Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(UPI)   "Put down that leaf blower and back away from the weapon"   (upi.com ) divider line
    More: Strange, American Sign Language, shorthand  
•       •       •

5101 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Sep 2012 at 11:59 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



31 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2012-09-03 07:19:38 AM  
i.imgur.com
Photo of the suspect.
 
2012-09-03 11:28:18 AM  

fallout.neoseeker.com



But did he have the vacuum cleaner and firehose nozzle?
 
2012-09-03 12:03:58 PM  
The second item on that page might have been a better submission for Fark...
 
2012-09-03 12:07:43 PM  
Jennie overdo it at Dragon*Con again?!
 
2012-09-03 12:09:28 PM  
What a rambling mess of an "article."
 
2012-09-03 12:13:03 PM  

AndreMA: The second item on that page might have been a better submission for Fark...


THIS.

The first story is simple assault. Whether it's using a leaf blower or just threatening to shove somebody, it meets the legal requirements.

The second story is a bit more Fark-worthy... a 3-year old deaf kid can't sign his own name because one of the symbols resembles a "gun" (i.e. pointing his index finger).

i.imgur.com
 
2012-09-03 12:17:42 PM  

LesserEvil: The first story is simple assault. Whether it's using a leaf blower or just threatening to shove somebody, it meets the legal requirements.



There needs to be some changes to the legal requirements for simple assault then, this lady obviously wasn't harmed in any way at all. When you hear a lady is assaulted, you are fully expecting to hear about her being attacked in a violent manner. Pointing a leaf blower at someone, in any manner, is hardly an assault.

"Oh noes, I got dust on me, stick this man with a violent crime sentence on his permanent record so he can't get a job anymore!"

/Stupid coont
 
2012-09-03 12:22:44 PM  

D_Evans45: There needs to be some changes to the legal requirements for simple assault then, this lady obviously wasn't harmed in any way at all. When you hear a lady is assaulted, you are fully expecting to hear about her being attacked in a violent manner.


That's battery.

"In law, assault is a crime which involves causing a victim to apprehend violence. The term is often confused with battery, which involves physical contact."
 
2012-09-03 12:23:21 PM  

D_Evans45: LesserEvil: The first story is simple assault. Whether it's using a leaf blower or just threatening to shove somebody, it meets the legal requirements.


There needs to be some changes to the legal requirements for simple assault then, this lady obviously wasn't harmed in any way at all. When you hear a lady is assaulted, you are fully expecting to hear about her being attacked in a violent manner. Pointing a leaf blower at someone, in any manner, is hardly an assault.

"Oh noes, I got dust on me, stick this man with a violent crime sentence on his permanent record so he can't get a job anymore!"

/Stupid coont


another biatch that needs to beat with a football bat
 
2012-09-03 12:26:39 PM  
Carraway said she was assaulted with flying debris and suffered from respiratory problems afterward
\

Reality: The coughed lightly once from dust.

Lawyer Speak: We're going to see if we can sue this guy for pain and suffering from this assault.
 
2012-09-03 12:27:57 PM  

D_Evans45: LesserEvil: The first story is simple assault. Whether it's using a leaf blower or just threatening to shove somebody, it meets the legal requirements.


There needs to be some changes to the legal requirements for simple assault then, this lady obviously wasn't harmed in any way at all. When you hear a lady is assaulted, you are fully expecting to hear about her being attacked in a violent manner. Pointing a leaf blower at someone, in any manner, is hardly an assault.

"Oh noes, I got dust on me, stick this man with a violent crime sentence on his permanent record so he can't get a job anymore!"

/Stupid coont


The legal definition of assault has been around for centuries. Perhaps you confuse it with "battery" which refers to actual contact being made. "Assault" si the act of threatening somebody, "battery" is the act of carrying out the threat.

