[quicklybroken]

I have question about "fighting-words doctrine". My friend and I were arguing about whether or not a person can be charged for assault on someone who violated the "fighting-words doctrine". For anyone who hasn't heard of it Fighting-words doctrine is -"those which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace". For example if i made comments to someone such as racial slurs and all sorts of other things directed at the person obvoiusly a violation of "fighting-words doctrine" and that person then chose to physically assault me such as "punch in me the face" can that person then still be charge for assault? I understand the person can be charged for the crime of "fighting-words doctrine"(also undestand this is a contraversal issue) but then also can the person be charged for assault for hitting the person? It has been my understanding that no matter what the verbal words said it is never ok to commit assault on someone else. So can someone please try to make sense to me because I am confused.

[rmet4nzkx]

Laws are state dependent. In many states, assault doesn't have to be physicial and depending on what you say you may violate many laws without laying a finger on another person.

[Mr. Knowitall]

You're confusing separate issues - when speech can be regulated by the state, and whether an act of battery is a crime. If somebody batters you, even if you provoke them, it can be charged as a crime.