McDonald's incident

[JMV]

Hit me with a metal rod once, shame on me. Hit me with a metal rod several times, bashing my head in the process, shame on you.

 

[Aviyur]

Fuck it, maybe those cunts won't be so leary in the future. Infact I can pretty much guarantee they're very quiet now.

Even if you're an employee in a fast food joint you have a right to feel safe at your workplace. They got what they deserved.

They instigated and lost. Shit happens.

 

[TonyVonTonyus]

They deserve it. He could have been acting in self defense. If I worked at a store and two people jumped over the counter at me I'd try to beat them with a metal rod as well.

 

[Kurokami]

Who took a video of this and why?

They deserve it. He could have been acting in self defense. If I worked at a store and two people jumped over the counter at me I'd try to beat them with a metal rod as well.

You miss the point. Hitting a person when they try to assault you is fine, beating them senseless afterwords, that's not the same.

 

[Saltyk]

As soon as the guy hit the person who jumped over the counter when they were down on the ground - the worker was in the wrong.

At least in my state - Someone comes at me I will drop them like a bad habit. With a bat - gun or what ever. If I do anything to the person once they are down - I would be in the wrong. At least in my state.

For any carry permit holders out there - if you pull your piece and you fire when someone was on the ground - you are a criminal at that point. Guy in Oklahoma just got locked up for finishing off a guy trying to hold him up.

You can use deadly force if there is a threat. Not after the threat has passed.

Exactly. He was the "victim" until he started beating them senseless with a metal rod. He should have just gone to his manager and had them deal with the situation while he cooled off in the manager's office. Then, he would have been okay. Of course we don't know all the details. The video seems to start after the trouble had already started. And the link provided has no info other than what is already in the OP. For all we know, he cussed them out to begin with.

The guy in Oklahoma. Was he working at a Pharmacy? Because I recall hearing about a guy that worked at a Pharmacy stopping a robbery by two punk kids (they might have had guns). He shot the first one in the head, which apparently left him unconscious, and the other ran out. He returned and put about six more bullets in the kid's chest. It's really sad, because up until that point, the guy was a hero. He saved all the customers and his coworkers from who knows what fate (being robbed at minimal). But then he has to just be a complete psychopath and murder the defenseless punk. I think he was sentenced to life in prison, but maybe the death penalty, and he didn't think he had done anything wrong. Even his son thought he did the right thing.

I wonder how all these people saying that the women in this situation deserved being beaten would react to a story about a man killing a unconscious criminal.

 

[Moromillas]

The title should be 'McDonald's hero defends himself, gets arrested.'

 

[Torrasque]

start as an act of self-defense

It was never self-defense. These people were not a threat to him and even if they were, you can't claim self-defense with a deadly weapon (such as a metal rod) unless they're equally armed. That's the law in Massachusetts, but regardless of where this is, he threw the self-defense idea out the window when he continued to beat her. He'll probably still get anger management, but he's going to go to those lessons via prison transport. You don't assault someone with a deadly weapon multiple times and not get thrown in jail because the person you were striking pissed you off. The world doesn't work that way.

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.

That is a good point about weapons, and I shall adress it.
As far as court cases go, "assault with a weapon" is probably just a technicality that means "assault with an extension of their body that has a certain potential to cause harm". That reminds of people who get a certain degree of martial arts, that "makes their hands count as deadly weapons". So as far as "assault with a weapon", it is just a technicality I don't really care for.
Of course, that doesn't rule out the fact that he still beat them with a metal rod. I just don't think "ZOMG METAL ROD! THIS GUY MUST BE THE FABLED ROD KILLER OF 98!". He could have just kicked them when they were down, and it would have been to the same effect.
Several people have exaggerated the damage that the metal rod could have done, and of course it shouldn't be ruled out, but it is not a lead pipe people...

 

[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.

 

[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?)

 

[Saltyk]

Who took a video of this and why?

They deserve it. He could have been acting in self defense. If I worked at a store and two people jumped over the counter at me I'd try to beat them with a metal rod as well.

You miss the point. Hitting a person when they try to assault you is fine, beating them senseless afterwords, that's not the same.

From what I can tell, it looks like this was going on for a moment. Most likely the customer was upset about [insert minor blown out of proportion issue here] and started yelling at the cashier. Perhaps he yelled back or even started the yelling, we don't know. Some other random person then decides to record it for some reason-I'm betting they saw it as Youtube fodder-and catches something far different than what they actually expected.

Also, I agree. Self defense is one thing. But you can go way too far. This is one of those way too far instances.

 

[Jegsimmons]

1. mcDonald employees are assholes
2. Customers at mcDonalds are BIGGER assholes who turn the employees into assholes because they accidently gave the little bastard pickles in his happy meal when 7 people have to fill 100 orders in 10 minutes.
3. He should have used a bigger rod.

 

[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. :^