Seattle "Superhero" Arrested For Pepper Spray Assault

AzrealMaximillion

New member
Jan 20, 2010
3,216
0
0
Blablahb said:
So you think going around, looking for trouble, and assaulting people with pepperspray when you find it is pretty alright? I disagree, and I think pretty much anyone will disagree with you also.
I think going around and breaking up fights is perfectly fine. I also think that using pepper spray in self defence should the situation arise is fine. The law seems to agree with me on the latter.


Blablahb said:
Then maybe he shouldn't attack groups of 8-10 drunk people carrying a weapon, eh?
Your definition of the word attack is heavily flawed as you seem to be the only person here thinking he went in specifically to assault people. If a cop ran in a maced the 8-10 people without warning, you wouldn't be calling this an assault. The sheer fact that he ran in, told them to break it up, then was attacked himself, then used the pepper spray on one person out of the large group pretty much throws a wrench in your definition of "assault". At least in the eyes of the law.

Blablahb said:
Yeah, as a certified security guard, having worked as a bouncer and currently having a sidejob in security in a shelter for drug addicts, kickboxing and krav maga enthousiast, what could I possibly know about crowd dynamics, weekend violence, de-escalation, situation control and fighting?
People should take the word of a weapons-approving keyboard warrior over mine any day of the week.
This "keyboard warrior happens to go to shcool for law. This keyboard warrior also lives next door to the former head of Pearson International Airport's security. (Best friends with his son). He was in charge of the airport security for 15 years, now he teaches and certifies security guards like yourself. I spoke to him about this specific situation. As you said you would do:
Blablahb said:
If there's multiple attackers, holds don't work. Use punches to the nose and jaw and kicks to the groin while positioning yourself well, or throw them into objects. Avoid being surrounded, always pick on one and strike with maximum violence untill he is incapacitated, then pick your next target, never throw half a punch at all of them at the same time
He pointed out how stupid it would be for one man to walk into a situation where there are 8-10 drunk people and start punching people to the nose and jaw. That's asking to get jumped. Which I agree with. I'm sorry but your certified security experience can't tell me that going into a multiple person situation is smart unless you either have back up, or non-lethal protection. Like pepper spray. Phoenix Jones had his pepper spray out to show the group of that he had such protection. If he had just run in with his bare hands, he may have been jumped before he got the chance to protect himself. And I can tell you for a fact that if you ran into a situation and just started punching and kicking groins without making an attempt to diffuse the situation first, that's assault.


Blablahb said:
I see him running in and getting involved in the fight quite clearly. Are you withdrawing just because you can't justify that he carried a weapon with the sole intention of committing assault, and was actively looking for trouble, and even was doing that in a manner so planned out, he brought a cameraman along?
You see him getting involved in the fight by stopping it, which is exactly what happened. You probably didn't see the fact that half the group left after the first 2 minutes, therefore breaking up the fight. The only reason this video was any longer than that was because he and his camera buddies were being constantly assaulted. The latter group in fact was almost hit by a car driven by the friends of the 2 girls attacking Jones. So we have drunk driving to tack onto them as well.

And the camera man is probably there for legal representation, to show that excessive force is never used by Jones.Either that or an upcoming documentary. This isn't the only video of Jones doing his job. And the fact that there is video evidence of multiple assaults against Jones and his cameramen will be looked at in a court of law. All the people in the video attacking Jones, driving drunk, committing a Hit and Run are all, by a legal standpoint, screwed. They caught up to the people in the offending car so they definitely have the licence plate, and therefore, the identity of all involved. And they'll have to show up to court too. They'll have to see this video and explain their actions. If anything Jones' charged will be dropped. Can't say the same for the people who attacked him. And to be honest I can't see the cops convicting Jones due to the fact that they didn't arrest the camera crew. If you're going to charge someone committing a felony but not charge 2 people who could be "accessories" to the crime, that's sloppy police work. The odds are so stacked in Jones' favour it's not even funny.
 

