PDA

View Full Version : Teen drawn on/approached by gangbanger- disarms and punches to submission


S_Constitutionist
July 24, 2009, 05:23 AM
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=154_1248394681

As I understand it, this just recently occurred.

There are so many things to pick apart here that I'm not sure I see the benefit in even trying to. Obviously, the kid made a VERY irrational move which easily could have been fatal. I understand that his "fight or flight" response was going absolutely haywire, and apparently he had a background in jujitsu, but still... I got goosebumps and shudders watching it. The actions of MANY in the film were definately illegal, on both ends.

Again, im not trying to turn this into a big thing. Of course, I would be willing to bet that the vast majority of us are not 14 year olds who obviously have some bad blood with a gang/gangbanger type- hanging out in the neighborhood skateboarding. It is, however, a real situation that I believe some things can be learned from.

WhistlerSWE
July 24, 2009, 05:57 AM
The kid handled it well when it started getting physical, he had a clear dominant position with the gangbanger not really posing any threat after losing the gun.

But who in his right mind would punch a guy pointing a gun towards you? :eek:

Hope the GB learned something from the experience, but its more likely he'll just bring more friends next time.

In my opinion the kid failed as soon as he started confronting.

MLeake
July 24, 2009, 06:18 AM
... and I hope it was. Otherwise, if the GB didn't want revenge for the fight itself, he and all his friends will want to get even over the internet video.

csmsss
July 24, 2009, 06:39 AM
The actions of MANY in the film were definately illegal, on both ends.*** are you talking about? Who did anything illegal besides the gang banger? No one I saw. As long as the gangster continued to fight, he was a threat and anyone there had every right to assist in subduing him.

Frankly, he's lucky the skateboarder didn't kill him. I hope the gang banger was arrested for the unprovoked aggravated assault he committed.

scottaschultz
July 24, 2009, 07:54 AM
Staged?? No way!!

Here is some guy recording his buddy skateboarding then all of a sudden this GB comes up to him and starts giving him a hard time. Does the guy recording all of this with his cellphone go to help his friend? Of course not! He just keeps watching and recording it all!

Scott

LeopardCurDog
July 24, 2009, 08:09 AM
Looked good to me. Only thing that could have made it better was if the BG would have gotten beaten more.

I liked the half homie under the chin thing though! 10 points for "ghetto cool"!

freakshow10mm
July 24, 2009, 08:39 AM
But who in his right mind would punch a guy pointing a gun towards you?
If you're looking at the business end of a gun, you're a dead man on your feet. He had the mentality many of us have. It's better to die on your feet than live on your knees.

As to their being much illegalities in the video, probably in reference to the beating after the gun was taken away, is not IMO illegal. The deadly threat changed to a physical threat which was being taken care of. If the gangsta pressed charges and I was on the jury, I would find no fault on the part of any of the skateboarders.

Sparks2112
July 24, 2009, 08:43 AM
Certainly not staged.

ZeSpectre
July 24, 2009, 08:45 AM
I was kinda surprised there wasn't more skateboard use.

It always amazes me how people get into a fistfight and keep punching each other in the head. The skull is BONE, there are a whole host of better places to hit someone if you want to disable them.

hogdogs
July 24, 2009, 08:46 AM
But who in his right mind would punch a guy pointing a gun towards you?
In one word... ME!!! Can't out run a bullet so may as well make it far harder to hit me...
Brent

Cope's Dist
July 24, 2009, 09:37 AM
I imagine the guy with the phone figured it was better to record it all in case they needed proof of anything in the future. The guy beating the heck out of the GB had already made up his mind he wasn't takin no crap and he didn't seem to need help. May have been "no too smart" cuz GB had gun, but some folks just ain't got a sense of humor about a gun in their face. I can say I don't.

Sparks2112
July 24, 2009, 09:48 AM
As an aside, this is a GREAT example as to why having a gun protects you from absolutely nothing if you choose to close within striking distance of an individual.

howwie
July 24, 2009, 09:58 AM
It was smart for the guy to record for evidence sake, but I can't say I wouldn't have turned tail and gotten out of the situation as soon as I saw the gun. But it ended okay in this incident, but this is not always the case. He's really lucky the GB wasn't willing to use that gun. I am/was a skater and I know how common it is to skate in bad areas. I always had my mini Ka-Bar in my belt and a G19 in the car.

Eskimo
July 24, 2009, 10:23 AM
The actions of MANY in the film were definately illegal, on both ends.

Just because something is illegal doesn't mean it's wrong.. : ) Those guys had every right to knock that guy in the head with those skateboards.

csmsss
July 24, 2009, 10:29 AM
Again, the ONLY actor in that video who did anything illegal was the gang banger.

Eskimo
July 24, 2009, 10:39 AM
Again, the ONLY actor in that video who did anything illegal was the gang banger.

Not true.. they didn't even try to hold the guy down, he was laying there covering himself and they were beating him. You mean to tell me you think you would get a pat on the back for that?

BeeGee
July 24, 2009, 10:48 AM
I would give him a pat on the back if I were there!!!!
BeeGee

Lavid2002
July 24, 2009, 10:50 AM
hell yeah man thats what tat guy gets

Sixer
July 24, 2009, 10:59 AM
That was great! The kid even tried to walk away!:eek: When that didn't work, he let his elbow do the talking.

.. they didn't even try to hold the guy down, he was laying there covering himself and they were beating him. You mean to tell me you think you would get a pat on the back for that?

HELL YES. I'm officially giving this kid a "e-pat" on the back :D

I mean, seriously? If you're gonna pull a gun on someone, not use it, then have it taken away... you probably deserve to get shot. Matter of fact it should be MANDATORY that you receive an a$$ whooping that's at least equal or greater to this one. The mini-thug got off lucky! Got his bell rung and lost his gat, but that was the extent of it. So many things about the wannabe gangbanger tick me off. He thought he could bully a kid just because he had a gun.

He learned his lesson though .... never get too close to your target :)

johnwilliamson062
July 24, 2009, 10:59 AM
he was laying there covering himself and they were beating him
That was not exactly how I would describe it.

Lets not rule out the possibility that these were in fact rival gangs members.

BTW, the PSI of a skateboard turned sideways is much greater than with the wheels. Easy to do much more damage with that way. The guy who didn't know how to use his gun is lucky those guys didn't know how to use their skateboards.

ZeSpectre
July 24, 2009, 10:59 AM
As an aside, this is a GREAT example as to why having a gun protects you from absolutely nothing if you choose to close within striking distance of an individual.

Actually it's a great example of "posturing" (Read Dave Grossman's book "On Killing").

To be blunt.

Gun-boy wasn't ready to go all the way to "maim/kill" (which is strangely reassuring) but since firearms don't have a "less lethal" setting he was stuck in a feedback loop.

