FranksWildYear s 08/28/2008
"These teeth are registered as a dangerous weapon in the State of Louisiana."
Helpful
Funny
Agree
Disagree
irishgit 08/28/2008
From a legal standpoint it makes perfect sense, because "aggravated" refers to the perpetrators use of a weapon, in this case the false teeth, as opposed to the natural teeth.
SZinHonshu 09/21/2005
This makes complete sense because the "aggravated" label applies when the perpetrator uses a weapon. A criminal can "arm" himself with false teeth but the natural kind are there involuntarily. Granted, my analysis dodges the issue of whether or not regular brushing and flossing constitutes the maintenance of a weapon.
scarletfeather 09/20/2005
Either way, it should be avoided at all costs.
sixty7a 02/26/2005
I'd be aggravated either way!
abichara 09/27/2004
Watch those dentures!
CastleBee 09/27/2004
What's the charge for gumming them?
jgls 09/27/2004
what about biting someone with no teeth or with someone else's false teeth?
numbah16tdhaha 09/27/2004
I'm suprised its not assault with a deadly weapon!
AndrewScott 09/27/2004
Undoubtedly put on the books because of Polident spokeslady, Martha Raye. Afterwards, Hugh Hefner sued for discrimination.
Vudija 09/27/2004
I understand that biting with dentures is worse, because they are stronger than natural teeth...BUT...One would have to wonder how often someone with dentures actually bites someone.
kamylienne 09/26/2004
. . . well, I guess I'd be pretty aggravated if someone left their dentures in my arm . . .
12 reviews! « Previous | Page of 1 | Next »
Sort by Newest Oldest Most helpful Least helpful Highest rated Lowest rated
