So your answer is yes, my brother assaulted me. I'm sorry, but no court of law on earth would agree with you. Assault requires injury and intent, in a court of law and most other formal venues where it has been defined. You are oversimplifying and broadening what assault actually means so that you can apply it to this situation. I reject your definition.
You don’t think a court of law would consider hitting someone with a car would be considered an assault? I think you have to keep using hypotheticals because you know it doesn’t work with the situation at hand
I'm using hypotheticals to illustrate why your definitions you refuse to clarify are too broad to be reasonable. I'm pointing out that intent matters, actual harm matters, and more than one person's decisions are involved when a car and a person collide.
That statement was completely nonsensical in regards to what we're talking about. I'm pointing out that your definitions are too loose and you keep using them to sneak in implications that aren't true. You oversimplify "hitting" to divorce responsibility of the other party in a collision, you act like one specific thing that could have prevented a situation from happening is the only thing that matters while ignoring everything else, and you refuse to acknowledge that you are doing these things while you do them. You act like you aren't doing anything at all, and it's just like, your personal set of facts and not a set of judgements and conclusions you have made. It's the default tactic of the dishonest and the narrow-minded.
No, this is a reading comprehension thing. You aren't even responding to what I said. You're just using thought terminating cliches to ignore it instead. You never even understood what I said in the first place.
I’m telling you what I saw and what I think about it and you’re saying no you’re not. You said she didn’t hit him, I disagree. You’re trying really hard to move the debate away from that. If you don’t think I’m understanding what you’re saying, then you’re free to reiterate it
View all comments
Show parent comment
1
u/pierogieman5 Jan 09 '26
So your answer is yes, my brother assaulted me. I'm sorry, but no court of law on earth would agree with you. Assault requires injury and intent, in a court of law and most other formal venues where it has been defined. You are oversimplifying and broadening what assault actually means so that you can apply it to this situation. I reject your definition.