Hacker News Reader

Comment by bobert92 | Hacker News Reader

Literally, with like paintball guns or some other form of humiliation.

Wouldn't that be assaulting a federal agent?

If they're off duty and in plain clothes shouldn't it be a civilian assault? Although, since the intent is to paint a federal agent I suppose you'd have a case.

or just assault?

Assault would be threatening them with a paintballing. Battery is when the paintball hits their trachea.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_difference_between_ass...

just alert everyone that they will be engaging in a paintball event; and they consent to the assault.

I am pretty sure it doesn't work that way. :)

Maybe if everyone signs a consent form at registration.

There is no registration at defcon, it's all anonymous. You hand them cash for a badge and a packet of info/stickers/cd and are on your way.

When you go to a paintball field, is there a complicated registration process, or is it just understood that paintball is played at this particular place? Whatever legal maneuvers the paintball field's management has to do, DefCon could do.

(I suspect the main objections to indoor paintball will come from the venue. Perhaps a less messy, but still humiliating, method can be used?)

This is an absurd proposal, but given that the Rio won't let people running pubs in this years call for parties attach stuff to the walls (Can't find the link offhand, but it was in the submission info), I think it's safe to assume that paint guns inside wouldn't happen.

That said, that's the least important reason, the more important one being that you can't just nail people with any kind of gun at an infosec conference, no matter how unconf it is.

And FYI, about 100 different people will have your credit card information if you use the hotel ATM to get your cash.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com