• Man arrested for throwing glass of water at Steve King
    33 replies, posted
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/man-arrested-throwing-glass-water-controversial-iowa-rep/story?id=61888097 A man was arrested Friday for throwing a glass of water in the face of controversial Rep. Steve King at a local restaurant, police said. Blake Gibbins, 26, allegedly approached King while he was eating lunch at Mineral City Mill and Grill restaurant in Fort Dodge, Iowa. He asked King if he was the congressman and then threw a glass of water on him, Fort Dodge police said in a press release. The release says others were also hit by the water, but no one was injured. Gibbins was arrested on two counts of misdemeanor simple assault and one count of disorderly conduct, police said. King, R-Iowa, has come under fire -- even by members of his own party -- for comments construed as racist and homophobic. King even denigrated Hurricane Katrina survivors just this week when he told a town hall in Iowa, where he stated all they did was ask for help from FEMA, while people in Iowa help each other.
one is protected speech the other is assault.
So wait, he just sloshed water on him? That's considered assault?
shoulda egged the cunt
#WaterBoy?
How long until we get the epic team up of Waterman and Eggboy?
Gosh can you fucking libs see that throwing dihydrogen monoxide at people is dangerous! Look at that name! How can it be anything but dangerous!
I mean yeah it is. Not that I'd shed any tears for Steve King getting a bit wet but it shouldn't be so hard to imagine why some random guy throwing water at you would be considered assault.
I remember someone saying that that's generally treated as assault because it could be acid and generate lots of panic, which creates more injuries.
Upon reading the title, I thought they meant the author of the same name. I was just like...why though?
He could've drowned, this should be attempted murder. (I do definitely understand the charges though as otherwise it'd be legally okay for anyone to throw water at anyone without consequence).
I'm down for people being charged if police are called but assault is too much. Throwing liquids at people in this day and age where it can easily be acid or something similar can be pretty serious, but when it really is just water, maybe a breach of the peace or something is more appropriate.
When you read up on it, he's only being charged with "misdemeanor simple assault," which, to me, makes it sound like at worst he'll get a slap on the wrist and/or some community service hours to fulfill. Just shortening it to assault makes it sound like he tried to glass the dude, or beat the shit out of him.
In many places assault is just making someone feel uncomfortable via threat or implication of violence or aggressive unwanted touching. That's why pointing a gun at a person is Assault with a Deadly Weapon. Physical violence instead falls under Battery.
What if the water was boiling, though. We condemn parents who smack their children's hands for misbehaving, but splashing water on other people should be permissible?
Maybe we can stop condemning the parents?
Okay but these are things that affect the charge, not the charge reflects the possibilities like this The charge reflects "he dumped water on him," not "he dumped water on him THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN BOILING"
Speaking from experience (...yep ), they don't charge you with assault although they technically can. Based on context it'd either be NFA + a formal apology or a caution.
There's a story here that needs told.
If the water was boiling, then it would make sense to charge them this way, it doesn't make sense to charge them for something that is a what if scenario.
You're deflecting what I said. We condemn parents for literally smacking a hand, not beating them mercilessly. Yet people are okay with this act here. Probably because he's a despicable person but that doesn't warrant a physical attack regardless of the manner.
Smacking a kids hand is still very very very much different than throwing water at someone. One is physically hurting someone who doesn't fully understand the consequences of their actions and which repeated actions can be seriously harmful to their mental and emotional health, whereas the other one is literally just making an adult slightly uncomfortable for a little while. Comparing the two is absurd.
Spoiled fruits and vegetables are also viable.
Oh, I drunkenly threw a drink over someone. They were petty and filed a police report.
Assault is defined as unwanted physical contact. Pain or form of contact is irrelevant. Would you be upset if someone walked up to you and said, "Oh hey aren't you TornadoAP?" and after confirming to the stranger, suddenly get splashed water upon with zero expectation of that? I'd call bullshit if you say you wouldn't be at the very least irritated, if not pissed.
That's not the point. The point is you're comparing child abuse to someone throwing a glass of water at an adult. I'd be a bit pissed but aside from being uncomfortable for a bit due to being wet, nobody was hurt or harmed and so instead of trying to get them charged and arrested and punished I'd try to work out what the problem is with them and solve it myself, like a normal decent human being.
I doubt you or anyone would be able to do that calmly, and if the person maliciously dumped water on you it's unlikely they are willing to discuss the problem calmly either, which leaves the only real option of filing assault charges, just like --
This is why something like egg kid could never happen in the US. Everyone would get up in arms about the definition of assault and argue what is free speech.
Can you please respond to my actual fucking points rather than dancing around the issue? We can get stuck an endless series of what ifs, that's not going to be doing anything productive.
As misguided as the comparison to child abuse was, he did respond to your points. EmperorScoripous appealed to the legal definition of assault, which is valid; if someone wants to try charging the water-thrower with assault, they can because that meets the definition of assault. Whether you personally think that should be strong enough grounds for legal action is irrelevant.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.