• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

this is horrible and very sad!!!

Bob Maxey said:
Unless . . . it is your daughter being hurt and I say to you, "I decided not to help because I ain't got no dog in the fight." "Too bad she died because of her injuries, but I did not want to be sued." Guess that gets me off your Christmas card list, huh?

Bob
Click to expand...

He mentioned if it was a stranger, he won't get involved. By his response if it involved someone he was related to or loved dearly it sounds like he would get involved.

It's much different jumping in for a loved one versus a stranger.

Also as lord mentioned earlier, we can all say we'd jump in and help a stranger, but when things actually go down a majority of us would stand by doing nothing. For this case, it'd be easier to decide since they're two smaller girls. However, say they were two huge guys...the chances a stranger will intervene has gone down to near zero.
 
Bob Maxey said:
Unless . . . it is your daughter being hurt and I say to you, "I decided not to help because I ain't got no dog in the fight." "Too bad she died because of her injuries, but I did not want to be sued." Guess that gets me off your Christmas card list, huh?

Bob
Click to expand...

First I wouldn't know you and we wouldn't be having a convorsation in the first place. So your point is mute.

Now I say on to you you intervene and hurt one of the attackers. He now file assault charges on you and you are sitting in jail wondering what just happened. You post bond and think the worse is over. Then you are served for his medical bills due to you assaulting him. You now have pay them and your criminal case comes up for assault. All this because you decided to play the good Samaritan.
 
I have to ask, is there any credibility to this video? How do we know it wasn't just staged as a stunt against a certain fast-food restaurant chain?

The video's source, 'World Star Hip-Hip' doesn't seem like a credible news source to me. Does anyone know of a reliable Reuters, AP, CNN, MSNBC, BBC, Xinhua, etc. news article covering this story? It's much more like a rather vulgar internet meme.
 
Bob Maxey said:
If one of them is hurt because they were subdued, tough crap basket. If one pulls a knife, you double up a fist and break the little woman's teeth.
Click to expand...

Quite, .... and she's already plunged her knife into one's abdomen before one's fist has had a chance to connect with her teeth.

I saw a rather vicious street fight the other day, involving 5 or 6 young men. I thought there is absolutely no way I'm getting involved with this.
 
An armed society is a polite society.

When I first moved to New Mexico in the 70s, there was a front page story about a citizen who put an end to similar nonsense.

The Albuquerque DA was interviewed, and was asked when it was OK to use deadly force to interrupt a violent crime. He replied - only when the perpetrator is squarely within your gunsights.

Since then, everyone has been trying to civilize the place so it's like the rest out there.
 
The fact that the girl/boy was transgendered has the makings of a real interesting case. Race and gender, to begin with. Apparently it was because the two girls thought the victim was a man in the woman's bathroom and freaked out.

Also, the cameraman was fired from McDonald's. Doesn't mean much, but it's a start.

As someone mentioned before, there have been a ton of fights recently at fast food places. I think there was on in PC this past spring break that was just a ton of vandalism. I don't think anyone was seriously hurt. Reminds me a bit of post offices and "going postal." That it's some sort sick trend that's sweeping the nation.

As a sidenote, the cameraman's Facebook suggested that the victim faked the seizure at the end. It was pretty sad.

As a guy, I don't know what I WOULD have done and how much trouble I would have been in had I had to absolutely lay both of them out. Would it be worth a criminal record? Well, it would be, but it would be a very shitty sacrifice. This case already has race written all over it, I seriously doubt a judge would condone a hard hit to a woman by a man. Freaking double standards.
 
Two people were ran over by a car following a fight in a McDonalds parking lot in Cleveland during their big 50,000 person hiring event last week. Great idea McDonalds!
 
EarlyMon said:
An armed society is a polite society.

When I first moved to New Mexico in the 70s, there was a front page story about a citizen who put an end to similar nonsense.

The Albuquerque DA was interviewed, and was asked when it was OK to use deadly force to interrupt a violent crime. He replied - only when the perpetrator is squarely within your gunsights.

Since then, everyone has been trying to civilize the place so it's like the rest out there.
Click to expand...

