Current Events > Video: Taco Bell employee throws boiling water on customer

(+) Yeah! (+)

I'm also literally watching a video where I don't see them fully walk past a counter, don't raise their arms in a threatening gesture, and don't pull a weapon.

Literally no angry customer, in the entire history of angry customers, has followed employees into an employees only section of the store or restaurant without the intent to cause harm.

old lady with the McDonald's coffee

I also don't see screaming employees or some evil plan to lock customers in against their will.

See this post here:

What even is the line between hot, and dangerously hot? If it's not hot enough, some customers will complain about that too. And not dangerously hot liquid can harm you as well. It seems like a no win situation.

1. The coffee was kept above safety regulation temperature.
2. The location had been in legal trouble before for coffee burns and ignored orders to lower the temperature.
3. The water in the steamer basket at taco bell isn't a product to be sold to customers.

What even is the line between hot, and dangerously hot? If it's not hot enough, some customers will complain about that too. And not dangerously hot liquid can harm you as well. It seems like a no win situation.

Uhh no weapon? If there is no threat of a weapon being used you don't use lethal force.

You can't make up the intent to cause harm where there is none. How was harm imminent when those women didn't have weapons and their arms didn't even leave their sides? If that fast food employee was a cop with a gun and shot both of those women to death then this whole topic would be people crying foul.

That's not how it works, bro.

Read the article then.

I did. How would someone be fumbling with the lock on a pushbar door that only locks on the outside? The dining room would have been closed at that time, so the employees would have had to let then in, and you wouldn't unlock the door because then other customers may think the dining room is open.

You seriously think this was premeditated attempted murder?

You can't make up the intent to cause harm where there is none. How was harm imminent when those women didn't have weapons and their arms didn't even leave their sides? If that fast food employee was a cop with a gun and shot both of those women to death then this whole topic would be people crying foul.

I guess this may come as a complete shock and surprise to you, but behind the counter actually is not a sacrosanct no-man's-land where the law permits you to do whatever you please to people that cross it.

You'd have somewhat of a point if they actually crossed that line and were fully behind the counter

I would argue boiling water can been used as lethal or at the very least excessive force.

What other weapon should the employees used to defend themselves?

Whats crazy about this country is if the employee just straight up shot the customer people would be like Ok right self defense. Boiling water is apparently over the line though.

If you are aggressive and go behind the counter in a business then you clearly dont mean well.

Whats crazy about this country is if the employee just straight up shot the customer people would be like Ok right self defense. Boiling water is apparently over the line though.

If you are aggressive and go behind the counter in a business then you clearly dont mean well.

Well I was on TB employees side till I learned the Manager locked them in before this happened.

Jesus

Already answered you Mike if the other person isn't armed with a weapon then in most cases no weapon.

That's not an answer. The customer moved behind the counter towards employees. This is indisputably an aggressive action and the employees have a legal right to defend themselves. How would you suggest they do that, considering trying to "fight" won't guarantee they aren't harmed and would likely get them fired?

That is entirely and answer you just dont accept it since apparently to you getting into a fight means you have to have a weapon of some sort

Once the customer was locked inside the store

Yeah, you literally have no fucking clue what you're talking about or how self-defense works. "Don't defend yourself" is literally not an answer to "how should they defend themselves?" