Another vote for the ‘He’s just defending himself’ crowd. Someone crazy enough to jump over a counter and try and attack you could easily be carrying a concealed weapon. In that guy’s shoes, any movement would be construed as a threat. A poster also mentioned he could have paid heed to the people telling him to stop. In those 15-20 seconds, everything outside of self defence would at the very least get tuned out, and in all probability, the screaming and the noise would add to the brain’s confusion and threat perception, and prevent him from making a rational decision about when the attackers cease being a threat.
Those charges are fucking bullshit.
It kind of wigs me out that what I’m hearing from a lot of you guys is “When attacked in any way, no matter how minor or severe, it is acceptable and even expected to go completely out of your mind with rage/panic and use force on the attacker until he/she is dead, even if other options such as walking away and/or stopping short of death were available.”
I just don’t really care for “but he was totally irrational and couldn’t help his behavior!” as an excuse. And I don’t think that beating someone to death is an acceptable response to being slapped/threatened in public. Prior to this thread I would have said that probably most people felt as I do.
Here is an amusing thread for those that think that one in a fight should consider what pedestrian onlookers are saying: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8jCRcwrpX8&feature=feedrec_grec_index
Observe that the guy in the white T shirt could do much more, and had plenty of fight left in him
- After onlookers are saying “let him go, etc…”
- After he is on the ground
The reason bystanders butt in saying “Let him/her go, Stop, etc…” isn’t because a fair response has been maximized, but, because they don’t want to be involved past their own level of amusement.
hh
Welcome to the real world honeybuns.
Well, (a) let’s first be clear that I shouldn’t push you, let alone smack you upside the head; but (b) if I do so, then, no, you should walk away, until and unless I continue to come after you with an accomplice in tow, what with him and me trespassing on private property by dint of vaulting over obstacles during my pursuit, in which case you have my full permission to hit back with the minimum force necessary to make me stop moving.
More like the world of Internet Tough Guys (does it imaginary hurt when you trip over your imaginary giant testicles constantly?) but thanks, I always appreciate a good welcome.
Ehm, guys…
it’s dEfuse. Seriously.
As a verb, diffuse means “spread”; as an adjective, “hazy”. The verb defuse means, in a literal sense, “take the fuse out of an explosive”; figuratively, “to prevent or stop an explosive situation”.
Kthxbye.
Except he wasn’t attacked “in any way” before going all WWII on them. The initial slap evoked no response, but then he lost his shit when the attacks didn’t stop and someone came behind the corner to continue hitting him. Imagine if you were working retail and two angry fat drunks started screaming at you. You’d probably feel somewhat threatened, but wouldn’t turn physical. Now imagine if one slapped you. You’d likely slap back or retreat and call security. Now what if one of the screaming fat drunks encroached on your space in a way that’s well beyond the border of acceptability, coming behind the counter to attack. You’d be like, “These bitches are about to get their asses sent to them,” or at least I would be.
I have mixed feelings on this, but ultimately land on the “Dude, chill out” side. I would have happily whacked those, ahem, ladies with a crow bar, but I would not have continued to do so after they lay injured on the ground, though I could see how someone would feel the need to incapacitate someone crazy enough to walk behind the counter in order to assault you.
As in, “that guy diffused her blood all over the room by smacking her with a crowbar, and that defused the situation”? 
I am in agreement with you here. I am just very :rolleyes: about some of the “this guy is a hero, I will contribute to his legal defense fund, this is a very reasonable reaction” stuff in this thread.
Aside from “this guy is a hero” what part of “this is a very reasonable reaction” is foreign to you? I think the last two whacks were probably a bit too far, but to say they’re unreasonable is just incorrect.
Actually I think you’ll find that you’re the one who is incorrect. I believe we are at an impasse, my good sir.
If you apologize in advance and put the post in a spoiler box, you already know you’re better off not posting at all. This is offensive and inappropriate. Don’t do it again.
twickster, MPSIMS moderator
It looks to me like what he used was a bun hook, a metal rod with a blunt hook at one end, used to drag plastic pallets of bread. A common piece of equipment, at least back when I worked there.
The more I hear about this, the more I’m on Rayon’s side.
See, this is what I don’t get. Why do you need to choose a side here? I think everyone involved behaved inappropriately.
My impression also, admittedly an uninformed one. The two women were obvioulsy in the wrong by attacking and chasing this guy; he had a right to self-defence; but at least to a casual viewing, seems he took it too far.
Fortunately, that’s what the courts are for - to take a non-casual look at it, see if he really went beyond his undoubted right to defend himself.
I’d lean very far to the side of the employee just doing his job in a case like this, because he clearly is not the instigator. It is just that the violence on the tape seems so excessive. If there’s a reasonable doubt of course he should get the benefit of it, but …
Thinking everyone behaved inappropriately doesn’t mean you think everyone involved behaved equally inappropriately, and once you’ve weighted the inappropriateness, you’ve in essence chosen a side whether you express it in those terms or not.
Personally, I find physically attacking someone for doing something that is standard procedure at every retail outlet in the country to be far more inappropriate than beating someone who is attacking you down with whatever happens to be handy and going overboard.
Note…this does not apply to the OP as I think he could defend himself.
I was in many fights when I was younger. My opponents were usually taller and weighed more than me. When they go down/you get the advantage…you have to press that advantage. You have to make SURE they won’t get up and come at you again because if they do you could get it bad. When you are fighting at a disadvantage you just can’t not pursue at less than 100% ability.
I was accused of being ‘excessive’ more than once. Particularly a guy that easily had several inches and 100 pounds on me. You CAN’T let that guy get a crack at you or you could be in a world of hurt.
Again, doesn’t apply to OP…but have to disagree with the ‘stop hitting them when they’re down’ thing.
Huh? The relative degree of bad behaviour isn’t an issue.
Far as I’m concerned, the two women should be charged without a doubt, and the only real issue is whether the guy was exercising legitimate self-defence or went beyond what is legitimate.