"Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 05:08:12 GMT, "jaybird" > wrote:
>
>>> Yeah - I keep making the mistake of expecting the law to follow the
>>> tenets of common sense.
>>>
>>> According to http://www.dictionary.com "assault" means
>>>
>>> 1. An unlawful threat or attempt to do bodily injury to another.
>>> 2. The act or an instance of unlawfully threatening or attempting
>>> to injure another.
>>>
>>> The bum's attack on the OP clearly meets this definition. No doubt
>>> you're going to tell me that Texas law defines "assault" differently.
>>
>>I see this mistake in your long list of them for this case... Rather than
>>getting your definition from www.dictionary.com you need to get it from
>>the
>>legal definition as it applies to the law in question.
>
> Why? You're the first person to behave as though Texas law applies to
> the entire universe; why is it suddenly invalid for me to choose my
> own convenient definitions?

Leave the Texas part of it aside since we've already established that most
states' laws are pretty similar on what meets the elements of the offense of
Assault. To properly apply the word to law, you must first start with a
legal definition.

>
>>The bum never made
>>or attempted to make any bodily injury to the OP.
>
> Any reasonable person would consider the bum's actions threatening.

Perhaps... but not an assault. Standing in front of a car yelling might
scare someone, but does not show sufficient intent to commit assault.

--
---
jaybird
---
I am not the cause of your problems.
My actions are the result of your actions.
Your life is not my fault.