Man Smashes iPhones & iPads In Apple Store

Jim Kim said:
The coppers might even put both of ya'll in the same cell for a sweet sweet weekend of hardcore love making.
Click to expand...

Nope. That individual is destabilized to a obviously mental incapacitated state.

You have absolutely no clue that he wouldn't turn that steelball on anyone who got/gets close.

I'd take him out for that simple reason.

Less coward, please.
 
atp1916 said:
Nope. That individual is destabilized to a obviously mental incapacitated state.

You have absolutely no clue that he wouldn't turn that steelball on anyone who got/gets close.

I'd take him out for that simple reason.

Less coward, please.
Click to expand...

Ok Internet tough guy.
 
Really surprised nobody has posted this yet.....


article-2528730-1A4610F100000578-575_638x565.jpg
 
Sonicks said:
It's a dick move destroying someone else's property. It doesn't matter if it's someone you don't like or a major corporation, destroying property is the cheapest way to feel like you're 'winning' without actually dealing with the person/corporation like a man.
Click to expand...
Well that's kind of the paradox. Unless they actually violated some terms or law, you don't "deal with a corporation." I mean what are you gonna do, write an angry letter to a manager whose secretary will throw it away? Not saying this guy's not an idiot also, but you're making it sound like there's some scenario where you're on equal footing as a major corporation.

atp1916 said:
Nope. That individual is destabilized to a obviously mental incapacitated state.

You have absolutely no clue that he wouldn't turn that steelball on anyone who got/gets close.

I'd take him out for that simple reason.

Less coward, please.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's your side of the story. The cameras would show the side of you walking up to someone who was destroying property who neither threatened or harmed any person and assaulting him. It's kind of like attacking someone spray painting the side of the building. Depending on the judge, you'd get charged with a felony for attacking a random stranger and get an even longer sentence than he would. You're talking like the guy was holding a knife and threatening to kill someone, but there's no actual evidence the guy was going to harm an actual person. It sounds like you're just looking for an excuse to go to prison. Cops love people like you.
 
I'm with Steve on this one, I can't stop laughing at the guys just watching the bloke smash all the iphones and macbooks.
 
Orddie said:
this video is fake. the fact that an apple store is that empty is the first clue.
Click to expand...

Think about it for a second though, the video does not start with a guy walking into the store, exchanging greets and then smashing iphones, the video starts halfway with the guy already, continuing smashing iphones and macbooks with only the staff in the store. You'd think that customers have already left the store in case he goes on a rampage.
 
atp1916 said:
Nope. That individual is destabilized to a obviously mental incapacitated state.

You have absolutely no clue that he wouldn't turn that steelball on anyone who got/gets close.

I'd take him out for that simple reason.

Less coward, please.
Click to expand...

Then you'd be in jail for murder. No French court would consider that self-defense. The rest of the world isn't like Florida.

The store staff did the right thing, no reason to escalate the situation, leave it to the cops.
 
Sonicks said:
Why, you ask? If I had a free pass to knock someone the hell out I would take it. I guarantee nothing would have happened to anyone that would have knocked his ass out. No way for him to sue back if you blindside the shit out of him and leave after.

Maybe I have too much anger I need to channel elsewhere....
Click to expand...

So you just like hitting and beating people up? Unless you're security you have no free pass to do this.

This guy was a jerk and security should've tackled him, instead they're just standing around like idiots. What the hell are the paid for? Remember the story about the Apple store scam with homeless people and the Apple employees actively encouraged it because it means more sales. That's why everyone hates how pretentious Apple is.
 
First thing employee should have walked in back and called the police then maybe if they were feeling ballsy asked him his name and information if not just wait for the cops let them taze the shit out of him and take him away then report the incident submit the videos then call corporate and inform them of the incident then i guess put more phones out on display.
 
MrCrispy said:
This guy was a jerk and security should've tackled him, instead they're just standing around like idiots. What the hell are the paid for?.
Click to expand...

Unless the guy starts being violent and starts swinging first, the security guards cannot and are not allowed to use force to tackle him down to the floor. That's usually the first thing they teach you when you apply for a security job license.
 
tetris42 said:
It's kind of like attacking someone spray painting the side of the building.
Click to expand...

Actually we should offer a bounty on people who spray paint public or other peoples property. Maybe $20 a head.
 
I would have held up a score card indicating a 9.3 out of a possible 10.0.
 
tetris42 said:
Well that's kind of the paradox. Unless they actually violated some terms or law, you don't "deal with a corporation." I mean what are you gonna do, write an angry letter to a manager whose secretary will throw it away? Not saying this guy's not an idiot also, but you're making it sound like there's some scenario where you're on equal footing as a major corporation.

Yeah, that's your side of the story. The cameras would show the side of you walking up to someone who was destroying property who neither threatened or harmed any person and assaulting him. It's kind of like attacking someone spray painting the side of the building. Depending on the judge, you'd get charged with a felony for attacking a random stranger and get an even longer sentence than he would. You're talking like the guy was holding a knife and threatening to kill someone, but there's no actual evidence the guy was going to harm an actual person. It sounds like you're just looking for an excuse to go to prison. Cops love people like you.
Click to expand...

