• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should squirting someone with breast milk be a felony?

Should squirting someone with breast milk be a felony?

  • Yes, it's a bodily fluid, therefore it is the same as urinating on someone

    Votes: 10 35.7%
  • No, it's only breastmilk, it's different than urine

    Votes: 2 7.1%
  • It should be a misdemeanor, but also include indecent exposure as well

    Votes: 7 25.0%
  • Other, please explain

    Votes: 9 32.1%

  • Total voters
    28
Ridiculous.

However, the reason it was a felony (I am guessing) is because the victim is a police officer doing her duty.

In PA at least, where I practice, if you commit a simple assault like this, it's a misdemeanor, but if it's against an officer while on duty, it automatically becomes a felony.

This will be negotiated down, I am sure.
 
Maybe it went off by accident, a misdemeanor......:lol:
 
Ridiculous.

However, the reason it was a felony (I am guessing) is because the victim is a police officer doing her duty.

In PA at least, where I practice, if you commit a simple assault like this, it's a misdemeanor, but if it's against an officer while on duty, it automatically becomes a felony.

This will be negotiated down, I am sure.

It's not a simple assault because it involves a bodily fluid.
 
I'm going to need to see visual evidence before I weigh in on this.

That is just too funny to visualize! :2rofll::2rofll::2rofll::2rofll::2rofll:

However, it's probably no different than attacking a guard with urine, feces or spit. Throw the book at her. And get her a breast pump!
 
Seems to me the deputy had located his face inappropriately. He could be charge with sexual harrassment.

It was a woman....;)
I would like to see the video, it sounds like one hell of a shot!.....;)
I can't stop laughing, so it must be funny....:lol:
 
It was a woman....;)
I would like to see the video, it sounds like one hell of a shot!.....;)
I can't stop laughing, so it must be funny....:lol:
So the officer is a lesbo.
 
That is not the case everywhere. Is that a distinction in the state where this happened?

Kentucky 508.025 Assault in the third degree.
(1)
A person is guilty of assault in the third degree when the actor:
(a) Recklessly, with a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument, or intentionally
causes or attempts to cause physical injury to:
1.
A state, county, city, or federal peace officer;


b. Being a person confined in a detention facility, or state residential treatment
facility or state staff secure facility for residential treatment which provides
for the care, treatment, or detention of a juvenile charged with or adjudicated
delinquent because of a public offense or as a youthful offender, inflicts
physical injury upon or throws or causes feces, or urine, or other bodily fluid
to be thrown upon an employee of the facility.
That secondary category (bodily fluid) isn't covered for adults, but seems relevant here.
 
Last edited:
FWIW, here's the mugshot:

0308101inside1.jpg

Here's the complaint.
 
I think "assault" with bodily fluids should be a special case of assault. Whether or not they know/suspect they have something that can be transmitted to someone else should determine the extent of the charges. Now I think that spitting or squirting on someone should be charged with something, but I don't think it should be as bad as hitting someone unless the person is attempting to actually give some disease that they know or suspect they have to someone else. Yeah, it's gross, but if the person's "clean" then there isn't any real danger or damage. And, even if they do have something, chances are very small of actually transmitting it in this manner.

I wouldn't have a problem with the indecent exposure if it were actually in public. I don't think it would apply here though. I'm not sure. I really don't agree with anyone who is charged with indecent exposure though having to go on the sex offenders list. Now, if it's someone who repeatedly shows themselves to children, sure. But many people just do it as some stupid prank or because they're drunk, and its not a sexual matter at all.
 
Kentucky 508.025 Assault in the third degree.
(1)
A person is guilty of assault in the third degree when the actor:
(a) Recklessly, with a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument, or intentionally
causes or attempts to cause physical injury to:
1.
A state, county, city, or federal peace officer;

I don't think breast milk could really be considered a 'deadly weapon' or a 'dangerous instrument', unless the 'squirter' has AIDS, or knew the 'squirtee'
was allergic......:mrgreen:
 
I don't think breast milk could really be considered a 'deadly weapon' or a 'dangerous instrument', unless the 'squirter' has AIDS, or knew the 'squirtee'
was allergic......:mrgreen:

It's not that it was a dangerous weapon, but the latter condition, that she intended to do harm to a peace officer.

Let me just say...breast milk can contain biological agents, and I find the idea gross in the extreme.

The perp was drunk, disorderly, and stupid.
 
only in KY. too funny.

Bunning's state ?
The same state with the worst schools in the country and/or the stupidest students?
This does take the cake, the fruitcake, for overreacting !
An "other" vote for me....some the the selections and votes make no sense.
 
Absolutely a felony. Officer on duty, possibility of infection, so on and so forth. Not to mention it's just a deliberately filthy thing to do.
 
That secondary category (bodily fluid) isn't covered for adults, but seems relevant here.

Nah, it's limited to "a detention facility, or state residential treatment
facility or state staff secure facility for residential treatment which provides
for the care, treatment, or detention of a juvenile charged with or adjudicated
delinquent".

So it doesn't apply here.
 
Nah, it's limited to "a detention facility, or state residential treatment
facility or state staff secure facility for residential treatment which provides
for the care, treatment, or detention of a juvenile charged with or adjudicated
delinquent".

So it doesn't apply here.

The first condition does, though...peace officer. I have no doubt that jail inmates are regularly charged with a third degree felony for urinating on the jail officers.
 
Back
Top Bottom