TokenRupee

New member
Oct 2, 2010
126
0
0
TitanAtlas said:
Well i guess, by the sequence of hate that our dear escapists are posting, no one likes the "Hero".

Honestly... he stopped the fight and the pepper spray was in order considering himself was attacked... Jail time and 5k fine is kinda harsh considering all things...

And yes he is kinda crazy and idiot to have hopes of being a hero, but you people forgot the most important thing... He hopes to be a hero, he doesn't care he gets injured or hurt, and honestly he does more then lots of big talkers say they would do. Hell... in where peopel say they would do this, he acctually does it.

Still Seattle crimes, appear more to be drunk people and deuchebaggery then anything else... so do not know what kind of crime there is in that place...
Very true. Sure, the costume may be going a bit far, but at least he's doing something. Most people probably wouldn't even call the cops or just say that can't be bothered by the whole thing.

Patrick_and_the_ricks said:
Not surprised at all. I like the guy and am sure he means well, but let's face it....

If he wasn't going to get charged for assault he would have wound up dead. If he really wanted to help his community he should have enlisted as a cop or something.

Costumed Superheroes have always been a failed premise, only form of vigilante I could see working in reality is some Dirty Harry wannabe.
So that he could arrive at the scene thirty minutes later? I saw him doing more than the cops normally do. Not saying that all cops are bad, but there are those that abuse their position or just don't care. At least he is doing something about it.
 

jobu59749

New member
Aug 3, 2009
94
0
0
Here's the problem with everyone's arguement about using the pepper spray in self-defense. Nobody in the fight, maliciously went after him, until he interjected himself into the fight. This goes towards all of the super-hero wannabe's out there. Stick to the conventions and walking old ladies across the street. You aren't batman or any other hero for that matter. You're a civilian, most of you don't even have expert combat skills or experience. If you disagree with law enforcement, maybe you should be part of the solution by addressing your concerns with your city council rather than contribute to the problem. You might have a cool fancy kevlar breastplate built into your rubberized suit...won't stop a bullet from hitting you in the face.

This opinion has nothing to do with me not supporting the hero. These people aren't hero's. A hero is defined typically being someone that does something stupid in the heat of the moment that saves lives. This guy is doing lots of stupid things, I don't know that he's saving anyone's life. When someone can prove that they have the skills of batman, green arrow, etc....great, and even then...they should let police handle things cuz death is forever.
 

HyenaThePirate

New member
Jan 8, 2009
1,412
0
0
I'm just waiting patiently for the headline, "Seattle Superhero slain in gunbattle with evil mobster mastermind"

My only concern about people deciding to take to the streets as costumed vigilantes is that considering logical progression of things in the comic book universe, it won't be very long until somebody else decides (usually after being inadvertently affected by the superhero without his knowledge) into donning a costume for "evil."

Sooner or later we're going to have some pretty colorful and inventive bank robberies, which sadly, I'm not sure I can say definitively would be an altogether terrible thing..
 

Sovereignty

New member
Jan 25, 2010
584
0
0
It took 26 minutes for the police to arrive?

Beyond this vigilante non-sense, that is RIDICULOUS.

Especially when that one chick TOTALLY got clipped by the car ahaha.... I mean. How sad.
 

darksakul

Old Man? I am not that old .....
Jun 14, 2008
629
0
0
Give this idiot a medal.

Also I am with this person on opinion

draythefingerless said:
to the people talking about the pepper spray and the taking weapons looking for fights....

1. so a woman who carries a pepper spray in her bag is a criminal offense?
2. cops stroll the night looking for trouble too. thats their job. to ensure they are safeguarding everyone. thats what this guy was doing. going thru the night, hoping he might stop any ongoing crime. looking to start a fight and looking for a fight to stop it are two different things.
2. he even avoided touching people in that fight. all he did was separate them(like normal thoughtful good hearted people do when they see a fight) and he used the pepper spray in his own defense.
 

lokiduck

New member
Jun 5, 2010
359
0
0
I go to a college not toooo far from Seattle so when i saw the article on the front page about Seattle's super Hero I laughed an went "Really? When did we get one of those?"

