or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › McHero arrested after McDonald's beatdown
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

McHero arrested after McDonald's beatdown

post #1 of 46
Thread Starter 
I'm sure that some of you may have already seen or heard about a video of an incident that took place inside a NYC McDonald's.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdXdY...layer_embedded

This is easily the most hilarious video that I've seen all month, and that's why I bothered to make a thread about it. It's even better than some of those videos of the Occupy Wall Street crowd getting taught a lesson.

It is clear that the two hoodrats got what they deserved and it was wrong to arrest the McDonald's employee. He has also been fired from his job. The guy is basically a hero and he was defending himself and his place of business from two vicious thugs who slapped him in the face and proceeded to jump over the counter in a threatening manner.

This McDonald's worker was previously convicted of a crime and he had served his time. Unlike unproductive losers such as those protesters on Wall Street for example, this guy was working hard for very low pay at a McDonald's and trying to improve his life.

In come these two disgusting hoodrats and they assault the guy, and the two potty mouthed whores basically got what they deserved. We shall see how the case goes, but I can easily tell right from wrong, and this McDonald's worker should have all charges dropped against him. He did not instigate the incident, and self defense should never be a crime.

SImply put, the guy is a McHero and he's being wronged. He also has the support of many people, judging by most of the comments that I've read various places online. And that really annoying and pathetic white woman towards the end who's screaming and shouting? Somebody should have shoved a sock into her mouth to get her to shut up.
post #2 of 46
There's a point after which self defense becomes assault. I suppose this man must have crossed that line to have been arrested.

The punks should have been arrested for trespassing, assault and causing a public nuisance. It's the job of the police to make that arrest.
post #3 of 46
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

There's a point after which self defense becomes assault. I suppose this man must have crossed that line to have been arrested.

The punks should have been arrested for trespassing, assault and causing a public nuisance. It's the job of the police to make that arrest.

I saw the video closely and perhaps the very last few hits were not needed, but the guy has a great excuse and a valid defense! He was in a threatening situation and he was pumped full of adrenaline! That is a natural and totally normal human reaction. He should get a slap on the wrist at most, in my opinion.
post #4 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

I'm sure that some of you may have already seen or heard about a video of an incident that took place inside a NYC McDonald's.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdXdY...layer_embedded

This is easily the most hilarious video that I've seen all month, and that's why I bothered to make a thread about it. It's even better than some of those videos of the Occupy Wall Street crowd getting taught a lesson.

It is clear that the two hoodrats got what they deserved and it was wrong to arrest the McDonald's employee. He has also been fired from his job. The guy is basically a hero and he was defending himself and his place of business from two vicious thugs who slapped him in the face and proceeded to jump over the counter in a threatening manner.

This McDonald's worker was previously convicted of a crime and he had served his time. Unlike unproductive losers such as those protesters on Wall Street for example, this guy was working hard for very low pay at a McDonald's and trying to improve his life.

In come these two disgusting hoodrats and they assault the guy, and the two potty mouthed whores basically got what they deserved. We shall see how the case goes, but I can easily tell right from wrong, and this McDonald's worker should have all charges dropped against him. He did not instigate the incident, and self defense should never be a crime.

SImply put, the guy is a McHero and he's being wronged. He also has the support of many people, judging by most of the comments that I've read various places online. And that really annoying and pathetic white woman towards the end who's screaming and shouting? Somebody should have shoved a sock into her mouth to get her to shut up.

I agree with you this worker does not have to take the physical and verbal abuse from 2 pieces of scum that were drunk and disorderly.He was right and McDonalds should have stood by his side and not fired him. Corporate bullshit rules again.
post #5 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

There's a point after which self defense becomes assault. I suppose this man must have crossed that line to have been arrested.

The punks should have been arrested for trespassing, assault and causing a public nuisance. It's the job of the police to make that arrest.

So arrest is proof of guilt?
post #6 of 46
About the only sane one in that video is the white woman. Anyone who thinks the guy in the blue cap shouldn't serve time is absutely nuts. Thank god we have laws, or you guys would be running riot non stop.
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
post #7 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

There's a point after which self defense becomes assault. I suppose this man must have crossed that line to have been arrested.

The punks should have been arrested for trespassing, assault and causing a public nuisance. It's the job of the police to make that arrest.

Exactly, the fact that Apple][ supports this about sums him up perfectly.
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
post #8 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

So arrest is proof of guilt?

Who said anything about guilt? Read the title of the thread, and read what I wrote. Was guilt ever discussed?
post #9 of 46
Looks like he went too far to me. They were clearly in a defenseless position for the last 30 seconds. Maybe he'll be fined by NFL commissioner Roger Goodell?

The first few hits were likely warranted. I don't know what the exact law is here, but it certainly seems more than self-defense.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #10 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Who said anything about guilt? Read the title of the thread, and read what I wrote. Was guilt ever discussed?

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

There's a point after which self defense becomes assault. I suppose this man must have crossed that line to have been arrested.

The punks should have been arrested for trespassing, assault and causing a public nuisance. It's the job of the police to make that arrest.


Your own words. His arrest is proof that he crossed a line i.e. committed a crime.
post #11 of 46
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

About the only sane one in that video is the white woman. Anyone who thinks the guy in the blue cap shouldn't serve time is absutely nuts. Thank god we have laws, or you guys would be running riot non stop.

The pathetic white woman is hardly acting in a sane manner. She wasn't shouting or protesting when the hoodrats slapped the guy or began going after him. Only when the two punks get dealt with does she begin objecting. Hysterical, screaming women contribute nothing worthwhile to any situation except noise pollution.

As for running riot, it seems that was exactly what the two thug girls were doing and the McDonald's employee put an end to their rioting. He gave the criminals a good McWhipping.
post #12 of 46
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Exactly, the fact that Apple][ supports this about sums him up perfectly.

Yes, I believe in right and wrong, something that is apparently a foreign concept for certain people. You also support criminals who camp out on private property (OWS), so I'm not surprised that you would side with two criminals inside a McDonald's who attack employees.
post #13 of 46
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Looks like he went too far to me. They were clearly in a defenseless position for the last 30 seconds. Maybe he'll be fined by NFL commissioner Roger Goodell?

The first few hits were likely warranted. I don't know what the exact law is here, but it certainly seems more than self-defense.

He was outnumbered two to one, and if you look closely at the video, you can see them attempting to get up a few times. That means that they were still a threat, and he was right to subdue them using whatever means he had available. They could have had weapons, such as a gun or knife. It is wise not to take any chances when criminals attack you.

When somebody is driving a car at 100 MPH, they can't just simply stop. It takes some time for the car to come to a complete stop. I think that the same concept applies to the McDonald's employee.
post #14 of 46
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

Your own words. His arrest is proof that he crossed a line i.e. committed a crime.

Exactly, he was arrested, but that does not prove any guilt at all. If the guy ends up being acquitted, then I will be happy, because it means that justice and common sense will have prevailed.
post #15 of 46
McHero absolutely did the right thing.

These people were crazy enough to jump the counter to come after him, and it was a two on one attack. There's no way to know if they were armed or how far they would go at that point, the threat has to be neutralized. He only hit them when they tried to get up. When they stayed down, he stopped.
post #16 of 46
From the video it seems that he gave an extra whack to two that was not needed for self defense. Having said that I give the benefit of the doubt to the person being attacked and defending themselves.
post #17 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

There's a point after which self defense becomes assault. I suppose this man must have crossed that line to have been arrested.

The punks should have been arrested for trespassing, assault and causing a public nuisance. It's the job of the police to make that arrest.

I wonder how it is people are expected to be so meditative in the midst of being attacked. This is a straight up fight or flight situation. He tried flight and they came around the counter and so he fought.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bsenka View Post

McHero absolutely did the right thing.

These people were crazy enough to jump the counter to come after him, and it was a two on one attack. There's no way to know if they were armed or how far they would go at that point, the threat has to be neutralized. He only hit them when they tried to get up. When they stayed down, he stopped.

Exactly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

From the video it seems that he gave an extra whack to two that was not needed for self defense. Having said that I give the benefit of the doubt to the person being attacked and defending themselves.

DITTO.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #18 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I wonder how it is people are expected to be so meditative in the midst of being attacked. This is a straight up fight or flight situation. He tried flight and they came around the counter and so he fought.

Exactly.

DITTO.

If you're involved in a physical altercation, whether it was self-defense or not, you can expect to be arrested. The police can then decide whether there is evidence to charge you with a crime. Then the courts properly assess your guilt or innocence. This is our system, and it's the best system in the world.

Why do all of you hate America so much?

My point is that no one here is saying he is guilty. The closest opinion to that was expressed by SDW.

But you guys seem to be implying that he shouldn't have been arrested at all. Which would absolutely be unamerican. We do not support vigilante justice in a civilized society.
post #19 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

Your own words. His arrest is proof that he crossed a line i.e. committed a crime.

You're reading into the statement something that simply is not there. He crossed a line that called for arrest. Nothing more has been demonstrated.

What happened after the arrest? Was he charged with assault or not?

If he was charged with assault, then the police believe there was sufficient evidence that he crossed another line (which I didn't touch upon). If he is then convicted, then it is assumed that there is sufficient evidence for that. But that hasn't happened yet.

Do you think from what we can see on the video, that he shouldn't have been arrested at all? Do you deny there may be more to what happened than what we can see on the video?
post #20 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

If you're involved in a physical altercation, whether it was self-defense or not, you can expect to be arrested. The police can then decide whether there is evidence to charge you with a crime. Then the courts properly assess your guilt or innocence. This is our system, and it's the best system in the world.

Why do all of you hate America so much?

My point is that no one here is saying he is guilty. The closest opinion to that was expressed by SDW.

But you guys seem to be implying that he shouldn't have been arrested at all. Which would absolutely be unamerican. We do not support vigilante justice in a civilized society.

Check your reading comprehension. People are merely saying he did the right thing. Where did I ever say he ought not be investigated or that all parties need not go through that. However you are wrong that if there's a physical altercation all parties are automatically arrested.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #21 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

People are merely saying he did the right thing.

There's no way we can see that from the video. There's probably a CCTV video that we will never see that will be presented to the jury in court if he is charged. I'm sure the right decision will be made. If he's acquitted, it will be a good outcome, and I will assume it's the correct one. If he's convicted, likewise.

I see far too many assumptions of innocence here.

And I hope the two punks didn't suffer any permanent injuries, and I hope their legal punishment is effective in changing their behavior.

There is no outrage here.
post #22 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I wonder how it is people are expected to be so meditative in the midst of being attacked. This is a straight up fight or flight situation. He tried flight and they came around the counter and so he fought.



Exactly.



DITTO.

He tried "flight" right after she slapped him or when he ran for his weapon?
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
post #23 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

He tried "flight" right after she slapped him or when he ran for his weapon?

Weapon? It was a metal rod. It's probably used for changing the signs that show the food and prices or something similar. You make it sound like he was running for a pistol. Two people came over the counter and were chasing him.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #24 of 46
Yes, it was a weapon. No one is making it sound like anything it wasn't. Whether Mrs. Green was killed with the candlestick or the revolver, she was still killed with a weapon.

And what you guys don't get is that you can't determine this man's guilt or innocence based on whether the punks deserved it or not. What they deserved was to be put in lockup for a couple of days, not to be bashed with a metal stick, beyond what was justifiable self-defense, which is what the courts must determine, not whether the punks deserved a beating.

Does anyone know if they had any permanent injury? Let's say they recieved permanent brain damage or lost sight in one eye. Do they deserve that? Do you care?
post #25 of 46
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Does anyone know if they had any permanent injury? Let's say they recieved permanent brain damage or lost sight in one eye. Do they deserve that? Do you care?

Seriously, who cares?

Whatever may happen to them is fully a consequence of their own stupid actions. Basically, 100% of the blame is on them. If they get off with only minor injuries, then they can consider themselves lucky. If they don't, then oh well, tough shit. Lost an eye? Too bad.

Bad shit often happens to extremely stupid and violent people. What a surprise.
post #26 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Yes, it was a weapon. No one is making it sound like anything it wasn't. Whether Mrs. Green was killed with the candlestick or the revolver, she was still killed with a weapon.

And what you guys don't get is that you can't determine this man's guilt or innocence based on whether the punks deserved it or not. What they deserved was to be put in lockup for a couple of days, not to be bashed with a metal stick, beyond what was justifiable self-defense, which is what the courts must determine, not whether the punks deserved a beating.

Does anyone know if they had any permanent injury? Let's say they recieved permanent brain damage or lost sight in one eye. Do they deserve that? Do you care?

No I do not care if the people trying to harm someone were themselves harmed, even badly by the person they were attempting to badly harm. I feel 100% free to judge them based off the video I saw. If you're their defense attorney you can excuse me from the jury if you want but for now I'm entitled to my own view on the matter.

The claim for self-defense rests on provocation and this man has a full justification here. He had a clear fear for his life or at a minimum, fear of serious injury. The two women were completely out of control and attacked him because he had to inspect a $50 bill. There is no way to attempt to rationally measure a counter-attack because that would involve knowing their rationales and amount of force they intended to apply and there was nothing reasonable or even understandable about their actions. They were acting like drunk bullies and for nothing more than needing a bill verified they assaulted him and jumped over the counter with the intent of doing much more and instead were beat down. Fear and anger are part of the response to being victimized which is what this man had done to him. If it were a woman getting a a few extra licks in on the guy that attempted rape would you even question it?

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #27 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

No I do not care if the people trying to harm someone were themselves harmed, even badly by the person they were attempting to badly harm. I feel 100% free to judge them based off the video I saw. If you're their defense attorney you can excuse me from the jury if you want but for now I'm entitled to my own view on the matter.

The claim for self-defense rests on provocation and this man has a full justification here. He had a clear fear for his life or at a minimum, fear of serious injury. The two women were completely out of control and attacked him because he had to inspect a $50 bill. There is no way to attempt to rationally measure a counter-attack because that would involve knowing their rationales and amount of force they intended to apply and there was nothing reasonable or even understandable about their actions. They were acting like drunk bullies and for nothing more than needing a bill verified they assaulted him and jumped over the counter with the intent of doing much more and instead were beat down. Fear and anger are part of the response to being victimized which is what this man had done to him. If it were a woman getting a a few extra licks in on the guy that attempted rape would you even question it?

Fortunately, our legal system is neither based on assumption, nor on retribution. Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be the case for foreign policy.
post #28 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

He was outnumbered two to one, and if you look closely at the video, you can see them attempting to get up a few times. That means that they were still a threat, and he was right to subdue them using whatever means he had available. They could have had weapons, such as a gun or knife. It is wise not to take any chances when criminals attack you.

They were both lying on the floor. His co-worker had to stop him. And if they had weapons, they wouldn't have been able to get them out without getting whacked again. Please.

Quote:

When somebody is driving a car at 100 MPH, they can't just simply stop. It takes some time for the car to come to a complete stop. I think that the same concept applies to the McDonald's employee.

So you acknowledge that part of his actions were motivated by rage? I thought he only had "the right to subdue?"
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #29 of 46
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

They were both lying on the floor. His co-worker had to stop him. And if they had weapons, they wouldn't have been able to get them out without getting whacked again. Please.

Perhaps, but I believe that it is better to be safe than sorry when dealing with those sorts of people.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

So you acknowledge that part of his actions were motivated by rage? I thought he only had "the right to subdue?"

Adrenaline played a part in it I would guess. The rage of the two thug girls is what sparked the self defense actions of the McHero. As I have previously written, the last couple of blows were perhaps excessive, but everything else was warranted and the benefit of the doubt should be given to the innocent person defending themselves and not the brutal and vicious attackers.
post #30 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Fortunately, our legal system is neither based on assumption, nor on retribution. Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be the case for foreign policy.

I cited the legal arguments. Ignoring them and claiming retribution doesn't change those arguments.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

They were both lying on the floor. His co-worker had to stop him. And if they had weapons, they wouldn't have been able to get them out without getting whacked again. Please.

So you acknowledge that part of his actions were motivated by rage? I thought he only had "the right to subdue?"

Of course part of his actions were motivated by raqge. He's not some trained cop. He's not beholden to some professional standard of minimum force.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #31 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I cited the legal arguments. Ignoring them and claiming retribution doesn't change those arguments.



Of course part of his actions were motivated by raqge. He's not some trained cop. He's not beholden to some professional standard of minimum force.

