A stranger baiting you with child molester accusations as part of a racist trolling sure seems like the kind of thing that should be covered.

The concept of "fighting words" in constitutional law is often misunderstood. Fighting words are a category of speech that is not protected by the constitution meaning that the government can punish one engaging in fighting words. It is a very narrow category of unprotected speech. And the fact that it can be punished by the government does not mean that it allows a private party to respond physically to a non-physical utterance of fighting words.

.. possible. Look @ all the made up crap about the dangers of trans people or immigrants too.

Btw as a straight men I solved my “gay problem” years ago and it is I don’t have sex with men.

The picture @ this link is priceless.

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/nation/after-maga-influencer-trolls-gay-couple-with-baby-support-grows-for-dad-who-threw-punches/


Video of the incident shows the Vulins react angrily. David shoves Niemi. Moments later, the couple and at least one other man confronted him again a few blocks away, according to a video Niemi published to X. In the clip, Niemi questions if the baby is safe with his own parents; David is then seen punching Niemi in the head several times.

and 9 times out of 10 i might agree. But 1. those were fighting words (in the vernacular and maybe common law)

2. Guys like this need to be afraid, physically afraid of serious death or injury, to do shit like this.

I can't imagine he will be charged. If he is there is no way in hell he will be convicted.

Unless there was a waiting room full of of Evilangelicals that week in the jury room, he'll probably be acquitted due to the extreme provocation and perceived threat his "victim" presented

Translation, “Here are some bullshit numbers I have pulled out of my ass because I hate gay people.”

The very first job that should be turned over to AI. IMO there should be a bullshit tax paid by these people because of the nonsense they spew.

goes to West Hollywood to attack gay people, thinking he is untouchable? Also, I want documented, video evidence of his "$2,000 camera" being destroyed by Vulin, otherwise, it did not happen.

problem being on that jury. I don't think there is a question on the standard juror form about despising bigots and assholes and "influencers".

These people are sick and evil. I would have ripped one of his eyes out, that's what he deserved.

Bad assumption, especially when they have a baby to protect. And David was reacting because he had been attacked in the past by bigots. I don't blame him a bit.

Many years ago, gay haters used to troll WH, jumping out of their cars and beating gay men who were just walking down the sidewalk. Then WH residents started walking in groups, and it didn't take long before a car load of bigots got their asses beat. And suddenly the attacks stopped. The WH gay community was simply protecting its own..

Quoted from the article:

I'm remembering the protester who was being escorted out of a MAGA rally before the 2016 election, when someone stood up and sucker-punched him--and the crowd cheered.

He's about as reasonable and responsible a guy as you'll ever meet. He married several years ago, and he and his husband adopted their second child about 1-2 years ago..
My daughter's opinion is they are two of the best parents she's ever known.
They're both doctors, living in Pennsylvania. Not only are their children safe with them, they'll grow up in a safe, loving environment.
There have been several studies that show that sexual orientation is not a driving force in child molestation.
It's a pathological condition; one where the molester is exerting control over the child, dominating the child through sexual assault. Sex is a means to an end here, and is totally separate from sexual orientation.

Walk up to a black man using a racist slur and he most likely will hit you. No jury would convict him.

Under PC 415(3), a prosecutor must prove that the words used were irected at a specific person:

The words must be aimed at an individual in a face-to-face encounter, not just shouted into a crowd or posted online.Inherently likely to provoke violence: The test is whether an average person in that specific context would be likely to respond with immediate physical violence.
A "Clear and Present Danger": There must be a high probability that the other person will erupt into violence immediately.
What Typically Counts (and What Doesn't)California courts have narrowed this category so significantly that many highly offensive acts do not qualify:
Not Fighting Words: Profanity used for emphasis, general political slogans (e.g., "F--- the Draft" in Cohen v. California), or criticism of government officials.
Likely Fighting Words: Personally abusive epithets or racial slurs directed at an individual while challenging them to a physical fight.The "Unusually Sensitive" Rule: If someone is unusually aggressive or sensitive and reacts violently to words that would not provoke an average person, the speaker is generally protected.
Civil ProtectionsEven if speech does not meet the criminal "fighting words" threshold, it may still violate California civil laws. The Ralph Act (Civil Code § 51.7) protects individuals from threats of violence based on protected characteristics (like race or religion), allowing victims to seek civil damages and restraining orders even if the government cannot prosecute the speech as a crime.Does your case involve law enforcement or a private dispute between individuals?AI responses may include mistakes. For legal advice, consult a professional. Learn more11 sitesThe Fighting Words Exception to the First AmendmentMar 11, 2026 — Similarly, in Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971), while reversing the defendant's conviction for disturbing the peace based o...North Carolina Criminal Law BlogHate Crimes | State of California - Department of JusticeThe U.S. Constitution allows hate speech as long as it does not interfere with the civil rights of others. While these acts are ce...State of California - Department of Justice (.gov)Fighting Words | Constitution Annotated | Library of CongressThe Court held that government may not punish profane, vulgar, or opprobrious words simply because they are offensive, but only if...Library of Congress – Constitution Annotated (.gov)Show all

Starting a physical altercation is dangerous and to be avoided. People get killed or end up arrested, or it goes on your record and can cause issues later. Also, violence is wrong.

I say leave the gay parents alone and worry about the pedophiles who can't be trusted to care for their own children, or anyone else's.

it just makes for "content" for their idiot masses to consume, and thereby growing their reach, gaining followers, and further monetizing their accounts. It's what they want, regardless of physical injury. They don't learn any lessons from getting their asses kicked. The consequences are worth it to them.

I'm not blaming the true victim here (the baby's parents), just pointing this out. As I understand it, the moment you start singing a Disney song, the content is completely unusable lest the "influencer" wants to get demonetized and potentially sued.