McDonalds employee defends himself

[Silurian]

Heh, in the EU paying with fifties is never a problem. With the possible exception of a bakery or a grocer. Do you really have that large a counterfeit problem?

Not everywhere in the EU

In the UK many places refuse £50 note and check £20s

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Somehow it was distorted into a ******** concept of "you should flee, because if you don't you're responsible, even if you're actually the victim". That's completely idiotic, defending yourself is the most basic right anyone have.

Does this also apply when the tables were turned and the victim starts to become the attacker like what was happening there? At some stage, the employee is out of harms way and becomes the one attacking the woman. This might be understandable given the situation, but I'm wondering if being the instigator robs her of her rights to defend herself at the moment she no longer poses a threat.

 

[Akka]

Does this also apply when the tables were turned and the victim starts to become the attacker like what was happening there? At some stage, the employee is out of harms way and becomes the one attacking the woman. This might be understandable given the situation, but I'm wondering if being the instigator robs her of her rights to defend herself at the moment she no longer poses a threat.

Self-defense applies everywhere, it's THE basic right.
Of course, it's NOT a "as soon as someone looks at you funny you're entitled to do whatever you want". Proportionnate response is the rule.

But what people have to understand is that once a fight is started, there is a LOT of leeway about what is "proportionate response".
A slap with an angry glare and nothing else is one thing, and you can be pretty sure you can actually scale your answer.
People rushing at you with intent is completely different, and from there it's widely different, because you've the adrenaline rush from the situation, you have something else in your mind than making some cold analysis about what you should do and calculating what should be "appropriate", and it's becoming hard to make any educated guess about what your attackers could have or do.

It's easy to be an armchair general and look coldly at a video and make all kind of theorical reasoning, but it's nothing like actually living the thing - and considering half of these theorical reasoning are ridiculous to begin with, it's even less relevant.

 

[dIZZyBlIZZy]

But what people have to understand is that once a fight is started, there is a LOT of leeway about what is "proportionate response".
A slap with an angry glare and nothing else is one thing, and you can be pretty sure you can actually scale your answer.
People rushing at you with intent is completely different, and from there it's widely different, because you've the adrenaline rush from the situation, you have something else in your mind than making some cold analysis about what you should do and calculating what should be "appropriate", and it's becoming hard to make any educated guess about what your attackers could have or do.

That's a panic reaction. It is possible to control the adrenaline rush. It just requires discipline and training. You are right, hindsight is 20/20, but if people didn't act like animals in a dangerous situation (be it a charging elephant or a deer in the headlights), would a situation like this have the same result?

Does this also apply when the tables were turned and the victim starts to become the attacker like what was happening there? At some stage, the employee is out of harms way and becomes the one attacking the woman.

At what point is that reached? How does one make the distinction between ok and too much? And who gets to make that distinction? Furthermore, if a definite line is drawn, is it possible to know your about to cross it in a panicked state?

 

[IglooDame]

At what point is that reached? How does one make the distinction between ok and too much? And who gets to make that distinction? Furthermore, if a definite line is drawn, is it possible to know your about to cross it in a panicked state?

The jury makes the distinction, if the police and/or DA decide to put the question to them.

 

[Akka]

That's a panic reaction. It is possible to control the adrenaline rush. It just requires discipline and training. You are right, hindsight is 20/20, but if people didn't act like animals in a dangerous situation (be it a charging elephant or a deer in the headlights), would a situation like this have the same result?

So, if someone is attacked, it's HIS responsability to have spend lots of time beforehand to train himself about being cold and dispassionnate about it ?
Or did you mean something else ?
Because I've a better idea : let's put the responsability on the attacker, which is the one acting like an animal in the first place.

As a side note, it's pretty GOOD to act like an animal if you're attacked. There is a reason why it has evolved so. Standing around while calculating odds is nice in movies and stories, but in reality it means you've a bashed skull before being able to act cool.

 

[dIZZyBlIZZy]

So, if someone is attacked, it's HIS responsability to have spend lots of time beforehand to train himself about being cold and dispassionnate about it ?
Or did you mean something else ?
Because I've a better idea : let's put the responsability on the attacker, which is the one acting like an animal in the first place.

Not a responsibility, but it should be done by all. If an inmate strikes me, I am perfectly capable of getting help and subduing him without going overboard. In 9 years, I've been struck by inmates thrice, and have yet to use a closed fist punch. twice I used OC and the third myself, the pod CO and the building sergeant had him taken down and cuffed less than 60 seconds after I got hit. It is easy to keep a cool head in a hard situation, be it inmate violence, a shipboard fire, or being accosted at McDonald's. You just need to get some training.

As a side note, it's pretty GOOD to act like an animal if you're attacked. There is a reason why it has evolved so. Standing around while calculating odds is nice in movies and stories, but in reality it means you've a bashed skull before being able to act cool.

There is no time to calculate odds like in a movie, hence the need to train. If you have developed the skills required you don't have to calculate squat, you already know. As far as a good idea to go animalistic, depends on the situation. My own training it won't work, because the basic philosophy is to "subdue by hurting without injuring." Every situation is different, I'll give that, but if most people took the time to learn to control panic, things can go a lot smoother.

Note - I am speaking strictly for regaining control in a situation in which deadly force is not a necessity. That's a whole different argument and not relevant in this particular case.

 

[Akka]

Seems you have missed the point : why should people be expected to train to react coldly in case of them being assaulted ?
They are not supposed to be subject to it, they should not be required to train about them.

I won't even talk about how it's illusionary to imagine that every people will just become cool under pressure just because he has had a bit of training.

 

[Zelig]

Do you really have that large a counterfeit problem?

Have you seen US notes?

