Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Dreadwinter wrote:(Man I hope I got it right, I bet first prize is awesome!)

Depends how high a hug from Dogma rates on your awesome-ometer?

To be honest, I don't see how this "new thing" itself isn't also a dead horse that has been beaten time and again.

But then again, conservative talking heads whining about the oversexualization of children/teenagers is about as mundane as them whining about Obama and trying to pin everything bad happening on him, from stubbing their toes that morning, to the next world war that they think will happen when the UN (which is actually a powerful new world order that secretly controls everything in the world) tries to force the next Romney to submit to some secret agreement that they think Obama has made with it that rends asunder the USA's sovereignty.

IE it happens every day, and twice on Sunday.

Melissia wrote:And a court date with a criminal charge chaser, mister Internet Tough Guy.

Thats wrong actually. If someone grabs you thats battery. Your response may be considered self defense.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kovnik Obama wrote:

Relapse wrote:If someone grabbed me, I'd level them and be justified.

Grabbed you? As in grope you? No you wouldn't, at least if you're reasonnable. You'd be flushed red with indignity, and wouldn't have a single clue how to react.
Then, later on, you'd laugh about it. Hey, that means someone thinks you have a cute ass.

Beleive me, I've been there.

Again, no thats battery or sexual assault/battery (depending on the local state's jurisdiction). If a woman is groped she is well within her legal rights to level the groper, or have the attacker arrested and convicted for such.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

youbedead wrote:

Relapse wrote:

Melissia wrote:And a court date with a criminal charge chaser, mister Internet Tough Guy.

Just stating a bit of personal history. As far as charges go, it comes down to the fact that the grabber is the assaulter, I acted in self defense.

No not in any western country or any state or county, self defense doesn't apply to he grabbed my ass.

Wanna bet?

Frazzled wrote:Thats wrong actually. If someone grabs you thats battery. Your response may be considered self defense.

Repeatedly beating someone with a pair of pliers until their skull fractured, with the stated intent of stabbing out their eyes, is not going to be so easily justified. I guarantee that if I did that to guys that violated my personal space, it'd go on my criminal record. I'm all for self defense, but there's a point where you have gone from self defense to simply attacking someone for the sake of attacking them.

Like if someone burst in to your home, and you shot them, then, still angry, you shot up their car and desecrated the corpse while calling to threaten their family. It shows a level of aggression that goes beyond mere self defense.

Melissia wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Thats wrong actually. If someone grabs you thats battery. Your response may be considered self defense.

Repeatedly beating someone with a pair of pliers until their skull fractured, with the stated intent of stabbing out their eyes, is not going to be so easily justified. I guarantee that if I did that to guys that violated my personal space, it'd go on my criminal record. I'm all for self defense, but there's a point where you have gone from self defense to simply attacking someone for the sake of attacking them.

I said self defense. Thats offense. Read the post and not whats in your head.
If you don't like it too bad. The legislation and drumbeat for this was driven by women. I'm just fine with that. Nothing says "personal space" like a swift punch to the nards.

Like if someone burst in to your home, and you shot them, then, still angry, you shot up their car and desecrated the corpse.

Sounds like a good start, but just a start.

Frazzled wrote:I said self defense. Thats offense. Read the post and not whats in your head.

Ahem:

hotsauceman1 wrote:

“She threatened to shove pliers into my eyes and then she took hold of the pliers and delivered three hefty hits against my temples and the area close to my eyes,” the girl wrote in the report.

http://www.thelocal.se/41860/20120705/

I DID read the post. She was trying to pluck the girl's eyes out with pliers.

As I said previously in this thread, this is something more associated with hate crimes than self defense.

My post! You were replying to me. Groping is sexual assault/battery and not to be tolerated by anyone against anyone. If people don't like, the law tells them to suck it.
Groping is a crime.

As the immortal bard once said: No means no you fether!

Frazz is right.

Here:


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/22/woman-beats-up-gropers_n_1619537.html

Any time you're in an intense, potentially life-threatening situation, the body naturally kicks into "fight or flight" mode. It's an unconscious reaction where -- in a matter of adrenaline-pumped nanoseconds -- you size up the danger and either a) fight your way to safety or, if the perceived danger is too great b) flee the scene. If you're Priscilla Dang, though, sometimes you do both at the same time.

Dang was on a run in a Vancouver, Wash., neighborhood last Friday when two teenagers on bikes, one 16, the other 18, approached her from behind. "One went in front and made eye contact with me like a smirk, like I thought he was saying 'Hi,'" said Dang of the encounter to KATU. "The next thing I knew I was pretty much groped on my bottom behind left side."