From what I saw it's really hard to actually tell what occurred... though it was pretty funny seeing that woman chasing him.
 

RvLeshrac

This is a Forum Title.
Oct 2, 2008
662
0
0
jobu59749 said:
Here's the problem with everyone's arguement about using the pepper spray in self-defense. Nobody in the fight, maliciously went after him, until he interjected himself into the fight. This goes towards all of the super-hero wannabe's out there. Stick to the conventions and walking old ladies across the street. You aren't batman or any other hero for that matter. You're a civilian, most of you don't even have expert combat skills or experience. If you disagree with law enforcement, maybe you should be part of the solution by addressing your concerns with your city council rather than contribute to the problem. You might have a cool fancy kevlar breastplate built into your rubberized suit...won't stop a bullet from hitting you in the face.

This opinion has nothing to do with me not supporting the hero. These people aren't hero's. A hero is defined typically being someone that does something stupid in the heat of the moment that saves lives. This guy is doing lots of stupid things, I don't know that he's saving anyone's life. When someone can prove that they have the skills of batman, green arrow, etc....great, and even then...they should let police handle things cuz death is forever.
So don't bother doing anything good, then, since you may get yourself into trouble? Is that it?

The cops did nothing. They *always* do nothing. The cops show up the next day to pick up the body of someone killed in the fight, then hold a press conference to talk about how safe they make the city.
 

RvLeshrac

This is a Forum Title.
Oct 2, 2008
662
0
0
Blablahb said:
AzrealMaximillion said:
I also think that using pepper spray in self defence should the situation arise is fine. The law seems to agree with me on the latter.
Why do you believe armed violence is a good thing then? I am against armed violence, because people get hurt or even killed. That's why any coward carrying or using a weapon should be prosecuted.

The flawed US justice system which arbitrarily allows and punishes for violence is irrelevant to this discussion. But even under that system, Jones did walk into that, sought the confrontation, and used a weapon when he got the confrontation he was looking for. Jones was the agressor who conciously created a situation where he'd be attacked.
AzrealMaximillion said:
He pointed out how stupid it would be for one man to walk into a situation where there are 8-10 drunk people and start punching people to the nose and jaw. That's asking to get jumped. Which I agree with. I'm sorry but your certified security experience can't tell me that going into a multiple person situation is smart unless you either have back up, or non-lethal protection. Like pepper spray.
I'm not saying it's smart, it's even unlikely you're walking out of such a confrontation unscathed. Group fights are scary. The worst I've been in in a 4 vs 1, and that was rough, even though I won.
What I am saying is, that what I described, is the best way of not getting hurt when attacked by so many attackers.

Naturally I discount the use of weapons, since all weapons escalate violence, and carrying weapons either is or should be a criminal offense. The risk of ever ending up in a group attack doesn't warrant carrying weapons out of senseless paranoid feeling.
AzrealMaximillion said:
Phoenix Jones had his pepper spray out to show the group of that he had such protection.
No, he had it out because he is a coward, who can't deal with the consequences of his own actions, and thus assaults other people. They were perfectly right to attack him after that. I'd have had at him the moment he showed that can too. If people pull out a weapon, all limitations are off, and you either fuck him up, or he does it to you.

If that crowd had beaten Jones into the hospital, they would have been perfectly justified. They were defending themselves against someone showing off a weapon with the intention of using it against them.
Pepper Spray is LTL. It is rare that it causes permanent damage.

If you punch someone, however, especially in the street, there's a very real risk of injury or death to the victim.

He's taking the high road here by not engaging in the excessive use of force. Using pepper spray on idiots fighting in the street is like hosing down dogs.
 

