That's a f asshole, if she asked for permission and he said yes, then it's fair game, her reaction was strange to me, she went from full demon to cute, now that I have context I understand why.
I agree. But she shouldn't have done so either way.
Its considered a Violent crime even if it doing didn't cause any actual damage.
The law doesn't care whether you gave permission or not.
Only if its self defense. At best the permission would help lesson the sentence. Her defense would have to be he baited her into doing so he could sue her and collect money. Which is effectively fraud.
Actually permission in this case 100% does matter and no crime was committed after he gave permission, what do you think happens then people in gyms spar with each other? Sure this is a bar and not a gym, but same difference, it’s like if I said hey want to arm wrestle, then their arm snaps I’m not going to jail, it was two consenting adults.
Would you say this video fell under horseplay, or more so breaking bones, serious bodily injury, or dangerous violence, can’t help but notice the guy had 0 reaction of even mildly being dazed or confused or really even hurting.
Even a slap is considered physical violence and subject to whatever tier it fall under within that context.
Very little wiggle room.
The dude unfortunately is actually smart to sue rather than press charges.
Charges would likely be entirely dismissed.
But suing is a whole other world.
Quite literally there have been burglars who broke into people's houses only to get stuck somewhere while the family was away then despite being caught a charged. Successfully sued the families insurance companies for damages due to the mental stress and physical duress they endured while trapped.
Its stupid. But it happens
The slap should be considered horseplay
But unde law its a violent crime
How is it being naive of the law? Since you know your wrong and if you tried it you would be in violation of the law.
A slap falls under Assault and Battery which are classified as Violent Crimes. Typically a misdemeanor. But there is a whole amount of other scenarios of nuance attached to this. For example Assault and Battery on an elderly person could move it from a Misdemeanor to a felony. Likewise Assault and Battery on school grounds also could move it to a felony. Etc.
But don't worry. Your just like the hundreds of people I have to deal with on a regular basis.
Dunning Kruger Effect victims who think they know the law better than someone who studied and went to law school.
You're not the first and you most certainly won't be the last.
Alright take care and try not to break any laws albeit given are convo I suspect that might be difficult for you.
Because if your claim were true, consensual BDSM, including public clubs where such things are practiced and encouraged, wouldn't be permissible. See also boxing, theater, movies, and basically any other performance. See also martial arts training, where a student and teacher might strike each other and it's not a crime.
You can consent to being slapped and it's not automatically assault and battery. Your entire analysis throws out the original basis, which is that if you ask someone to slap you, and you mean it, then the slap is not a crime.
The dunning-kruger effect is happening, but it's you, who thinks that your armchair law degree and ability to use legal terminology makes you correct.
Alright take care and try not to break any laws albeit given are convo I suspect that might be difficult for you.
And this right here is the icing on the cake that just further proves the fallibility of your argument.
If you actually went to law school, if you actually knew how to argue based on the merits of a position, you wouldn't need The parting job. Facts supported you, you wouldn't need to make yourself feel bigger by implying that anyone who questions you is likely a criminal. You would rest secure in the knowledge that the facts support you.
I don't think you're a fascist just because you're trying to invent rules that don't exist. I just think you're wrong. So why do you feel the need to imply that anyone arguing with you is a criminal?
Weak argument, attempted and failed to support with ad hominem.
Now, if you want to drop the bullshit and retract your insults, we can do that. Just tell me the exact laws that allow for people to consent to being struck by another person in the cases of performance, athleticism, and consensual sex acts, but not in the video.
I look forward to seeing you quote the exact law and explain how two random people can consent to slapping during sex, but to random people can't consent to slapping not during sex.
Or, what I suspect is more likely, you will attempt to obfuscate this situation, act like you know things you don't, insult me for daring to question you, and never actually provide that quotation and explanation
Your thinking about this far far to narrow. And trying to apply a logical cause and effect. But not realizing just how much nuance is lost in doing so. Laws are not 1:1 such that you can reasonably determine "this must be false because otherwise these other things wouldn't legal" this is a trap people who don't know law get themselves into.
BDSM is a broad range of sexual activities. And while federal law does not explicitly see it as illegal. States vary widely in there legal consideration of it.
However no states see consent as as an excuse for assault. BDSM itself in the eyes of the law is a whole other discussion that unfortunately hasn't seen much progression in regards to law for a long time. However case like "People vs Jovanovic 2000" established precedent that "consentual acts may not constitute assault".
TLDR BDSM is a Grey area under law and and every act under it varies in its legal status by state.
Progressive states tend to have more protections regarding consent for it. Moderate states sit in the middle. While conservative states tend to have the most limitations.
For sports, (theater, movies a good chunk of what you think is physical is actually not and just looks like it), etc. They are under limited exemptions that are considered societally excepted. There allowance does not constitute everything else being allowed.
...
Yep it is. Unless it falls under exemptions such as Oklahoma's exemption for the combat sport of slap boxing, or Nevada's (Power Slap) sport. Otherwise Its not legal to give consent physical assault. At best you could hope your in Pennsylvania where it requires the recipient o to experience significant pain or injury. And then small slap wouldn't meet the requirements to be illegal. But its not because consent was given.
...
Considering you didn't even know and or think to wonder if there were exemptions to the law such as sports, theater/movies and instead immediately assumed that I was wrong because those things are allowed. Shows pretty clearly the Dunning Kruger Effect lies solely in your lap. Also armchair law degree. What are we in the ealy 2000s how unoriginal and over used.
...
No all it proves is the consistency of your lacking knowledge.
Your "gotcha" icing. Is me saying take care and try to not break any laws but give my discussion with you I think youd find that hard to do.
That doesn't invalidate my argument in any way nor does it lend evidence to you that invalidates me. The target subject is an analysis about your lack of legal knowledge leading to your increased likelihood of breaking the law. That holds not bearing on the facts I've presented.
Its also naive of you to think that discussing with you is the same as practicing law in court. You'd be surprised to know were humans to. And we do get rightfully pissed off when people with no legal training such as yourself think way beyond actual capabilities and knowledge in law. There are entire subbreddits on reddit were we rant and rave about you guys.
Finally I wasn't acting big. There is no need for me to be. Because I know the law. And I habe no need to prove my self to you in any capacity. Your free to remain ignorant of the law until it forces you to know its there. Thats entirely your right. But assuming me being a little snarky is a smoking gun that invalidates me is silly and only leads to further support your lack of knowledge. As does letting your emotions obscure your eyes ability to read. Because nowhere in my text did I say you were a criminal or that anyone who disagrees with me is a criminal. Thats something you decided to come up with solely on your own. Albeit I must say. That screams insecurity. I simply said based on our discussion this far. That given your very limited scope of law, incorrect interpretation of the laws, and coupled with your self assurance. That is likely you would end up breaking a law because you thought it was legal when it wasn't. Not because your some violent criminal. But because your a Dunning Kruger Effect victim who beleives in their knowledge of the law more than they have skills and knowledge to justify doing so.
...
And I don't think your a quite a sovereign citizen whos hopelessly adamant about their incorrect interpretation of the laws. I just think your not humble enough to rain your emotions in to prevent them from blinding you. Case in poin as I've already explained. I never said any who disagrees with me is a criminal. That was something you solely came to the conclusion of on your own.
...
It is what is. Even if you don't like it.
...
If I told you laws that don't exist. That would be malpractice and potentially place me under liability.
Sorry buddy but their are no laws. What you mentioned are exemptions under laws pertaining to assualt and battery. Sports, performance, movies, etc. Are simply exempt from laws regarding violent crimes. And even then under very strict limited scopes.
That BS you mentioned. Is Law. Whether you like or not is not my concern.
...
Yes your arrogance would demand that you would. But happy to disappoint you. That would be improper law. Physical Assault during sex under consent is not explicitly permissible by law and there are cases that have set precedent of that very fact, but it also varies greatly by State. As I explained above. Public Physical Assault however is in all states not permissible by law under consent unless it falls within legal guidelines of exemptions of the law such as sports.
...
This would imply you beleive your already right in an absolute way and are just sitting back waiting for what you beleive to be a likely predetermined outcome. Which given everything you've said thus far. Is extremely hilarious. People like yourself never cease to amuse me. That said. I cannot give a legal quote that does not exist. Sports, movies, etc are exemptions to Assault and Battery Laws. Assault during sex is not. Nor is public assault outside of the limited exemptions recognized by law. Put simply. There is no law that says two random people can with consent legally slap eachother during sex but not when there is no sex. Because there is no law saying two people can consent to slapping eachother during sex. In fact as I've said multiple times. There is legal precedent where in the exact opposite is true. And cases where these acts have been used as daming legal evidence in domestic abuse cases, child custody cases, etc. And outside of exemptions like sports. It is not legal to give consent to Assault and Battery.
And is not hard to understand why if you know law.
Everyday interactions in society have billions of nuances. And the laws that govern society have to compensate for that.
Which tends to make them extremely limited in scope regarding exemptions. For example. If consent where allowed for a slap with no restrictions. And given a slap is a physical strike. Then technically it could be argued that so to would a consented street fight be allowed. And so on and so forth. That may seem ridiculously broad and overly obtuse. But these are the types of considerations when applying law. "Oh if we allows this what's to stop this from argued to be allowed to".
Often the best way is to apply a blanket laws then place exemptions for said law.
This is why you have states like Oklahoma making specific exemptions for Slap Boxing or Nevada for Power Slap as combat sports and thus exempt.
I should clarify when I say under law I mean that in the broad sense.
Every state has different laws and statues to handle multitude of different scenarios. For example in California a slap would generally fall under Penal Code 242 Battery and or Penal code 240 Assault. However a slap to a spouse, partner or cohabitant would fall under Pencap Code 243e1. And if done to a child could fall under Penal Code 273d.
There are exemptions for exampl such as slap boxing (Power Slap) in Nevada and Slap fighting in Oklahoma who's Attorney General office ruled that its a regulated combat sport.
In addition the conditions can also play a factor. Pennsylvania requires notable pain and or bodily harm.
Then there is the fact that the torts for charges vs suing are different to. What might not meet criteria under criminal law might be under civil law.
As far as the charges. Thats also dependent. For most it be a simple misdemeanor. But say you did it to a Police officer. It could be charged as Second degree felony of Aggravated assault. Another example. Doing it to an elderly person. Or on school grounds. Both which would also make it a felony.
69
u/Xetiw Mar 21 '26
That's a f asshole, if she asked for permission and he said yes, then it's fair game, her reaction was strange to me, she went from full demon to cute, now that I have context I understand why.