Unfortunately for the alleged gropers, the 23-year-old woman has taken kung-fu lessons since she was 5. Her family owns the Summit Wushu Academy, an Oregon martial arts studio.

She instantly pushed one of the teenagers to the ground and made him apologize. When the second teenager called her a derogatory term, Dang says she snapped, hitting him in the face several times while simultaneously dodging his punches. According to The Columbian, when he pulled out a knife she used his bike as a shield until a passerby showed up and called 911.

"I think they knew they messed with the wrong girl," Dang added to KATU.

Both suspects fled the scene and were later apprehended by sheriff's deputies, reports KPTV. The 18-year-old suspect is now facing fourth-degree assault charges, while the 16-year-old will be judged by a juvenile prosecutor.

Follow up: http://www.kirotv.com/news/news/crime-law/woman-kung-fu-background-fights-attackers/nPfR4/

Great how many blame Sweden for a single event taking place in Sweden.

Dark Scipio wrote:Great how many blame Sweden for a single event taking place in Sweden.

We'd most likely be having this discussion regardless of where it took place.

The girl who assaulted her should get time in Sweden's equivalent of Juvie Hall, if they have it. Expulsion, too. No excuse for it.

That said, what was this girl doing/wearing that would prompt the school to say she should tone it down? I'd really like to hear the other side of this story.

Melissia wrote:Well, when three people give three different interpretations of his post, it probably is better to let him explain

Mannahnin, Dreadwinter, and Kovnik have it right. I'm not claiming, at all, that the assault was justified. There are circumstances in which the use of force is justified, but the simple exercise of sexuality is not one of them (short of fending off sexual assault, obviously)*. This is, I think, the consensus of nearly everyone in society, though obviously there are exceptions.

I'm only claiming that the most interesting part of this case is that the school requested that the girl "tone down" her sexuality, both from a legal and moral standpoint. From a legal standpoint we'll probably never know, as I doubt many people here speak Swedish. From a moral standpoint, however, the question is one regarding the degree of sexuality being expressed by the victim. If it was simply a matter of it being clear that she was homosexual, then the request was inappropriate. If she was making repeated advances on not only the girl who assaulted her**, but other girls in the school (as in successive advances on the same people), and those advances were consistently being turned down then there is merit to the request. This is also true if the advances were physical.

And, to be perfectly clear, I think the same standard holds for heterosexual students as well. In many ways schools are like less formal places of business, and the latter types of behavior would not be tolerated in many of those. If anything students only receive clemency because, well, they're young and stupid. They can't be expected to fully understand how to show an interest in an appropriate manner, so they get chided first, and disciplined second; provided at least the mistake was innocent.




*Though I'll add that there is something to be said regarding proportionality. If your average woman slaps your average man making repeated lewd comments (bearing in mind that your average woman is no physical threat to your average man), the slap is justified.

**Again, this doesn't justify the assault, but I've seen violence occur because a particularly aggressive gay man continually made advances on a friend of mine who was notoriously unstable (he once threatened me with a hatchet). The tipping point being the time he whispered into his ear "The only reason you're not gay is because you don't know what it feels like to receive anal from a man." Where "receive anal from a man" were not the words used. My friend, proceeded to break the guy's nose and bruise several of his ribs. If this occurred between heterosexuals it would be no less inappropriate, but the balance of forces is very different due to simple genetics.

dogma wrote:

Melissia wrote:Well, when three people give three different interpretations of his post, it probably is better to let him explain

Mannahnin, Dreadwinter, and Kovnik have it right. I'm not claiming, at all, that the assault was justified. There are circumstances in which the use of force is justified, but the simple exercise of sexuality is not one of them (short of fending off sexual assault, obviously)*. This is, I think, the consensus of nearly everyone in society, though obviously there are exceptions.

I'm only claiming that the most interesting part of this case is that the school requested that the girl "tone down" her sexuality, both from a legal and moral standpoint. From a legal standpoint we'll probably never know, as I doubt many people here speak Swedish. From a moral standpoint, however, the question is one regarding the degree of sexuality being expressed by the victim. If it was simply a matter of it being clear that she was homosexual, then the request was inappropriate. If she was making repeated advances on not only the girl who assaulted her**, but other girls in the school (as in successive advances on the same people), and those advances were consistently being turned down then there is merit to the request. This is also true if the advances were physical.

