It's probably because you made it up. I wonder what else you've made up in this thread.Referees: Ref Slaps kid, Brawl Ensues
- Thread starter FLYLine27*
- Start date
It's probably because you made it up. I wonder what else you've made up in this thread.
cowboy82nd
Registered User
One last thing before I go. DyerMaker66, you keep on using the word abuse. If you look up the definition of child abuse it says:
Child abuse is when a parent or caregiver, whether through action or failing to act, causes injury, death, emotional harm or risk of serious harm to a child.
The ref is neither a parent or caregiver, so abuse doesn't pertain to this situation.
Child abuse is when a parent or caregiver, whether through action or failing to act, causes injury, death, emotional harm or risk of serious harm to a child.
The ref is neither a parent or caregiver, so abuse doesn't pertain to this situation.
By your logic then, you can rough up a friend of mine, with a slap, and I can come back and beat the everlasting crap out of you until you are in a coma...
Right?
It does?
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=child+abuse
Not satisfied?
http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/pubs/ccaps-spcca/chi-enf-eng.htm
Again, no mention of parent or caretaker. These searches took me 3 seconds, and one is from the highest form of police in Canada, so I think I'll take their definition over yours.
Here is what they have to say about parents and caregivers:
That does not say child abuse can only be committed by a parent or caregiver.
And a referee is a caretaker of the ice and all who are on it, so it even fits that definition.
Last edited by a moderator:
It was a hyperbole. Kind of like you going on page after page about this being child abuse.
Nah, you were just trying to make him out to be the victim. Poor referee.
I'm answering posts that are replying to me. Like cowboy82nd who misquoted a definition or Goonzilla who thinks it's okay for a ref to rough up kids.
What if the referee had taken the stick from the kid and beat him with it, would it be assault then? #hyperbole
cowboy82nd
Registered User
Nah, you were just trying to make him out to be the victim. Poor referee.
I'm answering posts that are replying to me. Like cowboy82nd who misquoted a definition or Goonzilla who thinks it's okay for a ref to rough up kids.
What if the referee had taken the stick from the kid and beat him with it, would it be assault then? #hyperbole
I didn't misquote anything. I took it right off of the National Child Abuse Hotline front page. Maybe that is the one for the U.S. (it does have a 1-800 phone number), but that's what it says. And now are you making stuff up? Your second paragraph never happened but according to you, that's what happens in hockey games so it's not assault. And did we just go from abuse to assault? Interesting
Not the point,
You said that if you were to slap someone in my family, I would have the right to use force to stop you,
So your logic dictates, that I can put you in a coma, if you slap someone in my family....
FLYLine27*
BUCH
Will do. See below. Again, like my post stated, this is going by New York laws.
Oh god.. I feel bad for your clients, you should be EMBARRASSED.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Assault in the 3rd degree:
A person is guilty of assault in the third degree when:
1. With intent to cause physical injury to another person, he causes
such injury to such person or to a third person; or
2. He recklessly causes physical injury to another person; or
3. With criminal negligence, he causes physical injury to another
person by means of a deadly weapon or a dangerous instrument.
Assault in the third degree is a class A misdemeanor.
Assault in the second degree.
A person is guilty of assault in the second degree when:
1. With intent to cause serious physical injury to another person, he
causes such injury to such person or to a third person; or
2. With intent to cause physical injury to another person, he causes
such injury to such person or to a third person by means of a deadly
weapon or a dangerous instrument; or
Assault in the first degree.
A person is guilty of assault in the first degree when:
1. With intent to cause serious physical injury to another person, he
causes such injury to such person or to a third person by means of a
deadly weapon or a dangerous instrument; or
2. With intent to disfigure another person seriously and permanently,
or to destroy, amputate or disable permanently a member or organ of his
body, he causes such injury to such person or to a third person; or
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harassment in the second degree.
A person is guilty of harassment in the second degree when, with
intent to harass, annoy or alarm another person:
1. He or she strikes, shoves, kicks or otherwise subjects such other
person to physical contact, or attempts or threatens to do the same; or
2. He or she follows a person in or about a public place or places; or
3. He or she engages in a course of conduct or repeatedly commits acts
which alarm or seriously annoy such other person and which serve no
legitimate purpose.
Subdivisions two and three of this section shall not apply to
activities regulated by the national labor relations act, as amended,
the railway labor act, as amended, or the federal employment labor
management act, as amended.
Harassment in the second degree is a violation.
-----------------------------------------------------------
So Mr Lawyer? What do you have to say about that? Can't imagine you ever passed a single bar exam, chump.
FLYLine27*
BUCH
FLYLine27*
BUCH
Did you read my posts at all dude? Or are you just being a jerk?
I'll let you re-read my original post:
Last edited:
And now are you making stuff up? Your second paragraph never happened
You quite clearly did, as I demonstrated that is not the definition in not just one but two places.
Not according to me, according to the rules of the game.
I can't believe you're arguing that.
I suppose it was expecting too much of you to not take a sentence that was clearly labelled "#hyperbole" in a serious manner.
No it doesn't, as no one put anyone in a comma in this situation when they all clearly used force. It's almost like you don't understand what excessive force is. Just watch the ref hit the kid and maybe you'll get it.
So you think one slap to the helmet is excessive force, yet, several punches to the back of the head, is....justified?
