If justifiable homicide is a valid legal defense, then why not justifiable assault?

[11 Bravo]

I maintain that if Fred Phelps or any of his spawn appear and attempt to disrupt the funeral of one of our fallen troops, friends and family should put the boots to them until they are reduced to bleeding and broken lumps; then step back and say, \"Sue me, asshole.\" I would do that just that, and then roll the dice with a jury of my peers.

[MonkeyFunk]

1. Because it's not justifiable.

As abhorrent as he and his clan are, they have a right to do what they do.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

2. Justifiable assault is a valid legal defense.

If you're being attacked, you don't have to kill the guy in self defense, you can just assault him until he stops.

:shrug:

Although, honestly, I wish more people felt this way about Phelps before he went after troops.

[bryant69]

3. I don't know many people, even on the right, who support Phelps

That said, if you are the first person to throw the punch, I think that is what will count.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[11 Bravo]

5. You are corrrect.

I have felt this way about Phelps since I first heard of his funeral disruptions, and should not have limited it to the funerals of soldiers. I guess I did so because that is what is currently receiving publicity, so that is what was in my mind. But I repeat, you are absolutely correct.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

4. Pretty Warped Definition Of 'Justifiable' Ya Got There.

Justifiable would be protesting back to them, not beating them bloody and senseless.

[SledDriver]

6. They wouldn't have to sue, you would be arrested

Unless you were acting in self defense (meaning they threw the first punch), you just can't go around beating the shit out of people because you disagree with them.

You might also want to re-read the 1st amendment.

[TahitiNut]

7. "Fighting words" defense.

:shrug: