Latest Breaking News

24601

(4,132 posts)

32. If in fact he touched the VP, the 1st amendment does not protect it. Not even

Mon Jun 4, 2012, 06:40 PM

Jun 2012

speech is an absolute right.

But I remember from class also that physical contact isn't necessary to prove assault, merely a physical action that causes someone to react as in a flinch. The contact which usually follows the assault is more often categorized as battery.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

58 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Supreme Court backs Secret Service arrest of man confronting Cheney [View all] villager Jun 2012 OP

Pretty obvious that they could arrest him. FBaggins Jun 2012 #1

Glad to know you support retaliatory arrests.... villager Jun 2012 #2

Odd... I missed where I said that. FBaggins Jun 2012 #4

I didn't. It was in your agreement with the verdict. If you read the SC's rationale for said verdict villager Jun 2012 #7

You mean the unanimous verdict? FBaggins Jun 2012 #10

Sadly, I also noted it was unanimous. villager Jun 2012 #13

Ginsburg and Breyer voted with the others so do you claim that they support retaliatory arrests? cstanleytech Jun 2012 #12

No surprise here Kelvin Mace Jun 2012 #3

FACTS: elleng Jun 2012 #8

You pretty much confirm my point Kelvin Mace Jun 2012 #11

+1 villager Jun 2012 #14

This matter is NOT ABOUT PROBABLE CAUSE, elleng Jun 2012 #18

No, Thomas made that clear Kelvin Mace Jun 2012 #23

'One agent, elleng Jun 2012 #25

OK, now we have conflicting accounts Kelvin Mace Jun 2012 #39

Yup, that confirms it Canuckistanian Jun 2012 #37

The probable cause was established before the arrest. NutmegYankee Jun 2012 #38

There should be know such thing Kelvin Mace Jun 2012 #40

They did not. NutmegYankee Jun 2012 #45

Thomas deliberately ignored the fact Kelvin Mace Jun 2012 #51

Your example lacks a hold on reality. NutmegYankee Jun 2012 #55

"allegedly pushed or touched him on the shoulder" ---which was it? wordpix Jun 2012 #27

If in fact he touched the VP, the 1st amendment does not protect it. Not even 24601 Jun 2012 #32

Right all around, 246. elleng Jun 2012 #35

If such an assault and/or battery occurred Kelvin Mace Jun 2012 #41

No charges being filed doesnt mean they dont have grounds techincally for an arrest. cstanleytech Jun 2012 #15

This situation would not stink Kelvin Mace Jun 2012 #24

The way I am reading (and I could be mistaken) cstanleytech Jun 2012 #28

Maybe, elleng Jun 2012 #31

Hmmmm Kelvin Mace Jun 2012 #42

Wasnt that ruling based around the whole "they arent citizens so they have no rights" excuse? If so cstanleytech Jun 2012 #46

The assertion was made that we still have Kelvin Mace Jun 2012 #50

Actually the court hasnt ruled on that aspect yet for US citizens if your refering to cstanleytech Jun 2012 #57

The USSS clearly had an opportunity and right Kelvin Mace Jun 2012 #44

You can be arrested pretty easy already if a police officer is determined enough to do so the ruling cstanleytech Jun 2012 #47

But there was no "snap decision" Kelvin Mace Jun 2012 #49

I dont recall it specifying the time though but thats not the point which was the court cstanleytech Jun 2012 #56

In a perfect world Sekhmets Daughter Jun 2012 #5

Nah, in a perfect world he would never have been born. nt cstanleytech Jun 2012 #17

In a perfect world, lightning will strike Cheney's battery pack crunch60 Jun 2012 #29

This isnt a perfect world though :( nt cstanleytech Jun 2012 #30

Equating Cheney to Eichmann is somewhat ahistorical. Cheney is more akin to coalition_unwilling Jun 2012 #21

I think Sekhmets Daughter Jun 2012 #34

Well, I'm an opponent of capital punishment, even for the darkest of rodents, so coalition_unwilling Jun 2012 #36

Sadly, I must agree with Kelvin Mace Jun 2012 #43

I'm not a fan of capital Sekhmets Daughter Jun 2012 #52

Russ Feingold would have taken them on, as would Eliot Spitzer or Anthony Weiner. But the coalition_unwilling Jun 2012 #54

Believe you misunderstand the authority of a VP. Not a deputy commander in 24601 Jun 2012 #33

Believe you misunderstand Sekhmets Daughter Jun 2012 #53

Eichmann was in charge of others. VPs have only their personal staffs. And the 24601 Jun 2012 #58

BAD headline from LATimes. elleng Jun 2012 #6

Listen carefully Can you hearing the Founding Father's scream from their graves at the outrageous lookingfortruth Jun 2012 #9

Guys like Cheney are above the law and Hubert Flottz Jun 2012 #16

Let's just face it this Deomcracy is a fraud. It has been the United States for the Corporations of lookingfortruth Jun 2012 #19

I disagree with the ruling, but very well bluestateguy Jun 2012 #20

It will be just as wrong then as it was in this case. But I know coalition_unwilling Jun 2012 #22

Its not the mouthing off that will land you into jail or atleast cstanleytech Jun 2012 #48

"he had bumped the vice president." Really? He "bumped" Cheney? What does that mean? wordpix Jun 2012 #26