Skateboard-boy, on the other hand, had plenty of non-lethal on hand and a willingness to employ it immediately.

Mentality, not tools.

csmsss
July 24, 2009, 11:02 AM
Not true.. they didn't even try to hold the guy down, he was laying there covering himself and they were beating him. You mean to tell me you think you would get a pat on the back for that?You must have been watching an entirely different video than I was. The guy with the gun was struggling to get to his feet the entire time. He was NOT simply covering himself. As long as he keeps moving and struggling, he's a threat and they had every right to keep pummeling him.

I guess they should have helped him to his feet and walked him over to his weapon so he could resume his attack?

Sweet baby Jebus.

scottaschultz
July 24, 2009, 11:13 AM
Cope's Dist wrote: I imagine the guy with the phone figured it was better to record it all in case they needed proof of anything in the future.

howwie wrote: It was smart for the guy to record for evidence sake...

I will remember what good friends you guys are while I am recovering from my injuries in a hospital bed while this GB waits to go on trial!

Scott

Eskimo
July 24, 2009, 11:16 AM
I'm sure a few skateboarders can easily outrun some fat gang member. They had his gun, all they had to do was get up and leave. You guys can play stupid if you want, but we both know there would have been no risk at all if they had simply taken his gun and left.

Keep in mind that I agree 100% that he should have been beaten 5x harder than he was.. I'm just talking legalities here.

You must have been watching an entirely different video than I was. The guy with the gun was struggling to get to his feet the entire time. He was NOT simply covering himself. As long as he keeps moving and struggling, he's a threat and they had every right to keep pummeling him.

I guess they should have helped him to his feet and walked him over to his weapon so he could resume his attack?

Sweet baby Jebus.

csmsss
July 24, 2009, 11:24 AM
You still haven't detailed which laws they broke. Also, why on earth should they leave? They weren't doing anything wrong! The gangbanger initiated the entire event and each and every person there was legally justified in doing whatever was necessary to force him to submit. Again, no laws broken.

goose13
July 24, 2009, 11:45 AM
I'm sorry if someone pulls a gun like that in a threatening manner all bets are off. The skateboarder did a good job, to me it didn't look like he instigated it, at one point he tried to skate away from the situation on his board, but that good for nothin stain on society gang banger proceeded to get physical. I know it may have looked bad the beating part, and maybe it was a little excessive, but whose to say if you get off of him that he's not gonna go for the gun, then it turns in to another struggle with could turn deadly. BG ****** off about you disarming him and giving him a whooping could turn bad if you let off of him could turn bad in an instant. and his other friends had every right to jump in and throw a few of their own blows, the gang banger (or wanna be) pulled a gun on them, putting their life on the line. Anytime someone pulls a gun on a human being in a threatening manner like that whether they plan on using it or not is still a threat, you don't know what their intentions are.

I know many of us being gun owners, and most of us on here holding CCW's might have handled this situation differently, but this kid is at the age where he can't legally carry, much less own a handgun so he used the tools at his disposal, his fists.

Eskimo
July 24, 2009, 11:48 AM
It was much more dangerous to continue beating him, if the guy was indeed a gang member.

Kyo
July 24, 2009, 11:50 AM
gang banger boy is lucky that the other guy didn't have a knife. then he woulda been done. I couldn't believe he kept getting CLOSER to the other kid as he had the gun on him. next to his own head none the less. idiot. got what he deserved.
I agree as well that if you are at the business end of a gun you are a dead man walkin.

Steamboatsig
July 24, 2009, 12:11 PM
My heart is racing watching that video. Props to the skateboarder, but man is he lucky to have survived the encounter. I feel for the skater though, now he has to watch his back for the rest of his life. You know the cholo gang banger is going to seek retaliation, and there are a bunch of crazier idiot gang bangers than him. I would have loved to seen the end of it all. Did the cops show up? Did the gang banger go to jail? What happened to the gang banger's buddy?

Great vid.

Cosmic Zamboni
July 24, 2009, 12:20 PM
I'm just kind of shocked that people would try to defend a guy who assaulted somebody with firearm because he got his butt whipped over it.

It's easy to sit in front of your computer screen and critique what somebody else did when a gun was stuck in his face. Real easy. I got robbed once by a guy with a gun who demanded that I empty my pockets. I didn't empty my pockets, but I started talking to him, so he had to get my wallet out of my pocket himself. The whole time I was looking for an opportunity to get the gun without getting shot but once he seemed satisfied with the wallet, I decided to let it go. It was a matter of opportunity and timing. But it's not in my nature to submit or to comply.

hogdogs
July 24, 2009, 12:24 PM
From what I see... The SB's just clammed up about the gun one of them now had and left the BG to the care of the "blue shirt" that walked out of the building. Now they got a gun to get in trouble with later.
Brent

JohnnyBmore
July 24, 2009, 01:03 PM
That gang banger was sooo lucky . If that had been half the CCW guys on this site im sure he would be dead . & a skate board can get pretty bad so like i said..
that dumbass is lucky .

Housezealot
July 24, 2009, 01:11 PM
It's better to die on your feet than live on your knees
KHAAAAAAAAAANNNNNN!:p

Housezealot
July 24, 2009, 01:23 PM
The SB's just clammed up about the gun one of them now had and left the BG to the care of the "blue shirt" that walked out of the building. Now they got a gun to get in trouble with later.

I just watched the video again and actually when "blue shirt" is trying to break it up at least one of the kids is yelling "he pulled a Gun"

hogdogs
July 24, 2009, 01:27 PM
What i mean is none volunteered to turn it over and I think I see one kid possibly picking it up when they head in to the scrap.
Brent

csmsss
July 24, 2009, 01:58 PM
What i mean is none volunteered to turn it over and I think I see one kid possibly picking it up when they head in to the scrap.Since the video stopped before everything drew to a conclusion, I don't think you have much basis to ASSUME that one of the skateboarders kept the gun. We simply don't know what happened to it - perhaps we should leave it at that instead of speculating.

TailGator
July 24, 2009, 02:10 PM
The gunman can be seen on the video grabbing the skateboarder's shirt and hanging on when the skateboarder tried to disengage. Skateboarder therefore had little choice but to continue his defense. Plus, at the beginning, the skateboarder's gestures give a strong impression that he was attempting to calm the situation. I can find no fault with the skateboarder.

If that was a security guard coming in at the end, he sure approached an armed confrontation rather casually, don't you think? But then, I couldn't tell where the gun was at that time, so maybe he didn't see it.

Video evidence is helpful should any charges be brought against the skateboarder and in prosecuting the gunman. Granted that LE could not have arrived in time to affect the outcome, would ya'll have preferred the cell phone be used to record video or call 911?

