But the WS guy didn't scream to let him go. The empire geomancer didn't twist his arm or drag him away. She just grabbed his wrist because the guy was being a prick and refusing to listen to her. Not even a second letter, the WS guard punched her. With not a chance to explain herself or the situation.
Saying that the woman holds responsibility because she "committed assault" is blatantly blaming the victim.
I'm talking about the actual law in real places here. Like, you can argue all you like that grabbing someone
shouldn't be assault, but I assure you that it, in fact, is. And is even more likely to be in both polities presented in this Quest.
If you genuinely think that your coworker actions are going to cause serious delays and troubles to the project and they continue despite your explicit warnings? Of course you can force them away. It's not about "thinking you know better". It's about not letting mistakes that are going to severely negatively affect you and the project happen because apparently it's assault to do so.
If you are working at a construction site and see some mismanaging heavy equipment and they refuse to stop despite your warnings, you physically stop them. Ideally you would call an overseer or a guard, but that may not be always an immediate option.
You don't just let them continue because "you don't think you know better".
If a coworker is physically forcing you away from your task, then yes, that's assault. Both legally and, if the task is not immediately dangerous, morally. Like, costing time and money sucks, but you don't get to physically force people out of your way to get to an elevator just because missing it will cause you to lose time and money...you losing time and money is a motive for an assault, not a legal or moral justification for one.
If it's immediately dangerous (as in the example of heavy machinery) it's acceptable assault to save their life or the lives of others, and you shouldn't generally be punished for it, but that's true of tackling someone under similar circumstances as well...doesn't mean that tackling people is okay when there's not imminent danger.
Yes it is. One is purposely meant to inflict harm and pain, to hurt the other person. The other is meant to momentarily stop them without hurting them. In case you haven't noticed, only one person is the medical bay getting a tooth regrown. The WS guy is perfectly hale and hearthy. Because grabbing someone writ is not comparable to punching them in the face.
We actually don't know that. They guy in question could have a broken wrist for all we know...he probably doesn't, but assuming he is unharmed by someone grabbing him hard enough to prevent him from moving his arm is not a safe assumption at all. That can easily leave bruises or worse depending on how hard she grabbed him.
Also, grabbing is often a prelude to other violence. Do you think if someone has already assaulted somebody, the law enforcement personnel nearby should wait for them to escalate the nature of their assault before stopping them? I'm not saying punching her was correct (it was probably a bit too much escalation), but physically stopping her probably was.
Punching is assault, grabbing isn't. Saying that it is is an insult to all the victims of actual assault, resting severity to what they suffered.
I am talking, objectively, about real world laws. Which say grabbing is assault. Your issue is not with me, it's with actual real world legal codes.
This is also very much like saying nobody who's been punched can claim they've been assaulted unless they've been beaten into a coma, since that's insulting to the people who've been beaten into comas. Even if being grabbed isn't usually as bad as being punched, it can still be assault.
"Enforce your will upon them because you know better"? Come on. That's and intentionally extreme way of describing non-violent behaviour. She didn't tackle him. She grabbed his wrist for a single second.
By her own account. We haven't heard the other side yet. And, again, we're talking about physically forcing someone to do something...touching someone's wrist to draw their attention is very different from grabbing it and trying to force their arm not to move and equating the two is not correct.
Physically stopping someone from breaking something by making a mistake you are actively warning them against is not assault. No if you do it in a non-violent way like standing in their way or, yes, grabbing their wirst.
Or should we just let people cause problems and damage because apparently is inherently wrong to "force" them to not do so?
Grabbing someone's wrist is, in fact, violent. Certainly grabbing it hard enough that they can't move their arm is likely to leave bruises at the least. And letting people cause problems is bad, sure, which is why you escalate it to someone who has actual authority and can sort out who is in the right about how the project should be handled.
If the Empire geomancer genuinely thought it warranted it, then that's enough. Because she didn't enact any violent action, and definitely not assault. Her intention wasn't "to force her will on the guy through force"
Her will was 'stop doing that' and then she physically forced him to stop doing it. How is that not enacting her will through force?
If the girl had started things by punching the guy then, yes, she should be hold responsible. But it was the violent guard that started thowing punchs.
Punching is not the only form of violence that exists.
