Quote:
Originally Posted by Rapini
callipygian, you're simply wrong about "fighting words" justifying physical violence. My guess is you don't know how to explain whatever it is you're trying to explain because you're wrong. There does exist a bright line that words alone never legally justify physical violence. You can google that if you want instead of directing me to google an unrelated constitutional law concept when we're discussing criminal law.
You're really going to make me Google this for you?
You live in Pennsylvania, or at least play there, right? You know what, even if you don't, I suppose you'll have to take my good word that I didn't cherry pick Pennsylvania for its unusual laws.
1. Verbally instigating a fight falls under PA disorderly conduct laws, which can be treated as high as a class 3 misdemeanor.
http://statelaws.findlaw.com/pennsyl...duct-laws.html
2. Simple assault falls under obvious laws against such behavior, the most trivial of which is fighting with mutual consent, which is also a class 3 misdemeanor.
https://www.themcshanefirm.com/pa-cr...-assault-laws/
---
ETA: I didn't check to see whether Pennsylvania has "stand your ground" type laws, but that's another avenue in which these issues tend to come up. Typically, the verbal threat has to be accompanied by some kind of show of force, e.g., someone threatens to cut you while holding a knife. But the end result is the same - the aggressor of physical violence is not liable for initiating contact, the verbal threat is taken on par with a physical action.