289

Arizona State instructor followed, injured by Turning Point crew (www.insidehighered.com)

submitted 1 year ago by HLMenckenFan@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

22 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 22 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] TechyDad@lemmy.world 110 points 1 year ago

“All he had to do was walk away,” Kolvet said of Boyles

He tried walking away. He walked away and these guys kept following him and taunting him/defaming him. A person can only be reasonably expected to tolerate that for so long.

This was clearly harassment with the intent to goad the professor into an action that Turning Point could spin in their favor. Either a frustrated "leave me alone" or some act of violence. After that, they'd use editing to remove their harassment so that it seemed like he got flustered and/or resorted to violence after the first innocent question.

[-] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 49 points 1 year ago

In the United States, if you insult someone so that they punch you, it's your fault. As we get more non-white or openly LGBT judges and prosecutors, hopefully they will enforce the law as written.

The fighting words doctrine, in United States constitutional law, is a limitation to freedom of speech as protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

In 1942, the U.S. Supreme Court established the doctrine by a 9–0 decision in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire.[1] It held that "insulting or 'fighting words', those that by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace" are among the "well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech the prevention and punishment of [which] … have never been thought to raise any constitutional problem."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_words

[-] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 1 year ago

To be clear, it’s not just insults in general. If you walk up to someone and say “you look like poop” and they respond by punching you square in the face, that’s on them. You need to go above and beyond in your attempted insults to raise to the level of fighting words.

[-] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago

Not gonna lie if I saw someone walk up to some dude and say "you look like poop" only to get fucking decked I think id be laughing too hard to care about right or wrong.

[-] SheDiceToday@eslemmy.es 11 points 1 year ago

if you insult someone so that they punch you, it's your fault

That's not quite true. That's speech that you can be arrested for.

For use of force, or throwing a punch, here's the justifications for force in one of the states in which I've had to work with the law: https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/PE/htm/PE.9.htm#9.22 Look at 9.31(b)(1). It specifically says that force is not justified based on verbal provocation alone. It doesn't matter what they say. As long as the speech doesn't constitute a threat, then you cannot swing freely and claim self-defense as a legal defense.

[-] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 1 year ago

The veritas playbook!

[-] Pretzilla@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

*Project Veritas

[-] hperrin@lemmy.world 104 points 1 year ago

That sure sounds like terrorism to me. Just scare everyone into agreeing with you by being violent toward them, right? It’s the conservative way.

[-] PrinceWith999Enemies@lemmy.world 100 points 1 year ago

They need to be investigated as a criminal organization.

[-] argo_yamato@lemm.ee 74 points 1 year ago

Turning point should be treated like the hate group they are.

[-] 8BitRoadTrip@lemm.ee 23 points 1 year ago

Absolutely

[-] Bizarroland@kbin.social 16 points 1 year ago

I would not be surprised if a doj investigation into their email servers over the next 3 years or so revealed some absolutely horrendous shit that they've been doing while claiming to be Noble do-gooders.

[-] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 year ago

Why would the police investigate themselves?

[-] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 year ago

How else are they going to declare they’ve been investigated and no wrongdoing was found?

[-] Uranium3006@kbin.social 28 points 1 year ago

Nazis

[+] sugarfree@lemmy.world -88 points 1 year ago

Not a great situation, but he doesn't have the right to lunge for the cameraman as he did. He was dealt with using minimal and reasonable force and was not further attacked after the threat was over. I wouldn't want charges for anyone over such a minor incident, but if anyone is charged it should be the attacker.

[-] Telorand@reddthat.com 48 points 1 year ago

Sorry, but I believe you are entirely wrong. Even the police are investigating it as aggravated assault by the right wing idiots. If the professor felt threatened (especially due to being harassed), he was within his rights to defend himself, even if that meant he made the first move.

He was outnumbered two to one, and they were stalking and verbally harassing him with the intent to incite a reaction. Additionally, that kind of speech is not protected. If anyone should get charges, it's the two abusers.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago

But after Inside Higher Ed interviewed Kolvet, Arizona State released what Adam Wolfe, the police spokesman, said was security footage taken from atop a parking garage on the main Tempe, Ariz., campus. The video shows Boyles reaching for the camera, seemingly trying to grab it or otherwise stop the recording—but the Turning Point interviewer, in all black with a backward baseball cap, almost immediately pushes Boyles face-first onto the concrete.

[-] agent_flounder@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

As another person commented...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_words

this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2023

289 points (98.3% liked)

politics

19107 readers

3253 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News