T Nation

Dear Combat Forum


#1

I know many of us never stray out of here and that's with good reason... but I would like to see some opinions from you people in these threads.

http://tnation.T-Nation.com/free_online_forum/music_movies_girls_life/excessive_or_well_deserved

http://tnation.T-Nation.com/free_online_forum/music_movies_girls_life/citizen_superhero_arrested

Oftentimes the opinions of those who often deal or have dealt with violence in both the real world and competition vary greatly from the general public who haven't been punched since third grade, so I want to see what you guys say.

Thanks.

irish.


#2

In the first thread I think the guy may have been justified in his use of the stick as a weapon. There were multiple opponents and therefore a disparity of force. He had also attempted to flee first rather than escalating. I'd say that the only way that he wouldn't be justified is if there had been an exit that he could have easily fled through in the back of the McDonald's and he chose to instead stand his ground and fight.

Now, whether he was justified in continuing to strike his attackers once they were down on the ground is another story. Unfortunately, we can't tell from the video what the two women attackers were doing while on the ground because the counter is in the way. As I understand use of force laws (and they can vary from state to state/country to country) you are justified in using sufficient force to stop the attacker. Once they are neutralized though, you don't have the right to continue assaulting them (and that's pretty much what you're going to get charged with at that point).

I think he may have gotten himself into trouble by not realizing this distinction.

In the second thread, I think that the guy was foolish to involve himself in a fight that he had no stake in. I can understand wanting to diffuse a violent situation before anyone gets seriously hurt, but he doesn't have the legal right to use physical force in that scenario. His best bet would have been to call 911 and then only choose physical force if it looked like there was immediate risk of serious harm to one of the individuals.

Now, had it been a perceived mugging, rape, murder or other violent crime, or had one individual been at a considerable disadvantage (like one was a 120 lb woman or child and the other was a very large man, one had a weapon, etc...) then maybe I could see trying to "protect/defend an innocent" and he could have probably pled the good Samaritan defense. Also, in such a situation (especially had the perp had a weapon) I would actually agree with not making one's presence known prior to launching into physical force. You want the element of surprise in that case.

He also made no attempt to diffuse the situation by verbal means or get a more clear idea/picture of what was really happening with speech prior to using force. That was a mistake on his part. Had he just said, "Hey! What's going on here?! I'm going to call the police if you two don't stop it!" The two people would have likely stopped dancing and told him that no, everything was fine. Had he been afraid that speaking could have put him in danger, he could have first found cover (hidden behind the corner of a building for instance) and been ready to run for it should one of the individuals have tried to pursue him.

Either way, given the situation (or at least the description of it we have), I think he made an erroneous decision and subsequent actions.


#3

First:
Deserved, but force used was overwhelming and unnecessary. I'm guessing he's going back to the pen, but if he gets lucky and he's off probation...

Second:
The guy deserves the charge. If you pepper spray a bunch of people who appear to be in an altercation, you're an idiot. What are the circumstances surrounding the fight? Is there a victim? Could you have sprayed some of that stuff in his eyes? Pepper spraying people is assault. Would we be asking questions if he came in with a taser and started zapping people?

In the video down the page, a girl, obviously a bystander, comes at him after getting pepper sprayed. I believe this is justified though foolish.

The guy is trying to act like some sort of authoritarian figure, an overzealous police officer perhaps. He's a douche that dresses in a costume.


#4

Those women were keeping it real. He kept it realer. :slightly_smiling:

http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=11915&title=when-keeping-it-real-goes-wrong---brenda-johnson?xrs=share_copy

These days there is an epidemic of young people who have no sense. Especially young women. They will go stepping up on a man like they are a man, but expect not to get treated like a man. As James Brown said this is a mans world. If women are going to act like tough guys and start shit then they should not be able to expect to get treated different from a man.

That video should be shown to high school kids because it could teach an important lesson. I hope that poor guy gets some leniency because those bitches asked for what they got.


#5

If you choose to attack somebody you should not be expecting mercy.

