you lay a hand on that person you need to be charged with assault and pay the price for your actions.

And to respond to what Stymie said about Chris Brown. My understanding is that they were both hitting each other and I think it's pathetic that only he was charged. They both should have been charged with assault, not just the person that threw a meaner punch.

I can respect your views on this.

It's so sad that we live in a culture that tells us that violence is wrong, yet we raise our kids surrounded by it - in entertainment, many even use physical violence as a means to discipline when it comes to our children, etc, etc...basically endorsing it by our behaviour.

We are taught to say violence is not acceptable but we are encouraged to participate in it and, more often than not, do so willingly.

I feel the same way about bullying. We are all taught to say it's wrong...yet we have a culture that is obsessed with making fun of others (particularly in the public eye) - it's entertainment.

It's no wonder people are such fuck ups.

CarrieMpls said:

tinaz said:

x3

Add one more to the mix. Punching anyone other than in self defense is never OK.

Agreed.

JustErin said:

Stymie said:

I can respect your views on this.

It's so sad that we live in a culture that tells us that violence is wrong, yet we raise our kids surrounded by it - in entertainment, many even use physical violence as a means to discipline when it comes to our children, etc, etc...basically endorsing it by our behaviour.

We are taught to say violence is not acceptable but we are encouraged to participate in it and, more often than not, do so willingly.

I feel the same way about bullying. We are all taught to say it's wrong...yet we have a culture that is obsessed with making fun of others (particularly in the public eye) - it's entertainment.

It's no wonder people are such fuck ups.

I agree, particularly with the bolded part.

JustErin said:

PurpleJedi said:

Take it in the context of which we speak.

In the case shown on this video and the McDonald's case of which I mentioned, the women stepped up to the dudes as equals, with the same anger and antagonism that you'd show an equal.

Now...I have NO PROBLEM with pulling punches. That's not what I'm getting at, and I think that my reply to Dave1992 should've cleared that up.

What I am getting at is that if you - as a "weaker" woman (which is what is being portrayed) - get in some dude's face as an equal and get treated as such (get punched in the face just like a dude would) then you can't hide behind the code of conduct from 50 years ago. Otherwise it's a double standard.

...now...what's this with getting stroked by Joe!?!? He and I need to "step outside" now??? (old-school 1950's style ?)

1.)But her whole point is that women ARE equals.

2.)And my whole point is that no anger or antagonism warrants a violent response - regardless of gender.

3)Again, this whole dudes can respond in a physical violent manner and it's totally acceptable is what is fucked up.

4.)I don't care what the person is doing to piss you off, you lay a hand on that person you need to be charged with assault and pay the price for your actions.

5.)And to respond to what Stymie said about Chris Brown. My understanding is that they were both hitting each other and I think it's pathetic that only he was charged. They both should have been charged with assault, not just the person that threw a meaner punch.

the woman was the assailant & batterer

A court will have to determine if the upper cut was warrented.

But I don't know the lengths with what she did, she put 2 hands on him

Maybe his upper cut wasn't warrented, but I don't think being 'on the job' is an

excuse for him to be assaulted. Many people die before the proper authorities get there

You 4th line is not reasonable, so the person can cut you and if you put your hands on them you should be charged? if the person slaps or punches you, you should be charged? If the person takes something from you, you should be charged? Verbal stuff is one thing...

Assault

An assault invoves:

1. An intentional, unlawful threat or "offer" to cause bodily injury to another by force;
2. Under circumstances which create in the other person a well-founded fear of imminent peril;
3. Where there exists the apparent present ability to carry out the act if not prevented.

Note that an assault can be completed even if there is no actual contact with the plaintiff, and even if the defendant had no actual ability to carry out the apparent threat. For example, a defendant who points a realistic toy gun at the plaintiff may be liable for assault, even though the defendant was fifty feet away from the plaintiff and had no actual ability to inflict harm from that distance.