Some people walk around looking for a reason to get violent with someone, that mentality is far worse IMO. It is a desire to cause pain and only held back by legal repercussions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: -PK-
like this
atp1916 said:
People are so pussified.

I would have walked up and decked that fool. Hardcore.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I would've done the same if that store was my woman.

It says he had some old phone, so it's clearly not about the silly "we only offer 1 year warranty" Apple has tried on the continent. Maybe he just wanted to break some things.
 
Steve said:
This guy is my new hero. I have no idea why he is smashing all those phones, iPads and laptops with a steel ball but I couldn't help but laugh as everyone just stood there watching him.
Click to expand...

Ladies and gentlemen, here is the person that is pretty much responsible for the decline of this site, once a place of actual journalism, now just a childish click bait hate site...
 
I guess just another self-entitled hipster that couldn't handle a shop assistant saying "No!"

I bet he's now telling his lawyer "...sob sob...but it's not my fault!"
 
SGTGimpy said:
Then you would get sued for assault from the duche bag. Just not worth it since he is just breaking insured property.

Now if he was physically attacking people and causing harm. Then yes, you could have beat him to an inch of his life with a Macbook and you would have been fine.
Click to expand...

This didn't happen in the US...you cannot sue poeple all over the world (or for the amount) that you can in the US...just saying.

If I had entered this store in Denmark, §13 in our "constitution" makes it legal for me to put this guy down, as he is doing damage to either persons or property ...and he would never be able to sue me.
 
atp1916 said:
People are so pussified.

I would have walked up and decked that fool. Hardcore.
Click to expand...

I generally don't disagree with you but it really depends on the laws there. If this were here in the US, he gets to sue you for assault and wins because we protect criminals rights to the point of stupidity. My first instinct when someone is being a complete douche of this level in public is to lay them out, however I temper that with the reality that I can't afford to get sued for everything I own.
 
Dekoth-E- said:
I generally don't disagree with you but it really depends on the laws there. If this were here in the US, he gets to sue you for assault and wins because we protect criminals rights to the point of stupidity. My first instinct when someone is being a complete douche of this level in public is to lay them out, however I temper that with the reality that I can't afford to get sued for everything I own.
Click to expand...

He can sue...or try.

I would be quite (edit: very) confident that any decent defense lawyer worth their salt would point out the clearly obvious elephant in the room (or so you would imagine) that the individual in the commission of the actual crime was destabilized to the point of complete unpredictability.

Add in the weapon the individual was using, his complete proclivity to actually using it (and not just threatening things/people with it), the close proximity of bystanders (and store employees he may have had previous interactions with) to him, and the actual interaction that he was carrying on with those individuals on the side....and yeah - someone says the wrong damn thing and next thing you know that person is lying on the floor with their head smashed in.


Regardless of it all though, i get your point with the criminal rights protection to the point of stupidity angle. Here in the US, i probably would find myself irrationally close to being behind bars.

I only have to read some of the replies in this thread to witness some of the idiotic logic that makes that kind of thing even possible.
 
Stimpy88 said:
Ladies and gentlemen, here is the person that is pretty much responsible for the decline of this site, once a place of actual journalism, now just a childish click bait hate site...
Click to expand...

It is surprising how many people keep posting asking for Steve or Kyle to ban their accounts. you know you could just delete them if you don't want to be here anymore, it saves them the trouble of having to do all that clicking to ban you.
 
Stimpy88 said:
Ladies and gentlemen, here is the person that is pretty much responsible for the decline of this site, once a place of actual journalism, now just a childish click bait hate site...
Click to expand...

You're shitting me, right? How have you been around since 2004 and not understood the humor that Steve has when posting things? If you're taking everything seriously, and/or personally, then that is your fault, not the site or Steve's (or anyone elses for that matter).
 
atp1916 said:
People are so pussified.

I would have walked up and decked that fool. Hardcore.
Click to expand...

Classy as fuck. You're nickname isn't Seabass, is it?

Unless he's hurting people, just let him do his thing until the Police arrive.
 
tetris42 said:
Well that's kind of the paradox. Unless they actually violated some terms or law, you don't "deal with a corporation." I mean what are you gonna do, write an angry letter to a manager whose secretary will throw it away? Not saying this guy's not an idiot also, but you're making it sound like there's some scenario where you're on equal footing as a major corporation.
Click to expand...

Simple. If this guy felt he was wronged by Apple because they violated his rights under EU law, then get with the authorities or get a lawyer, etc...There are ways to 'fight' big businesses as long as you're in the legal right. If his recourse was to break shit because he was 'wronged' then he's the dumbass.

The way I see it, if he was legally correct about the way Apple treated him, then attempting to win in court is MUCH cheaper than getting arrested and having to pay for property destruction.
 
Ur_Mom said:
Classy as fuck. You're nickname isn't Seabass, is it?

