Ha

@Braeside Dove That is Awesome!

@Braeside Dove Thank you so much, you as well...

You guys are awesome, great comments and analysis! Here’s our take, we’ll break it down into a few points, the necessity, the fight, and the post. The Necessity: Was it necessary to act and put hands on the bad guy? You could make the case either way, but we’ll take the side of the good guys, having good intentions, and a good reason for doing so. The conflict started with verbal assaults on the woman taking orders at the counter but quickly escalated to a physical conflict (spitting on her). We would argue that the fight had already started with the verbal attack, but once it turns physical, all bets are off. At what point should the men have stepped in? Do they wait until she is hit with a fist? When he pulls out a knife? A gun? If violence is the answer, it’s the only answer and should be used quickly, effectively, and decisively. Which brings us to the next point. The Fight: Once the men decided to put their hands on the bad guy were they effective? For the most part the answer is probably yes, since the conflict ended without anyone seriously injured. It’s a win. However, could they have done better? Our opinion is yes; they could have. The vast majority of self-defense is centered around techniques to stop a threat, usually by causing some form of damage to the other person, but what happens when that “throat punch” or “shot” is not going to be justified? Can you control the bad guy without causing massive amounts of damage to them or yourself? Do you train or practice control techniques to be any good at them? Does anyone even teach them in your area? Two, large, grown men had a hard time controlling a smaller, weaker, guy on the ground and while standing. To Laura’s point, this is where things like Daniel Penny can happen. You are allowed to use enough force to overcome the attack, but it must be reasonable, not only to you, but to the average everyday person who might be sitting on your jury. The Post: We think that this type of post is a problem for us, not for the content, but for the motivations behind it. The guy making the post is reportedly a big country singer here in the States, although we don’t know who he is. He talks a good game about trying to calm the bad guy down. What really happened? He pulled out his phone and took a video of they guy at the counter yelling at the woman and cut to the fight. Where is the whole video? Where was his manhood? Why didn’t he step in to protect her? Why didn’t he help the two good Samaritans while they struggled? To top it off, he references his song, how it is about stepping in and doing the right thing, and uses that to attach himself to the actions of the two men who were in the fight. For all of the people in his comments thanking him for being so brave and what hero he is; Real men don’t take pictures, real men act, real men don’t steal the valor of other men in the arena, and real men don’t post about or draw attention to themselves for it.

@Laura Taylor It's all yours...