RvLeshrac

This is a Forum Title.
Oct 2, 2008
662
0
0
Signa said:
RvLeshrac said:
Signa said:
RvLeshrac said:
...but they'll damn well make sure you don't spend the night in a park.
If you're referring to the same story I heard, it was because by allowing the Occupy Wallstreet protesters to camp in the park, they would then have to allow the WBC to camp there too. Ground rules need to be set so that the ones who wish to abuse the system can't. The Mayor actually invited the protesters onto city hall grounds for overnight, and yet that wasn't good enough.
Yeah, that's pretty much complete bullshit. No locality has ever prevented the WBC from doing anything protest-related. I can't think of anyone intelligent who argues that they don't have a right to do what they do. The First Amendment is sacred, it seems, except when it comes to using public land for the public good.
The way it was conveyed to me (completely second hand BTW, so don't take this as an argument) was that the act of camping in a park was separate from the actual protest. So if that's the case, the First Amendment is irrelevant. That's why the WBC has been allowed to protest, but they always do it within the letter of the law (They are all lawyers after all). What I was told was that none of the protesters were told to GTFO, just that they couldn't camp in the park. It pisses me off because I think it makes the protesters look like a bunch of spoiled brats instead of the rational, but pissed off people that they are.

But maybe that's all wrong. I never even heard of the issue until my friend explained it. We might even be talking about different cities, I don't know. I know some other cities have behaved rather poorly in handling the protesters.
The occupation of the area is, as you might expect from the name of the group, part of the protest.

Since the police physically removed them from Wall, where they were initially planning to set up camp, they chose the next best option.
 

moviedork

New member
Mar 25, 2011
159
0
0
lokiduck said:
I go to a college not toooo far from Seattle so when i saw the article on the front page about Seattle's super Hero I laughed an went "Really? When did we get one of those?"

From what I saw it's really hard to actually tell what occurred... though it was pretty funny seeing that woman chasing him.
How could someone from Seattle not know about Phoenix Jones?
 

Mrsoupcup

New member
Jan 13, 2009
3,487
0
0
TokenRupee said:
So that he could arrive at the scene thirty minutes later? I saw him doing more than the cops normally do. Not saying that all cops are bad, but there are those that abuse their position or just don't care. At least he is doing something about it.
If by doing something you mean putting himself and those around him in danger, and living out a juvenile man-child fantasy.

You can't even see a fight in the video, just a shaky cam and a few people being maced.
This guy is an idiot, and if it wasn't charges it would be a funeral.

The Police while flawed, are far more functional than a grown man in Halloween costume.
 

OrokuSaki

New member
Nov 15, 2010
386
0
0
Small question but one that irks me nonetheless. Why did they call him a superhero? In comics superheros have super powers, without them they're just heroes. Except the Punisher, they call him a nutcase. But isn't he just a "hero" if he's a moron in a costume? I say he isn't super until AFTER a lab accident gives him super-powers.
 

Caverat

New member
Jun 11, 2010
204
0
0
maninahat said:
1. No, because the woman wasn't carrying it with the express intention of looking for people to use it on. If someone attacked her and she had to use it, she would be using it in self defence. If she purposely went looking for people to use it on, she would be committing assault. The key is in people taking "reasonable action". The pepper spray is reasonable self defence if you are attacked and can't get away or rely on the police to get there in time. Looking for and running into fights to use the pepper spray isn't.
2. Cops perform that duty in an official capacity, which makes them accountable (don't laugh), impartial and trained for the task. Trying to do their job is as advisable as attempting to perform surgery in the place of doctors. I'm surprised no one got seriously hurt, with all the blinded people wandering around on the roads.
3. As far as I can tell, he had the pepper spray out almost immediately, and it is hard to tell what he did to seperate the fight in the first place. It seems that the ladies were angry at him for using the pepper spray in the first place.
It's like how people who do neighbourhood-watch patrols are looking for trouble like this Pheonix guy, and should be charged if they carry any kind of protective equipment what-so-ever beyond a cellphone and a flashlight(provided its not a 4 D cell mag light, as those make good clubs)
 

