Originally posted by: Cookie
How hard do you have to hit someone to break their nose?
Not hard at all. Just need the right angle or the right situation or just happens. I see them all the time.
Originally posted by: Cookie
How hard do you have to hit someone to break their nose?
Originally posted by: Boo Boo
this is why you should be a gay
Originally posted by: Boo Boo
this is why you should be gay
When did this event take place? Was anyone arrested?
Originally posted by: jjsole
There are two sides to every story, however in either one he's probably fvcked, as he should be.
His punch was obviously anger related, since he could have walked away. Playing the 'self-defense card' after choosing to escalate a fight with a girl by punching her is typical of a sissy girl-beater.
Playing the 'self-defense card' after choosing to escalate a fight with a girl by punching her is typical of a sissy girl-beater.
Originally posted by: Agentbolt
Playing the 'self-defense card' after choosing to escalate a fight with a girl by punching her is typical of a sissy girl-beater.
You are a spectacular example of idiocy. Did you read the original post? HE didn't escalate anything, she attacked him and drew blood badly enough to need stiches, and threw the first punch. Who caused her to jump into violence in the first place I don't know, he just said they were arguing about money and it got really heated, but anything past words was started solely by her.
Playing the "girls can do whatever they want to guys and it's completely unreasonable for them to fight back" card is typical of a clueless retard who's simply saying whatever he feels is PC and safe.
Originally posted by: jjsole
Originally posted by: Agentbolt
Playing the 'self-defense card' after choosing to escalate a fight with a girl by punching her is typical of a sissy girl-beater.
You are a spectacular example of idiocy. Did you read the original post? HE didn't escalate anything, she attacked him and drew blood badly enough to need stiches, and threw the first punch. Who caused her to jump into violence in the first place I don't know, he just said they were arguing about money and it got really heated, but anything past words was started solely by her.
Playing the "girls can do whatever they want to guys and it's completely unreasonable for them to fight back" card is typical of a clueless retard who's simply saying whatever he feels is PC and safe.
What does he want, a hero's welcome?
Noone is condoning what she did - but she's a girl...he had a choice to not retaliate and he chose to pummel her. I don't buy the part that it's 'self-defense.' If it was a guy, he absolutely did the right thing. But it wasn't a guy and he simply could have shoved her away and called the cops himself if it was that bad.
But it wasn't a guy and he simply could have shoved her away and called the cops himself
I find it strange that charges where not layed right away.
Originally posted by: PingSpike
Its easy to say "wrestle her to the ground" when posting on a message board. Not so easy when she's coming at your like a rabid spider monkey while blood is gushing out of your forehead.
Originally posted by: Agentbolt
I find it strange that charges where not layed right away.
I do as well, it's the one part of this that doesn't make any sense to me. Usually they ask right away if you want to press charges, don't they? When they told him to go home another cop was still talking to her in her apartment, and they told him they'd be in touch very soon, and not to go anywhere. My hope is that they simply decide against charging either of them.
Originally posted by: SirStev0
I meant more on a legal standpoint. She was being the aggressor, used a weapon, started the fight, and apparently from what she said prompted the response in order to get the guy in trouble. If it were two guys, the guy who acted like the girl did would be the one in the most trouble legally. Does that mean the girl is the one who should get the most punishment.
Sorry for the mix-up I could see where you got your response from how I worded the question.
Originally posted by: freedomsbeat212
Originally posted by: ryan256
She attacked first, with a weapon, with intent to hurt and harm.
He defended himself.
/thread
disagree. Since it's not some random person on the street, i'm sure there was build up to the "attack." It wasn't random and, come on, he probably did something to warrant a spoon to his face. But, that aside, there was probably time for him to walk out and tell her to cool off.
It just doesn't add up - if I was walking down the street and some crazy lady came at me with a knife, well, I'd kick the sh1t out of her because it was random and my instinct is to preserve my own life. but for a girlfriend to attack you - there's more to the story than we're hearing...
Originally posted by: Agentbolt
But it wasn't a guy and he simply could have shoved her away and called the cops himself
The fact that you think any girl (not just this girl, but apparently any girl) would instantly be cowed and defeated by a simple shove says volumes about your opinion of women.
If anything I'm very impressed by the number of women chiming in who, even if they don't agree with how he reacted specifically, they're not condemming him simply because he fought back. Most women are not so stuck in the past, it's nice to see.
in big trouble now, you can't hit a girl!
Originally posted by: Citrix
in big trouble now, you can't hit a girl!
welcome to sitcom society where nearly every sitcom shows women physically bashing men and its ok.