Are you allowed to strike a person if they say you can?Is it self defense to use force on someone threatening violence but hasn't used it yet?Is it illegal to encourage someone to fight you?Can you be shot in “self-defense” for attempting to disarm someone?Is it illegal to sell a spell online?Is an implied physical threat via looming over someone legal?When can a cop force a person to comply?When can someone who's not a police officer use physical force?Why can security guards/bar bouncers physically remove a person and it's not considered battery?Outside of regular self defence, when is fighting legal?Under what circumstances is it OK to intentionally drive at people?If I accidentally send a package to the wrong person, is it still my property?Force person on stand to only say, yes or no, legal?How hard is it to change a condo association name in Washington DC?
Weird lines in Microsoft Word
Friend wants my recommendation but I don't want to give it to him
Would a primitive species be able to learn English from reading books alone?
Not hide and seek
How to split IPA spelling into syllables
Did I make a mistake by ccing email to boss to others?
Why is indicated airspeed rather than ground speed used during the takeoff roll?
Magnifying glass in hyperbolic space
Is there a POSIX way to shutdown a UNIX machine?
Travelling in US for more than 90 days
Should I warn a new PhD Student?
Connection Between Knot Theory and Number Theory
PTIJ: Which Dr. Seuss books should one obtain?
How do you justify more code being written by following clean code practices?
Can a Knock spell open the door to Mordenkainen's Magnificent Mansion?
Why is "la Gestapo" feminine?
Mortal danger in mid-grade literature
Pre-Employment Background Check With Consent For Future Checks
What is the tangent at a sharp point on a curve?
Why didn't Voldemort know what Grindelwald looked like?
Offset in split text content
How can I, as DM, avoid the Conga Line of Death occurring when implementing some form of flanking rule?
Asserting that Atheism and Theism are both faith based positions
categorizing a variable turns it from insignificant to significant
Are you allowed to strike a person if they say you can?
Is it self defense to use force on someone threatening violence but hasn't used it yet?Is it illegal to encourage someone to fight you?Can you be shot in “self-defense” for attempting to disarm someone?Is it illegal to sell a spell online?Is an implied physical threat via looming over someone legal?When can a cop force a person to comply?When can someone who's not a police officer use physical force?Why can security guards/bar bouncers physically remove a person and it's not considered battery?Outside of regular self defence, when is fighting legal?Under what circumstances is it OK to intentionally drive at people?If I accidentally send a package to the wrong person, is it still my property?Force person on stand to only say, yes or no, legal?How hard is it to change a condo association name in Washington DC?
It's my understanding if a person agrees to fight then it's legal. So if they say "hit me" does that mean it's legal for a person to hit them? What if they obviously mean it in a sarcastic way, or taunting? Is it legal for them to hit the person back if they didn't agree to get hit?
I ask because I've seen a lot of videos were reporters heckle celebrities and normal people, and when they get agitated they say "hit me" or "go ahead, take a swing". Would it be illegal if they did?
united-states assault
asked Dec 16 '16 at 2:52
JankinJankin
801310
add a comment |
It's my understanding if a person agrees to fight then it's legal. So if they say "hit me" does that mean it's legal for a person to hit them? What if they obviously mean it in a sarcastic way, or taunting? Is it legal for them to hit the person back if they didn't agree to get hit?
I ask because I've seen a lot of videos were reporters heckle celebrities and normal people, and when they get agitated they say "hit me" or "go ahead, take a swing". Would it be illegal if they did?
united-states assault
asked Dec 16 '16 at 2:52
JankinJankin
801310
add a comment |
It's my understanding if a person agrees to fight then it's legal. So if they say "hit me" does that mean it's legal for a person to hit them? What if they obviously mean it in a sarcastic way, or taunting? Is it legal for them to hit the person back if they didn't agree to get hit?
I ask because I've seen a lot of videos were reporters heckle celebrities and normal people, and when they get agitated they say "hit me" or "go ahead, take a swing". Would it be illegal if they did?
united-states assault
asked Dec 16 '16 at 2:52
JankinJankin
801310
It's my understanding if a person agrees to fight then it's legal. So if they say "hit me" does that mean it's legal for a person to hit them? What if they obviously mean it in a sarcastic way, or taunting? Is it legal for them to hit the person back if they didn't agree to get hit?
I ask because I've seen a lot of videos were reporters heckle celebrities and normal people, and when they get agitated they say "hit me" or "go ahead, take a swing". Would it be illegal if they did?
united-states assault
united-states assault
asked Dec 16 '16 at 2:52
JankinJankin
801310
asked Dec 16 '16 at 2:52
JankinJankin
801310
asked Dec 16 '16 at 2:52
JankinJankin
801310
asked Dec 16 '16 at 2:52
JankinJankin
801310
asked Dec 16 '16 at 2:52
JankinJankin
801310
801310
add a comment |
add a comment |
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
This is going to vary by state to some degree. The Wisconsin battery law says in part:
(1) Whoever causes bodily harm to another by an act done with intent to cause bodily harm to that person or another without the consent of the person so harmed is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.
(2) Whoever causes substantial bodily harm to another by an act done with intent to cause bodily harm to that person or another is guilty of a Class I felony.
And the terms are defined like this:
“Bodily harm" means physical pain or injury, illness, or any impairment of physical condition.
“Substantial bodily harm" means bodily injury that causes a laceration that requires stitches, staples, or a tissue adhesive; any fracture of a bone; a broken nose; a burn; a petechia; a temporary loss of consciousness, sight or hearing; a concussion; or a loss or fracture of a tooth.
So it would seem that one could present a defense of "they consented" if bodily harm was inflicted, but not if great bodily harm was inflicted. If they were being obviously sarcastic, then that's not really consent.
answered Jan 10 '18 at 5:00
D MD M
3,607323
2
In some states, they semi-circularly define an assault as an assault which... and leave it to common law precedent to more precisely interpret assault. So you (the citizen considering whether they might assault a person) have to read the restatement of torts to know why consent matters.
– user6726
Jan 10 '18 at 5:43
1
Pro and amateur boxers consent to being hit before the fight. Wouldn't this be an example?
– mark b
Jan 10 '18 at 19:44
Certainly boxers consent due to the nature of the sport, but I'm also sure that boxers inflict substantial bodily harm rather often (which makes consent irrelevant) and they aren't prosecuted. I don't know if that's due to some other law or just discretion. Chapter 444 of Wisconsin law regulates boxing specifically but it doesn't seem to give an exemption for substantial battery. For all I know common law says that boxing is acceptable. That might be its own question.
– D M
Jan 10 '18 at 20:38
Boxing an other contact sports are specifically authorized in the context of a licensed regulatory scheme. Not anyone can consent to that.
– ohwilleke
Jan 11 '18 at 11:29
@ohwilleke so if they call it a sport it's allowed, otherwise it's illegal?
– Jankin
Nov 9 '18 at 12:26
|
show 1 more comment
No one can give anyone permission to break the law
That includes you giving permission for someone to hit you if, without that permission, their doing so would be illegal.
There are circumstances where it is legal to hit people, for example, in the context of a sporting event like boxing, football or another contact sport. Or in self-defence which does not extend to punching someone who provokes you: you must have a reasonable fear of immanent (or actual) violence and self-defence is limited to the minimum force necessary to resolve the threat (what this is depends on jurisdiction).
Punching someone who merely says "hit me" or "go ahead, take a swing" would be illegal, however, if the entire circumstances were such that the person to whom this was said had a reasonable apprehension of immanent violence then self-defence may make this legal. Similarly, punching someone who has hit you first is only lawful if the purpose of your punch is to stop them hitting you again or to place them under arrest for the crime of hitting you - if they hit you and ran away you are not permitted to use violence against them because you are no longer in danger unless you are subjecting them to reasonable force in the course of making an arrest.
answered Dec 16 '16 at 4:06
Dale MDale M
55.4k23579
2
Also worth noting that you shouldn't fall for the "I won't press charges" line that's portrayed in some TV shows and movies, because most jurisdictions do not require a complaining witness to proceed with assault charges. As long as they can prove the assault occurred, whether the person wants you to be charged or not, they can get you convicted of that crime.
– animuson♦
Dec 16 '16 at 7:53
IIRC there was some mention a while back on this site about boxing being a very peculiar exception to the law, but I can't find it. Can you address how boxing or MMA matches can be legal at the same time that it is not legal to strike a person with their explicit permission?
– feetwet♦
Dec 16 '16 at 20:21
4
This seems wrong in both directions. In boxing, the objective is to render the opponent unconscious via battery. No competent modern expert would agree that beating someone in the head until he can't stand up in less than ten seconds is "harmless." OTOH, if someone says, "try to hit me; I want to see if you are fast and strong enough to land a painful blow?" The stated goal in that case is to test a skill, sort of an impromptu "game." A priori nobody can say with any certainty that harm would be inflicted in the attempt, so are the parties not absolved of intent in such a case?
– feetwet♦
Dec 16 '16 at 23:33
1
@Jankin you cannot consent to something illegal - some forms of contact are illegal irrespective of consent
– Dale M
Jan 5 '17 at 5:55
1
This should not be downvoted. You can certainly be prosecuted for committing a crime even if the victim gave you permission. There are fringe cases like in contact sports but they certainly don't establish any rule to the contrary
– Shazamo Morebucks
Apr 7 '18 at 21:02
|
show 5 more comments
It's my understanding if a person agrees to fight then it's legal.
You are wrong.
So if they say "hit me" does that mean it's legal for a person to hit
them?
No.
What if they obviously mean it in a sarcastic way, or taunting?
Still no.
Is it legal for them to hit the person back if they didn't agree to
get hit?
A person can use physical force in self-defense, if necessary and proportional. But, they can't hit someone to punish someone for hitting them if the threat to their person has ended.
I ask because I've seen a lot of videos were reporters heckle
celebrities and normal people, and when they get agitated they say
"hit me" or "go ahead, take a swing". Would it be illegal if they did?
It would be illegal if they did.
answered Jan 11 '18 at 11:26
ohwillekeohwilleke
50.8k257128
1
If you cannot consent to a fight then why isn't boxing and martial arts illegal?
– Jankin
Apr 8 '18 at 11:28
1
@Jankin Because they are specifically singled out as exceptions under regulatory schemes.
– ohwilleke
Apr 8 '18 at 18:46
add a comment |
What if you are playing a game which involves hitting on hand would that be assault
answered 15 mins ago
Random personRandom person
1
New contributor
Random person is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Many of you are not very good lawyers. It's very simple to understand battery if you just read your statutes. It literally depends on what state the battery occurs in and what the state defines as a battery.
For example, in the state of Florida, there are various defenses to battery Charges:
Consent (Yes, it's a real thing)
Mutual Combat
Insufficient intent
Self Defense
Intent is an essential element of a battery. Therefore, if the victim consented to the touching, no criminal battery can occur. Likewise, in the right circumstances, the process of mutual combat could be raised. Under this process, if two (or more) people mutually engage in a fight, neither should be charged with battery because they both agreed to be touched or struck by the other.
So, rather than just blatantly tell someone they are wrong, one should consider all of the elements, the state in which the incident occurred, and any other extenuating factors, rather than just jump on this site and tell someone they're wrong. Otherwise, I guess that would make YOU wrong. I hope you feel a little less ignorant. Remember, ignorance is not stupidity, it's lacking the proper knowledge. Yes, that would be you.
answered Apr 7 '18 at 21:00
Kell MacDonaldKell MacDonald
111
4
You could do less with the pompous talking-down, and more with providing resources to support what you're claiming, especially as it contradicts the quoted text of at least one law regarding battery.
– Nij
Apr 7 '18 at 22:48
add a comment |
Battery | Wex Legal Dictionary / Encyclopedia | LII / Legal Information ...
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/batteryDefinition.
In criminal law, a physical act that results in harmful or offensive contact with another's person without that person's consent.
In tort law, the intentional causation of harmful or offensive contact with another's person without that person's consent.
With consent the act is not illegal. That is the law.
answered Aug 25 '18 at 2:34
Bonnie PeeleBonnie Peele
1
A legal dictionary cannot accurately represent the law in all areas.
– D M
Nov 10 '18 at 0:50
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "617"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f15860%2fare-you-allowed-to-strike-a-person-if-they-say-you-can%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
This is going to vary by state to some degree. The Wisconsin battery law says in part:
(1) Whoever causes bodily harm to another by an act done with intent to cause bodily harm to that person or another without the consent of the person so harmed is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.
(2) Whoever causes substantial bodily harm to another by an act done with intent to cause bodily harm to that person or another is guilty of a Class I felony.
And the terms are defined like this:
“Bodily harm" means physical pain or injury, illness, or any impairment of physical condition.
“Substantial bodily harm" means bodily injury that causes a laceration that requires stitches, staples, or a tissue adhesive; any fracture of a bone; a broken nose; a burn; a petechia; a temporary loss of consciousness, sight or hearing; a concussion; or a loss or fracture of a tooth.
So it would seem that one could present a defense of "they consented" if bodily harm was inflicted, but not if great bodily harm was inflicted. If they were being obviously sarcastic, then that's not really consent.
answered Jan 10 '18 at 5:00
D MD M
3,607323
2
In some states, they semi-circularly define an assault as an assault which... and leave it to common law precedent to more precisely interpret assault. So you (the citizen considering whether they might assault a person) have to read the restatement of torts to know why consent matters.
– user6726
Jan 10 '18 at 5:43
1
Pro and amateur boxers consent to being hit before the fight. Wouldn't this be an example?
– mark b
Jan 10 '18 at 19:44
Certainly boxers consent due to the nature of the sport, but I'm also sure that boxers inflict substantial bodily harm rather often (which makes consent irrelevant) and they aren't prosecuted. I don't know if that's due to some other law or just discretion. Chapter 444 of Wisconsin law regulates boxing specifically but it doesn't seem to give an exemption for substantial battery. For all I know common law says that boxing is acceptable. That might be its own question.
– D M
Jan 10 '18 at 20:38
Boxing an other contact sports are specifically authorized in the context of a licensed regulatory scheme. Not anyone can consent to that.
– ohwilleke
Jan 11 '18 at 11:29
@ohwilleke so if they call it a sport it's allowed, otherwise it's illegal?
– Jankin
Nov 9 '18 at 12:26
|
show 1 more comment
This is going to vary by state to some degree. The Wisconsin battery law says in part:
(1) Whoever causes bodily harm to another by an act done with intent to cause bodily harm to that person or another without the consent of the person so harmed is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.
(2) Whoever causes substantial bodily harm to another by an act done with intent to cause bodily harm to that person or another is guilty of a Class I felony.
And the terms are defined like this:
“Bodily harm" means physical pain or injury, illness, or any impairment of physical condition.
“Substantial bodily harm" means bodily injury that causes a laceration that requires stitches, staples, or a tissue adhesive; any fracture of a bone; a broken nose; a burn; a petechia; a temporary loss of consciousness, sight or hearing; a concussion; or a loss or fracture of a tooth.
So it would seem that one could present a defense of "they consented" if bodily harm was inflicted, but not if great bodily harm was inflicted. If they were being obviously sarcastic, then that's not really consent.
answered Jan 10 '18 at 5:00
D MD M
3,607323
2
In some states, they semi-circularly define an assault as an assault which... and leave it to common law precedent to more precisely interpret assault. So you (the citizen considering whether they might assault a person) have to read the restatement of torts to know why consent matters.
– user6726
Jan 10 '18 at 5:43
1
Pro and amateur boxers consent to being hit before the fight. Wouldn't this be an example?
– mark b
Jan 10 '18 at 19:44
Certainly boxers consent due to the nature of the sport, but I'm also sure that boxers inflict substantial bodily harm rather often (which makes consent irrelevant) and they aren't prosecuted. I don't know if that's due to some other law or just discretion. Chapter 444 of Wisconsin law regulates boxing specifically but it doesn't seem to give an exemption for substantial battery. For all I know common law says that boxing is acceptable. That might be its own question.
– D M
Jan 10 '18 at 20:38
Boxing an other contact sports are specifically authorized in the context of a licensed regulatory scheme. Not anyone can consent to that.
– ohwilleke
Jan 11 '18 at 11:29
@ohwilleke so if they call it a sport it's allowed, otherwise it's illegal?
– Jankin
Nov 9 '18 at 12:26
|
show 1 more comment
This is going to vary by state to some degree. The Wisconsin battery law says in part:
(1) Whoever causes bodily harm to another by an act done with intent to cause bodily harm to that person or another without the consent of the person so harmed is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.
(2) Whoever causes substantial bodily harm to another by an act done with intent to cause bodily harm to that person or another is guilty of a Class I felony.
And the terms are defined like this:
“Bodily harm" means physical pain or injury, illness, or any impairment of physical condition.
“Substantial bodily harm" means bodily injury that causes a laceration that requires stitches, staples, or a tissue adhesive; any fracture of a bone; a broken nose; a burn; a petechia; a temporary loss of consciousness, sight or hearing; a concussion; or a loss or fracture of a tooth.
So it would seem that one could present a defense of "they consented" if bodily harm was inflicted, but not if great bodily harm was inflicted. If they were being obviously sarcastic, then that's not really consent.
answered Jan 10 '18 at 5:00
D MD M
3,607323
This is going to vary by state to some degree. The Wisconsin battery law says in part:
(1) Whoever causes bodily harm to another by an act done with intent to cause bodily harm to that person or another without the consent of the person so harmed is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.
(2) Whoever causes substantial bodily harm to another by an act done with intent to cause bodily harm to that person or another is guilty of a Class I felony.
And the terms are defined like this:
“Bodily harm" means physical pain or injury, illness, or any impairment of physical condition.
“Substantial bodily harm" means bodily injury that causes a laceration that requires stitches, staples, or a tissue adhesive; any fracture of a bone; a broken nose; a burn; a petechia; a temporary loss of consciousness, sight or hearing; a concussion; or a loss or fracture of a tooth.
So it would seem that one could present a defense of "they consented" if bodily harm was inflicted, but not if great bodily harm was inflicted. If they were being obviously sarcastic, then that's not really consent.
answered Jan 10 '18 at 5:00
D MD M
3,607323
answered Jan 10 '18 at 5:00
D MD M
3,607323
answered Jan 10 '18 at 5:00
D MD M
3,607323
answered Jan 10 '18 at 5:00
D MD M
3,607323
3,607323
2
In some states, they semi-circularly define an assault as an assault which... and leave it to common law precedent to more precisely interpret assault. So you (the citizen considering whether they might assault a person) have to read the restatement of torts to know why consent matters.
