Quote: Originally Posted by karrie
They're a single item Scott. He may have hit the kid mainly with the nipple, but it still bears the weight of a bottle behind it.
If the bottle and the nipple were considdered the same object, then they would be labeling the bottle as the weapon of assault not the nipple, and they wouldn't even be mentioning what part of the bottle hit the infant (The nipple) it would still have been the bottle. They are identifying the rubber nipple as the weapon in the assault because they seem to realize the difference between the two (The bottle and the nipple) Where as a bottle can do much more harm then the rubber nipple (Which the nipple can do none)
Are you going to tell me that if I got smacked on the highway by an 18 wheeler at 160kmh while holding a box of feathers, that the box of feathers was the thing that killed me since it was between myself and the truck which contained the force in which killed me?
Exact same logic if someone hit you with a milk bottle and made you bleed, but identify the rubber nipple as the weapon which did it to you, when if anything the rubber nipple and the box of feathers would have reduced the impact recieved.
regardless of which you call the actual weapon... they're not classifying it a deadly or controlled weapon, but, using it in an attack grants it the status of weapon for that attack.
One has to prove the intent to attack or do harm in order to considder it a weapon.
Man people are blowing this way out of what has been supplied in information.