S_Constitutionist
July 24, 2009, 02:18 PM
Im not trying to give the impression that the skateboarder was in the wrong. He had a gun pulled on him and thus, the GB was threatening his life. Personally, I wish he would have messed him up far worse. Originally, it seemed to me that the other kids joining in, hitting the GB with their boards was excessive- though that was my first take. Now, im not so sure. It seems that the GB WAS continually trying to gain the upper hand (Grabbing/throwing/etc) rather than defend his head.

I agree- props to the kid. Im not sure I would have the guts to do what he did- but in that situation, I suppose instict takes over.

Unfortunately I do not have the rest of the story, I'll post more info when/if there is news coverage and or more info comes out.

Sixer
July 24, 2009, 03:04 PM
That GB will probably get his butt whooped again when his homies see this :D

Thursday
July 24, 2009, 03:27 PM
Wow he handled that well. Sounds like the GB is talking ish while he's getting spanked. That kid delivers some blows, you can even see how dazed and messed up the GB is when he stands up. I honestly don't think he even had a thought of using that gun, just trying to intimidate. It was a legal fight! 1:25 in you can see the ref come in.:D

Housezealot
July 24, 2009, 03:29 PM
That GB will probably get his butt whooped again when his homies see this
you know that's an interesting thought, we all keep worring about gang retalition to the SB, I have no knowlage about how a gang works but perhaps the GB would not want everyone to know he didn't have the "Guts" to pull the trigger and got whooped by a kid half his size:D

chadwimc
July 24, 2009, 03:30 PM
I'm too old,fat and slow to be wrestling with punks. If, for some reason, I was able to get the bad guy to the ground, I would do anything in my power to leave him there for the coroner. I would consider anybody trying to pull me off a threat.

Of course I'm too old, fat and slow to be skate boarding too...

markj
July 24, 2009, 04:21 PM
I hope repurcussions are not soon to follow on this young man. He showed a lot of nerve, he tried to avoid it as long as he could have. Having a gun pointed at you makes you think.

Composer_1777
July 24, 2009, 04:23 PM
LOL this doesn't even count.... That wannabe thug couldn't shoot a barn in front of his face.

He was just swinging around a gun and got punched... big deal.

Eskimo
July 24, 2009, 04:28 PM
I'm just kind of shocked that people would try to defend a guy who assaulted somebody with firearm because he got his butt whipped over it.

It's easy to sit in front of your computer screen and critique what somebody else did when a gun was stuck in his face. Real easy. I got robbed once by a guy with a gun who demanded that I empty my pockets. I didn't empty my pockets, but I started talking to him, so he had to get my wallet out of my pocket himself. The whole time I was looking for an opportunity to get the gun without getting shot but once he seemed satisfied with the wallet, I decided to let it go. It was a matter of opportunity and timing. But it's not in my nature to submit or to comply.

I don't see a single person defending him.. elaborate?

TailGator
July 24, 2009, 04:41 PM
Originally, it seemed to me that the other kids joining in, hitting the GB with their boards was excessive

Probably not. Think about it - if you were on a jury for a kid who used his skateboard against a guy with a gun, who would you say had the disparity of force on his side? Add in that the gunman is the aggressor, with no apparent provocation, and the kids with the skateboards look to be in the clear to me.

Just my take, of course, but while the gunman was starting to lose the fight, he was still resisting when the other kid got in his whacks with the skateboard. I have a really hard time seeing that go against them.

MLeake
July 24, 2009, 04:44 PM
... for one thing, in similar clips done by actual newscameramen, when the BG has friends (there's a second banger at start of clip) they almost always come to threaten the person with camera, to try to make them stop recording. Neither banger approached the guy filming.

The fat banger posed and postured way too much, and seemed to be hamming it up for the camera.

Most of the punches and skateboard hits didn't look like they connected.

The fat banger wasn't bleeding anywhere, after theoretically being hit multiple times with skateboards.

The second banger doesn't do much of anything to help his pard.

And again, the skaters posted the video to a major internet site, where they had to suspect the gang would eventually see it.

For all those reasons, I think this was a staged prank.

Housezealot
July 24, 2009, 04:55 PM
granted I doubt the sb's would have thought of it, the GB could concievably (I know its a stretch) had a BUG. I would not have considered the threat stopped untill he and his buddy were totally restrained.

EastSideRich
July 24, 2009, 06:13 PM
when the BG has friends (there's a second banger at start of clip) they almost always come to threaten the person with camera, to try to make them stop recording. Neither banger approached the guy filming
If you look close when the fight goes to the ground, The friend is tied up with two of the skaters on the ground about 20 ft away.
Could be staged I guess, but I think a lot of the blows while they're struggling on the ground connected. That was a genuine ass-whoopin; whether it was staged or not I guess we'll never know.

One more thing: Did anyone else hear a shot at about 1:17 on the video?

Slopemeno
July 24, 2009, 08:21 PM
That's not staged. I'd give that kid (Victim #1, I suppose) lots of credit for keeping his composure and turning the tables.

MLeake
July 24, 2009, 08:40 PM
look at the fight from around 1:40 to 1:55

If this isn't staged, then the skater does a great job of accidentally missing almost every punch he throws. Out of all those shots, two connect; the first one looked like it surprised him, and the second is only a grazing backhand. Everything else just barely misses.

So he either knows some grappling but can't punch for crap, or else he's just trying to make it look good but accidentally hits his partner with only one real shot.

The security guard isn't terribly concerned with it, either.

The whole thing just screams staged fight in order to make a viral video.

Re4mer
July 25, 2009, 07:27 AM
If you watch the first part of the video its clear the kid tries several times to walk away and the BG doesn't let him. Its only then that he goes for the gun. What happens next is the normal reaction you would get from any group of people faced with that situation. Personally I think the kids did well.

skydiver3346
July 25, 2009, 07:49 AM
:confused: Have looked at this numerous times and those punches and knee to his face are real. Don't think it is staged and if it is, the bad guy is more stupid than I thouht for takings a butt whippin like that (just for the camera).

My only comment, is that they should have let the teen keep on kicking the bad guy's butt instead of pulling him off. Then, he really would have learned his lesson.

jman841
July 25, 2009, 08:09 AM
I think it is real and i would not be surprised to know if the skater has had some sort of martial art training, His first instinct after getting to the ground was to achieve the mount position on his larger attacker. I have trained in martial arts since i was very young and currently train in a few varieties including Brazilian Jujitsu, If there is one thing i have learned from it is that looks are deceiving, I know many people who look very non threatening and would not intimidate a fly but could easily take on people twice as strong and heavy as they are.

I think this is a great example of the effectiveness of BJJ in a real situation, The skaters instinct was to get the fight to the ground and take dominant position, granted his technique could have been better, however, He clearly won and that is all that counts.