And, to be perfectly clear, I think the same standard holds for heterosexual students as well. In many ways schools are like less formal places of business, and the latter types of behavior would not be tolerated in many of those. If anything students only receive clemency because, well, they're young and stupid. They can't be expected to fully understand how to show an interest in an appropriate manner, so they get chided first, and disciplined second; provided at least the mistake was innocent.




*Though I'll add that there is something to be said regarding proportionality. If your average woman slaps your average man making repeated lewd comments (bearing in mind that your average woman is no physical threat to your average man), the slap is justified.

**Again, this doesn't justify the assault, but I've seen violence occur because a particularly aggressive gay man continually made advances on a friend of mine who was notoriously unstable (he once threatened me with a hatchet). The tipping point being the time he whispered into his ear "The only reason you're not gay is because you don't know what it feels like to receive anal from a man." Where "receive anal from a man" were not the words used. My friend, proceeded to break the guy's nose and bruise several of his ribs. If this occurred between heterosexuals it would be no less inappropriate, but the balance of forces is very different due to simple genetics.

Pretty much bang on, right there.

Another thing to factor in might be if the girl with the pliers had bad experiences with lesbians before and if the girl that got assaulted did something that was the straw that broke the camel's back. A lot of ifs right there because we don't have the full story, I think.
I only bring this up because I know a couple people that got tired of beIng grabbed by guys and went beserk after one time too many of being groped.

Frazzled wrote:

Melissia wrote:And a court date with a criminal charge chaser, mister Internet Tough Guy.

Thats wrong actually. If someone grabs you thats battery. Your response may be considered self defense.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kovnik Obama wrote:

Relapse wrote:If someone grabbed me, I'd level them and be justified.

Grabbed you? As in grope you? No you wouldn't, at least if you're reasonnable. You'd be flushed red with indignity, and wouldn't have a single clue how to react.
Then, later on, you'd laugh about it. Hey, that means someone thinks you have a cute ass.

Beleive me, I've been there.

Again, no thats battery or sexual assault/battery (depending on the local state's jurisdiction). If a woman is groped she is well within her legal rights to level the groper, or have the attacker arrested and convicted for such.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

youbedead wrote:

Relapse wrote:

Melissia wrote:And a court date with a criminal charge chaser, mister Internet Tough Guy.

Just stating a bit of personal history. As far as charges go, it comes down to the fact that the grabber is the assaulter, I acted in self defense.

No not in any western country or any state or county, self defense doesn't apply to he grabbed my ass.

Wanna bet?

Absolutely, I thought you were a lawyer fraz. Using the AZ law as example (since thats were I live.)

13-404. Justification; self-defense
A. Except as provided in subsection B of this section, a person is justified in threatening or using physical force against another when and to the extent a reasonable person would believe that physical force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful physical force.
B. The threat or use of physical force against another is not justified:
1. In response to verbal provocation alone; or
2. To resist an arrest that the person knows or should know is being made by a peace officer or by a person acting in a peace officer's presence and at his direction, whether the arrest is lawful or unlawful, unless the physical force used by the peace officer exceeds that allowed by law; or
3. If the person provoked the other's use or attempted use of unlawful physical force, unless:
(a) The person withdraws from the encounter or clearly communicates to the other his intent to do so reasonably believing he cannot safely withdraw from the encounter; and
(b) The other nevertheless continues or attempts to use unlawful physical force against the person.

Bolded important bit, as with most self defense laws it only counts as self defense if you believe that you can not safely disengage from the encounter and can only use force to the extent a reasonable person would believe that physical force is immediately necessary. So can you charge the groper with battery/assault absolutely, can you shove him/pepper spray him, debatable I would lean towards yes, can you deck/stab/shoot/taze/etc. him, no.

I can envision the trial:

Guy that got decked: well you see your honor, I grabbed his nads because I wanted to have sex with him, and that's when he hit me...

Judge: Case dismissed because the plantiff is an idiot.

exactly

dogma wrote: a friend of mine who was notoriously unstable (he once threatened me with a hatchet).

I didn't know you were friends with Uncle Buck!

A three way tie? Balls

Relapse wrote:I can envision the trial:

Guy that got decked: well you see your honor, I grabbed his nads because I wanted to have sex with him, and that's when he hit me...

Judge: Case dismissed because the plantiff is an idiot.

Or:

Guy that got decked: well you see your honor, I stumbled and accidently brushed my hand across the front of his trousers

Judge: In light of there being no evidence of sexual assault by the plaintiff, no camera/film/etc, and plenty of evidence of violence taken against the plaintiff for apparently little to no reason, the decker gets the cane.

