Adult Slapping a Child

I could have kicked most adults butts at 12 also. Your story is not a universal application in spite of the vigor with which you defend it. I bet you think Mike Brown was an innocent misunderstood kid also.

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

Your argument makes sense if we were talking about two adults. However, we are not. We are talking about a 12 year old child and an adult stranger.

---

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

The child is not 13, the child is 12...and this was not a group situation where a bunch of children were attacking an adult. This child also had one arm in a sling. Even the adult did not make a claim of anything more than a push.

You have to compare apples to apples.

My take on this is that this was a ticked off adult with anger management issues who got extremely stupid...and a cop that really didn't want to do his job that day.

---

What worries me here is the implication that size somehow matters - would we tell a 6ft 300lb man that his 5ft 90lb wife is too small to have caused him damage, therefore he has no right to defend himself? There should never be such an assumption. Never.

There's no allegation here that the child was trying to start a fight or that the child caused injury to the man. When you're scared of somebody, slapping them in the face would be an oddly counter-intuitive reaction. Face-slapping is a power play.

clearly the man was not worried about the one armed kid hurting him, that's why he got out of his car, yelled in the kids face and slapped the kid. it would not surprise me if this man had lots of pent up anger and decided to take his rage out on a child who was smaller and only had use one arm. really if theres a kid is in the road, stop, blow the horn, drive around or call the police, don't get out of the car.

Quote:

---

Quoting Dogmatique

---

What worries me here is the implication that size somehow matters - would we tell a 6ft 300lb man that his 5ft 90lb wife is too small to have caused him damage, therefore he has no right to defend himself? There should never be such an assumption. Never.

---

To me its not the fact that the child was smaller or larger. To me, its the fact that he was a child...and a child with one arm in a sling, to boot.

I would NEVER slap a child in the face, let alone someone else's child. Don't we teach children to scream, yell, run, fight back if a strange adult attacks them or tries to grab them? This was a 12 year old child.

Clearly, my point was missed (I'm not even sure it was noticed, to be blunt).

L, you're focused on the child's age. You actually made a point of saying the child is 12, not 13. What happens? The child automatically falls into a different bracket?

Quote:

---

The child is not 13, the child is 12

---

Colour me confused. Obviously, I'm missing something. What happens when he turns 13?

Forget the ages. Self defense universally relies on the premise of disparity of force. Age is irrelevant. ANY 12 year old would pose a legitimate and valid threat to say someone like Stephen Hawking (or anyone else who is wheel-chair bound and has no use of his arms or legs). But that same 12 year old would not pose anywhere near the same threat to an 18 year who is mobile and healthy. Conversely, if there were four or five 12 year olds, now the driver is experiencing a disparity of force. Forget the age, it's 4 or 5 against 1. So the totality of the circumstance determines if there was a threat or not - not someone's age. Would you be calling a 17 year old, 240 lb, 6'4 linebacker "a kid"? Would that same 17 year old be charged for attacking a 40 year old? He's just "a kid", though.

Imaginary threats don't count.

Quote:

---

Quoting PADriver13

---

Forget the ages. Self defense universally relies on the premise of disparity of force. Age is irrelevant. ANY 12 year old would pose a legitimate and valid threat to say someone like Stephen Hawking (or anyone else who is wheel-chair bound and has no use of his arms or legs). But that same 12 year old would not pose anywhere near the same threat to an 18 year who is mobile and healthy. Conversely, if there were four or five 12 year olds, now the driver is experiencing a disparity of force. Forget the age, it's 4 or 5 against 1. So the totality of the circumstance determines if there was a threat or not - not someone's age. Would you be calling a 17 year old, 240 lb, 6'4 linebacker "a kid"? Would that same 17 year old be charged for attacking a 40 year old? He's just "a kid", though.

---

That's pretty much the point I was trying to make. With one adjustment...

A 12 year old may well be able to "take" an adult down. Totality of circumstances and all that.

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:

---

Quoting Mr. Knowitall

---

Imaginary threats don't count.

---

Neither does the assumption that every 12 year old is unable to pose a threat to an adult.

Quote:

---

Quoting PADriver13

---

Forget the ages. Self defense universally relies on the premise of disparity of force. Age is irrelevant. ANY 12 year old would pose a legitimate and valid threat to say someone like Stephen Hawking (or anyone else who is wheel-chair bound and has no use of his arms or legs). But that same 12 year old would not pose anywhere near the same threat to an 18 year who is mobile and healthy. Conversely, if there were four or five 12 year olds, now the driver is experiencing a disparity of force. Forget the age, it's 4 or 5 against 1. So the totality of the circumstance determines if there was a threat or not - not someone's age. Would you be calling a 17 year old, 240 lb, 6'4 linebacker "a kid"? Would that same 17 year old be charged for attacking a 40 year old? He's just "a kid", though.

---

This is the point that I was making about age. A 17 year old 240lb 6'4' linebacker is no kid, physically. Although, a 17 year old would likely be charged as an adult anyway.

And to respond to Pro...I was merely correcting the age, not attempting to imply that there is an automatic difference between a 12 and 13 year old.