>>130339567
Didn't Vic Berger molest someone?

>>130339567

You can laugh but he actually is being assaulted. The legal threshold for assault or battery which is the correct legal definition is that any contact which isn't someone touching your shoulder or arm to get your attention like an associate would do is assault/battery.

>>130339911
Don't think much is going to hold up in court unless it's at least remotely violent, senpai

>>130340071
So you don't think a crowd of people walking up to a woman and uninvitedly touching her body constitutes a crime?

I used a woman as an example becuse it might get you to understand the concept a little better.

File: 1441895074592.jpg (97KB, 450x652px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 450x652px

>>130339567
>Vic Berger
imagine being so effeminate that you get upset about another man's success and dub piano music over footage of a crowd of being harassing a single man as though this presents Mike as histrionic or delusional even though he's clearly being singled out

The mental image of Vic Berger frantically piecing this together in order to say "haha got em" and "my team is winning" is the only thing about this that's even remotely amusing.

Vic Berger is getting pre-emptively clowned by a man with a lisp.

>>130339567
>Vic Berger
What's that kiddy fiddler doing now?

Thernovich is a gorilla...mindseth

>>130340444
>you don't think a crowd of people walking up to a woman and uninvitedly touching her body constitutes a crime?
no?

>>130341168

Well it is, it's called battery and it doesn't have to cause physical harm. I don't know about you but I wouldn't find it particularly pleasant to have a single person touching me whilst I was going about my business never mind a crowd.

What they're doing is battery and it is illegal.

>>130341525
then why aren't they being arrested? a mystery.

>>130341525
It's not that I don't understand the concept, it's that you're being extremely pedantic.

It may be against the law on paper, but no judge will even consider convicting someone unless actual harm was committed or some legitimate amount of danger was in the picture.

Herding someone out of an area would not get you charged, certainly not on the same level as someone punching another in the face.

I don't think you understand how the legal system works here if you believe all crimes are equal.

>>130341858

Because it is a tort not a crime.

>>130341525
the ever so trustworthy wikipedia tells me that
>Criminal battery requires intent to inflict an injury on another.
not seeing such intent in op video 2bh
could cernovich be a pussy? hm.

>>130342313
but you said it was a crime?

>>130342341
>Criminal battery requires intent to inflict an injury on anothe

Yeah, that's why you don't go to wikipedia if you don't understand the law. Criminal battery is different to the civil tort of battery.

>>130340444
IS SHE WEARING A BURKA? BECAUSE IF SHE ISN'T SHE IS LITERALLY ASKING FOR ME TO RAPE HER AND CUT HER HEAD OFF*


>*NOT NECESSARILY IN THAT ORDER ALLAHU ACCCCCCCCHHHBRRRRRRRRRRR

>>130342548
we are talking about the crime, not the tort though.

>>130339567

Didn't that student journalist who got pushed in a similar way by Melissa Click's cultists get judged assault or something?

>>130342514
For all intents and purposes it is the same thing it still involves intervention by the state. It just has to be instigated by someone else.

File: Screenshot_2017-06-06-21-09-56-1.png (925KB, 1080x1476px) Image search: [Google]

925KB, 1080x1476px

>>130339567
I hate this faggot

>>130342872
What did he mean by this?

>>130339567
From April?
How afraid of Cernovich are you that you make these threads?
The attacks only show that you see and fear his increasing influence.

>>130342831
so i am right in that the touching in op video does not constitute a crime?

File: Screenshot_2017-06-06-21-09-51-1.png (418KB, 1080x1191px) Image search: [Google]

418KB, 1080x1191px

>>130343007
>I broke the story
What a kike.

>>130342680

No, we're talking about battery. A tort is common law, or civil law for you Americans. Just because the police didn't arrest someone for a crime doesn't mean they haven't broken "the law". That's why you can take people to civil court and seek damages.

>>130343150
It's assault because they're forcibly removing someone against their will from a public space.

The reason nobody got arrested is because sometimes laws are suspended in the context of protests and shit.

Sorry haters but Cernovich breaks stories hours/days before CNN MSNBC etc

>>130343449
but you said it was a crime. is it or is it not a crime? i don't think it is.

>>130343585
Fuck off Mike. You're a retard, all you do is take other people's scoops and claim you broke the story.

>>130344030
Was the first person to announce there would be strikes in Syria aire base.

Little bit bigger than a 4chan story you seem so butthurt about.

>>130343643
Let's do an experiment.
>be in US
>find some public street
>start gently pushing some stranger down the road
Let's see how you fare.

>>130344373
well i doubt it will constitute a crime, since i am not showing intent to inflict injury. much like op video.

>>130344885
Shut the fuck up and do it. Then we'll talk.

File: 1bbr8l.jpg (52KB, 952x500px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 952x500px

>>130343643

The differentiation between a crime and a tort is your last bastion. Your initial objection was that you don't consider the unwanted touching of a female to be a crime but you didn't qualify it (and neither did I) by specifying intent so your blanket objection can be dismissed. So you lost here.

You then moved on to ponder why they aren't being arrested when i only stated it was illegal. The only difference between a tort and a criminal matter is who instigates the procedure, if you violate a tort you have still broken the law, which is why the state can intervene and penalise you. So you lost here.