Unless he's hurting people, just let him do his thing until the Police arrive.
Click to expand...

That would be "your" in "you're nickname...". ;)


You don't know that he won't hurt someone. He's way way past what you'd call "level-headed."

Why would anyone (you?) give him the benefit of the doubt?

I wouldn't, but that's just me.
 
atp1916 said:
That would be "your" in "you're nickname...". ;)


You don't know that he won't hurt someone. He's way way past what you'd call "level-headed."

Why would anyone (you?) give him the benefit of the doubt?

I wouldn't, but that's just me.
Click to expand...

Fuck, I knew that. I think I even wrote it right the first time, then changed it... I need a beer. :D

I'd keep an eye on him and if he did advance on someone, then lay into him. Otherwise, let him do his damage and get tazed and arrested. Getting physical would escalate it a bit more.

Although, I'd love to see a huge dude just tackle him and take him out. Just WHAM! and he's down for the count...
 
Sonicks said:
Simple. If this guy felt he was wronged by Apple because they violated his rights under EU law, then get with the authorities or get a lawyer, etc...There are ways to 'fight' big businesses as long as you're in the legal right. If his recourse was to break shit because he was 'wronged' then he's the dumbass.

The way I see it, if he was legally correct about the way Apple treated him, then attempting to win in court is MUCH cheaper than getting arrested and having to pay for property destruction.
Click to expand...
Well my guess is none of his rights were violated, he probably just got tricked by a legal policy. If it's legal, there's no recourse at all if you don't have proof. For example, the salesman could have lied straight to his face about something, but if he has no evidence, then he's SOL. This is stupid though. He's only going to go to jail and owe a lot of money, Apple's insurance will cover this, all he's doing is sabotaging his own life.

atp1916 said:
He can sue...or try.

I would be quite (edit: very) confident that any decent defense lawyer worth their salt would point out the clearly obvious elephant in the room (or so you would imagine) that the individual in the commission of the actual crime was destabilized to the point of complete unpredictability.

Add in the weapon the individual was using, his complete proclivity to actually using it (and not just threatening things/people with it), the close proximity of bystanders (and store employees he may have had previous interactions with) to him, and the actual interaction that he was carrying on with those individuals on the side....and yeah - someone says the wrong damn thing and next thing you know that person is lying on the floor with their head smashed in.


Regardless of it all though, i get your point with the criminal rights protection to the point of stupidity angle. Here in the US, i probably would find myself irrationally close to being behind bars.

I only have to read some of the replies in this thread to witness some of the idiotic logic that makes that kind of thing even possible.
Click to expand...
Forget the suing thing, even if there was no civil case involved, you'd be facing assault and battery charges for what you described. The thing is you don't seem to understand the distinction between someone being a moron destroying some property v. someone who is demonstrating he's actually dangerous. These distinctions might seem nonexistent to you, but they make a huge difference in the eyes of the law (and the police). Here's the difference:

You attacking someone destroying property that's not even yours = Assault and Battery
You attacking someone threatening to harm someone or who is actively hurting someone = justifiable self-defense or defense of another.

If you don't make the distinction between the two and think everyone who doesn't attack someone having a hissy fit in public is a pussy, well, that's what gets you landed in jail. Being a pussy or not has nothing to do with it, it's just basic understanding of the law.
 
Ur_Mom said:
Fuck, I knew that. I think I even wrote it right the first time, then changed it... I need a beer. :D

I'd keep an eye on him and if he did advance on someone, then lay into him. Otherwise, let him do his damage and get tazed and arrested. Getting physical would escalate it a bit more.

Although, I'd love to see a huge dude just tackle him and take him out. Just WHAM! and he's down for the count...
Click to expand...


Yeah, i see your point about getting physical leading to more escalation. That being said - isn't the situation already off the chain?

I only made my comment in the first place because he was beginning to engage the bystanders toward the end of the video, and actually did stop to start gesturing. There's no quicker road to an even more pissed off state than dealing with another person (or people) who tell you what you don't want to hear.

Furthermore, given his proximity to the people standing by, the fact that that small distance can be closed in a a mere couple of seconds, and given his current lack of rational thought processes - it would be way too damn late to do anything before (if) he did cross over and land a hit on someone's face.

Are you seriously going to imagine your (or anyone else's) reflexes will be quick enough to intercept the lunatic if he decides to take offense to someone saying something and go after that person?

Read about the Tueller Drill. It was determined that an attacker could cover a distance of 21 feet in ~1.5s (attacking with a knife).

Code: 
Mythbusters covered the drill in the 2012 episode "Duel Dilemmas". At 20 feet the gun wielder was able to shoot the charging knife attacker just as he reached the shooter. At shorter distances the knife wielder was always able to stab prior to being shot.[4]

This situation was in much closer proximity. This individual was clearly very, very disturbed and looking to hurt stuff. You cannot give any bit of reasonable doubt to this person that that "stuff" wouldn't involve human beings at any point in that entire episode.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top