Forgot the dynamics of adult vs 15 year old here,
No one, (except in your mind) is defending the official, first of all, there was nothing to come out that slap, it was pointless, didn't do anything, didn't need it, etc.
But the kid was NEVER in any danger of being pummeled by the ref like you want to believe, so was he wrong, absolutely,
And you think the price for being wrong is to be on the receiving end of a what, a dozen punches to the back of the head?
You sound like so many weekend warriors....
Considering one was assault/ child-abuse and the other was self-defence, yes.
Forget a major part of what's wrong with it? Sure, I guess.
You quite clearly are, or this discussion would be over.
You don't know that at all. The guy just hit a kid for no reason, who knows what he was going to do next? The fact is if he didn't majorly eff up we wouldn't be having this conversation. It's all on him.
He wasn't just "wrong", he hit someone else's kid and abused his power as an official to do so. Yeah, all of us weekend warriors spend our time arguing with people who support refs hitting kids. And yes, you are supporting it, because if you hit a minor you deserve to be pummelled. Don't like what happened? Don't hit kids.
Last edited by a moderator:
Considering one was assault/ child-abuse and the other was self-defence, yes.
Forget a major part of what's wrong with it? Sure, I guess.
You quite clearly are, or this discussion would be over.
You don't know that at all. The guy just hit a kid for no reason, who knows what he was going to do next? The fact is if he didn't majorly eff up we wouldn't be having this conversation. It's all on him.
Watch the video again,
He slaps the kid once....a few seconds goes by and he gets attacked,
And you are a first class moron if you think what the second kid did was "justifiable" hate to be blunt, but there really is no other way to put it.
The ref screwed up, absolutely, no reason to slap a kid in the helmet, but holy christ man, think for once, the kid...was wearing...a helmet...and absorbed, a short...cuff...to the side...of the head...
I had to spell that out there, because you seem to believe the ref cold-cocked him from behind and didn't let up....oh wait...that was the other kid, who didn't even see what happened....
BTW, try explaining self defense...when the kid who attacked him, DIDN'T SEE WHAT HAPPENED.
- Mar 22, 2012
- 22,317
- 8,692
Haven't checked this thread until now, but yes, I do want him banned for life for viciously assaulting an official. He doesn't deserve a second chance, nor does the official.
Lol at the posters that keep calling these brats poor abused "children". Or if they're indeed
children, they should've NEVER hit an adult, NEVER. It's simply a cultural taboo, in a civilized
society at least.
children, they should've NEVER hit an adult, NEVER. It's simply a cultural taboo, in a civilized
society at least.
Last edited:
selyak
Registered User
FLYLine24 - the only problem with your analysis is that you are posting the New York assault statute. This incident happened in Michigan, not New York. Under Michigan's assault law (which defines an assault to include an attempt to cause physical harm), the ref's conduct would almost certainly fall within the definition of assault.
FLYLine27*
BUCH
I know, like I said in my original post is that the laws I were posting were New York, since I know the laws in the NY. I was unsure of what state they are in the of that video (Wasn't aware it was Michigan).
Just trying to let people know that there is no one set of laws for the whole country that everyone goes by. Each state that different interpretation of what they consider an assault. Lawyer guy didn't realize that, must be a terrible lawyer if they thinks all laws are the same state to state.
Goonzilla
Welcome to my house!
Fact of the matter is that this is quite a valuable debate and I hope any mods don't feel the need to do anything about any content. It's an issue for coaches, players and parents because it doesn't just relate to incidents with referees, but with boundaries and discipline in general.
I would hope that anyone coaching kids tries to impart some skills or knowledge that is useful away from the playing arena as well as on it, including to be able to make smart decisions under pressure, to always think before they act and to be measured in their response to such situations.
Increasingly too many people seem unable to control or restrain themselves in a range of situations, not just at the rink, I think born out of frustrations or lack of control over other aspects of their lives.
There are some things that are just not acceptable; and a referee lashing out at a player or a player attacking anyone, let alone a referee, from behind both cross the line. Clearly some people will have differing opinions of where the line is or certainly some have some quite different world views and life experiences; or perhaps lack of.
One things for certain. Referees are much harder to find and more valuable than players are.
I would hope that anyone coaching kids tries to impart some skills or knowledge that is useful away from the playing arena as well as on it, including to be able to make smart decisions under pressure, to always think before they act and to be measured in their response to such situations.
Increasingly too many people seem unable to control or restrain themselves in a range of situations, not just at the rink, I think born out of frustrations or lack of control over other aspects of their lives.
There are some things that are just not acceptable; and a referee lashing out at a player or a player attacking anyone, let alone a referee, from behind both cross the line. Clearly some people will have differing opinions of where the line is or certainly some have some quite different world views and life experiences; or perhaps lack of.
One things for certain. Referees are much harder to find and more valuable than players are.
Goonzilla
Welcome to my house!
Your really talking semantics though. I had a quick look at NY. Essentially, lower level 'assaults' are just called something else other than assault. They are still 'assaults' by most any dictionary definition.
So you are right, but others are also not wrong.
FLYLine27*
BUCH
Not semantics at all.
If I brought this case to the DA, and wanted "assault" charges against any of those parties I would be laughed out of the building.
There is no such thing as "lower level assaults" in New York, if there is no injury there is no assault, it's pretty cut and dry.