 

[dIZZyBlIZZy]

Seems you have missed the point : why should people be expected to train to react coldly in case of them being assaulted ?
They are not supposed to be subject to it, they should not be required to train about them.

Your right, they shouldn't be. They should be able to work their day with the worst being obnoxious customers then go home and go to sleep without having to lock the front door. That's not the reality we live in. People should train in self defense because it will do much to prevent a person from becoming a victim.

I won't even talk about how it's illusionary to imagine that every people will just become cool under pressure just because he has had a bit of training.

It worked for me, my coworkers, and my shipmates from my Navy days. No, it won't work for everyone, but if a person does not take the opportunity to try to learn, can we really say that said person would be incapable of reducing his own panic level?

 

[nivi]

Proper training is not mandatory nor really needed in today's reality, violent crime rates are actually lower than they have ever been.



And most people aren't Sherlock Holems or Chuck Norris. Keeping your cool while under attack is reserved for the few.


Link to video.

 

[dIZZyBlIZZy]

Proper training is not mandatory nor really needed in today's reality, violent crime rates are actually lower than they have ever been.

True, but anyone can be a victim. Very few people who train in defense will actually ever use it, I won't say unnecessary in today's world, but few would ever actually need it. For those who would though, the training was beneficial. If not for preventing a violent crime, how about keeping calm in self treatment of first aid or egressing a house fire?

And most people aren't Sherlock Holems or Chuck Norris. Keeping your cool while under attack is reserved for the few.

I'm no Chuck Norris, but I've learned to keep a rational head in such situations as fire, attack, and riot. I won't say that everyone can do it, but if I can, I'd think most others could?

 

[IglooDame]

Dizzy, you're absolutely correct in thinking that self-defense training (or confrontation training, or crisis training, etc) is useful and good. However, the point is that a person should not be expected to have such training, or have the lack of such training held against them in a situation that is generally uncommon or unexpected for them - such as a McDonalds customer getting violent and coming over the counter.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Claire Rayner knows what to do


Link to video.

 

[nivi]

I think the number of people who take practical self defense (not judo and other ) and actually had to use it to save their lives is close to meaningless.

How long did it take you? For me it was about 1 year, of constant drilling, it's not that most can't, it's that they won't. And to be perfectly honest, even after all that training, I am still not 100% sure of how I will react to a violent attack.

 

[dIZZyBlIZZy]

Dizzy, you're absolutely correct in thinking that self-defense training (or confrontation training, or crisis training, etc) is useful and good. However, the point is that a person should not be expected to have such training, or have the lack of such training held against them in a situation that is generally uncommon or unexpected for them - such as a McDonalds customer getting violent and coming over the counter.

I'll cede, I wasn't meaning to say such a person was lower for a lack of training. I meant it more as an expect the best/prepare for worst thing. I'd go into further detail, but it would be going way off topic. What was originally meant was that the option was available to a person. This incident the person handled it as best he could. I just meant that as one option, and the response is the implication that staying calm requires you to be Rambo or somesuch.

How long did it take you?

Hard to answer, because the training never stops. In naval service we drilled firefighting and nuclear spills at least weekly (some stretches daily). TDOC requires retraining in PPCT every 6 months, unless you are qualified for OC spray or shock shield, then it's quarterly with your firearms requal. But through 2 shipboard fires, 3 inmate assaults, 2 riots, and 1 escape, I've managed myself calmly.

 

[Akka]

I'll cede, I wasn't meaning to say such a person was lower for a lack of training. I meant it more as an expect the best/prepare for worst thing. I'd go into further detail, but it would be going way off topic. What was originally meant was that the option was available to a person. This incident the person handled it as best he could. I just meant that as one option, and the response is the implication that staying calm requires you to be Rambo or somesuch.

Not at all, the point before was that you can't judge coldly a situation involving an assault, and as such people saying that someone "could just have done X" are armchair generals that sprout nonsense because they completely fail at understanding what it actually means to be assaulted.

Hard to answer, because the training never stops. In naval service we drilled firefighting and nuclear spills at least weekly (some stretches daily). TDOC requires retraining in PPCT every 6 months, unless you are qualified for OC spray or shock shield, then it's quarterly with your firearms requal. But through 2 shipboard fires, 3 inmate assaults, 2 riots, and 1 escape, I've managed myself calmly.

You also realize you're talking about a life based on training (military), attracting by its very nature people who are already less afraid by nature than the norm, and comparing it to "just train a bit everyone and it will work" ?

 

[7ronin]

In most states, even castle doctrine state, does the atmosphere of imminent danger need to be obvious?

Yes, but this area is iffy. Did the assailant [intruder] have the ability to inflict grave bodily injury? Did the assailant have the opportunity to employ that ability? Was the assailant behaving in such a manner that a reasonable person, knowing what the cashier knew at the time, conclude that the cashier was placed in jeopardy?

since the intruder was unarmed, deadly force was not legal.

Not true. This is a common misperception.

 

[pob]

Everyone should consider some sort of defense training because there is a reasonable chance that at some point in your life you will be assaulted.

However, where training can help in one on one situations, when there are multiple attackers it becomes much more difficult to defend yourself. They don't come at you one at a time like in batman! I've seen an adult kickboxer get taken down by two kids (~12 years old) just because he couldn't defend from both at once (one in front, one behind).

 

[Formaldehyde]

In the UK many places refuse £50 note and check £20s

£50 is worth quite a bit more than $50.

Besides, this is NYC where $50 bills are now prevalent. They are even now prevalent in suburban Florida.

Self-defense applies everywhere, it's THE basic right.

Beating a helpless woman with a metal rod is not a basic right after merely being slapped and then followed. Even one blow was likely unwarranted based on how he immediately returned after getting a weapon.