Excessive or Well Deserved?

Off Topic
101

[quote]Professor X wrote:

My point is, you can’t see what happened behind the counter. That video is not enough to judge that he used “excessive force”. That depends on what they did behind the counter.
[/quote]

I suspect that will be hotly debated in a courtroom.

In my opinion, it is enough to say that. To others, maybe not.

[quote]
I think the fact they were women is why people are so accepting of just writing off that he did something to them they did not deserve or that was not warranted.[/quote]

I agree. But brutality is brutality, whether its warranted or not, and it shocks people.

102

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
… It is not just about doing as little as possible so you can get away.[/quote]

Actually I think it is. Legally speaking that is.

But it’s pretty dumb to not get away if you can, if it’s a real threat. It might offend your ego but that is the reality.

[/quote]

What I mean is, if it is my house, why am I running?

That is why I brought up the burglar.

Also, this guy was CORNERED. Where was he going to run to? The dumpster? [/quote]

You are running because you don’t want to get killed by the threat. Otherwise you have to question how much of a threat it is.

Actually he left the scene and grabbed a weapon and came back.

I agree with Irish, you should really get a more realistic idea of what your rights are with self-defense. I think it’s pretty important to know.

But aside from that, in your house you probably don’t have a douche with a cell phone so you could get away with more excessive force and the level of threat of someone in your house is much greater than defending a burger joint’s cash register.

Edit going to rewatch the video about him leaving though

103

^^scratch that about him leaving, it’s questionable.

104

[quote]debraD wrote:

Actually he left the scene and grabbed a weapon and came back.

[/quote]

Walking 10 feet from the register is leaving the scene? The females also pursued him into a employees only part of the restaurant before he grabbed a weapon.

105

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:
I want to ask…

To those of you who feel his actions are justified, at what point would they not have been justified? What if he had permanently paralyzed one of the women or worse killed them? Would your stance change?

This story reminds me of the case of Jerome Ersland, the pharmacist who executed one of the robbers/attackers after they were down. He received life in prison.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-20066839-504083.html[/quote]

The point from some of us is that we do not have COMPLETE INFORMATION. We know from the article that it is alleged he struck them when they attempted to get back up. What we do not know is what his state of mind was (his level of fear and what that fear was based upon and whether it was reasonable under the circumstances) and we do not know if she ever represented a weapon, express or implied.

If someone substantially smaller than you does not fear you, I’m not sure where you’re from (canada right? you’re the dude that think he can call black women “negress” right? well, you’re from Kansas my man, home of Oz, you might not understand), but where I’m from, when someone acts brazen like this in the face of seeming common sense, it means they are armed.

She was definitely a man-acting hood bitch, not some lilly white girl waving her finger coming around the counter to give him a piece of her mind.[/quote]

What sort of information do you need once they are lying on the ground beaten? I have no qualms with the initial strikes, only the strikes AFTER they were down and out.

Self-defense is about neutralizing a threat enough for you to get away. Not beating people once they are down.[/quote]

You missed the memo.

We have INCOMPLETE INFORMATION. We can not see what those two bitches were doing when they were down. We do not know what threat of a weapon, if any, that was implied or expressed. For all you know she could have been trying to get up with her hand in her pocket reaching for something. My point is and was, we do not know.

Most likely, you are right and what he did was excessive. But there are other considerations if you want to consider the matter fully, and we do not have COMPLETE INFORMATION.

106

Even in your home or place of business this could be considered unacceptable.

Earlier I posted a link with a video of a pharmacist who defends his own pharmacy from a robber with a gun.

After the kid (who tries to rob him) is lying on the ground from being shot by the pharmacist, the pharmacist executes him point blank with 5 straight shots to the stomach.

The argument that he could have had a weapon did not hold up in that situation and I’d be surprised if it does in this one. The pharmacist received life in prison.

107

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:
I want to ask…

To those of you who feel his actions are justified, at what point would they not have been justified? What if he had permanently paralyzed one of the women or worse killed them? Would your stance change?

This story reminds me of the case of Jerome Ersland, the pharmacist who executed one of the robbers/attackers after they were down. He received life in prison.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-20066839-504083.html[/quote]

The point from some of us is that we do not have COMPLETE INFORMATION. We know from the article that it is alleged he struck them when they attempted to get back up. What we do not know is what his state of mind was (his level of fear and what that fear was based upon and whether it was reasonable under the circumstances) and we do not know if she ever represented a weapon, express or implied.

If someone substantially smaller than you does not fear you, I’m not sure where you’re from (canada right? you’re the dude that think he can call black women “negress” right? well, you’re from Kansas my man, home of Oz, you might not understand), but where I’m from, when someone acts brazen like this in the face of seeming common sense, it means they are armed.

She was definitely a man-acting hood bitch, not some lilly white girl waving her finger coming around the counter to give him a piece of her mind.[/quote]

What sort of information do you need once they are lying on the ground beaten? I have no qualms with the initial strikes, only the strikes AFTER they were down and out.

Self-defense is about neutralizing a threat enough for you to get away. Not beating people once they are down. It doesn’t entitle you to do what you want.[/quote]

In my mind having spent time in prison changes what is considered reasonable. I don’t know if a jury would agree but a guy coming from that kind of background is going to be trained to react much more aggressively out of necessity.
[/quote]

Unfortunately, the law does not mitigate what was required b/c you spent time in prison.

108

[quote]Soulja874 wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

Actually he left the scene and grabbed a weapon and came back.