Perhaps NM is a little different, but nobody anywhere I have ever lived carries a gun (unless they plan to use it for illegal activities).
 
lordofthereef said:
Perhaps NM is a little different, but nobody anywhere I have ever lived carries a gun (unless they plan to use it for illegal activities).
Click to expand...

??

The US is filled with states where lawful citizens with concealed carry permits could have stood next to you, and you'd never know.

Did I misread something??
 
I know many people that have concealed weapons permits and carry daily. In fact if I recall correctly, here in West Virginia, you can walk right down the street with a gun on your side as long as it is in plain view of everyone else.
 
Equal rights... those guys could have stopped the fight by knocking those girls out. Its completely legal to defend another with equal force.

Second they should locked the girl being attacked in the bathroom.

The manager should have locked the attackers out. Locked down the store till the police arrived.

Mcdonalds can be sued. You have a duty to protect your patrons. Especially inside the store. It even extends to the parking lot.

Freaking animals. Two on one how cowardly is that?? While shes on the ground.
 
maluminse said:
Equal rights... those guys could have stopped the fight by knocking those girls out. Its completely legal to defend another with equal force.

Second they should locked the girl being attacked in the bathroom.

The manager should have locked the attackers out. Locked down the store till the police arrived.

Mcdonalds can be sued. You have a duty to protect your patrons. Especially inside the store. It even extends to the parking lot.

Freaking animals. Two on one how cowardly is that?? While shes on the ground.
Click to expand...


Ok your signature has me curious. Are you the lawyer there?

Then I have to ask clarification about this: Equal rights... those guys could have stopped the fight by knocking those girls out. Its completely legal to defend another with equal force."

Really? There wouldn't be some hubbub about males hitting females, regardless of the situation from a legal standpoint?
 
coonster said:
Really? There wouldn't be some hubbub about males hitting females, regardless of the situation from a legal standpoint?
Click to expand...

Assault and battery is not gender specific. It's just frowned upon if a man hits a woman. Complete moral issue, no legal rule against it. You won't get in trouble for the simple fact they're a woman and you're a man, but for physically harming anyone is what you'll get in trouble for. And if you get some feminist judge you may be screwed for the ruling just based on her moral standpoints.
 
ParishL31 said:
Assault and battery is not gender specific. It's just frowned upon if a man hits a woman. Complete moral issue, no legal rule against it.
Click to expand...

Moral issue?

Have you talked to any cops that respond to family disturbances lately?

I have.

Violent women using weapons and hospitalizing men afraid to hit women is a real-world problem.

So, here's my opinion of the translation to your expression moral issue:

1. The judge is an Oprah-lover - you're guilty.

2. The judge has been beaten black and blue by a woman - you're innocent.

(Seems you've edited while I was posting - ok, I'll let my comments stand as-is.)
 
EarlyMon said:
Moral issue?

Have you talked to any cops that respond to family disturbances lately?

I have.

Violent women using weapons and hospitalizing men afraid to hit women is a real-world problem.

So, here's my opinion of the translation to your expression moral issue:

1. The judge is an Oprah-lover - you're guilty.

2. The judge has been beaten black and blue by a woman - you're innocent.
Click to expand...

I never said this moral issue wasn't a problem. I know many women who are in the false sense that because they're a woman they won't be hit back.

My friend was in that situation with an abusive woman, she would wail on him relentlessly. One time he decides to push her out the way so he can leave the house since she was blocking the way, he was arrested and convicted of domestic abuse because the girl lied. Guess what kind of judge he got.

I'm not supporting the whole, "never ever hit a woman". I will refrain from hitting a woman as long as I can, but if a woman would come at me with a knife, they're getting a fist to the face in a heart beat.

In a nutshell, it's wrong for anyone to hit anyone regardless of gender. Just because you're a woman doesn't give you special rights.

*edit for your edit* It appears we're on the same point on this subject.
 
ParishL31 said:
Assault and battery is not gender specific. It's just frowned upon if a man hits a woman. Complete moral issue, no legal rule against it. You won't get in trouble for the simple fact they're a woman and you're a man, but for physically harming anyone is what you'll get in trouble for. And if you get some feminist judge you may be screwed for the ruling just based on her moral standpoints.
Click to expand...