– user6726
Jan 10 '18 at 5:43
1
Pro and amateur boxers consent to being hit before the fight. Wouldn't this be an example?
– mark b
Jan 10 '18 at 19:44
Certainly boxers consent due to the nature of the sport, but I'm also sure that boxers inflict substantial bodily harm rather often (which makes consent irrelevant) and they aren't prosecuted. I don't know if that's due to some other law or just discretion. Chapter 444 of Wisconsin law regulates boxing specifically but it doesn't seem to give an exemption for substantial battery. For all I know common law says that boxing is acceptable. That might be its own question.
– D M
Jan 10 '18 at 20:38
Boxing an other contact sports are specifically authorized in the context of a licensed regulatory scheme. Not anyone can consent to that.
– ohwilleke
Jan 11 '18 at 11:29
@ohwilleke so if they call it a sport it's allowed, otherwise it's illegal?
– Jankin
Nov 9 '18 at 12:26
|
show 1 more comment
2
In some states, they semi-circularly define an assault as an assault which... and leave it to common law precedent to more precisely interpret assault. So you (the citizen considering whether they might assault a person) have to read the restatement of torts to know why consent matters.
– user6726
Jan 10 '18 at 5:43
1
Pro and amateur boxers consent to being hit before the fight. Wouldn't this be an example?
– mark b
Jan 10 '18 at 19:44
Certainly boxers consent due to the nature of the sport, but I'm also sure that boxers inflict substantial bodily harm rather often (which makes consent irrelevant) and they aren't prosecuted. I don't know if that's due to some other law or just discretion. Chapter 444 of Wisconsin law regulates boxing specifically but it doesn't seem to give an exemption for substantial battery. For all I know common law says that boxing is acceptable. That might be its own question.
– D M
Jan 10 '18 at 20:38
Boxing an other contact sports are specifically authorized in the context of a licensed regulatory scheme. Not anyone can consent to that.
– ohwilleke
Jan 11 '18 at 11:29
@ohwilleke so if they call it a sport it's allowed, otherwise it's illegal?
– Jankin
Nov 9 '18 at 12:26
2
2
In some states, they semi-circularly define an assault as an assault which... and leave it to common law precedent to more precisely interpret assault. So you (the citizen considering whether they might assault a person) have to read the restatement of torts to know why consent matters.
– user6726
Jan 10 '18 at 5:43
In some states, they semi-circularly define an assault as an assault which... and leave it to common law precedent to more precisely interpret assault. So you (the citizen considering whether they might assault a person) have to read the restatement of torts to know why consent matters.
– user6726
Jan 10 '18 at 5:43
1
1
Pro and amateur boxers consent to being hit before the fight. Wouldn't this be an example?
– mark b
Jan 10 '18 at 19:44
Pro and amateur boxers consent to being hit before the fight. Wouldn't this be an example?
– mark b
Jan 10 '18 at 19:44
Certainly boxers consent due to the nature of the sport, but I'm also sure that boxers inflict substantial bodily harm rather often (which makes consent irrelevant) and they aren't prosecuted. I don't know if that's due to some other law or just discretion. Chapter 444 of Wisconsin law regulates boxing specifically but it doesn't seem to give an exemption for substantial battery. For all I know common law says that boxing is acceptable. That might be its own question.
– D M
Jan 10 '18 at 20:38
Certainly boxers consent due to the nature of the sport, but I'm also sure that boxers inflict substantial bodily harm rather often (which makes consent irrelevant) and they aren't prosecuted. I don't know if that's due to some other law or just discretion. Chapter 444 of Wisconsin law regulates boxing specifically but it doesn't seem to give an exemption for substantial battery. For all I know common law says that boxing is acceptable. That might be its own question.
– D M
Jan 10 '18 at 20:38
Boxing an other contact sports are specifically authorized in the context of a licensed regulatory scheme. Not anyone can consent to that.
– ohwilleke
Jan 11 '18 at 11:29
Boxing an other contact sports are specifically authorized in the context of a licensed regulatory scheme. Not anyone can consent to that.
– ohwilleke
Jan 11 '18 at 11:29
@ohwilleke so if they call it a sport it's allowed, otherwise it's illegal?
– Jankin
Nov 9 '18 at 12:26
@ohwilleke so if they call it a sport it's allowed, otherwise it's illegal?
– Jankin
Nov 9 '18 at 12:26
|
show 1 more comment
No one can give anyone permission to break the law
That includes you giving permission for someone to hit you if, without that permission, their doing so would be illegal.
There are circumstances where it is legal to hit people, for example, in the context of a sporting event like boxing, football or another contact sport. Or in self-defence which does not extend to punching someone who provokes you: you must have a reasonable fear of immanent (or actual) violence and self-defence is limited to the minimum force necessary to resolve the threat (what this is depends on jurisdiction).
Punching someone who merely says "hit me" or "go ahead, take a swing" would be illegal, however, if the entire circumstances were such that the person to whom this was said had a reasonable apprehension of immanent violence then self-defence may make this legal. Similarly, punching someone who has hit you first is only lawful if the purpose of your punch is to stop them hitting you again or to place them under arrest for the crime of hitting you - if they hit you and ran away you are not permitted to use violence against them because you are no longer in danger unless you are subjecting them to reasonable force in the course of making an arrest.
answered Dec 16 '16 at 4:06
Dale MDale M
55.4k23579
2
Also worth noting that you shouldn't fall for the "I won't press charges" line that's portrayed in some TV shows and movies, because most jurisdictions do not require a complaining witness to proceed with assault charges. As long as they can prove the assault occurred, whether the person wants you to be charged or not, they can get you convicted of that crime.
– animuson♦
Dec 16 '16 at 7:53
IIRC there was some mention a while back on this site about boxing being a very peculiar exception to the law, but I can't find it. Can you address how boxing or MMA matches can be legal at the same time that it is not legal to strike a person with their explicit permission?
– feetwet♦
Dec 16 '16 at 20:21
4
This seems wrong in both directions. In boxing, the objective is to render the opponent unconscious via battery. No competent modern expert would agree that beating someone in the head until he can't stand up in less than ten seconds is "harmless." OTOH, if someone says, "try to hit me; I want to see if you are fast and strong enough to land a painful blow?" The stated goal in that case is to test a skill, sort of an impromptu "game." A priori nobody can say with any certainty that harm would be inflicted in the attempt, so are the parties not absolved of intent in such a case?
