Not really; with a former roommate, when one of us had a bad day, we would go out back and spar for a bit to blow off steam. Depending on how bad of a day, sometimes we were pushing the limits of the pads, but nothing that would be out of place in any training gym.Charlies.Contingency wrote:True, and as I look back through this thread, it appears that it may have been aimed more towards, finding a defense to fighting with your brother... It might just be me, but that's the way it looks now. Don't want to go to jail, don't get into a physical altercation, simple as that. If you both say, (Colorful word inserted here) it, lets duke it out in the front yard, jail time may be the consequence.
Search found 3 matches
Return to “'Equal Combat' or similar worded LEO stmts”
- Wed Nov 26, 2014 5:36 pm
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: 'Equal Combat' or similar worded LEO stmts
- Replies: 31
- Views: 7566
Re: 'Equal Combat' or similar worded LEO stmts
- Wed Nov 26, 2014 10:00 am
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: 'Equal Combat' or similar worded LEO stmts
- Replies: 31
- Views: 7566
Re: 'Equal Combat' or similar worded LEO stmts
The problem here is that boxing or any martial art can easily cause serious bodily injury, (invalidating the defense by point (1)) even if that is not the intent, and any participant should be well aware of that, therefore any such injury would be caused knowingly.Charlies.Contingency wrote:Not only is this just defense to prosecution, but it is not entirely relevant. Only under Assault, Aggravated Assault, or Deadly Conduct does this consider to be a defense to prosecution. TO my understanding, say you were a boxer, or teaching karate, etc, it would be relevant to protect you from being charged with assault. If this were a fight between family member, it would still fall under the Class A Misdemeanor I listed above. Note that family violence is highly condemned in the state of Texas.croc870 wrote:Sec. 22.06. CONSENT AS DEFENSE TO ASSAULTIVE CONDUCT. (a) The victim's effective consent or the actor's reasonable belief that the victim consented to the actor's conduct is a defense to prosecution under Section 22.01 (Assault), 22.02 (Aggravated Assault), or 22.05 (Deadly Conduct) if:
(1) the conduct did not threaten or inflict serious bodily injury; or
(2) the victim knew the conduct was a risk of:
(A) his occupation;
(B) recognized medical treatment; or
(C) a scientific experiment conducted by recognized methods.
(b) The defense to prosecution provided by Subsection (a) is not available to a defendant who commits an offense described by Subsection (a) as a condition of the defendant's or the victim's initiation or continued membership in a criminal street gang, as defined by Section 71.01.
For simple assault, it can be helpful, so long as there was no serious bodily injury, but you'll still take the ride, which is what the OP was asking about IMO.
- Thu Nov 20, 2014 6:43 pm
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: 'Equal Combat' or similar worded LEO stmts
- Replies: 31
- Views: 7566
Re: 'Equal Combat' or similar worded LEO stmts
OK, so what governs two people putting on boxing gloves and pads, and having a match out in the back yard? No advertising or admission fees; just two people consensually doing things to each other calculated to cause bodily injury? (By the definition of bodily injury presented in the penal code, ("physical pain, illness, or any impairment of physical condition") the only non-assaultive way you could ever win a boxing match is by standing around until your opponent gets bored and leaves.)