[/quote]

Walking 10 feet from the register is leaving the scene? The females also pursued him into a employees only part of the restaurant before he grabbed a weapon. [/quote]

Sure and you could argue that he could have kept going and left McDonalds to defend itself. But it happened fast so I don’t think that’s how it happened but it is debatable. It could be presented like that in court anyhow.

I don’t think it’s right but that’s how it goes. The article BG linked described him leaving and coming back also.

109

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
… It is not just about doing as little as possible so you can get away.[/quote]

Actually I think it is. Legally speaking that is.

But it’s pretty dumb to not get away if you can, if it’s a real threat. It might offend your ego but that is the reality.

[/quote]

What I mean is, if it is my house, why am I running?

That is why I brought up the burglar.

Also, this guy was CORNERED. Where was he going to run to? The dumpster? [/quote]

Your house is different. There are a variety of “castle” laws in effect. But the use of deadly force in or around your property is still very nuanced in most States. But usually the homeowner will get the benefit of the doubt from the State in close calls as long as you’re not out there executing people.

110

Its simple fight or flight response. Many can argue that the guy should have stopped when the women were knocked out, but in reality, once you get going, your instincts (read: your pre-programmed response) takes over and wants to make sure they are down and won’t get back up.

Just about everyone here would have done the same thing.

111

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
What I mean is, if it is my house, why am I running?

That is why I brought up the burglar.
[/quote]

Your house is different. It falls under different rules and oftentimes is part of a “Castle doctrine” that allows you to protect your home.

However, this varies GREATLY from state to state.

[quote]
Also, this guy was CORNERED. Where was he going to run to? The dumpster? [/quote]

That does indeed add another facet to this case, because you’re right, he was.

That does not change the fact that once he launches his own assault while they’re down, he’s legally in the wrong area.[/quote]

I disagree with your closing conclusion.

He’s not wrong if they are still a threat. Would you make the same conclusion if she were reaching for a knife or a gun, or stating that she was going to “shoot his ass”?

Again, we have INCOMPLETE INFORMATION. But most likely, you’re correct.

112

[quote]forbes wrote:
Its simple fight or flight response. Many can argue that the guy should have stopped when the women were knocked out, but in reality, once you get going, your instincts (read: your pre-programmed response) takes over and wants to make sure they are down and won’t get back up.

Just about everyone here would have done the same thing.[/quote]

exactly…or they would have gotten beaten up by two women.

All of these supposed law school grads and no one can explain why these women aren’t charged with anything.

113

[quote]forbes wrote:

Just about everyone here would have done the same thing.[/quote]

Untrue. Very untrue.

I can guaran-fuckin-tee you that most people here, probably yourself included, aint “built” like this kid when it comes to violence. VERY FEW PEOPLE ARE.

114

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:
Its simple fight or flight response. Many can argue that the guy should have stopped when the women were knocked out, but in reality, once you get going, your instincts (read: your pre-programmed response) takes over and wants to make sure they are down and won’t get back up.

Just about everyone here would have done the same thing.[/quote]

exactly…or they would have gotten beaten up by two women.

All of these supposed law school grads and no one can explain why these women aren’t charged with anything.[/quote]

They should be charged IMO but I’m guessing it’s because McDonald’s isn’t going after charges because they’re afraid of being sued or bad publicity.

115

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:
Its simple fight or flight response. Many can argue that the guy should have stopped when the women were knocked out, but in reality, once you get going, your instincts (read: your pre-programmed response) takes over and wants to make sure they are down and won’t get back up.

Just about everyone here would have done the same thing.[/quote]

exactly…or they would have gotten beaten up by two women.

All of these supposed law school grads and no one can explain why these women aren’t charged with anything.[/quote]

They should be charged IMO but I’m guessing it’s because McDonald’s isn’t going after charges because they’re afraid of being sued or bad publicity.[/quote]

I don’t think anyone is even debating whether they should be charged or not. It’s the cashier’s actions which are in question.

116

[quote]therajraj wrote:
Even in your home or place of business this could be considered unacceptable.
[/quote]

Pretty sure you can shoot anyone who invades your home in Texas and several other states.

117

[quote]Soulja874 wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:
Even in your home or place of business this could be considered unacceptable.
[/quote]

Pretty sure you can shoot anyone who invades your home in Texas and several other states. I’m starting to think you don’t fully grasp US laws. [/quote]

?

Did I or didn’t I just post an article where someone killed someone in their place of business and received life? Did I say with absolute certainty that he won’t get off or did I just express my opinion based on what I read in another case with similar details?

Furthermore, what is your legal background? Do you have a Juris Doctorate?

118

.

119

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]Soulja874 wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

Actually he left the scene and grabbed a weapon and came back.

[/quote]

Walking 10 feet from the register is leaving the scene? The females also pursued him into a employees only part of the restaurant before he grabbed a weapon. [/quote]

Sure and you could argue that he could have kept going and left McDonalds to defend itself. But it happened fast so I don’t think that’s how it happened but it is debatable. It could be presented like that in court anyhow.

I don’t think it’s right but that’s how it goes. The article BG linked described him leaving and coming back also.

[/quote]

I agree but when it comes down to it he had to make a snap decision and to think that he’s some kind of villain for defending himself is foolish.

Also, I’m referring to the video when I make any statements to what the McDonald’s employee did.

120

[quote]forbes wrote:
Its simple fight or flight response. Many can argue that the guy should have stopped when the women were knocked out, but in reality, once you get going, your instincts (read: your pre-programmed response) takes over and wants to make sure they are down and won’t get back up.

Just about everyone here would have done the same thing.[/quote]

First of all, you have no idea how you would act in that situation. But if you did react as he did, you’d face all the same charges that this guy now faces.