– feetwet♦
Dec 16 '16 at 23:33
1
@Jankin you cannot consent to something illegal - some forms of contact are illegal irrespective of consent
– Dale M
Jan 5 '17 at 5:55
1
This should not be downvoted. You can certainly be prosecuted for committing a crime even if the victim gave you permission. There are fringe cases like in contact sports but they certainly don't establish any rule to the contrary
– Shazamo Morebucks
Apr 7 '18 at 21:02
|
show 5 more comments
No one can give anyone permission to break the law
That includes you giving permission for someone to hit you if, without that permission, their doing so would be illegal.
There are circumstances where it is legal to hit people, for example, in the context of a sporting event like boxing, football or another contact sport. Or in self-defence which does not extend to punching someone who provokes you: you must have a reasonable fear of immanent (or actual) violence and self-defence is limited to the minimum force necessary to resolve the threat (what this is depends on jurisdiction).
Punching someone who merely says "hit me" or "go ahead, take a swing" would be illegal, however, if the entire circumstances were such that the person to whom this was said had a reasonable apprehension of immanent violence then self-defence may make this legal. Similarly, punching someone who has hit you first is only lawful if the purpose of your punch is to stop them hitting you again or to place them under arrest for the crime of hitting you - if they hit you and ran away you are not permitted to use violence against them because you are no longer in danger unless you are subjecting them to reasonable force in the course of making an arrest.
answered Dec 16 '16 at 4:06
Dale MDale M
55.4k23579
2
Also worth noting that you shouldn't fall for the "I won't press charges" line that's portrayed in some TV shows and movies, because most jurisdictions do not require a complaining witness to proceed with assault charges. As long as they can prove the assault occurred, whether the person wants you to be charged or not, they can get you convicted of that crime.
– animuson♦
Dec 16 '16 at 7:53
IIRC there was some mention a while back on this site about boxing being a very peculiar exception to the law, but I can't find it. Can you address how boxing or MMA matches can be legal at the same time that it is not legal to strike a person with their explicit permission?
– feetwet♦
Dec 16 '16 at 20:21
4
This seems wrong in both directions. In boxing, the objective is to render the opponent unconscious via battery. No competent modern expert would agree that beating someone in the head until he can't stand up in less than ten seconds is "harmless." OTOH, if someone says, "try to hit me; I want to see if you are fast and strong enough to land a painful blow?" The stated goal in that case is to test a skill, sort of an impromptu "game." A priori nobody can say with any certainty that harm would be inflicted in the attempt, so are the parties not absolved of intent in such a case?
– feetwet♦
Dec 16 '16 at 23:33
1
@Jankin you cannot consent to something illegal - some forms of contact are illegal irrespective of consent
– Dale M
Jan 5 '17 at 5:55
1
This should not be downvoted. You can certainly be prosecuted for committing a crime even if the victim gave you permission. There are fringe cases like in contact sports but they certainly don't establish any rule to the contrary
– Shazamo Morebucks
Apr 7 '18 at 21:02
|
show 5 more comments
No one can give anyone permission to break the law
That includes you giving permission for someone to hit you if, without that permission, their doing so would be illegal.
There are circumstances where it is legal to hit people, for example, in the context of a sporting event like boxing, football or another contact sport. Or in self-defence which does not extend to punching someone who provokes you: you must have a reasonable fear of immanent (or actual) violence and self-defence is limited to the minimum force necessary to resolve the threat (what this is depends on jurisdiction).
Punching someone who merely says "hit me" or "go ahead, take a swing" would be illegal, however, if the entire circumstances were such that the person to whom this was said had a reasonable apprehension of immanent violence then self-defence may make this legal. Similarly, punching someone who has hit you first is only lawful if the purpose of your punch is to stop them hitting you again or to place them under arrest for the crime of hitting you - if they hit you and ran away you are not permitted to use violence against them because you are no longer in danger unless you are subjecting them to reasonable force in the course of making an arrest.
answered Dec 16 '16 at 4:06
Dale MDale M
55.4k23579
No one can give anyone permission to break the law
That includes you giving permission for someone to hit you if, without that permission, their doing so would be illegal.
There are circumstances where it is legal to hit people, for example, in the context of a sporting event like boxing, football or another contact sport. Or in self-defence which does not extend to punching someone who provokes you: you must have a reasonable fear of immanent (or actual) violence and self-defence is limited to the minimum force necessary to resolve the threat (what this is depends on jurisdiction).
Punching someone who merely says "hit me" or "go ahead, take a swing" would be illegal, however, if the entire circumstances were such that the person to whom this was said had a reasonable apprehension of immanent violence then self-defence may make this legal. Similarly, punching someone who has hit you first is only lawful if the purpose of your punch is to stop them hitting you again or to place them under arrest for the crime of hitting you - if they hit you and ran away you are not permitted to use violence against them because you are no longer in danger unless you are subjecting them to reasonable force in the course of making an arrest.
answered Dec 16 '16 at 4:06
Dale MDale M
55.4k23579
answered Dec 16 '16 at 4:06
Dale MDale M
55.4k23579
answered Dec 16 '16 at 4:06
Dale MDale M
55.4k23579
answered Dec 16 '16 at 4:06
Dale MDale M
55.4k23579
55.4k23579
2
Also worth noting that you shouldn't fall for the "I won't press charges" line that's portrayed in some TV shows and movies, because most jurisdictions do not require a complaining witness to proceed with assault charges. As long as they can prove the assault occurred, whether the person wants you to be charged or not, they can get you convicted of that crime.
– animuson♦
Dec 16 '16 at 7:53
IIRC there was some mention a while back on this site about boxing being a very peculiar exception to the law, but I can't find it. Can you address how boxing or MMA matches can be legal at the same time that it is not legal to strike a person with their explicit permission?
– feetwet♦
Dec 16 '16 at 20:21
4
This seems wrong in both directions. In boxing, the objective is to render the opponent unconscious via battery. No competent modern expert would agree that beating someone in the head until he can't stand up in less than ten seconds is "harmless." OTOH, if someone says, "try to hit me; I want to see if you are fast and strong enough to land a painful blow?" The stated goal in that case is to test a skill, sort of an impromptu "game." A priori nobody can say with any certainty that harm would be inflicted in the attempt, so are the parties not absolved of intent in such a case?
– feetwet♦
Dec 16 '16 at 23:33
1
@Jankin you cannot consent to something illegal - some forms of contact are illegal irrespective of consent
– Dale M
Jan 5 '17 at 5:55
1
This should not be downvoted. You can certainly be prosecuted for committing a crime even if the victim gave you permission. There are fringe cases like in contact sports but they certainly don't establish any rule to the contrary
– Shazamo Morebucks
Apr 7 '18 at 21:02
|
show 5 more comments
2
Also worth noting that you shouldn't fall for the "I won't press charges" line that's portrayed in some TV shows and movies, because most jurisdictions do not require a complaining witness to proceed with assault charges. As long as they can prove the assault occurred, whether the person wants you to be charged or not, they can get you convicted of that crime.
– animuson♦
Dec 16 '16 at 7:53
IIRC there was some mention a while back on this site about boxing being a very peculiar exception to the law, but I can't find it. Can you address how boxing or MMA matches can be legal at the same time that it is not legal to strike a person with their explicit permission?
– feetwet♦
Dec 16 '16 at 20:21
4
This seems wrong in both directions. In boxing, the objective is to render the opponent unconscious via battery. No competent modern expert would agree that beating someone in the head until he can't stand up in less than ten seconds is "harmless." OTOH, if someone says, "try to hit me; I want to see if you are fast and strong enough to land a painful blow?" The stated goal in that case is to test a skill, sort of an impromptu "game." A priori nobody can say with any certainty that harm would be inflicted in the attempt, so are the parties not absolved of intent in such a case?
– feetwet♦
Dec 16 '16 at 23:33
1
@Jankin you cannot consent to something illegal - some forms of contact are illegal irrespective of consent
– Dale M
Jan 5 '17 at 5:55
1
This should not be downvoted. You can certainly be prosecuted for committing a crime even if the victim gave you permission. There are fringe cases like in contact sports but they certainly don't establish any rule to the contrary
– Shazamo Morebucks
Apr 7 '18 at 21:02
2
2
Also worth noting that you shouldn't fall for the "I won't press charges" line that's portrayed in some TV shows and movies, because most jurisdictions do not require a complaining witness to proceed with assault charges. As long as they can prove the assault occurred, whether the person wants you to be charged or not, they can get you convicted of that crime.
– animuson♦
Dec 16 '16 at 7:53
Also worth noting that you shouldn't fall for the "I won't press charges" line that's portrayed in some TV shows and movies, because most jurisdictions do not require a complaining witness to proceed with assault charges. As long as they can prove the assault occurred, whether the person wants you to be charged or not, they can get you convicted of that crime.
– animuson♦
Dec 16 '16 at 7:53
IIRC there was some mention a while back on this site about boxing being a very peculiar exception to the law, but I can't find it. Can you address how boxing or MMA matches can be legal at the same time that it is not legal to strike a person with their explicit permission?
– feetwet♦
Dec 16 '16 at 20:21
IIRC there was some mention a while back on this site about boxing being a very peculiar exception to the law, but I can't find it. Can you address how boxing or MMA matches can be legal at the same time that it is not legal to strike a person with their explicit permission?
– feetwet♦
Dec 16 '16 at 20:21
4
4
This seems wrong in both directions. In boxing, the objective is to render the opponent unconscious via battery. No competent modern expert would agree that beating someone in the head until he can't stand up in less than ten seconds is "harmless." OTOH, if someone says, "try to hit me; I want to see if you are fast and strong enough to land a painful blow?" The stated goal in that case is to test a skill, sort of an impromptu "game." A priori nobody can say with any certainty that harm would be inflicted in the attempt, so are the parties not absolved of intent in such a case?
– feetwet♦
Dec 16 '16 at 23:33
This seems wrong in both directions. In boxing, the objective is to render the opponent unconscious via battery. No competent modern expert would agree that beating someone in the head until he can't stand up in less than ten seconds is "harmless." OTOH, if someone says, "try to hit me; I want to see if you are fast and strong enough to land a painful blow?" The stated goal in that case is to test a skill, sort of an impromptu "game." A priori nobody can say with any certainty that harm would be inflicted in the attempt, so are the parties not absolved of intent in such a case?
– feetwet♦
Dec 16 '16 at 23:33
1
1
@Jankin you cannot consent to something illegal - some forms of contact are illegal irrespective of consent
– Dale M
Jan 5 '17 at 5:55
@Jankin you cannot consent to something illegal - some forms of contact are illegal irrespective of consent
– Dale M
Jan 5 '17 at 5:55
1
1
This should not be downvoted. You can certainly be prosecuted for committing a crime even if the victim gave you permission. There are fringe cases like in contact sports but they certainly don't establish any rule to the contrary
– Shazamo Morebucks
Apr 7 '18 at 21:02
This should not be downvoted. You can certainly be prosecuted for committing a crime even if the victim gave you permission. There are fringe cases like in contact sports but they certainly don't establish any rule to the contrary
– Shazamo Morebucks
Apr 7 '18 at 21:02
|
show 5 more comments
It's my understanding if a person agrees to fight then it's legal.
You are wrong.
So if they say "hit me" does that mean it's legal for a person to hit
them?
No.
What if they obviously mean it in a sarcastic way, or taunting?
Still no.
Is it legal for them to hit the person back if they didn't agree to
get hit?
A person can use physical force in self-defense, if necessary and proportional. But, they can't hit someone to punish someone for hitting them if the threat to their person has ended.
I ask because I've seen a lot of videos were reporters heckle
celebrities and normal people, and when they get agitated they say
"hit me" or "go ahead, take a swing". Would it be illegal if they did?
It would be illegal if they did.
answered Jan 11 '18 at 11:26
ohwillekeohwilleke
50.8k257128
1
If you cannot consent to a fight then why isn't boxing and martial arts illegal?
– Jankin
Apr 8 '18 at 11:28
1
@Jankin Because they are specifically singled out as exceptions under regulatory schemes.
– ohwilleke
Apr 8 '18 at 18:46
add a comment |
It's my understanding if a person agrees to fight then it's legal.
You are wrong.
So if they say "hit me" does that mean it's legal for a person to hit
them?
No.
What if they obviously mean it in a sarcastic way, or taunting?
Still no.
Is it legal for them to hit the person back if they didn't agree to
get hit?
