McDonald's incident

[Torrasque]

Most comments on the TDW site say "bitches deserved it" which I have to agree with.
You don't poke an angry bear and then chase it into a corner.

I have to disagree. The bear analogy is fine until you remember that this is a rational human being who should know when to stop. Retaliation: fine. Beating them with a metal rod when they're down: not fine. That's taking it too far.

In my example, the bear is the cashier who went to the back, and the people poking the bear are obviously the two women. I simply mean you don't chase an irritated person into a corner and expect nothing to happen, the person will almost always react in a violent and retaliatory way.
And yes, I agree that after the first couple hits, that was going too far.

 

[Craorach]

What happened to, "We reserve the right to refuse service"? Why didn't this individual just tell them to GTFO if they can't act like civilized customers (is that an oxymoron yet?)

That is pretty much never enforced in my experience. Refusing service in even the most extreme of situations can loose people their jobs.

 

[Winterfel]

I can't really support any of the sides but I can state one simple fact:
If you mess with someone, you better be willing to take whatever response they throw at you.

Let's say you have no clue about the persons history or general temperament. Cornering them after you physically assult them is like asking to have them throw their worst at you.

Seriously, how could these two not be the ones behind bars? He might've gone overboard but let's face it, if they wouldn't have chased him no one would've been hurt, he should be punished for what he did, of course, but the other two should have atleast twice that punishment IMHO.

 

[maddawg IAJI]

and what have the coworkers get fired over it? you know theyd get fired for even touching her

They wouldn't get fired for touching a customer if she is acting hostile towards them.

It took place in New York where I'm guessing that law is not in effect.

Also if it had been insults and slapping, you'd be correct, it was the hopping over the counter and pursuing someone into the kitchen that suggests to me that they were going to continue to assault him, and I think anyone working a fast food job like that would assume the same.

Also are we looking at the same "metal rod" I mean that is not really a "lethal weapon" anymore than "heavy shoes" are. yes you could kill someone with that with enough repeated assault, but then again with enough repeated assault you can kill someone without a weapon. In my mind a deadly weapon would be more, gun, blade, baseball bat (mass of this is enough to kill a person in a single blow)

So I think he was justified in picking up the rod and threatening them, and if they continued to approach (as self defense does not require that you actually be assaulted just that the reasonable threat of being attacked exists.) striking them as a means of defending himself. I do not think repeatedly striking them on the ground was justified (which is why I said it started as a defensive action but clearly he crossed the line from defense to aggression pretty quickly) I do think the charges he received were completely spot on.

Also quick note about one of your other posts (in which you mention he should have called a manager) if the NY McDonalds is anything like the ones I've been to on the west coast, the one in red not doing anything like the rest of the employees was either a shift-leader or a manager.

It still doesn't mean the man is allowed to attack her. Honestly, its a bad case of the bystander affect at play (In both the crowd and the coworkers). And when I say a deadly weapon, I mean that by the legal definition of a deadly weapon.

"A weapon is generally something used to injure, defeat, or destroy and may cover many types of instruments, such as a blackjack, slingshot, billy, metal knuckles, dagger, knife, pistol, revolver, or any other firearm, razor with an unguarded blade, and any metal pipe or bar used or intended to be used in a club, among others." -http://definitions.uslegal.com/w/weapon/

Under that definition, what he used was indeed a deadly weapon.

Yes, there was probably a plethora of alternative options open to most people, however, he has a history of violence, and is more than likely not completely stable.
His reaction to the situation is exactly was would be expected of someone with major anger issues.

If you noticed when he grabbed the bar, he had to seriously reach over the back, telling me that there wasn't much opportunity to get into the back via an open path, and he therefore couldn't have gone out the back door.

The two women deliberately penned him in so he couldn't get away from them, presumably so they could continue their verbal and physical assault.

The simple fact that the man attempted to walk away in the first place, given his mental instability, is a sign of self control. When the women penned him in, it was obviously the end of his rope.

And his history will probably get him a harsher sentence since he is a repeat offender. And if it is exactly what you would expect, would you hire this man?