GojuBrian
July 25, 2009, 08:26 AM
The skateboarder did good all things considered. He did miss alot of punches, but the ones that count landed. Wish the bg would have been ko'd.

I wonder what happened to lead up to the gb pulling a gun?

MLeake
July 25, 2009, 08:39 AM
and the only one that hits with any power doesn't look like it meant to, from the angle the kid's fist made with his own wrist. This, despite the fact that the skater is in full mount, and the gangsta isn't really doing much blocking.

The skateboard strikes have no real effect, and look like they are also pulled both in intensity and somewhat off to the side.

The skater's friends don't react with anything like the intensity one would expect against somebody who had pulled a gun; it's treated more like a joke.

The guard approaches in a calm and quiet manner, by himself. He's obviously not taking it seriously.

Not only that, but in googling every combination I can think of that would pull up an actual news article about this incident, guess what? There are none. This thing shows up on a bunch of skater sites, and some fight sites, but it's also on digg and youtube.

If the media aren't all over this, that's only one more reason to say STAGED.

Oh, btw, in a case like this, where the gangstas have fewer people than the skaters, BJJ is great. If the gangstas had the numbers, then BJJ would be problematic. Skater would have been vulnerable the whole time he was tied up with gansta 1.

But it doesn't matter, because this is FAKE. If it were real, you can bet you'd have already read news articles from reputable sources about a police investigation looking for the kid with the gun, the kid who posted the video, etc.

GojuBrian
July 25, 2009, 08:44 AM
I don't believe it was staged, but so what if it was? Still makes for good tactical response conversation.

Want to go back and forth on whether or not it was staged,which it wasn't imo, or talk about the actual sitation,etc...? :rolleyes:

JohnKSa
July 25, 2009, 08:56 AM
As long as he keeps moving and struggling, he's a threat and they had every right to keep pummeling him.Haven't watched the video, but this statement is badly in error.

Threat assessment is far more complicated than this. The idea that you can keep shooting or beating someone as long as they keep "moving and struggling" is absolutely incorrect. You can keep shooting or beating someone as long as they still pose a credible threat to you but the idea that they have to be completely disabled (not "moving or struggling") for the threat to be over is not based in fact.

MLeake
July 25, 2009, 09:02 AM
... kid initially goes for both keeping the gun directed away from himself, and for taking the fat gangsta's balance. This is good. Kid doesn't really seem to focus on directing the gun in any particular direction, but then again there are people in most directions and that would have taken a whole different level of awareness and capability. This is not good or bad, it just is. Kid's focus seems to go away from gun almost immediately after takedown. This is bad, if he doesn't KNOW the gun is currently out of play and out of reach.

Not sure where gun ends up. Other skaters may grab it. Otherwise, there's an unsecured firearm that everybody is ignoring, despite the yells of "he's got a gun."

As somebody else noted, during all the time kicking and punching, nobody really disables gangsta's hands or ties up his arms. If he had any other weapons, this could have bitten them all really badly.

Kid recording video would have been smarter to take a moment to secure the weapon, but didn't seem too worried about that. Kid recording video didn't yell, "GUN!" when he saw it, and his actions seemed more like those of somebody thinking, "cool, check this out!" than "oh sh**!!" (IE filming, maneuvering for better angles, not helping his buddy, not warning others)

As somebody else noted, skateboards make more effective weapons if turned like a blade, to increase surface pressure. Same would be true for an oar or paddle, or any hard, flat object.

As I noted, I wouldn't recommend posting a vid that is guaranteed to rile up a gang. I wouldn't recommend posting a vid of a bunch of my buddies kicking a guy or hitting him with objects, as that might rile up cops and DAs. I would recommend reporting any incident of having been threatened with a firearm to the police.

Guard should not have walked up into the middle of a crowd so casually, and by himself. Guard should definitely have called for backup, right after he called 911 or Canadian equivalent (guy who posted video had Canadian flag by his handle; hard to tell from accents and buildings where this was).

So, there's my discussion of the tactics in this event that for any number of reasons seems staged.

MLeake
July 25, 2009, 09:27 AM
... I suppose I should also mention that the fat gangbanger is stupid, (although since I think the whole thing is fake, he's probably just assisting with the setup) for several reasons.

1) He assumes that 2 bangers plus one gun will intimidate a large group; it might, but it might not;

2) It's possible that he's posturing with a fake gun, as somebody else suggested;

3) He gets close to the skater with a weapon drawn but held in such a way that he can't really maintain control of his weapon or the situation (IE held up sideways, gangsta style - this has to be fake, seriously - under his own jaw). Normally, if close up and not shooting yet, better to keep the non-gun hand and hip forward, and the pistol back by the shelter of the gunside hip. Can fend or strike with the left, and hip-shoot or raise the gun to low ready from a guarded position.

4) Gangsta dudes separate, while dealing with a group, instead of being in position to watch each other's backs.

Tactically, bunch of bozos.

Still think it's fake.

csmsss
July 25, 2009, 09:31 AM
Haven't watched the video, but this statement is badly in error.

Threat assessment is far more complicated than this. The idea that you can keep shooting or beating someone as long as they keep "moving and struggling" is absolutely incorrect. You can keep shooting or beating someone as long as they still pose a credible threat to you but the idea that they have to be completely disabled (not "moving or struggling") for the threat to be over is not based in fact.I couldn't disagree more, John. As long as the bad guy is continuing to make exertions toward getting to his feet and to an offensive position, he constitutes a threat. And, if I may, your approach could very well get you killed. Nope. As long as my adversary continues to mount a defense and isn't simply submitting, he's a threat and I'm well within my rights to take any actions necessary to induce submission.

And...let us not forget that in this case we're talking about a situation where the good guy does not possess a weapon. He doesn't have any means of keeping the bad guy at arms' length should the bad guy get up into a position of equivalency or better. Nope. He's got every right to beat the hell out of the bad guy until the bad guy has fully and obviously stopped posing any sort of threat.

Brian Pfleuger
July 25, 2009, 09:37 AM
I'm with MLeake on this one. I'm going with fake. Might be real but if I had to guess, I'd say fake.

JohnKSa
July 25, 2009, 09:44 AM
As long as the bad guy is continuing to make exertions toward getting to his feet and to an offensive position, he constitutes a threat.The problem is that any sane/normal person will struggle and attempt to escape if he's being beaten.

If you take the position that you will continue to beat a person until they stop struggling then what you're saying is that unless you beat a person into unconsciousness they still pose a threat. You won't sell that one to a jury because that's not what the law allows.

You're confusing the difference between a potential threat and an immediate threat of serious injury or death. The former is NOT grounds for use of deadly force (such as beating a person with a skateboard) while the latter IS grounds for use of deadly force.