Battery

A battery is the willful or intentional touching of a person against that person’s will by another person, or by an object or substance put in motion by that other person. Please note that an offensive touching can constitute a battery even if it does not cause injury, and could not reasonably be expected to cause injury. A defendant who emphatically pokes the plaintiff in the chest with his index finger to emphasize a point may be culpable for battery (although the damages award that results may well be nominal). A defendant who spits on a plaintiff, even though there is little chance that the spitting will cause any injury other than to the plaintiff's dignity, has committed a battery.

Self-Defense

A person who is assaulted may use such reasonable force as may be necessary, or which at the time reasonably appears to be necessary, to protect himself or herself from bodily harm. An act of self-defense must ordinarily be proportionate to the threat. That is, if you believe a person is going to spit on you, depending upon the context it may be reasonable to push the person away, but it would not be reasonable to hit the person with a baseball bat.

A plaintiff may be expected to withdraw from the threat, if possible, before engaging in forcible resistance. However, if the plaintiff is in his own home and the defendant is not a member of the plaintiff's household, a plaintiff will typically not be required to further withdraw from the threat once the plaintiff has retreated to his own home.

Provocation

Words alone, no matter how insulting or provocative, do not justify an assault or battery against the person who utters the words.

http://www.expertlaw.com/...ttery.html

[Edited 10/23/12 11:43am]

OldFriends4Sale said:

JustErin said:

1.)But her whole point is that women ARE equals.

2.)And my whole point is that no anger or antagonism warrants a violent response - regardless of gender.

3)Again, this whole dudes can respond in a physical violent manner and it's totally acceptable is what is fucked up.

4.)I don't care what the person is doing to piss you off, you lay a hand on that person you need to be charged with assault and pay the price for your actions.

5.)And to respond to what Stymie said about Chris Brown. My understanding is that they were both hitting each other and I think it's pathetic that only he was charged. They both should have been charged with assault, not just the person that threw a meaner punch.

the woman was the assailant & batterer

A court will have to determine if the upper cut was warrented.

But I don't know the lengths with what she did, she put 2 hands on him

Maybe his upper cut wasn't warrented, but I don't think being 'on the job' is an

excuse for him to be assaulted. Many people die before the proper authorities get there

You 4th line is not reasonable, so the person can cut you and if you put your hands on them you should be charged? if the person slaps or punches you, you should be charged? If the person takes something from you, you should be charged? Verbal stuff is one thing...

Assault

An assault invoves:

1. An intentional, unlawful threat or "offer" to cause bodily injury to another by force;
2. Under circumstances which create in the other person a well-founded fear of imminent peril;
3. Where there exists the apparent present ability to carry out the act if not prevented.

Note that an assault can be completed even if there is no actual contact with the plaintiff, and even if the defendant had no actual ability to carry out the apparent threat. For example, a defendant who points a realistic toy gun at the plaintiff may be liable for assault, even though the defendant was fifty feet away from the plaintiff and had no actual ability to inflict harm from that distance.

Battery

A battery is the willful or intentional touching of a person against that person’s will by another person, or by an object or substance put in motion by that other person. Please note that an offensive touching can constitute a battery even if it does not cause injury, and could not reasonably be expected to cause injury. A defendant who emphatically pokes the plaintiff in the chest with his index finger to emphasize a point may be culpable for battery (although the damages award that results may well be nominal). A defendant who spits on a plaintiff, even though there is little chance that the spitting will cause any injury other than to the plaintiff's dignity, has committed a battery.

Self-Defense

A person who is assaulted may use such reasonable force as may be necessary, or which at the time reasonably appears to be necessary, to protect himself or herself from bodily harm. An act of self-defense must ordinarily be proportionate to the threat. That is, if you believe a person is going to spit on you, depending upon the context it may be reasonable to push the person away, but it would not be reasonable to hit the person with a baseball bat.

A plaintiff may be expected to withdraw from the threat, if possible, before engaging in forcible resistance. However, if the plaintiff is in his own home and the defendant is not a member of the plaintiff's household, a plaintiff will typically not be required to further withdraw from the threat once the plaintiff has retreated to his own home.

Provocation

Words alone, no matter how insulting or provocative, do not justify an assault or battery against the person who utters the words.

http://www.expertlaw.com/...ttery.html

[Edited 10/23/12 11:43am]

Wow.