And I suppose you could put some blame on the coworkers for even allowing that woman to climb up and over the wall and allow her to just keep going without any intervention. I'm not saying one party is wrong and one party is right. I'm saying both parties were idiotic in the end, but he didn't have to be. It was avoidable and it could have been prevented, but it was not and now one man is probably going to prison. What I'm being bothered by is the large attempts at justifying his actions. He wasn't justified in striking that person multiple times, especially after they stopped harassing him and were sobbing on the floor (You can hear him strike her again at about 55 seconds in after he initially stopped.)

Fact of the matter is, you can't justify either side.

 

[Jegsimmons]

also i think the guys who jumped the desk were going for the cash register. the camera didn't catch it, but i'm sure it's a safe bet that's what happened.....and they had machetes....and a bazooka.

 

[Chiiru]

What happened to, "We reserve the right to refuse service"? Why didn't this individual just tell them to GTFO if they can't act like civilized customers (is that an oxymoron yet?)

That is pretty much never enforced in my experience. Refusing service in even the most extreme of situations can loose people their jobs.

I'm lucky at my job then! My boss has a sign that says that, and she regularly tells me if anyone comes in and gives me shit, I can tell them to not let the door hit them on the ass on the way out (in those exact words, even). I've told a customer once that if she didn't like our prices, she could go elsewhere. She ended up spending over $40 in our store.

Luckiest employee ever. :^

 

[Craorach]

I'm lucky at my job then! My boss has a sign that says that, and she regularly tells me if anyone comes in and gives me shit, I can tell them to not let the door hit them on the ass on the way out (in those exact words, even). I've told a customer once that if she didn't like our prices, she could go elsewhere. She ended up spending over $40 in our store.

Luckiest employee ever. :^

Do you work in big business fast food or retail, or it a smaller, more independent?

The bigger the business gets, the less they care about their employees.

 

[let's rock]

One thing to say here

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

Both are in the wrong, but the customers had it coming. If he only used his fists to get them to back off i would side with him, but he went over the line with the metal and the hitting while they were down.

If he won't take your money either get out another bill or leave, jump over the counter and scream at the employee? That is stupid for many reasons.

1. It is a shitty job I have little to no tolerance for morons
2. I take that plus the fact that a yelling customer puts worker on edge
3. Hit the employee or give them a reason to have to defend themself.

What do you get? Violence!

Sorry, but you don't get to cry because you lost the fight you started.

this, especially the last line, you sit there poking a angry ass person who is working a shitty job, what the fuck do you expect them to do, shit sparky muffins that makes everything better? hell no, they are gonna woop some ass.


OT: the rod beating, especially after the first "swing" or so, was much, but god dammit ghetto chicks..please, you are not invincible. I swear this video could've been put in any mcdonalds in my town and i wouldn't have batted an eye lash if it was here.

 

[Engarde]

Law is the law. I still don't see the need to knock someone to the floor with a metal bar, but a valid point nonetheless.

First thing that comes to hand in a moment of violence.

Frankly, there are many FAR more dangerous things he could have done or used. Just as an example off the top of my head, a fryer basket fresh from 200 degree oil.

Now that would have been nasty, ouch. I don't think people would agree with him so much if he had done that, true. Interesting point, I hadn't thought of that.

 

[Bobbity]

He killed a classmate in highschool? Fuck, but I would have wanted to be pretty sure that he was stable before I let him back on the streets...

 

[Vanguard_Ex]

Most comments on the TDW site say "bitches deserved it" which I have to agree with.
You don't poke an angry bear and then chase it into a corner.

I have to disagree. The bear analogy is fine until you remember that this is a rational human being who should know when to stop. Retaliation: fine. Beating them with a metal rod when they're down: not fine. That's taking it too far.

In my example, the bear is the cashier who went to the back, and the people poking the bear are obviously the two women. I simply mean you don't chase an irritated person into a corner and expect nothing to happen, the person will almost always react in a violent and retaliatory way.
And yes, I agree that after the first couple hits, that was going too far.