YES, if the person is still struggling they constitute a potential threat, but that doesn't mean you can automatically keep beating them until they're unconscious or dead. Once the person no longer poses an immediate threat to you your legal grounds for use of deadly force evaporate.He's got every right to beat the hell out of the bad guy until the bad guy has fully and obviously stopped posing any sort of threat. Again, you don't get to keep using deadly force until "any sort of threat" is gone. The deadly force laws are very specific about exactly what sort of threat justifies the use of deadly force.

For example, if someone points a gun at me, that gives me the right to use deadly force to stop the attack. But if my friends and I outnumber him and have impact weapons, once he's been disarmed his ability to cause me serious injury or death is virtually eliminated. If I keep beating him once he can't really pose a serious threat then I've overstepped the law. The law takes into account such things as disparity of force.

hogdogs
July 25, 2009, 09:44 AM
If it is a faked setup vid, I find the butt whoopin dealt out to be a bit severe for a stunt/prank.
:D:eek::cool:
Brent

jon_in_wv
July 25, 2009, 09:50 AM
You're confusing the difference between a potential threat and an immediate threat. The former is NOT grounds for use of deadly force (such as beating a person with a skateboard) while the latter IS grounds for use of deadly force.

I think it would be tough to argue that small guy like the skate boarder, hitting a much bigger guy in the back with a skate board is deadly force. Thats not something that is likely to result in serious injury or death. If he was striking him in the head, perhaps.

Secondly, the GB did bring in a firearm and the kids fought back. I don't think your going to find to mny prosecutors or too many juries that are going to consider what these kids did the same thing as what the GB did.

Standing up to a POS GB like that is resky but these kids are heroes in my book. If good people stood up to evil like that all the time, we would be in a better world.

csmsss
July 25, 2009, 09:56 AM
John, you go on creating these imaginary distinctions if you like, but if someone wants to stop getting pummeled in a fistfight, all he has to do is give up and cover up. Getting up or even struggling to resist or get to one's feet tells me that person still constitutes an immediate threat. Since we know he started the confrontation, a prudent person would continue to pound on him until he submits. If someone has attacked you and subsequently attempts to get to his feet, or to fight back, HE IS A THREAT!!! I don't know how to put it any simpler than that.

hogdogs
July 25, 2009, 10:05 AM
BTW, I feel the need to point out that the SB's were not tactically approaching this as a law abiding citizen would. These are "deviant youth" just like the GB's are. They go around destroying property on a routine basis (pulling a grind on freshly painted curbs is the minimum.) and were just looking at this as the teenage posturing needed not to look like a punk. It went from posturing to a flat out beat down to punk the GB.
Don't get me wrong I feel they did the right thing up to but not including walking off with the pistol in their pocket... real gun or not...
Brent

JohnKSa
July 25, 2009, 10:08 AM
John, you go on creating these imaginary distinctions if you like, but if someone wants to stop getting pummeled in a fistfight, all he has to do is give up.The law creates the distinctions.

I agree that the attacker giving up ends the confrontation and the justification for the use of deadly force, but that's not the ONLY thing that ends it. Once a person no longer poses an immediate threat of serious injury or death then the law says you no longer get to use deadly force.If someone has attacked you and subsequently attempts to get to his feet, or to fight back, HE IS A THREAT!!!Getting to one's feet is absolutely not the same as "fighting back", and "moving or struggling" is not evidence, in and of itself, of posing a threat that justifies the use of deadly force.I think it would be tough to argue that small guy like the skate boarder, hitting a much bigger guy in the back with a skate board is deadly force.I was responding to a particular statement made and I attempted to make it clear that my comments were general, not specifically related to the video.

Furthermore, even if you could make the case that beating someone with an impact weapon doesn't constitute deadly force it's important to remember that even the use of force (not deadly force) is also restricted by law to situations where it is "immediately necessary to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force." Once the attacker stops trying to use unlawful force against the defender then even non-lethal force is unjustified.

The point is that "moving or struggling", in and of itself, is not sufficient grounds for continuing to beat someone with an impact weapon. It takes more justification than that.

Some reading material.

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.9.htm#9.31

csmsss
July 25, 2009, 10:16 AM
John, I'm at my wit's end. You continue to persist in asserting the belief that gaining the upper hand in a fistfight, however momentary it may be, constitutes ending a threat. IT DOESN'T. That bad guy gets up to his feet, he's heading straight for the firearm he earlier lost possession of. The threat isn't over until the threat is obviously over. If you wish to give the bad guy every opportunity to get the advantage over on you, by all means have at it. But your approach could very easily get you killed.

JohnKSa
July 25, 2009, 10:25 AM
You continue to persist in asserting the belief that gaining the upper hand in a fistfight, however momentary it may be, constitutes ending a threat.That is incorrect. I have absolutely NOT said that momentarily gaining the upper hand ends the threat.

What I have said is that "moving or struggling" is not in and of itself justification for continuing to beat a person with an impact weapon.That bad guy gets up to his feet, he's heading straight for the firearm he earlier lost possession of.You have every right to do whatever is required (including using deadly force) to keep him from arming/rearming himself with a deadly weapon as long as it is reasonable to believe he would use it against you.

"Arming/rearming himself with a deadly weapon" is NOT the same thing as "getting to his feet" or "moving or struggling".The threat isn't over until the threat is obviously over.Again, there are different levels of "threat" and the law makes a distinction as to the level and immediacy of the threat in granting justification for use of deadly force.

You have made comments indicating that "moving or struggling" or "getting to his feet" is justification for continuing to beat someone with an impact weapon. It isn't legal justification. Read the laws in the link I provided.

Thursday
July 25, 2009, 10:47 AM
In something like this, I wouldn't stop until he stopped struggling or submitted to me by following my orders. In something like this I would hope my adrenaline and emotions of just facing a life and death situation would not take me to the point of no return.(anybody seen the ending of Greenstreet Hooligans:rolleyes:) but if someone pulled a gun on me and I was able to disarm and pin him giving him the beating of a lifetime I would not want to stop until he was compliant. I would no doubt want to detain him until the authorities arrive, and he is not going to be detained by getting to his feet(which could easily allow him to A. run, B. mount an offensive, C. recover his lost weapon) He is going to be detained on the ground doing as I say.

JohnKSa
July 25, 2009, 11:10 AM
...I would not want to stop until he was compliant.I HIGHLY recommend that people learn what is legal when it comes to using deadly force in their particular states.

The first step in a self-defense encounter is saving your life and preventing injury, but you don't want to overstep the law once things swing your way or you'll end up a criminal.by getting to his feet(which could easily allow him to A. run, B. mount an offensive, C. recover his lost weapon)The concern about the person rearming himself is real and as a defender one would have the right to prevent that, but it's unrealistic to pretend that continuing to beat him or detaining him are the only two options available. Grand juries/prosecutors are not going to be that easily duped.