In short, this woman complained about debris hitting her car from landscaper's action, and he decided to be an ass about it, escalating the asshattery. Granted, we'd probably find it a funny moment in a movie, but a lot of things you see in the movies and TV constitute assault (and many times, battery). Cases like this are prosecutes all the time, and there is nothing at all odd about it. The woman might have been a bit snootish complaining about the debris hitting her car, but the leaf-blower buy crossed the line with his response. Stupidity all around, but the guy gets the charges for carrying it to the next level.

The case of the kid with the sign language issue, on the other hand, is a great example of asinine political correctness gone rampant, and definitely Fark-worthy.
 
2012-09-03 12:36:28 PM  

D_Evans45: LesserEvil: The first story is simple assault. Whether it's using a leaf blower or just threatening to shove somebody, it meets the legal requirements.


There needs to be some changes to the legal requirements for simple assault then, this lady obviously wasn't harmed in any way at all. When you hear a lady is assaulted, you are fully expecting to hear about her being attacked in a violent manner. Pointing a leaf blower at someone, in any manner, is hardly an assault.

"Oh noes, I got dust on me, stick this man with a violent crime sentence on his permanent record so he can't get a job anymore!"

/Stupid coont


Actually, you can get some fairly serious eye injuries from leaf blowers or other wind producing devices. Your eyeballs aren't really built to withstand solid objects moving at high speeds. Of course, this depends on the distance between the subject and the leaf blower and the amount of particulate matter being projected at them, but I don't think it is acceptable to propel potentially perilous projectiles at people.
 
2012-09-03 12:37:33 PM  
Good thing he don't have a gun.

/holy, holy
 
2012-09-03 12:39:53 PM  

LesserEvil: The legal definition of assault has been around for centuries. Perhaps you confuse it with "battery" which refers to actual contact being made. "Assault" si the act of threatening somebody, "battery" is the act of carrying out the threat.



That may be the long standing legal definition, but when 99% of the population hears someone is assaulted, they assume someone was attacked. You think all the airheaded HR secretaries out there know the difference? When someone sees "assault" on your record, they think you hurt somebody. This man would be better of charged with disturbing the peace.
 
2012-09-03 12:42:26 PM  

Great Justice: Of course, this depends on the distance between the subject and the leaf blower and the amount of particulate matter being projected at them, but I don't think it is acceptable to propel potentially perilous projectiles at people.



You must be the type of pedant who would escalate a minor leaf blower incident into a full fledged assault case. This perilous danger you're imagining is a weakass leafblower with a tiny motor. Whats it kicking up, 1/3rd of a horsepower worth of leaf fragments and dust particles?! Whooooaaa!!!
 
2012-09-03 12:45:04 PM  

Fizpez: Carraway said she was assaulted with flying debris and suffered from respiratory problems afterward

Reality: The coughed lightly once from dust.

Lawyer Speak: We're going to see if we can sue this guy for pain and suffering from this assault.



Glad someone else in this thread has common sense.
 
2012-09-03 12:46:12 PM  

D_Evans45: Great Justice: Of course, this depends on the distance between the subject and the leaf blower and the amount of particulate matter being projected at them, but I don't think it is acceptable to propel potentially perilous projectiles at people.

You must be the type of pedant who would escalate a minor leaf blower incident into a full fledged assault case. This perilous danger you're imagining is a weakass leafblower with a tiny motor. Whats it kicking up, 1/3rd of a horsepower worth of leaf fragments and dust particles?! Whooooaaa!!!


Funny how we don't really know those details, when they make all the difference. Leaf blower producers have to put warnings on leaf blowers about not pointing them at yourself and others. Why do you think that is?
 
2012-09-03 12:47:37 PM  

D_Evans45: LesserEvil: The legal definition of assault has been around for centuries. Perhaps you confuse it with "battery" which refers to actual contact being made. "Assault" si the act of threatening somebody, "battery" is the act of carrying out the threat.


That may be the long standing legal definition, but when 99% of the population hears someone is assaulted, they assume someone was attacked. You think all the airheaded HR secretaries out there know the difference? When someone sees "assault" on your record, they think you hurt somebody. This man would be better of charged with disturbing the peace.