And in response to that you brought up wikipedia which states that criminal battery involves physical harm when tort battery doesn't require it. So you lost here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_(tort)

Which is still a law, so your last bastion is semantics and i dont know about you but if someone breaks the law, whether it is criminal or civil, then what they did is a crime.

So you lost and you're wrong.

>>130345287
And thus the Anglo slays the Nordic dragon

>>130345287
>Your initial objection was that you don't consider the unwanted touching of a female to be a crime
and i was apparently correct? nice post though.

>>130345534
No you weren't because you didn't qualify it.

>>130345709
you were the one that didn't qualify it my man. i just responded to your post.

>>130341168
t.achmed

...Aaand we're back, danger and play dot com, gorilla mindthet

>>130345803
>you were the one that didn't qualify it my man

I know I didn't but you didn't qualify your objection either. if you were aware of the difference then you wouldn't have made a blanket objection.

>>130346275
i was under the impression that gently shoving a person was not a crime, and i was correct, unless it involves intent to harm which is not happening in the video/your post. i don't know why you're still posting 2bh, we both agree that it is not a crime.

>>130346571

wait so i can gently move you away, whenever you go out?

>>130346827
it wouldn't be criminal battery

>>130346827
A group of us should stand outside of anon's home and gently steer him in whatever direction we wish every time he leaves the house.

>>130346920

is that a yes or no, to my question?

>>130347051
i don't know? ask the police. the point is that it wouldn't be criminal battery, which is the topic.

>>130341168
Yes brother. Tahharush gamea is my favorite hobby too.

>>130346571

You aren't correct though because you can't walk around "gently shoving" people, it is illegal, and you can be taken to court and the state will penalise you for doing it.

>>130339567
it wasn't even that bad

>>130347710
but is it a crime? is it criminal battery? no? then i am correct. because that was my point. sad that you're trying to squirm out of this, just stop posting instead man.

it's assault "and" battery because assault is the threat of violence while battery is actual physical contact. So basic assault charges don't even involve contact.

>>130347885
>but is it a crime? is it criminal battery? no? then i am correct. because that was my point.

It wasn't your point at all. it's your last bastion because it is the only place you have left to run to but your initial objection was that uninvitedly touching a woman wasn't a crime.

it depends on intent whether it is a crime and depending on the manner in which you do it then it is illegal.
And you didn't qualify it.

Is this what a hebrew hodown looks like?

>>130339567
lel this is the guy who writes books on masculinity

>>130348247
>It wasn't your point at all
it was literally my only point in this thread. by last bastion you imply i have several, when it was just that one.

>>130339911
>>130341525
>>130342728
>>130343455
You guys are really cucked. Hope you don't go to any concerts or bars where everyone is assaulting each other nonstop

>>130348450

No it wasn't. Your first post in this thread was an objection to my statement that uninvitedly touching a woman was a crime.

You said it wasn't. You didn't qualify it by saying that in order for it to be a criminal offence it requires intent, you flat out denied it was a crime.

It's your only point now because you have nowhere else to go but whether it is a criminal matter or not doesn't mean it isn't illegal.

>>130339567
Old news, you dumb shill. You're intentionally sliding threads.

Such as this one:
>>130347049
>>130347049
>>130347049

Bump that thread!!

> Going into a crowd of people
> Shouting "Bill Clintons a Rapist" repeatedly
> People object
> Push you out the area in the gayest way possible
> Start whining about being assaulted

On both sides, at what point to these actions help with anything?

>>130348661
>You said it wasn't.
and it isn't. we can agree on this, but you just don't stop do you. there was no intent of harm in your post, and i responded accordingly.

>>130348597
Well, nom because tort battery excludes incidental and unavoidable touching, like you might expect at a concert, or on a bus, or on a train, it doesn't exclude people walking up to you in the middle of the street and pushing and touching you.

Because that's fucking weird, and illegal.

>mike cernovich
He's just a shitty book merchant, but he's not endearing like Alex Jones

>>130348881
but not a crime ;^)

Did he get his friends to push him around, or were those people real?


I can't tell the difference any more.

File: 88187.jpg (24KB, 586x330px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 586x330px

>>130348813
>and it isn't. we can agree on this,

No we can't because whether it is criminal requires intent, and you didn't mention it, you just said it wasn't a crime.

You're fucking wrong.

>>130341075
Lmao

>>130348265
Americans are a bunch of pussies.

>>130349231
>and you didn't mention it,
you were the one not mentioning it in your example. i responded to the contents of your post. the contents of your post does not say it is with intent to harm, so it's not a crime. you are by far the dumbest bong i have ever encountered on 4chan.

>>130339567
>show your taxes chant
Is this really the left best line of attack right now?
It's going to be a long 8 years for them

File: v0Rgg_f-thumbnail-100-0_s-600x0.jpg (449KB, 600x588px) Image search: [Google]

449KB, 600x588px

>>130349672
>you were the one not mentioning it in your example. i responded to the contents of your post

The contents of my post were whether or not you think uninvitedly touching a woman was a crime.

You said it wasn't, you didn't specify intent and neither did I but you're pretty certain it isn't a crime. Check out old rapey hands over here. fucking hell what country do you come from?

>>130348597
It's the same way in much of America you retard.