Legally speaking, because he continued to beat them and because of the fact that they were women, he's fucked.

Don't know what to say about 'superhero' other than WTF?


#6

First video- that guy is an animal and deserves to be locked up. Not going to repeat my reasoning but that should not fall under the protection of self defense.

Superhero- Another nut job, this guy should be locked up before he gets himself or someone else seriously hurt or killed. Psychiatrist would be much needed...


#7

First one:

The orginal video no longer works so I looke it up and I just don't see the problem with his actions, or reaction. I know the law may view it differently but to me that is a problem. When someone jumps the counter I could only assume they are going to try and kill you. I have seen someone shot over a parking place before so when defending yourself you can really make no assumptions of the persons intent. I agree it would have been smarter if he just backed away after knocking them down but there has to be something about his state of mind after having two people come over the counter at him.

Second one: That guy is just looking for trouble, while I applaude someone who is willing to take action against crime there are better ways of doing it.


#8

The first video looks a little excessive when he keeps on hitting them when they're down.

The second video, that guy is crazy. I've seen another video of him with a stun gun or stun baton threatening a guy who had a few drinks and was going to his car to drive. He's just playing superhero. Why is he breaking up fights and messing with drivers who've been drinking? Why not go after drug dealers or actually dangerous criminals? He could become a patrol officer and do the same thing probably.


#9
  1. Guy got attacked and the person attacking him made a huge mistake. you cant be jumping over counters and jumping people then wanting them arrested when you get your ass kicked. I know she was a woman and I am against hitting women but male or female jumping the counter and going after someone earns you a beating.

  2. Guy needs help. Nobody with a brain goes looking for trouble and he does. I enjoy comic books just as much as the next nerd but seriously thats gonne get him killed.


#10

Early Impressions:

First: Who's Lovin' It?

He used potentially deadly force to repel what may not have been a potentially deadly assault. As far as I know neither woman was armed (though I would bet that the two assailants/"beaten parties" would have availed themselves of plenty of dangerous/maiming weapons of opportunity had it progressed). The man with the metal rod has a previous record. I do not know enough about what kicked the incident off so questions about "Fighting Words", "creating exigency", and "mutual antagonism" are open.

I think he is going to catch plenty of charges and wind up doing time over this. Not that I agree with it. Just that woman's lib doesn't seem to make 2 women attacking the same disparity of force that 2 men would be when the DA is piling on the charges. I am sure McDonald's/the owner(s)/controlling interests of that franchise will do everything they can to separated from him and paint his actions as "against policy". They WILL be sued, they are the deep pockets.

Most Important: How insane would it have been if he could have had access to Westdale Warrior's archaic weapons locker? It would be like Braveheart meets every John Singleton movie ever. I would pay to watch that. It would have to be better than Terra Nova.

Second: OH, FOR FUCKS SAKE!

This is all about buying the stupid prize.

The DA's office has declined to press charges. Some fucking LARPers got arrested. Some lucky cop got to be the one that frisked, hooked, and hung paper a bunch of ComicCon/Mortal Combat rejects while his co-workers dealt with the usual drunk, puking, assholes. Honestly, I think the real victims are all the cops who ALMOST got to tell this story, but had to do other shit.

Also, how is Dog the Bounty Hunter doing now that he is no longer the biggest attention whore with a pepper spray can?

Regards,

Robert A

EDIT TO ADD: Watched the McDonald land beat down a few more times. Unless the guy can make a hell of a case for "furtive movement"/they were going for a weapon then he is hosed. Again, not that I don't think the two would have hesitated to dump a bunch of hot grease on him if they had a chance. In fact, I would bet hot grease/boiling rice/boiling grits/(my favorite)a cup full of baby lotion that has been microwaved would be a fairly natural move.


#11

Watchmen anyone?


#12

Actually I was thinking more of this:

OR This story

http://lancasteronline.com/article/local/465564_Police-report-pot-of-hot-oil-used-in-assault.html

but yeah this works too:

Regards,

Robert A