MrDwhitey wrote:

Relapse wrote:I can envision the trial:

Guy that got decked: well you see your honor, I grabbed his nads because I wanted to have sex with him, and that's when he hit me...

Judge: Case dismissed because the plantiff is an idiot.

Or:

Guy that got decked: well you see your honor, I stumbled and accidently brushed my hand across the front of his trousers

Judge: In light of there being no evidence of sexual assault by the plaintiff, no camera/film/etc, and plenty of evidence of violence taken against the plaintiff for apparently little to no reason, the decker gets the cane.

You think that would work eh? Try it.

More to the point these laws and court cases were put in place to protect women against gropers. to wit your example:
Guy that got decked: well you see your honor, I stumbled and accidently brushed my hand across the front of her blouse.

Judge: You're so full of gak its not funny. Bailiff, beat this man again please.

Not my point.

My point was "Word against Word". I would certainly hope in a legal system you actually require evidence.

MrDwhitey wrote:Not my point.

My point was "Word against Word". I would certainly hope in a legal system you actually require evidence.

You have evidence.
You will lose.

I suggest you try it. Further I suggest you find the nearest karate tournament. Grope a female black belt. Stand for your principles and become that test case!

What evidence? Someones word is enough evidence to send someone to jail? My oh my, and I thought you lived in a democracy.

I'm off to work now, go post that weiner dog firing fireworks at people some more, wouldya?

MrDwhitey wrote:What evidence? Someones word is enough evidence to send someone to jail? My oh my, and I thought you lived in a democracy.

Nope, but it will be enough to get the female 4th degree blackbelt off, if even charged (not in a million freaking years). On the positive, you'll still be in the hospital after she hurts you real bad. Sounds like justice to me.

dogma wrote:
And, to be perfectly clear, I think the same standard holds for heterosexual students as well.

Apologies if I have told you this one before, I have been here I while now and I might be repeating myself.

I was in a pub in Middlesbrough a few years back and there was a hen party in, probably about 12-14 women. All dressed up, all being loud.. you know how they are.

Anyway, I was stood at the bar with a mate, and three of them were getting served in front.. they turned round and looked at us, and then one of them said "Hey! You look a bit like Robbie Williams!" (gak pop singer) I replied "Oh I have been told that before.. is that good or bad then?" at this point, one of the girls nudged her mate, and they all grinned, and then with a speed that defied her ample frame, she snaked a hand out, and fully grabbed my gonads. Like both of them, inside her palm, in a strangely vice like grip that I wouldnt have thought possible for one of the fairer sex.

I instantly and involuntarily gasped and went "GAAH!" as it hurt quite a bit.. and this brought hoots of laughter and derision from not only the crowd of her friends at the table, but also half of the strangers present. At this point I tried to tear myself clear, but she properly had hold of my sack hard, it was like I was being pinched by Spongebobs fething boss, and the sharp movement was actually extremely painful, it was I reckon.. about 50% knacker sack and about 50% pubes getting ripped out.

I then did an impromptu karate chop on her wrist and when I looked up the grinning bar man casually said "what's yours then mate?" as if this type of thing happens on a daily basis.

At which point I replied "Jesus!... can you imagine the scene if I just rammed three fingers up her fething skirt?!"

I tell you.. if you think this type of gak is ever going to work both ways, you must have another thing coming! Many a day I think things would be simpler if I was born a woman...

If only so I could get a job on an RM base and be an absolute filth bag.

Can you imagine!? 700 men, aged 18-35 and all super fit?! I would be air-tight every night of the week!

And what they did was wrong, but that sort of thing happens with men as well. Dunno why you seem to think otherwise.

mattyrm wrote:

dogma wrote:
And, to be perfectly clear, I think the same standard holds for heterosexual students as well.

Apologies if I have told you this one before, I have been here I while now and I might be repeating myself.

I was in a pub in Middlesbrough a few years back and there was a hen party in, probably about 12-14 women. All dressed up, all being loud.. you know how they are.

Anyway, I was stood at the bar with a mate, and three of them were getting served in front.. they turned round and looked at us, and then one of them said "Hey! You look a bit like Robbie Williams!" (gak pop singer) I replied "Oh I have been told that before.. is that good or bad then?" at this point, one of the girls nudged her mate, and they all grinned, and then with a speed that defied her ample frame, she snaked a hand out, and fully grabbed my gonads. Like both of them, inside her palm, in a strangely vice like grip that I wouldnt have thought possible for one of the fairer sex.