A person can use physical force in self-defense, if necessary and proportional. But, they can't hit someone to punish someone for hitting them if the threat to their person has ended.
I ask because I've seen a lot of videos were reporters heckle
celebrities and normal people, and when they get agitated they say
"hit me" or "go ahead, take a swing". Would it be illegal if they did?
It would be illegal if they did.
answered Jan 11 '18 at 11:26
ohwillekeohwilleke
50.8k257128
1
If you cannot consent to a fight then why isn't boxing and martial arts illegal?
– Jankin
Apr 8 '18 at 11:28
1
@Jankin Because they are specifically singled out as exceptions under regulatory schemes.
– ohwilleke
Apr 8 '18 at 18:46
add a comment |
It's my understanding if a person agrees to fight then it's legal.
You are wrong.
So if they say "hit me" does that mean it's legal for a person to hit
them?
No.
What if they obviously mean it in a sarcastic way, or taunting?
Still no.
Is it legal for them to hit the person back if they didn't agree to
get hit?
A person can use physical force in self-defense, if necessary and proportional. But, they can't hit someone to punish someone for hitting them if the threat to their person has ended.
I ask because I've seen a lot of videos were reporters heckle
celebrities and normal people, and when they get agitated they say
"hit me" or "go ahead, take a swing". Would it be illegal if they did?
It would be illegal if they did.
answered Jan 11 '18 at 11:26
ohwillekeohwilleke
50.8k257128
It's my understanding if a person agrees to fight then it's legal.
You are wrong.
So if they say "hit me" does that mean it's legal for a person to hit
them?
No.
What if they obviously mean it in a sarcastic way, or taunting?
Still no.
Is it legal for them to hit the person back if they didn't agree to
get hit?
A person can use physical force in self-defense, if necessary and proportional. But, they can't hit someone to punish someone for hitting them if the threat to their person has ended.
I ask because I've seen a lot of videos were reporters heckle
celebrities and normal people, and when they get agitated they say
"hit me" or "go ahead, take a swing". Would it be illegal if they did?
It would be illegal if they did.
answered Jan 11 '18 at 11:26
ohwillekeohwilleke
50.8k257128
answered Jan 11 '18 at 11:26
ohwillekeohwilleke
50.8k257128
answered Jan 11 '18 at 11:26
ohwillekeohwilleke
50.8k257128
answered Jan 11 '18 at 11:26
ohwillekeohwilleke
50.8k257128
50.8k257128
1
If you cannot consent to a fight then why isn't boxing and martial arts illegal?
– Jankin
Apr 8 '18 at 11:28
1
@Jankin Because they are specifically singled out as exceptions under regulatory schemes.
– ohwilleke
Apr 8 '18 at 18:46
add a comment |
1
If you cannot consent to a fight then why isn't boxing and martial arts illegal?
– Jankin
Apr 8 '18 at 11:28
1
@Jankin Because they are specifically singled out as exceptions under regulatory schemes.
– ohwilleke
Apr 8 '18 at 18:46
1
1
If you cannot consent to a fight then why isn't boxing and martial arts illegal?
– Jankin
Apr 8 '18 at 11:28
If you cannot consent to a fight then why isn't boxing and martial arts illegal?
– Jankin
Apr 8 '18 at 11:28
1
1
@Jankin Because they are specifically singled out as exceptions under regulatory schemes.
– ohwilleke
Apr 8 '18 at 18:46
@Jankin Because they are specifically singled out as exceptions under regulatory schemes.
– ohwilleke
Apr 8 '18 at 18:46
add a comment |
What if you are playing a game which involves hitting on hand would that be assault
answered 15 mins ago
Random personRandom person
1
New contributor
Random person is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
What if you are playing a game which involves hitting on hand would that be assault
answered 15 mins ago
Random personRandom person
1
New contributor
Random person is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
What if you are playing a game which involves hitting on hand would that be assault
answered 15 mins ago
Random personRandom person
1
New contributor
Random person is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
What if you are playing a game which involves hitting on hand would that be assault
answered 15 mins ago
Random personRandom person
1
New contributor
Random person is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 15 mins ago
Random personRandom person
1
New contributor
Random person is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 15 mins ago
Random personRandom person
1
answered 15 mins ago
Random personRandom person
1
1
New contributor
Random person is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Random person is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Random person is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
Many of you are not very good lawyers. It's very simple to understand battery if you just read your statutes. It literally depends on what state the battery occurs in and what the state defines as a battery.
For example, in the state of Florida, there are various defenses to battery Charges:
Consent (Yes, it's a real thing)
Mutual Combat
Insufficient intent
Self Defense
Intent is an essential element of a battery. Therefore, if the victim consented to the touching, no criminal battery can occur. Likewise, in the right circumstances, the process of mutual combat could be raised. Under this process, if two (or more) people mutually engage in a fight, neither should be charged with battery because they both agreed to be touched or struck by the other.
So, rather than just blatantly tell someone they are wrong, one should consider all of the elements, the state in which the incident occurred, and any other extenuating factors, rather than just jump on this site and tell someone they're wrong. Otherwise, I guess that would make YOU wrong. I hope you feel a little less ignorant. Remember, ignorance is not stupidity, it's lacking the proper knowledge. Yes, that would be you.
answered Apr 7 '18 at 21:00
Kell MacDonaldKell MacDonald
111
4
You could do less with the pompous talking-down, and more with providing resources to support what you're claiming, especially as it contradicts the quoted text of at least one law regarding battery.
– Nij
Apr 7 '18 at 22:48
add a comment |
Many of you are not very good lawyers. It's very simple to understand battery if you just read your statutes. It literally depends on what state the battery occurs in and what the state defines as a battery.
For example, in the state of Florida, there are various defenses to battery Charges:
Consent (Yes, it's a real thing)
Mutual Combat
Insufficient intent
Self Defense
Intent is an essential element of a battery. Therefore, if the victim consented to the touching, no criminal battery can occur. Likewise, in the right circumstances, the process of mutual combat could be raised. Under this process, if two (or more) people mutually engage in a fight, neither should be charged with battery because they both agreed to be touched or struck by the other.
