Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

If your noisy neighbor was setting of a blowhorn with a high duty cycle for multiple days with the express intent to cause harm to you, it would probably be fair to call that some form of assault.


> with the express intent to cause harm

Citation?


Do I need a citation that people honking to cause a distrubance intended to disturb?


> Do I need a citation that people honking to cause a distrubance intended to disturb?

Wow, that's quite a comment and a remarkably transparent backpedaling from "intent to cause harm".


From the Merriam Webster,

Disturbance, 2) : noisy or violent activity : commotion


Good grief. Yes, a disturbance can refer to noise or violence, but that doesn't imply that a noise is violence. This is the lowest quality argumentation I've seen on this site for a while.


I'm giving a definition that applies to my own words. That's the way I meant distrubance. Also, it's not because something isn't violent that it isn't harmful.


You specifically likened it to assault. A noisy protest is annoying and it can disturb the quiet but it isn’t harmful in any sense that could be considered assault.


As with anything, there is nuance. A noisy protest is merely annoying, a 140dB train horn less than ten meters away is assault.


Granted. Arrest the people with the 140dB train horns.


I'm glad we agree. We should also fine people that are using otherwise reglementory horns in order to cause a nuisance, as we normally do.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: