That’s very much the expected outcome. In the US, at least, the law has long recognized that there are some things you just can’t say without expecting a beatdown. This is called the “fighting words doctrine.” Generally, it covers things like the OP example, which is very clearly a direct personal insult that a reasonable person would expect could lead to violence.
And this is a very good policy that maintains civility between people in public. There are States now that will allow absolutely anything to be said to anyone, without any recourse available to the person being harassed. As you can expect, those policies have led to people with much louder mouths, and a general lack of respect. People tend to hold their tongue a lot more when they can get punched in the face.
That’s very much the expected outcome. In the US, at least, the law has long recognized that there are some things you just can’t say without expecting a beatdown. This is called the “fighting words doctrine.” Generally, it covers things like the OP example, which is very clearly a direct personal insult that a reasonable person would expect could lead to violence.
And this is a very good policy that maintains civility between people in public. There are States now that will allow absolutely anything to be said to anyone, without any recourse available to the person being harassed. As you can expect, those policies have led to people with much louder mouths, and a general lack of respect. People tend to hold their tongue a lot more when they can get punched in the face.
Fighting words haven’t had legal standing for a long time as anything but a mitigating circumstance for sentencing.
What let Aldrin off was the previous personal and targeted harassment.