Florida man arrested after he allegedly gave girlfriend a 'wet willy,'

I think so too.

 

On the contrary my friend, I clearly presented that my focus was looking for evidence that it was violent and gave my opinion that I highly expect that it was more than playful. I even pointed to the words "belligerent drunk" and especially "continued" to give the wet willie as suggesting that likely it was beyond playful (abuse).

You on the other hand have jumped to conclusions not only about it having to be violent abuse with little to no evidence but also appear to be accusatory toward me and others here of not being against abuse.

I just merely broke down the argument...

 

What conclusion did I jump to concerning this case?

 

Wow, so much misunderstanding of the law in this thread.

The article says: "Sireci was arrested on a battery charge."

.Assault vs. Battery

 

What I did was discussed the evidence and you jumped to the conclusion that simply grabbing her wrist determined abuse, and are adamant about it. In fact ,I also even addressed that grabbing someone to give a wet willie would be a typical playful way of doing it along with a sneak attack SO your basing abuse merely on grabbing her wrist is making a judgment without enough evidence. I don't know, but there seems to have something else behind this obsession to rush to judgment...

Dude, I don't want to jump to conclusions but it really does seem this wet willie stuff strikes a nerve with you.

Again, for instance, I understood where the Rev Mitchell was coming from with the expression “slapped” (“If it was JUST a wet willie”) but you jumped to another conclusion on him:

Then you start to beg the question on your jumped to conclusions and hyperbole the events:

How do you know that he didn’t simply playfully grab her and give her the DREADED WET WILLIE in front of her daughter?!

What evidence do you have that he was violently assaulting her and abusive? That was point. There is not enough information to determine the actual events as being truly violent or just an arrest over a playful wet willie.

Such drama! I hope I’m never around if someone give you a wet willie…

 

minnesota.cbslocal.com/2014/10/20/mankato-man-charged-with-giving-cop-a-wet-willy/

 

wfsb.com/story/29719398/pd-man-charged-after-giving-4-year-old-a-wet-willy

 

cbsnews.com/news/mavs-delonte-west-fined-25k-for-wet-willie/

 

Wow! It seems pretty annoying but felony wet willie??? That's crazy! I've seen a few people get one and a long time ago some girl gave me one and to be honest I didn't like someone sticking their slobber into my ear, but then she was pretty cute so I didn't mind that much.

I used to have fun lightly touching a person's hair to make them think their was a bug crawling in their hair, but by definition I guess that "horse play touching" was a battery bug impersonation offense.

 

Grabbing her wrist is battery and abuse. Yes, I am adamant. The evidence is the woman's statement, as well as the daughter's statement that she witnessed the incident. The woman and her daughter believed it was abusive.

I admit that you seem to have far more experience with "wet willies" than I do. I didn't really know there are several techniques that people use to deliver the "dreaded willy."

Maybe you should contact the abuser and offer to testify as an expert witness at his trial.

"Your Honor, in my expert opinion concerning the wet willy, known in the scientific community as 'wettious wilious' there is not enough evidence to determine if there was true violence in the delivery of the wet willy. Just grabbing her wrist, without leaving marks, is not battery or abuse, despite what the laws say. This is simply a case of over reaction and hyperbole to a unskillfully executed wet willy. It was just a playful joke. The woman and her daughter have a hyper sensitive reaction to what was playful contact with the boyfriend."

 

It’s almost like you wrote a bunch of stuff that was wrong while candy was right the whole time. Perhaps an apology to her for her your arrogant condescension is in order.

It’s pretty simple. Keep your hands to yourself. Why is that so hard for people to understand? You touched peoples hair to make them think a bug was in there. Wow you are a riot! That is so funny!

 

That makes for a tough choice. If I continue to kiss my wife 'goodbye' before leaving for work every morning, I will statistically live 10 years longer ... but every kiss risks a 'battery' charge if she didn't want to be kissed that morning. Live 10 years vs 'misdemeanor battery' ... decisions, decisions.

 

[Luke 6:42 NIV] 42 How can you say to your brother, 'Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,' when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.

 

Are you seriously trying to compare kissing your wife goodbye to a drunken man grabbing his wife’s wrist and sticking his finger in her ear? One is mutual and the other is not. And you guys wonder why #metoo became a thing.

 

Because he has a pine tree sticking out of his and it keeps getting in my eye.

 

You compared "a drunken man grabbing his [girlfriend's] wrist and sticking his finger in her ear" to "touching people's hair" ... so I compared "touching people's hair" to "kissing my wife goodbye". I think that touching hair and kissing are indeed similar and both meet the narrowest definition of "battery" (touching someone without consent).

It was a reductio ad absurdum aimed at exposing the flaw in equating all touch with battery. I am not defending abuse, I am manning the wall against Social Justice Warriors on the BAPTISTBOARD. Every man who touches any woman is not guilty of battery ... contrary to what some here appear to be claiming!

 

You are manning a wall made of straw. I didn’t compare hair touching to kissing. Nobody equated all touching to battery. Another straw man. Why can’t people read. I was just making fun of how not funny his practical jokes were.

Also there is a word called consent that you might want to look up. Or a myriad of case law to support this as Jerome has posted. There are lots of hills to die on in the great crusade against social justice but the defense of the wet willie might be the dumbest one I’ve ever seen.

 

Good grief, do we really need to teach reading comprehension?

Here is what you actually said and the general topic of this conversation:

Here is your comment which I referenced:

Here is what I accused you of:

NOTE CAREFULLY THAT I MADE NO CLAIMS ABOUT YOU COMPARING "hair touching to kissing".

Here is what I said about comparing "hair touching to kissing":

I CLAIMED THAT I COMPARED THE TWO IN RESPONSE TO THE COMPARISON THAT YOU MADE.

Really? It sure sounds that way here:

My thoughts, exactly.

So I need to wake my sleeping wife and get her consent before kissing her on the cheek and heading off to work? Since I cannot prove verbal consent if challenged in a court of law, should I get her consent in writing, just to be safe? Remember: "It’s pretty simple. Keep your hands to yourself. Why is that so hard for people to understand?"

Then it is a good thing that I am defending the right of people to hold a contradictory opinion, and not the right of a drunken fool to give a wet willie.

 

Nevermind.

 

Benjamin stated he liked to lightly touch people's hair to make them think there was a bug in it. That was what Use of Time was referring to, not what I said.