The bottom line is that the law does not give one the right to beat a person into complete compliance or until they stop moving or stop trying to get to their feet. It only gives a person the right to use deadly force until it is no longer IMMEDIATELY NECESSARY to prevent the attacker from injuring or killing the defender.

I don't claim to be an expert on the laws of all states so I would invite anyone who can post a link to a state law indicating that a defender has the legal right to use deadly force until the attacker is compliant (vs. simply not posing an immediate threat) to please do so.I would no doubt want to detain him until the authorities arrive, and he is not going to be detained by getting to his feet(which could easily allow him to A. run, B. mount an offensive, C. recover his lost weapon) He is going to be detained on the ground doing as I say.Detaining people by force carries with it some serious legal concerns that a person should be cognizant of if he plans to make it part of his strategy. There has been a good deal of general information written on this topic, but it wouldn't hurt to consult an attorney in your area for a specific read.

MLeake
July 25, 2009, 11:26 AM
I guarantee you, if I hit you multiple times in the head with my fist, you'd be bleeding from a few places.

I further guarantee you, if a bunch of people hit you with skateboards, even with bad technique, you'd be bleeding.

The fat gangsta isn't bleeding. He barely has a grass stain on his shirt. His hands seem to work just fine - which they would not if he had been blocking skateboards with them.

Almost none of the punches connected, and it looked like the skateboarder was throwing stage punches for the vast majority. The skateboards looked like they were aimed to miss as well.

Was not much of a beatdown. Just lots of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

Fake. Staged. Bogus.

hogdogs
July 25, 2009, 11:54 AM
MLeake, I have split a few eye brows... But I have had many more wins with little to ZERO blood from my opponent. One guy took 15 or 20 hits that were good connects (several poorly laid hits not counted) before I pushed his sleep button. Many guys are very good at intentionally opening up a guy on the eye brow or cheek bone as they realize the advantage of blood in the eye or just the psychological effect blood loss has on many people. I never really learned to try for that tactic. I just swing for the fences:o
Brent

TailGator
July 25, 2009, 12:00 PM
I HIGHLY recommend that people learn what is legal when it comes to using deadly force in their particular states.

Certainly good advice, but . . .

In the video, the guy who was losing the fight (the guy who started out with the gun), responded to attempts by the winner of the fight (the guy who initially had a gun pointed AT him) to get up and disengage by pulling him back down.

Is there any jurisdiction in the US where that would not be considered an aggressive move, an effort by the BG to continue the engagement, and therefore justify further defensive action by the victim? It would seem to me that in the situation where the BG continues the engagement, even though he has been wounded to whatever degree large or small, your right to self defense continues until BG consents in some way to giving up his efforts to hurt you.

MLeake
July 25, 2009, 12:03 PM
Brent, in my experience, on the occasions I did any serious punching, lips were split and noses were bloodied. (Not counting kempo sparring, with gloves, 20 years ago - those punches weren't serious, and we were padded)

I've never seen anybody take multiple shots from a hard object and not show obvious signs of damage afterward, though. Those skateboards weren't connecting in a serious manner.

As I noted earlier, look at the punches the skater throws from mount. He's throwing a lot of quick, back and forth pendulum punches, and only one connects going forward. It connects awkwardly for both the skater and the gangsta, and probably hurt the skater's wrist more than the gangsta's head.

The only one that connects on the backswing is on the back of his wrist and hand, not on the knuckles. That's how I throw a backfist when practicing drills with a partner, when I want to connect but NOT hurt him.

If the skater wasn't just putting on a show, then he seriously needs to work on his punching.

JohnKSa
July 25, 2009, 12:30 PM
...your right to self defense continues until BG consents in some way to giving up his efforts to hurt you.That's part of it, but even if he hasn't given up, when he no longer has the reasonable means to hurt you your right to use deadly force ends.

You can't automatically continue using deadly force until he gives up/consents to stop trying to hurt you/stops moving/stops trying to get to his feet/is compliant. You have to stop when he no longer poses a reasonable and immediate threat of serious injury or death.

For example, if a person A pulls a gun on person B who is armed with a makeshift impact weapon, person B has the right to use his impact weapon in self-defense against person A. Once person A is disarmed, now (barring other issues such as a large difference in size, strength or skill), person B (with his impact weapon) enjoys a disparity of force over person A and probably can't legally continue beating him with his impact weapon unless there is no other way for him to disengage to safety or unless that's his only reasonable option for preventing person A from getting his gun back.

In a similar situation you may still be able to use force at that point but as soon as the attacker does not pose a credible and immediate threat of serious injury or death to you the justification for deadly force ends.

The point is that you can't keep beating someone with an impact weapon simply because they are still moving/struggling/trying to get to their feet. Legally you must stop when they no longer pose an immediate and credible threat of serious injury or death. EVEN if they're still moving/struggling/trying to get up....therefore justify further defensive action by the victim?Well, further defensive action would be called for-- but that could include retreating and confiscating the pistol which wouldn't involve any force at all. If a Grand Jury/prosecutor/jury feels that a reasonable person (whose concern was personal safety and not revenge) would have disengaged rather than continue beating the person then the situation is no longer about self-defense at all. You absolutely don't have the right to punish someone for committing a crime against you, you only have the right to stop them from hurting or killing you.

Furthermore, even if further defensive action is justified under the law it's a HUGE mistake to believe that just because "further defensive action" is justified that deadly force is automatically justified. If it is reasonable (and sufficient) to use force (not deadly force) or the threat of force/deadly force would reasonably be expected to end the threat to the defender and the use of such means didn't expose the defender to the threat of serious injury or death then deadly force would be illegal.

TailGator
July 25, 2009, 01:08 PM
Furthermore, even if further defensive action is justified under the law it's a HUGE mistake to believe that just becuse "further defensive action" is justified that deadly force is automatically justified.

I agree with everything you said, but I'm not sure you and I are looking at the same video, or at least the same things in the same video.

Here is what I am referring to: The skateboarder, towards the end of the fight, tried to get up and end the fight, such as it is. The gunman, even though he has been relieved of the gun (at least it no longer shows upon the video), and taking some lumps from his intended victim, grabs the skateboarder and pulls him back down. Essentially, I am saying that the skateboarder attempted to retreat and that the gunman is the one who took the action that made the engagement continue. At least, that is my interpretation of what I see in the video.

The skateboarder then popped him a couple of more times, and tried again to get away. That does not seem to me to be either deadly force or unjustified. Are you really saying that if a BG continues to engage you as you retreat (or attempt to retreat) that further use of force is unjustified? In other words, do your rights to self defense end when you attempt to retreat? I wouldn't think so, but I will yield to those more versed in the law than I.

