Main > Everything Else
Hallowindow III
shmokes:
--- Quote from: ChadTower on September 23, 2009, 07:47:34 am ---
Assult implies intent most of the time. I don't know that "have some jolly ranchers" is the same as "I intend to harm you". Just don't shoot it at them out of a potato cannon and you'll be fine.
--- End quote ---
Intent would definitely be present in this scenario for the tort assault (though probably not for criminal assault). You don't need to "intend to harm someone"; you just need to intend to cause an apprehension of harmful or offensive contact. And what you actually intended is immaterial. The question is whether a reasonable person would expect his actions to cause someone to apprehend imminent harmful or offensive contact. Apprehension is similarly measured. The question is whether a reasonable person would apprehend harmful or offensive contact. In this case you might run into trouble because it's likely easier to create an apprehension of harmful contact in the mind of a child than an adult, and you are presumably firing your candy at children.
ChadTower:
That's why everyone hates lawyers... they can even make throwing candy at a trick or treater sound like you went after him with a Buick.
Fordman:
But really,
Why throw candy at trick or treaters to begin with? If you shoot it out of a potato gun, no one will likely come back year after year. If you dont want to give candy, then leave the porch light off and or ignore the knocks. Chances are the 'word' on the street will be, dont go to that guys house!
If you invite people to your house, suchs as TOT's, then shoot them with a potato gun full of candy, then you open yourself up to assault because they didnt tresspass, you invited them with honsest intentions. I'll bet if you shoot a kid with a potato gun, you'll get a visit from local/county police within minutes and maybe some street justice!
Fordman
ChadTower:
No one said he intended to use a potato gun. ::)
shmokes:
Is it too late to suggest the potato gun.
If it makes you feel better I was speaking only about intent and whether shooting candy at children would count as an assault. In fact it would really probably be no big deal if you did this and were sued for assault. Assault is almost always charged alongside battery, but if there was no battery there are three types of damages you might be required to pay: compensatory (like if the kid is so distraught that he suffers physical harm like he starts vomiting or something), nominal, punitive. Nominal damages exist just to acknowledge that a person's rights were technically violated but not in any way that is truly worthy of compensation -- you might be ordered to pay $1 to the person. And punitive damages are only awarded in especially egregious situations, like if you were knowingly putting kids lives in danger for fun or something. In this case you'd hopefully only pay nominal damages (unless you used the potato gun of course).
On the other hand, if a piece of that candy hits a kid that's a battery. In fact, if it even hits the kid's candy bag it's a battery. :)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version