Ah, hmm...good point. You are pretty much asking for it if you pursue him, yeah. They were kinda pushing their luck I guess.

 

[Raesvelg]

Much like other, similar incidents, I have little to no sympathy for the women who instigated it. They picked the fight, they don't get to ***** about the consequences, and I sincerely hope that they realize that you can't always get away with being a psychotic *****. Assuming that the person you're abusing, particularly if you cross the line into assault, will just passively take it, is a good way to get yourself hurt.

As they discovered, much to their undoubted chagrin and my personal amusement.

 

[rangerman351]

Wait, why is no one caring that HE KILLED A HIGH SCHOOL CLASSMATE. What the hell, man?

 

[Snowalker]

No one commenting on the fact the dude name is FUCKING MACKINTOSH... Escapists, you're letting me down.

 

[Darius Brogan]

Yes, there was probably a plethora of alternative options open to most people, however, he has a history of violence, and is more than likely not completely stable.
His reaction to the situation is exactly was would be expected of someone with major anger issues.

If you noticed when he grabbed the bar, he had to seriously reach over the back, telling me that there wasn't much opportunity to get into the back via an open path, and he therefore couldn't have gone out the back door.

The two women deliberately penned him in so he couldn't get away from them, presumably so they could continue their verbal and physical assault.

The simple fact that the man attempted to walk away in the first place, given his mental instability, is a sign of self control. When the women penned him in, it was obviously the end of his rope.

And his history will probably get him a harsher sentence since he is a repeat offender. And if it is exactly what you would expect, would you hire this man?

And I suppose you could put some blame on the coworkers for even allowing that woman to climb up and over the wall and allow her to just keep going without any intervention. I'm not saying one party is wrong and one party is right. I'm saying both parties were idiotic in the end, but he didn't have to be. It was avoidable and it could have been prevented, but it was not and now one man is probably going to prison. What I'm being bothered by is the large attempts at justifying his actions. He wasn't justified in striking that person multiple times, especially after they stopped harassing him and were sobbing on the floor (You can hear him strike her again at about 55 seconds in after he initially stopped.)

Fact of the matter is, you can't justify either side.

I completely understand where you're coming from here, but you're ignoring the fact that this man is obviously mentally unstable. (Also, I put quite a bit of blame on his co-workers, because their efforts were pitiful)

Mental instability causes people to think in strange ways, and react in even stranger ways.

Anger like that doesn't just 'pop' in and out whenever, and his actions are minimally justified because he's got what are obviously severe issues. If the women had known he was inherently violent, they wouldn't have tried to assault him, and he wouldn't have beaten them down in a loss of control.

Given that he's been in prison once before, it's likely that he was hired as a show of charity on the part of the manager, or his parole officer got the job for him.

Leaving things at this: The women are stupid stunned cunts for reacting like that because of some fucking money, and the guy should be sent to an institution that can hopefully help him overcome his huge anger issues.
I say this because he obviously made an attempt to avoid conflict, when he tried to walk away and the women penned him in.

 

[jpoon]

Damn, that moron is obviously right back where he should be (in jail). Looks like McDumpster's was a bit too stressful for that guy.

 

[Darius Brogan]

He killed a classmate in highschool? Fuck, but I would have wanted to be pretty sure that he was stable before I let him back on the streets...

As evidenced by his attempt to walk away before the beat-down started, he was trying to exercise control and avoid physical conflict.

 

[RaikuFA]

What happened to, "We reserve the right to refuse service"? Why didn't this individual just tell them to GTFO if they can't act like civilized customers (is that an oxymoron yet?)

because "the customer is always right" which needs to be abolished

 

[Darius Brogan]

Damn, that moron is obviously right back where he should be (in jail). Looks like McDumpster's was a bit too stressful for that guy.

Yes, blame the mentally unstable guy with anger issues that two stunned cunts penned him behind the counter and tried to assault him verbally and physically because they had a counterfeit $50 in their purse.

That makes so much sense.