It would seem to me that an unintended consequence of such an interpretation of the law would be an escalation of defensive force; i.e., I would want to be sure that BG was completely incapacitated (as in dead or unconscious) before I retreated. If I cannot legally continue to defend myself if the BG continues to attack or engage during my retreat, then I have to maximize the damage to him before I attempt retreat in order to be more certain that my retreat is successful. That doesn't seem to be in line with good law or good tactics, unless we are going to start indulging those who look for excuses to plug people.

Thursday
July 25, 2009, 03:15 PM
John I see where your coming from. I would retract what I said before for the most part but I would do what I could to detain the GB until LEO arrived and I could turn him over to them. In NC we can not make a citizens arrest but we are allowed to citizen detention. I would try this route on the grounds that he just threatened my life with a deadly weapon, which I would think falls under aggravated assault. Which would give grounds to detain. Under NC law private citizen is under a duty to retreat unless in doing so he would be placed in greater danger. Which I would think in this situation would put oneself in greater danger.

Under G.S. 15A-404 in section C is the manner of detention.
(c) Manner of Detention. - The detention must be in a reasonable manner considering the offense involved and the circumstances of the detention.

While this is pretty broad I'm sure it would cover a greater force given the weapon invovled. I would do what the kid did initially until I was sure he was not a threat anymore. While continuous blows to the skull are probably not justified I'm sure the first few in the beginning of the scuffle were.

I am also not an attorney, I don't have a law background. I'm just throwing some things out there.

JohnKSa
July 25, 2009, 07:35 PM
TailGator,

I started out by responding to a specific comment made, not by analyzing the details of the encounter in the video. If what you say about the video is correct then your assessment of the legality of the skateboarder's response is probably correct as well.

Thursday,

Detaining people against their will is legally risky if you are not an LEO. I would recommend that you consult an attorney before incorporating it into your strategy/tactics.

Sixer
July 25, 2009, 10:23 PM
This video is as real as it gets. You don't stage this kind of stuff in broad daylight on public property with a POS camera phone. As far as the lack of blood goes... it's hard to tell with the video quality, but even if the GB isn't bleeding that doesn't mean he's not swollen and bruised. I've taken a few shots myself that were thrown with bad intentions. The ones that connected to the forehead and temple area hurt like a sonofabich and really rung my bell, but never bled.

Also, your not gonna find this story in your daily paper. If this was in a big city it would hardly be considered newsworthy. Besides, nobody was gonna wait for the cops to show. Even the skater dudes don't want that attention. They likely don't get along with the law well either.

Another thing, if this skater kid happened to legaly have a gun, he would have been within his rights to use it on the GB. So why all the fuss about excessive force? If you're fighting for your life you make sure the other guy ain't gettin up.

SAIGAFISH
July 25, 2009, 10:35 PM
he,s right I once got jumped walking home late at nightby 4 homies
held my own for a minute but it was soon a boot party,the only place i was bleeding was from my knukles .i had lumps every were head back arms legs
eyes lip no bleeding.found two of them weeks later with a friend of mine
we had alittle chat:mad::mad:;)

jon_in_wv
July 25, 2009, 10:49 PM
I wonder how many times the actions of the skaters has been criticized or decried as opposed to the gang banger? Personally, I think its a sad state of affairs that we aren't on our feet applauding any time evil is stomped into the ground. If ALL thugs were met with the same fate, this thug wouldn't have been waving his little piece around in broad daylight.

I'm so tired of the outcry when a thug runs into someone who is a better fighter than he is. The POOR GUY, look at the beating he took! IT breaks my heart. :barf:

MLeake
July 25, 2009, 11:10 PM
seriously, they are not. The skater's fist swings forward past the banger's head, then back past the banger's head, multiple times, no break in rythm, no interruption. He's not punching, he's keeping time. The motion is not consistent with punches connecting.

Also, the skater keeps swinging around the forehead and top of the head of the gangsta... nobody in their right mind does that, unless they want to break a hand - or, unless they want to be able to miss really close and make it look good. The target area is not one that anybody would actually go for. Jaw, nose, eyes, maybe temples; definitely not the top of the head.

The crappy video is in keeping with other hoax videos. As far as Sixer's comment, "Also, your not gonna find this story in your daily paper. If this was in a big city it would hardly be considered newsworthy," I'd have to call BS. A thug pulls a gun on kids near a public building (looks like a school or other city/county owned facility) and it wouldn't be considered newsworthy? Yeah, right... I've lived in some major cities, and this would have made TV and front page news in any of them.

This is fake. It's right up there with the bogus "confiscated" video of the rednecks chasing the yuppie in the convertible...

Sixer
July 25, 2009, 11:30 PM
Who do you think is going to report this? The skater... no, the thug...nope, bystanders... probably, but nobody involved is gonna hang around to give an interview or make a statement.

What are the cops gonna do? Drop what theyre doing and start a massive search for a thug with a gun and every kid with a skatebord... There will be no report, thus no names and no news.

PS - The video is real.

nemo2econ
July 25, 2009, 11:30 PM
Thanks for posting this and drawing our attention to it. Interesting and edifying.

I haven't seen any comment from the FLF folks about what appears to be a second scrap, in the background on the sidewalk, with several others. Watch the video from 1:00 to about 1:35, especially around 1:18 ff.

What do you make of the apparent second fight?

dandydany
July 25, 2009, 11:32 PM
Wow!!!, I'm glad to be in the great wastes of the Far West, in the boondocks.I found myself in such situations a few time but without the physical part...I don't see anything wrong with the skateman trying to get away and he was pretty brave in my book . The GB is lucky to have got away with a couple bumps and scratches. In the background, I think there was another GB getting beat up. The first fat one with the gun was just trying to show off to his buddies how big he was.

MLeake
July 25, 2009, 11:42 PM
You say, "What are the cops gonna do? Drop what theyre doing and start a massive search for a thug with a gun and every kid with a skatebord... There will be no report, thus no names and no news."

Wrong. Investigators would look at street, buildings, area features visible in video and figure out roughly where this happened, and probably exactly where it happened within short order.

If the gang bangers are really gang bangers, the video will be brought to the attention of the local PD or SD gang unit, who will probably know who the guys are.

The security guard should be easy to find. And so on.

To name three examples of videos that came back to bite their posters:

Lakeland, FL cheerleader beatdown;

and

guy speeding in Ferrari and filming it;

and

bumfights video.

In all those cases, the cops and DA found videos they thought were real, they investigated, they charged, and they prosecuted, and they obtained either guilty verdicts or plea bargains.

I think some people just really, really want this video to be real because it indulges their sense of how things should work.