Your misunderstanding of the term doesn't change the definition. A crime was committed. The guy is getting charged. Assault is assault, no matter what YOU think. In fact, ignorance is no excuse in the eyes of the law.... you might want to consider that if you ever have the urge to assault somebody in response to something another person says that offends you or upsets you in some irrational way.

It is likely he'll get a very short probation, and it's not a felony. Perhaps Mr. Leaf Blower should take that into consideration next time he decides to escalate a situation?
 
2012-09-03 12:47:56 PM  

LesserEvil: AndreMA: The second item on that page might have been a better submission for Fark...

THIS.

The first story is simple assault. Whether it's using a leaf blower or just threatening to shove somebody, it meets the legal requirements.

The second story is a bit more Fark-worthy... a 3-year old deaf kid can't sign his own name because one of the symbols resembles a "gun" (i.e. pointing his index finger).

[i.imgur.com image 630x379]


That story was greenlit over a week ago.
 
2012-09-03 01:02:05 PM  

Great Justice: Funny how we don't really know those details, when they make all the difference. Leaf blower producers have to put warnings on leaf blowers about not pointing them at yourself and others. Why do you think that is?



There are warning labels on the coffee you buy in the morning, the food you put in your kids mouths, the instruction manual of your video games. Your point?

A leafblower is about as capable as producing the perilous danger you whined about as the frisbee my dog is chewing on right now.

Im not saying this asshat was justified or that he shouldnt be charged with anything. Charging him with assault for blowing some dust at the broad is a bit much though, he's gonna carry that assault charge around with him on his permanent record. That makes him look like a violent offender, isnt the actual reality.
 
2012-09-03 01:09:17 PM  

LesserEvil: Your misunderstanding of the term doesn't change the definition. A crime was committed. The guy is getting charged. Assault is assault, no matter what YOU think.



And youll notice my original post stated that the definition of assault needs to change or something then. It isn't just my misunderstanding of the term, either. 99% of the population will assume someone was attacked if assault is mentioned. While the strict legal definition of assault may only imply a threat, the population as a whole accepts the word "assault" to mean attack. If the population as a whole confuses assault with actual battery, something needs to be changed.

Quick Fark poll, when you hear someone was assaulted, do you automatically think
 
2012-09-03 01:10:56 PM  
Quck Fark poll, if you hear someone was assaulted, do you think they were merely threatened?
 
2012-09-03 01:31:11 PM  
I work outside with power equipment and everybody on the crew gets the blower pointed at them at full throttle a couple times per day. Not only does it get a lot of the sawdust off you but it cools you down as well.

And unless you have the blower sitting on a pile of dirt, it's not going to pick up dirt or other debris to shoot out at somebody. The woman is a coont and full of shiat.
 
2012-09-03 03:18:49 PM  
So, what if he had a little hose from the fuel tank to the end of the nozzle.
And a little valve to direct some of that fuel out the business end of the leaf blower in a fine mist.
And an extra spark plug down at the end...

See, she didn't know he didn't have all that stuff. So she felt threatened.
It's a shame to disappoint people; something should be done about this.
 
2012-09-03 05:48:08 PM  
Leaf Blower = Mexican bagepipes
 
2012-09-03 06:03:04 PM  

D_Evans45: Quck Fark poll, if you hear someone was assaulted, do you think they were merely threatened?


Yes, of course.

The other phrase you hear all the time is "assault and battery". Even if you aren't educated, you have to wonder what the difference is, and finding out is easy.

Also, there is nothing "merely" about assault. The charge is not reserved for people that had no intent of following through. If a guys threatens to stab you with a knife if you don't give him your wallet, or worse takes a swipe and misses, it's still a violent crime.
 
2012-09-03 07:58:19 PM  

LindenFark: D_Evans45:...

The other phrase you hear all the time is "assault and battery". Even if you aren't educated, you have to wonder what the difference is, and finding out is easy.