I instantly and involuntarily gasped and went "GAAH!" as it hurt quite a bit.. and this brought hoots of laughter and derision from not only the crowd of her friends at the table, but also half of the strangers present. At this point I tried to tear myself clear, but she properly had hold of my sack hard, it was like I was being pinched by Spongebobs fething boss, and the sharp movement was actually extremely painful, it was I reckon.. about 50% knacker sack and about 50% pubes getting ripped out.

I then did an impromptu karate chop on her wrist and when I looked up the grinning bar man casually said "what's yours then mate?" as if this type of thing happens on a daily basis.

At which point I replied "Jesus!... can you imagine the scene if I just rammed three fingers up her fething skirt?!"

I tell you.. if you think this type of gak is ever going to work both ways, you must have another thing coming! Many a day I think things would be simpler if I was born a woman...

If only so I could get a job on an RM base and be an absolute filth bag.

Can you imagine!? 700 men, aged 18-35 and all super fit?! I would be air-tight every night of the week!

HOLY FETH Matty that sounds hidiously painful...... how log did you take to recover-i cant imagine your pain....... you poor . Still a hilariously good laugh though .(sorry for laughing at you agony)

anyway if you want real pain-practice sword training with my freind. training blades only.

Hes broken mine but im still pummeling him even with the top quarter of my Bastard sword missing(the Bastard sword being the sword that i am most proficient with).

Realising hes losing badly he tries the sneaky tactic of kicking me in the nads with his steel toecapped boots.

suffice to say im in agony but somehow i manage to put all of this pain aside and fight back for several minutes before seeing an opening and proceeding to rip straight through his defences and inflict a coup de grace on him accept his surrender and walk some distance away before collapsing in total agony.

i remained there for about 5 minutes before i could force myself up.


Getting back on topic: Its fething VILE what happened to that poor girl. if ide been there ide have kicked the gak out of the fether that assaulted her be they male or female. Why cant people who are individual be different. so what she likes other girls whats wrong with that? i hope she takes every penny the school and that homophobic little slut have. My rage at this knows no bounds and as such i have been forced to crank Theartes des Vampires Carmilla up to potentaly fatal levels to try and counter my hate rage before i declare war on sweden(there already on probation in my books for sheltering my dad)

Melissia wrote:And what they did was wrong, but that sort of thing happens with men as well. Dunno why you seem to think otherwise.

I dont think otherwise! I just thought you might like to hear that story.

I will say though, men wouldn't report that kinda thing cos the coppers would probably laugh at you as well. It probably happens far less to women because the blokes know they will end up in cuffs if they do gak like that!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

master of ordinance wrote:[

anyway if you want real pain-practice sword training with my freind. training blades only.

I can well imagine cos sword fighting hurt as a kid when you got twatted on the hand with a wooden sword!

I have little interest in learning now though, it seems a bit close to LARPing for me.. When am I ever going to need to sword fight anyway!?

Frazzled wrote:

MrDwhitey wrote:What evidence? Someones word is enough evidence to send someone to jail? My oh my, and I thought you lived in a democracy.

Nope, but it will be enough to get the female 4th degree blackbelt off, if even charged (not in a million freaking years). On the positive, you'll still be in the hospital after she hurts you real bad. Sounds like justice to me.

I love that example since I sat in on a trial for a friend of mine that is a 4th degree black belt who was accused of battery. We were working on a construction site and one of the foremen decided he wanted to prove what a hardass he was by threatening my bud with a hammer when they were alone in a basement of the complex we were building.
He took one punch from my friend that caused $8,000 dollars worth of damage to his face and broke several bones on the left side of his head.
It was a case of word against word and my bud didn't even bother with a lawyer, in a trial that only went a couple of hours. In the end, the judge ruled it a case of mutual combat and my bud got off free.
The thing that sealed it was when my friend was questioning his accuser, he drew a map of the room on a board and asked where the accuser was standing when he pulled the hammer on him. His accuser indicated where he was standing, and my friend then said, "So you admit to pulling the hammer out at me."
The idiot replied by saying, "But I put it back".
At that point, it was pretty much in the bag and my friend wasvindicated a few days later with the judges descision.

MrDwhitey wrote:What evidence? Someones word is enough evidence to send someone to jail? My oh my, and I thought you lived in a democracy.

I'm off to work now, go post that weiner dog firing fireworks at people some more, wouldya?

Actually in the court system eyewitness testimony is often placed above fact or hard evidence, so yes someones word is more then enough to send someone to jail, thats how most rape cases (false or real) are convicted.

Fraz I know that if this were to ever actually happen that it would be unlikely to be convicted, I was just pointing that technically you are not legally justified to do it. But as we both know, actual legality /= what actually happens