And I continue to think it’s funny, which obviously doesn’t mean you should do it.
If he watched this movie, he’s the real victim.
Mass egging charged under anti-terrorism statute.
Womanly shrieks reported.
The individual is said to have barked at the K-9 unit.
The Dancing Man of Cottonwood Heights has been exonerated. Though questions remain.
Spoiler: it’s not against the law.
Guys, a topic that is kind of interesting but that you should still not bring up on a first date is how the NFL's instant-replay system is similar in some ways to the courts of appeal. Both systems use a…
You might have thought that our nation's court system would not have to trouble itself with the act commonly known as the "wet willy," but if so, you were sadly … well, actually you were mostly right. But not entirely.
For international readers that may not be familiar with the term—I'm sure the act is universal, but not the name—to administer a "wet willy" is to lick one's finger and then insert said finger into another's ear canal. The purpose for doing this might vary from mild harassment to a desperate bid for attention, though I'm no psychologist. The "wet willy" is classified under "petty assault" on the Wikipedia page "list of school pranks" (along with, for example, the noogie, the wedgie, the towel snap, pantsing, "happy corner" and the circle game), and that seems about right as a general description, at least.
Note, however, that if you are a 34-year-old homeless man and you administer a wet willy to a four-year-old boy to whom you are a complete stranger (WFSB, Hartford Courant), Connecticut may instead classify it as second-degree "breach of the peace" and/or "reckless endangerment."
It was totally unfair that the victims had a backup set.