So, rather than just blatantly tell someone they are wrong, one should consider all of the elements, the state in which the incident occurred, and any other extenuating factors, rather than just jump on this site and tell someone they're wrong. Otherwise, I guess that would make YOU wrong. I hope you feel a little less ignorant. Remember, ignorance is not stupidity, it's lacking the proper knowledge. Yes, that would be you.
answered Apr 7 '18 at 21:00
Kell MacDonaldKell MacDonald
111
4
You could do less with the pompous talking-down, and more with providing resources to support what you're claiming, especially as it contradicts the quoted text of at least one law regarding battery.
– Nij
Apr 7 '18 at 22:48
add a comment |
Many of you are not very good lawyers. It's very simple to understand battery if you just read your statutes. It literally depends on what state the battery occurs in and what the state defines as a battery.
For example, in the state of Florida, there are various defenses to battery Charges:
Consent (Yes, it's a real thing)
Mutual Combat
Insufficient intent
Self Defense
Intent is an essential element of a battery. Therefore, if the victim consented to the touching, no criminal battery can occur. Likewise, in the right circumstances, the process of mutual combat could be raised. Under this process, if two (or more) people mutually engage in a fight, neither should be charged with battery because they both agreed to be touched or struck by the other.
So, rather than just blatantly tell someone they are wrong, one should consider all of the elements, the state in which the incident occurred, and any other extenuating factors, rather than just jump on this site and tell someone they're wrong. Otherwise, I guess that would make YOU wrong. I hope you feel a little less ignorant. Remember, ignorance is not stupidity, it's lacking the proper knowledge. Yes, that would be you.
answered Apr 7 '18 at 21:00
Kell MacDonaldKell MacDonald
111
Many of you are not very good lawyers. It's very simple to understand battery if you just read your statutes. It literally depends on what state the battery occurs in and what the state defines as a battery.
For example, in the state of Florida, there are various defenses to battery Charges:
Consent (Yes, it's a real thing)
Mutual Combat
Insufficient intent
Self Defense
Intent is an essential element of a battery. Therefore, if the victim consented to the touching, no criminal battery can occur. Likewise, in the right circumstances, the process of mutual combat could be raised. Under this process, if two (or more) people mutually engage in a fight, neither should be charged with battery because they both agreed to be touched or struck by the other.
So, rather than just blatantly tell someone they are wrong, one should consider all of the elements, the state in which the incident occurred, and any other extenuating factors, rather than just jump on this site and tell someone they're wrong. Otherwise, I guess that would make YOU wrong. I hope you feel a little less ignorant. Remember, ignorance is not stupidity, it's lacking the proper knowledge. Yes, that would be you.
answered Apr 7 '18 at 21:00
Kell MacDonaldKell MacDonald
111
answered Apr 7 '18 at 21:00
Kell MacDonaldKell MacDonald
111
answered Apr 7 '18 at 21:00
Kell MacDonaldKell MacDonald
111
answered Apr 7 '18 at 21:00
Kell MacDonaldKell MacDonald
111
111
4
You could do less with the pompous talking-down, and more with providing resources to support what you're claiming, especially as it contradicts the quoted text of at least one law regarding battery.
– Nij
Apr 7 '18 at 22:48
add a comment |
4
You could do less with the pompous talking-down, and more with providing resources to support what you're claiming, especially as it contradicts the quoted text of at least one law regarding battery.
– Nij
Apr 7 '18 at 22:48
4
4
You could do less with the pompous talking-down, and more with providing resources to support what you're claiming, especially as it contradicts the quoted text of at least one law regarding battery.
– Nij
Apr 7 '18 at 22:48
You could do less with the pompous talking-down, and more with providing resources to support what you're claiming, especially as it contradicts the quoted text of at least one law regarding battery.
– Nij
Apr 7 '18 at 22:48
add a comment |
Battery | Wex Legal Dictionary / Encyclopedia | LII / Legal Information ...
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/batteryDefinition.
In criminal law, a physical act that results in harmful or offensive contact with another's person without that person's consent.
In tort law, the intentional causation of harmful or offensive contact with another's person without that person's consent.
With consent the act is not illegal. That is the law.
answered Aug 25 '18 at 2:34
Bonnie PeeleBonnie Peele
1
A legal dictionary cannot accurately represent the law in all areas.
– D M
Nov 10 '18 at 0:50
add a comment |
Battery | Wex Legal Dictionary / Encyclopedia | LII / Legal Information ...
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/batteryDefinition.
In criminal law, a physical act that results in harmful or offensive contact with another's person without that person's consent.
In tort law, the intentional causation of harmful or offensive contact with another's person without that person's consent.
With consent the act is not illegal. That is the law.
answered Aug 25 '18 at 2:34
Bonnie PeeleBonnie Peele
1
A legal dictionary cannot accurately represent the law in all areas.
– D M
Nov 10 '18 at 0:50
add a comment |
Battery | Wex Legal Dictionary / Encyclopedia | LII / Legal Information ...
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/batteryDefinition.
In criminal law, a physical act that results in harmful or offensive contact with another's person without that person's consent.
In tort law, the intentional causation of harmful or offensive contact with another's person without that person's consent.
With consent the act is not illegal. That is the law.
answered Aug 25 '18 at 2:34
Bonnie PeeleBonnie Peele
1
Battery | Wex Legal Dictionary / Encyclopedia | LII / Legal Information ...
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/batteryDefinition.
In criminal law, a physical act that results in harmful or offensive contact with another's person without that person's consent.
In tort law, the intentional causation of harmful or offensive contact with another's person without that person's consent.
With consent the act is not illegal. That is the law.
answered Aug 25 '18 at 2:34
Bonnie PeeleBonnie Peele
1
answered Aug 25 '18 at 2:34
Bonnie PeeleBonnie Peele
1
answered Aug 25 '18 at 2:34
Bonnie PeeleBonnie Peele
1
answered Aug 25 '18 at 2:34
Bonnie PeeleBonnie Peele
1
1
A legal dictionary cannot accurately represent the law in all areas.
– D M
Nov 10 '18 at 0:50
add a comment |
A legal dictionary cannot accurately represent the law in all areas.
– D M
Nov 10 '18 at 0:50
A legal dictionary cannot accurately represent the law in all areas.
– D M
Nov 10 '18 at 0:50
A legal dictionary cannot accurately represent the law in all areas.
– D M
Nov 10 '18 at 0:50
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Law Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f15860%2fare-you-allowed-to-strike-a-person-if-they-say-you-can%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