maninahat

New member
Nov 8, 2007
4,397
0
0
Caverat said:
maninahat said:
1. No, because the woman wasn't carrying it with the express intention of looking for people to use it on. If someone attacked her and she had to use it, she would be using it in self defence. If she purposely went looking for people to use it on, she would be committing assault. The key is in people taking "reasonable action". The pepper spray is reasonable self defence if you are attacked and can't get away or rely on the police to get there in time. Looking for and running into fights to use the pepper spray isn't.
2. Cops perform that duty in an official capacity, which makes them accountable (don't laugh), impartial and trained for the task. Trying to do their job is as advisable as attempting to perform surgery in the place of doctors. I'm surprised no one got seriously hurt, with all the blinded people wandering around on the roads.
3. As far as I can tell, he had the pepper spray out almost immediately, and it is hard to tell what he did to seperate the fight in the first place. It seems that the ladies were angry at him for using the pepper spray in the first place.
It's like how people who do neighbourhood-watch patrols are looking for trouble like this Pheonix guy, and should be charged if they carry any kind of protective equipment what-so-ever beyond a cellphone and a flashlight(provided its not a 4 D cell mag light, as those make good clubs)
Nope: Neighbourhood watch organisations specifically tell their members to not go intervening in crimes. They are mostly supposed to serve as a form of surveillance, with members being expected to be vigilant against crimes, and to call the police on the first signs of trouble. They are not supposed to "patrol" the streets. Neighbourhood watches have the blessing of community police, rather than freelance super heroes, who are regularly told to cease and desist.
 

AzrealMaximillion

New member
Jan 20, 2010
3,216
0
0
Blablahb said:
Why do you believe armed violence is a good thing then? I am against armed violence, because people get hurt or even killed. That's why any coward carrying or using a weapon should be prosecuted.

The flawed US justice system which arbitrarily allows and punishes for violence is irrelevant to this discussion. But even under that system, Jones did walk into that, sought the confrontation, and used a weapon when he got the confrontation he was looking for. Jones was the agressor who conciously created a situation where he'd be attacked.
I'm pretty sure the US Justice system is pretty relevant in this discussion seeing as how he was arrested for breaking the law allegedly. The US Justice system must be flawed if no one was arrested for all the other offenses committed in the video (hit and run, driving while intoxicated,assault). I'm not even going to argue about you thinking Jones was the attacker in this because it's simply not a fact.

Blablahb said:
I'm not saying it's smart, it's even unlikely you're walking out of such a confrontation unscathed. Group fights are scary. The worst I've been in in a 4 vs 1, and that was rough, even though I won.
What I am saying is, that what I described, is the best way of not getting hurt when attacked by so many attackers.
Which is a completely different situation than this. Kicking groins and punching jaws to defend against a group is not the same as running in to stop a fight. If Phoenix Jones just ran into the fight and started punching jaws, that would constitute assault from out of nowhere. He had a non lethal self defence weapon to keep people off of him. Your talking about attacking people before they attack you. Completely different.

Blablahb said:
No, he had it out because he is a coward, who can't deal with the consequences of his own actions, and thus assaults other people. They were perfectly right to attack him after that. I'd have had at him the moment he showed that can too. If people pull out a weapon, all limitations are off, and you either fuck him up, or he does it to you.

If that crowd had beaten Jones into the hospital, they would have been perfectly justified. They were defending themselves against someone showing off a weapon with the intention of using it against them.
So you call him a coward for going into a group of almost 10 people fighting with protection, then say that its perfectly okay for him to have been hospitalized for doing so? God, that's ass backwards. What would you have him do, go in with nothing? The cops took nearly 15 minutes after FIVE 911 calls to the same area were made. That's pathetic. Even is someone has a weapon out you still have to use reasonable force to stop them in the eyes of the law. Putting someone in the hospital over bringing out pepper spray is not reasonable. That's bad logic. So you don't condone a guy breaking up a 10 person brawl and using pepper spray to make he doesn't get hurt, but you'd condone this group of people to beat him to a pulp for doing so? That's asinine. That's a complete reversal of logic.