Fist-fighting tickets/fines?

[FrogFeathers]

My son (the black belt) and I were discussing class rings. He has a friend (we'll call him A) who is an amazing martial artist (we've known this guy for six years and he's only gotten better).

We've put to rest the "registering yourself as a weapon" UL because of snopes. But, today, he told me a new one that sounds utterly ridiculous and I couldn't find anything about it, here or on a general search.

My son was told that a person involved in a fist fight gets fined by how many rings said person is wearing. He said to me that A told him that if he were ever in a fight and the police arrived, the assailants would be fined $50 per ring as they are considered "weapons".

Possible? Ridiculous? UL spread like the "registering yourself as a weapon"?

I told my son I'd ask, so thanks.

[Eddylizard]

The only think I can think of is if heavy or spiked rings were worn as a type of improvised knuckleduster, in order to increase the amount of damage inflicted. If it could be shown that this was the purpose of wearing the rings, then the assailent might be dealt with more severly by the court. Showing that intent might be difficult though. I can't see that there would be a fixed 'per ring' tariff though.

[FrogFeathers]

That's what I figured. If they showed that someone purposefully left the house with numerous rings on to act as a pseudo-brass knuckles.

But, like you said, intent is hard to prove.

[Amigone201]

Originally Posted by FrogFeathers

That's what I figured. If they showed that someone purposefully left the house with numerous rings on to act as a pseudo-brass knuckles.

But, like you said, intent is hard to prove.

Doesn't matter why they left the house with them. The point is was it assault, or assault with a weapon? Could be the difference between a misdemeanor and a felony.

One thing that I've seen recently worn by kids in school (in Glasgow at least) is jewelry that essentially consists of 2 or more rings joined together, with a plate on the outside (often, but not always, with the wearers name or football affiliation picket out in chunky letters). Some of them are quite small, but some of them cover the outside of three fingers, and are essentially a small knuckleduster.

A member of staff told me that if the pupils were stopped by the police wearing this jewelry, it would be confiscated as a weapon, but its tolerated in the school. Now, that sounded like an UL to me, but it does sort of raise the question: When does jewelry stop being decorative and start being a weapon? To be honest, as big and chunky as some of the "knuckleduster" style rings are, they still dont look as bad as if someone was just wearing 3 sovereign rings (not that uncommon sadly...).

As to the OP, I dont think that fining people per ring is particularly feasible. If you only hit someone with a right hook, would you have to pay for all your rings, or just the ones on your right hand? If someone gets headbutted by a guy with an eyebrow ring, would he have to pay an extra $50? Besides, most rings wouldnt actually do any extra damage if you punched someone, or at least I would assume they wouldnt.

[Troberg]

When does jewelry stop being decorative and start being a weapon?

I would say when it's made of brass or other non-precious metal and is actively used to physically clarify one's opinion about another person's face.

Edit: My spelling sucks, as usual...

[diddy]

Once one gets into a fist fight, you have to take the risk that you might be exposing your body to other things that are attatched to ones fist. Its not really more of an assult though unless the ring or jewelry was intentionally designed and worn to cause additional harm. That doesnt make them "weapons" since they are of a decorative nature and are not sold for that purpose.

That beiong said, you dont have to register a baseball bat and it can be a terrible weapon. I would guess that if you punched a guy knowing he would be damaged it would be a worse offense (like second degree assult), bt not with a weapon since rings and such are not usually capable of casuing any harm unless the fist is behind it.

[Black Belt and Socks]

Having been the guests of both the St. Louis City (once) and St. Louis County (twice) for assault, and wearing rings all three times, I can tell you it's not true in Missouri.

No charges filled in two of the incidents, charges dropped in the third, just in case you had to know. I'm not a turn the other cheek type of person.

BB "they had it coming, I swear!" &S

[tribrats]

I didn't think much about the title of the thread until I saw who posted it. Then my first thought was "Oh no. Who did she beat up?!?!"