"Weird Mike" Cernovich gets ''assaulted''

twitter.com/VicBergerIV/status/853464309669744640

LMFAO

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_(tort)
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Didn't Vic Berger molest someone?

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.

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

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.

>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.

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

Thernovich is a gorilla...mindseth

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

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.

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

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.

Because it is a tort not a crime.

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.

but you said it was a crime?

>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.

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

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

...

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

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.

I hate this faggot

What did he mean by this?

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.

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

>I broke the story
What a kike.

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.

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

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

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

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

Little bit bigger than a Sup Forums story you seem so butthurt about.

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.

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

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

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.

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.

And thus the Anglo slays the Nordic dragon

>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.

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

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

t.achmed

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

>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.

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.

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

it wouldn't be criminal battery

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

is that a yes or no, to my question?

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

Yes brother. Tahharush gamea is my favorite hobby too.

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.

it wasn't even that bad

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.

>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?

lel this is the guy who writes books on masculinity

>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.

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

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.

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

Such as this one:
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?

>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.

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

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.

>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.

Lmao

Americans are a bunch of pussies.

>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 Sup Forums.

>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

>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?

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