Also, there is nothing "merely" about assault. The charge is not reserved for people that had no intent of following through. If a guys threatens to stab you with a knife if you don't give him your wallet, or worse takes a swipe and misses, it's still a violent crime.



I was using "merely" to differentiate between something as minor as a simple threat and something as major as full blown physical assault, anyone who isn't a pedant could gather as much.

You can keep foolishly plugging on about the nuanced legal definitions, I obviously know the difference now, the fact is that 99% of the population assumes someone is attacked when they hear about someone being assaulted. Dictionary.com's first entry for the word "assault" is "a sudden, violent attack; onslaught." That's what jumps to everyones mind when you say assault, not some obscure legal definition that does or does not include battery.
 
2012-09-03 09:34:19 PM  

D_Evans45: LesserEvil: The legal definition of assault has been around for centuries. Perhaps you confuse it with "battery" which refers to actual contact being made. "Assault" si the act of threatening somebody, "battery" is the act of carrying out the threat.


That may be the long standing legal definition, but when 99% of the population hears someone is assaulted, they assume someone was attacked. You think all the airheaded HR secretaries out there know the difference? When someone sees "assault" on your record, they think you hurt somebody. This man would be better of charged with disturbing the peace.


You think there's anything new about 99% of the people being wrong about 99% of stuff 99% of the time?

How about you actually try learning something new today instead of biatching the the English definition of a word isn't what you think it should be.

/Why do I suspect D_Evans45 has something embarrassing in his police record that keeps him from getting a better job?
 
2012-09-03 09:47:57 PM  
zzzzzzzzz
 
2012-09-06 04:34:16 AM  

D_Evans45: LindenFark: D_Evans45:...

The other phrase you hear all the time is "assault and battery". Even if you aren't educated, you have to wonder what the difference is, and finding out is easy.

Also, there is nothing "merely" about assault. The charge is not reserved for people that had no intent of following through. If a guys threatens to stab you with a knife if you don't give him your wallet, or worse takes a swipe and misses, it's still a violent crime.


I was using "merely" to differentiate between something as minor as a simple threat and something as major as full blown physical assault, anyone who isn't a pedant could gather as much.


I did indeed gather as much, but I'm calling out your question as leading: "My distinguished colleague would have you believe that 'assault' is merely a simple threat. I may be just a simple country lawyer, but does that sound right to you?" For bonus points, you used the word "assault" in your rebuttal. In reality, I know that assault can range from cocking a fist to shooting a gun and missing. "Everyone" knows the term "assault with a deadly weapon" and they would not call that a minor, simple threat.

You can keep foolishly plugging on about the nuanced legal definitions, I obviously know the difference now,

Foolish, perhaps, if the goal is to change your mind. I'm not sure how I "keep plugging on" in my Boobies, unless that was an invitation to make a second post, in which case you're welcome.

the fact is that 99% of the population assumes someone is attacked when they hear about someone being assaulted. Dictionary.com's first entry for the word "assault" is "a sudden, violent attack; onslaught." That's what jumps to everyones mind when you say assault, not some obscure legal definition that does or does not include battery.

It's hardly obscure if you've watched a few episodes of Law and Order or any other police/court procedural. You seem to like making sweeping generalizations about what everybody knows and assumes and what jumps to their minds. Everything one knows is obvious. Everything one doesn't know is obscure. I think you make the mistake of assuming it's a "fact" that your knowledge set matches 99% of the population.

You asked for a poll, I responded with an honest answer. Now you're complaining because 100% of poll respondents gave you an answer contrary to your position. Granted the sample size is too small, but so far all the data says you're wrong! The problem is, you've set yourself up to fail, because even if more than half the respondents gave you responses you liked, to support your statements, 99% of respondents would have to agree.
 
2012-09-06 04:36:55 AM  
Ha! Pwned by the filter! I obviously meant:

I'm not sure how I "keep plugging on" in my only post,
 
Displayed 31 of 31 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report