re: House Cleaning

Sure you would, kitten.

quote:

---

as you seem really confused.

---

You don’t even know what the hell you’re talking about or responding to. No one is talking about fighting you. No one is talking about law or lawyers or courts or anything else except you, boy.

You’re the only one confused, here. Try to keep up, kitten.

All I said was that I know you don’t act like this in person (and that’s guaranteed). No one- absolutely no one on this entire forum- believes you are the badass you pretend to be on the internet.

quote:

---

All I said was that I know you don’t act like this in person (and that’s guaranteed).

---

You said the above "because of physical consequences", and I'm telling you that that's not the way the world works nor the law.

So, based on your last few posts, I'd like to ask our Mod to qualify if repeated name calling is against the rules and a ban-able offense. I'm fine with it if it is, but it seems worth clarifying.

quote:

---

You said the above "because of physical consequences"

---

Absolutely. That’s why we all know you don’t really behave this way in person.

You’re as tame as a kitten outside of the internet.

For good reason.

quote:

---

That’s not the way the world works

---

Shrug. Happens every single day.

quote:

---

Happens every single day.

---

Felonious assault? Yes, it does. Ruins lives and families.

That douche is only still here because he sucked Boz off relentlessly during #InsiderNotAnInsiderGate

Pretty simple really

quote:

---

physically attacking a person because of what they said is felonious assault

---

unless a weapon is used or serious harm befalls you as a result of the altercation or threat of an altercation (even without battery taking place), I'm not sure felonious is correct.

Likely, simple assault and battery would be the charges in your run of the mill fist fight. And, it is generally accepted that it takes two to tango, so I doubt one would be awarded every penny another owns with all things in context over a simple assault charge.

Also, depending on what words you choose to use, how you intend to use them, and how they are received, people are always allowed the moral right to self-defense with minimal force.

"Fighting words" is a legal concept (words "by their very utterance, inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace").

If someone continues to insult, harrass or demean another person, the victim of the verbal assault has the right to use minimum force available to resist the verbal abuse. This could be an open hand slap across the face of the mouth that won't shutup. An individual doesn't have to leave an area just because another is being a jerk. Of course, escalation could follow and the victim may become the assailant or at least equally as guilty (back to two to tango theory). It is a risk of resorting to physical means to resolve problems.

That said, words that create debate or dispute wouldn't qualify, so fighting over "does Golding" or "doesn't Golding suck" likely won't justify a physical retaliation.

If you guys are starting a Fight Club I want in.