I don't even know if I should respond to this in depth. I'm pretty sure I made myself very clear as to what I meant.

LadyCasanova said:

OldFriends4Sale said:

a friend of mine growing up his step father used to get beat up by his mother all the time, she and her sisters were stalky and streat fighters, he was a thin man who just liked to have a drink. Stories of him getting slammed in metal garbage cans were common

Not just gender and size, but what about age? this guy is obviously older(grandfather) and this woman GOT BACK UP after that punch and came at him, so she wasn't all that fragile

2) Ummm, that guy sure the hell did not deliver that uppercut like he was a "grandpa." People

also confuse being older with being weaker. I know plunty of old people who can still beat the

shit out of someone. Him being old is not an excuse.

JustErin said:

OldFriends4Sale said:

the woman was the assailant & batterer

A court will have to determine if the upper cut was warrented.

But I don't know the lengths with what she did, she put 2 hands on him

Maybe his upper cut wasn't warrented, but I don't think being 'on the job' is an

excuse for him to be assaulted. Many people die before the proper authorities get there

You 4th line is not reasonable, so the person can cut you and if you put your hands on them you should be charged? if the person slaps or punches you, you should be charged? If the person takes something from you, you should be charged? Verbal stuff is one thing...

Assault

An assault invoves:

1. An intentional, unlawful threat or "offer" to cause bodily injury to another by force;
2. Under circumstances which create in the other person a well-founded fear of imminent peril;
3. Where there exists the apparent present ability to carry out the act if not prevented.

Note that an assault can be completed even if there is no actual contact with the plaintiff, and even if the defendant had no actual ability to carry out the apparent threat. For example, a defendant who points a realistic toy gun at the plaintiff may be liable for assault, even though the defendant was fifty feet away from the plaintiff and had no actual ability to inflict harm from that distance.

Battery

A battery is the willful or intentional touching of a person against that person’s will by another person, or by an object or substance put in motion by that other person. Please note that an offensive touching can constitute a battery even if it does not cause injury, and could not reasonably be expected to cause injury. A defendant who emphatically pokes the plaintiff in the chest with his index finger to emphasize a point may be culpable for battery (although the damages award that results may well be nominal). A defendant who spits on a plaintiff, even though there is little chance that the spitting will cause any injury other than to the plaintiff's dignity, has committed a battery.

Self-Defense

A person who is assaulted may use such reasonable force as may be necessary, or which at the time reasonably appears to be necessary, to protect himself or herself from bodily harm. An act of self-defense must ordinarily be proportionate to the threat. That is, if you believe a person is going to spit on you, depending upon the context it may be reasonable to push the person away, but it would not be reasonable to hit the person with a baseball bat.

A plaintiff may be expected to withdraw from the threat, if possible, before engaging in forcible resistance. However, if the plaintiff is in his own home and the defendant is not a member of the plaintiff's household, a plaintiff will typically not be required to further withdraw from the threat once the plaintiff has retreated to his own home.

Provocation

Words alone, no matter how insulting or provocative, do not justify an assault or battery against the person who utters the words.

http://www.expertlaw.com/...ttery.html

[Edited 10/23/12 11:43am]

Wow.

I don't even know if I should respond to this in depth. I'm pretty sure I made myself very clear as to what I meant.

JustErin, I hear and agree with your other points, I was talking only about #4 in your post

Your statement was not clear in that post, to me at least, it's very open, but the law says different

and according to the law, what he did may or may not be in lines with what the law says as far as self defense is concerned

[Edited 10/23/12 11:58am]

JustErin said:

PurpleJedi said:

That goes for both MEN and WOMEN, correct? Both ways.

Guy, seriously? Have you not been reading what I've been writing?

Even right under the part you bolded, I talk about that.

My bad. I'm so through with the Chris Brown/Rhianna bullshit that I tune it out.

I think you and I agree with the core of the matter, with the big exception that you don't accept violence as a part of everyday life, whereas I feel it's just a part of life and you need to watch yourself. If you attack the wrong person you WILL get your ass handed to you...man or woman.