Your legal arguments are sound, but there's no way you can pass judgment without seeing what happened behind the counter, or at a minimum hearing more testimony About what happened from those who did. You seem to be skipping that step. Like I said, thank God our legal system doesn't work that way.
post #32 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Your legal arguments are sound, but there's no way you can pass judgment without seeing what happened behind the counter, or at a minimum hearing more testimony About what happened from those who did. You seem to be skipping that step. Like I said, thank God our legal system doesn't work that way.

I have no doubt that on the jury, that video would be the primary and deciding piece of evidence. I'm free to pass judgement. My judgement doesn't carry any weight though.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #33 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I have no doubt that on the jury, that video would be the primary and deciding piece of evidence.

That's a pretty dumb assumption. There is almost certainly CCTV footage that shows more, as well as testimony of the witnesses. You have a very simplistic and naive way of judging things.
post #34 of 46
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I have no doubt that on the jury, that video would be the primary and deciding piece of evidence. I'm free to pass judgement. My judgement doesn't carry any weight though.

I have never had the pleasure, or misfortune of ever having to do jury duty, but this is one case where I wouldn't mind being on the jury.
post #35 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

Perhaps, but I believe that it is better to be safe than sorry when dealing with those sorts of people.

So we should just beat people into unconsciousness--just in case they MIGHT have a weapon?

Quote:

Adrenaline played a part in it I would guess.

Adrenaline is not a defense.

Quote:
The rage of the two thug girls is what sparked the self defense actions of tMcHero.

But his actions are only justified to a point. What if one of them died? Would that change your story?

Quote:
As I have previously written, the last couple of blows were perhaps excessive, but everything else was warranted and the benefit of the doubt should be given to the innocent person defending themselves and not the brutal and vicious attackers.

All people charged with crimes get the benefit of the doubt.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #36 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

That's a pretty dumb assumption. There is almost certainly CCTV footage that shows more, as well as testimony of the witnesses. You have a very simplistic and naive way of judging things.

I think you watch too much CSI. I've been on a jury. There's a room full of people and video from one angle. That's more than you get for 90% of crimes that are prosecuted.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

I have never had the pleasure, or misfortune of ever having to do jury duty, but this is one case where I wouldn't mind being on the jury.

A good prosecutor will likely drop the charges. They have to pick winning cases to prosecute and this one is clearly in a gray area.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #37 of 46
One thing to note is that he did back away then they came around the couter at him from both sides. This guy had one of each side of him behind the counter. Oh and I think the blonde lady needed at least one whack. What a banshie she is.
post #38 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

Oh and I think the blonde lady needed at least one whack. What a banshie she is.

How fun! You're just a wonderful human being. Your mom must be proud.
post #39 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

There's a point after which self defense becomes assault. I suppose this man must have crossed that line to have been arrested.

That is just so presumptuous. The guy looks like he snapped there, and he happened to be significantly stronger than the two women. You don't even know if their injuries were due to the last couple hits or simply because he's fairly strong. I think you may be underestimating this here.

Anyone know if the women were charged as well? Regardless of how badly they were injured that does still constitute assault on their part. The whole situation is just bad anyway.
post #40 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

That is just so presumptuous. The guy looks like he snapped there, and he happened to be significantly stronger than the two women. You don't even know if their injuries were due to the last couple hits or simply because he's fairly strong. I think you may be underestimating this here.

Anyone know if the women were charged as well? Regardless of how badly they were injured that does still constitute assault on their part. The whole situation is just bad anyway.

The presumption that he is significantly strong or that they women willing to jump over the counter didn't have knives or other weapons is just that, a presumption and he shouldn't be forced to risk his life to test those presumptions.

Any honest person should be able to simply note that if the genders were reversed, if two men were at the counter and slapped a female cashier for needing to verify a $50 bill, then came over and around the counter to attack her that the level of force wouldn't even be questioned. If they were getting back up and she as the one engaging in self-defense beat them back down until they stayed down, it would be seen as completely justified. Everyone would gladly note that if they get back up, that even injured, they could come after her again and hurt or murder her.

This is pure self-defense.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › McHero arrested after McDonald's beatdown