Again, the punches being thrown by the skater show that either this video was fake, or else he really doesn't know where to aim a punch, and can't connect anyway. Either this video was fake, or the skaters just weren't worried about the gang bangers having addtional weapons. Either the video was fake, or the skaters never really worried that much about the gang bangers.

Too many weird things have to have happened in order to make this a real vid. Occham's razor says it's a hoax.

Sixer
July 25, 2009, 11:55 PM
Wrong. Investigators would look at street, buildings, area features visible in video and figure out roughly where this happened, and probably exactly where it happened within short order.

I agree that this would be the case IF there was a dead or severely beaten body... but there isn't. We have no idea how old this video is. It's very unlikely that the police saw it before it made its way online. What makes you think the cops are gonna put all that time and effort over a little street brawl?

Go on YouTube and run a search for "street fights". You'll get thousands of hits. Let me know how many of those videos you think the police investigated.

MLeake
July 26, 2009, 12:01 AM
... then those skaters really need to learn how to fight.

The one in the grey sweatshirt hit his buddy with the skateboard more than he hit the gangsta.

It looks like the first skater scored a few more hits than I credited him for, at first, but of those one was glancing off the cheek (and could have been either a convincing fake or a barely connected shot) and the others were, once again, off the top of the head.

The grey sweatshirt skater, when he went to fists, was also punching at the top of the gangsta's head.

And again, what happened to the gun?

If this isn't fake, then it's a good example of people who act tough but don't know what they're doing.

hogdogs
July 26, 2009, 12:34 AM
At about 1:13 to 1:15, I think I am seeing a kid to left of GB/SB reaching down for the gun...
Brent

kerby
July 26, 2009, 01:20 AM
Skateboarder tried to walk away, GB pointed his gun twice at him, you can see the escalation of anger in GB, skateboarder allowed to get in close, attempt a disarm, and proceed to subdue. Of course, he was ******, on top of which these look like young teenagers. But did you see the Gb buddy in the background gettin his beatdown as well. there were two more skateboarders on him. I am curious as to how this ended.

kerby

WeedWacker
July 26, 2009, 02:43 AM
For those calling fake, watch it again. Some of the first shots landed squarely on the chin and the GB could have had a glass jaw for all we know.

Also remember these aren't the protege of the likes of Chuck Norris or Bruce Lee. If there is a fight that breaks out with the kids I work with it looks alot like this. Some of the blows that landed are similar to some I have experienced but most were midsection and you will barely feel them but multiple hits to the head eventually accumulate and some of those were harder than you may think.

I still don't see how this is tactics and training. Maybe a suggestion we need more training to hone our tactics so we don't look ridiculous like these clowns?

BlackFeather
July 26, 2009, 06:54 PM
Being 18 and from neighborhoods in indio and the likes this happens on occaison... usually not a gun involved but he tried to walk away... the GB is the loser here in every angle the way I see it... and he definately wasnt a real gang banger because he wouldnt of cared or he would have just shot him anyways... the guy was trying to be big and bad so he thought hed bully some skaters... tactically it all sucked... but keep in mind no one here would be in that predicament... do any of you skate? or expect some gang banger to push you around while he is by himself and there are more of you? wouldnt you just walk away and when he grabbed you again what would you do? the video is proof that animal mentality is the last resort but its better than stupidity...

CTccBoy
July 26, 2009, 07:34 PM
This is the way fist fights look in real life. Just like a real life gunfight doesn't look like a duel in a Western movie, a fist fight between two hoods doesn't look like the friggin Karate Kid. If the skateboarder really did have some background in Brazilian Jiu Jitsu, then the banger is lucky he didn't get choked until he was unconsious or get his legs or arms broken. Getting punched is pretty painless as compared to some of the chokes and joint locks a well trained BJJ practitioner can get you in. I think there are a number of us on here that would agree the banger got away light, considering that if he did that to me, even if I didn't have a pistol on me, I'd still have a knife or maybe two that I would have used.

MLeake
July 26, 2009, 09:33 PM
I've seen a few fistfights over the years. If this video was real, these guys were really not very good. Maybe that means that's actually a good thing, and normally, they're peaceable, decent types.

However, I guess there's no easy way to prove either way.

Tactically, the only things to learn, if this is a real video:

1) Don't trust the mere possession of a gun to guarantee others will react in the way you want;

2) If you close to contact range, you defeat one of the strengths of a projectile weapon;

3) It's good to know how to use your weapon, if you are going to; this applies to guns, fists, and skateboards, in the video;

4) If dealing with a group of adversaries, it's a bad idea to split up.

Cheers, out.

Steve1911
July 27, 2009, 09:45 AM
he was laying there covering himself and they were beating him

What I saw is a gang banger that got in over his head. I have a close friend that is in the martial arts. He picked the video apart for some technical stuff, but said the skate board guy had no choice in beating the gang guy into submission.

If you think he was "laying there covering himself" .... If you watch it again, he is in a clench with the skateboarder guy. HE would not let go... HE kept trying to hold on to the other guy...

Did you miss the other guy that rode up with the gangster on the bike...? What was he doing? Could he have come up and shot the skateboarder? I think that the other skateboarder guys took care of him...

But you are allowed to use force enough to stop the threat, and most generally, are allowed to use the force on the BAD GUY what you FEAR FROM HIM. What do you think the skateboarder guy can fear from the bad guy if he has a gun pointed at his head?

rburch
July 27, 2009, 11:13 AM
I lost count in school of how many fights I saw where both guys had their eyes shut and were just throwing punches.

From my watching it could be fake, it could be real and the skater's only training is watching UFC on tv.

But in any case it's obvious the guy didn't know what he was doing, he kept punching to the head.

Sixer
July 27, 2009, 12:47 PM
But in any case it's obvious the guy didn't know what he was doing, he kept punching to the head.

Man, I gotta disagree... for one the GB outweighed the Skater kid by about 30lbs. The skater also kept his cool while having a gun pointed in his face. When it came time to get physical, he didn't throw some wild haymaker... he popped him in the chin with a short, quick elbow that wobbled the GB.
For a few seconds the camera goes nuts and then we see the skater and GB both on the ground.

At this point it almost looks like the skater is punching from his back, but his shots are landing. He manages to get the dominant position on the GB and hits him with a good right hand. Now he's got the thug (who is still trying to fight back) in a full mount, and the skater goes to the "ground and pound". The skater doesn't land most of these punches, but he keeps busy on offense.

The skater effectively disarms the GB, and gives him a good beatdown. The skater was in more danger from his idiot, board swinging, buddy than anything. :D All in all I think he did a pretty good job and it ended well.

BlackFeather
July 27, 2009, 06:38 PM
the only thing I would have done instead would have to be taking the gun and backed away... I have a feeling I have more of a background then that kid does in MA but he was not a "gang banger"... yet again he was a wannabe and thought this made him look "bad"...