Welll... if she truly were "feminist," she would be all for equality, right? So she should still be able to make an objective ruling based simply on the fact that violence is violence, regardless or gender.

I've never been in a situation where I had to decide whether to hit a woman before, but if I were to play a scenario in my mind where it wasn't life-or-death, I still think I'd be screwed if I had some chick in my face, pushing and shoving me.
 
coonster said:
Welll... if she truly were "feminist," she would be all for equality, right? So she should still be able to make an objective ruling based simply on the fact that violence is violence, regardless or gender.
Click to expand...

Seems reasonable. I dated a judge, she was cool. But - judges are people, with their own foibles, too.

I've never been in a situation where I had to decide whether to hit a woman before, but if I were to play a scenario in my mind where it wasn't life-or-death, I still think I'd be screwed if I had some chick in my face, pushing and shoving me.
Click to expand...
If a woman is in your face, pushing and shoving then it's the same as a man - hitting them in the face is an escalation, not a measured defense.

Take some aikido (not violent defense) classes.

What am I missing?
 
Dark Jedi said:
First I wouldn't know you and we wouldn't be having a convorsation in the first place. So your point is mute.

Now I say on to you you intervene and hurt one of the attackers. He now file assault charges on you and you are sitting in jail wondering what just happened. You post bond and think the worse is over. Then you are served for his medical bills due to you assaulting him. You now have pay them and your criminal case comes up for assault. All this because you decided to play the good Samaritan.
Click to expand...

Assuming that the jury feels the same way. And then there is the inevitable appeal that might discard the verdict arrived at by the previous legal adventure. No guarantee there will be a successful suit or that a jury will find my guilty, anyway. No guarantee that I will be arrested or charged in the first place, either. We only know what will happen when it happens and no guarantees either way.

So if I get involved, I am screwed. If I stand by and do nothing, I am perhaps also sued and I must live with a death I might have prevented.

Or perhaps I am sued by a father or mother for not getting involved. These days, that kind of suit might be allowed. Legally I am likely not required to get involved, but then there is civil court.

We live in a time where violence is less and less tolerated and I think many people are simply fed up with the wrong charges and silly law suits that support the bastard/basterdess over the decent man that just tried to help.
 
EarlyMon said:
Seems reasonable. I dated a judge, she was cool. But - judges are people, with their own foibles, too.

If a woman is in your face, pushing and shoving then it's the same as a man - hitting them in the face is an escalation, not a measured defense.

Take some aikido (not violent defense) classes.

What am I missing?
Click to expand...

You're missing the fact that aikido isn't really known to be "realistic."

I'm not saying hit someone in the face because they're in your face. I'm saying it's pretty certain the person is going to hit you, just giving you a prologue to the ass kicking with some words and shoves.

I know there's a distinction between self-defense and "escalating" the fight/situation. But if a white person slapping a black person is quick to be labeled a hate crime, gender's an even bigger, more general issue. People will bring it up in court. That line that divides self-defense from making matters worse is almost non-existant when it comes to a man defending himself.
 
coonster said:
You're missing the fact that aikido isn't really known to be "realistic."
Click to expand...

I used to teach it, but it's not for everyone I guess. I know a lot of cops who find it quite realistic.

I'm not saying hit someone in the face because they're in your face.
Click to expand...

Really? OK, I misunderstood your early statement, sorry.

coonster said:
I've never been in a situation where I had to decide whether to hit a woman before, but if I were to play a scenario in my mind where it wasn't life-or-death, I still think I'd be screwed if I had some chick in my face, pushing and shoving me.
Click to expand...
 
McDonald's Employee Took Credit For Filming Brutal Beating In Baltimore Fast Food Joint | The Smoking Gun

SO apparently it was a guy dressed like a woman, who was in the womens restroom. That in and of itself does not deserve a beating like that....but then he faked the seizure. Seems this guy had a few screws loose.

This is the society we live in....bathrooms will need to become unisex or we'll need more for trans-genders and gays. This beating is a product of our political correctness.

Either way the cops should have been called and no beat down was justified.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom