Thought Control full stop.
Grab my junk, I’m going to panic and defend myself. PERIOD...
How often is this even used?
>>Starting in January, Illinois will bar a rare criminal defense allowing the use of a victim’s sexual orientation as justification for violent crime, a ban gay rights advocates say they will attempt to replicate in about half a dozen states next year.
So when a “gay deceiver” comes onto a guy or gal under false pretense, it will be criminal to respond to the unwanted intrusion?
Both females and males have been wrongfully courted by members of the same sex (in disguise).
Some homosexuals court such encounters knowing that they risk getting beat up for it (rough trade). It’s a kink among some.
This is the start of justifying sexual harassment by homosexuals.
Defend yourself against their advances... be targeted as homophobic.
How about tougher laws prosecuting domestic abuse (and murder) among same sex couples?
Huh? If you kill someone and it’s not..
a. An accident. Or...
b. Self defense. Then...
It’s either murder or some form of manslaughter. I don’t really have an issue with this. If a dude grabs another man’s junk w/o being invited then that’s a form of assault and may be grounds to rearrange some of his teeth. But it’s not a license to kill.
Rauner is a total disgrace.
How can you even prohibit a defense attorney from saying this in court?
But if I was a juror in a case like I've just described I'd be at least somewhat sympathetic to the defendant regardless of how the judge instructed us jurors.That is because after a good bit of research I've become a *very* firm believer in "jury nullification".
At least I'd be sympathetic if the harm to the perv in question wasn't serious...I doubt that I'd be sympathetic if there was serious harm intentionally inflicted.
Perhaps in Illinois but if it is appealed above that level there is a long history of precedence.
It is called Provocation, it is well documented and dates back to the 16th century.
Being sexually assaulted (queers call it “flirting”) absolutely fits the definition.
* * * * * * * *
Provocation (legal)
Provocation is a set of events that might be adequate to cause a reasonable person to lose self control, whereby a criminal act is less morally culpable than a premeditated act done out of pure malice (malice aforethought).[1][2] It “affects the quality of the actor’s state of mind as an indicator of moral blameworthiness”.[1] The provocation is said to “mitigate” the crime, and the crime is said to be committed in the heat of passion, under an irresistible urge incited by the provoking events, and without being entirely determined by reason
Provocation may be defined by statutory law, by common law, or some combination. It is a possible defense for the person provoked, or a possible offense by the person provoking. Provocation may be a defense by excuse or exculpation alleging a sudden or temporary loss of control (a permanent loss of control is in the realm of insanity) as a response to another’s provocative conduct sufficient to justify an acquittal, a mitigated sentence or a conviction for a lesser charge. Provocation can be a relevant factor in a court’s assessment of a defendant’s mens rea, intention, or state of mind, at the time of an act of which the defendant is accused.
much more at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provocation_(legal)
.
didn’t this happen on a talk show when a the producers thought it would be cute to show a straight male’s secret admirer was an alternative lifestyle degenerate?
It ended with a manslaughter.
Unless the other person attacks you you have NO right to hit them. These people are very disturbed people and don’t have enough sense to not come on to non-homosexusls.