Because being a bouncer doesn't give you any more legal right to hit someone than not being a bouncer?
Poll: Poll: Do you think the force is reasonable and justified?
- Thread starter Burnsy2023
- Start date
Because being a bouncer doesn't give you any more legal right to hit someone than not being a bouncer?
But being attacked gives anyone the legal right to self defence.
It all comes back to the point of the initial discussion - reasonable or unreasonable - which has us divided on whether the punches beyond the first are justified. Was the level of force used after that first blow necessary? Probably not as the guy went down and hit his head on a car on the way, so toning down the force rather than increasing it would probably have been the better way to go.
I don't necessarily disagree with you, even though I think it's justified.
He might have toned them down, or kept them the same, rather difficult to tell, what with the kid in question going back for more in a weakened state time and time again...
I view it from bouncer was attacked, hit the kid once in self defence, the kid came back for more, bouncer hit him once again in self defence, for some reason the kid comes back for a third attempt, doesn't take a genius to figure out his intentions, bouncer hits him once again... maybe it was preemptive, maybe it was just 'right, let's put this kid down for good, he's had 2 chances' (that we have seen)
He might have toned them down, or kept them the same, rather difficult to tell, what with the kid in question going back for more in a weakened state time and time again...
I view it from bouncer was attacked, hit the kid once in self defence, the kid came back for more, bouncer hit him once again in self defence, for some reason the kid comes back for a third attempt, doesn't take a genius to figure out his intentions, bouncer hits him once again... maybe it was preemptive, maybe it was just 'right, let's put this kid down for good, he's had 2 chances' (that we have seen)
Part of the problem is the end result too. It's difficult to make out if the antagonist hit his head on the ground as he went down as there's someone obscuring the view, but I'm not so sure that the outcome of an encounter like this should be someone ending up completely motionless on the floor with people crowding around to check he's still ok. If anything that's the most shocking thing, the potential for a life threatening/changing injury. If after the first punch the bouncer had pushed him away, which would still likely have floored him, and he'd have got up and kept coming, then perhaps a second blow might have been more reasonable in my view, but as it stands it just seems a tad excessive.
I guess if your idea of going back for more is being stood there with your hands down presenting a similar threat level to that of a 12 year old girl.
I wouldn't care except honestly, as much as the kid deserved putting on his arse, he literally could've hit his head on the concrete and died from that third punch. It actually does look like he whacks his head as he falls. You really need to be careful hitting people in the head like that if you don't want to end up on manslaughter charges. That did happen to a guy in the town I live, one punch and the guy hit his head on the pavement and died, then you have one person dead and one person in prison over a drunken punch up. Stupid.
Where do you start. Interesting case though. I think the bouncer should have let the guy swing first, especially the third time. Then easily reasonable force however was the kid going for him or just going to speak to him. That's what it would revolve around.
exactly.
I don't see how the bouncer could have handled it better in the OP - the situation would have just got more out of control.
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,747
- Location
- Southampton, UK
You really don't need someone to swing first for it to be reasonable. Courts have made that fact very clear.
Well in that case not much else you can do.
Lol What? Risk potentially fatal injury just to justify using force?!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-38992393
A 12 year old girl with a knife could still easily hospitalise you or worse...
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Feb 2014
- Posts
- 2,957
WHY ?
He isn't at work to get attacked by anyone that thinks they'll have a go.
end of the day bouncers are a target for morons who want to act hard just because.
I completely disagree that the bloke who is being paid to do a job should be allowing people to potentially assault him before he can act in self defense.
Who is to say the "attacker" isn't going to pull a concealed weapon out once he is close, or grab the bouncer so that his mates can then join in ?
In the heat of the moment when under attacked you act in your own best interests.
He didn't have a knife, he was holding nothing, you can't just incapacitate people because "they could have a knife". Should I choke out or KO someone any time I have a confrontation in public because they could have a knife? Is that the assumption we're working on these days?
I'm not saying it isn't a very real threat for bouncers, or people like the Police as well, but you can't use it as a defence when there's no suspicion or cause to think someone does have a knife. If on the other hand they do have a knife or threaten to use one, treat them as a risk to your life and act accordingly, including using deadly force.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 8,353
its amazing what you can notice when you get to see something from a different angle multiple times, sit back and properly analyse the scenario isn't it
its amazing what you can notice when you get to see something from a different angle multiple times, sit back and properly analyse the scenario isn't it
There isn't even a suspicion he had a knife, and that's not why the bouncer punched him if we're being honest.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 6,636
No I don't see a problem.
When it comes to drunk idiots who cause problems I don't care at all.
When it comes to drunk idiots who cause problems I don't care at all.
Sorry if you get drunk and start swinging at people then those who perceive themselves to be in danger can quite rightly put you down within reason. That stupid fool kept getting up and pushing it further and given he has already shown his cards that he was violent - that bouncer quite rightly stopped it before it escalated. He seemed reasonably restrained to be honest - once he had the adrenaline going he could have gone well overboard
I remember what Nottingham was like on a night out from when I was at uni. It is rough as and full of drunk students with nothing better to do. Frights and brawls were pretty common.
I witnessed an off duty copper get put into a coma for attempting to stop someone kicking the **** out of their girlfriend in the middle of upper parliament street on a night out just up from that club in the video.
I witnessed an off duty copper get put into a coma for attempting to stop someone kicking the **** out of their girlfriend in the middle of upper parliament street on a night out just up from that club in the video.
You never know when someone might have a knife - there is a good example of this on youtube with a confrontation between a motorcycle group (acting like a wannabe gang) and some redneck types ("OSU students involved in Pawnee County confrontation") one of the guys slips a knife out of pretty much nowhere and conceals it in his hand.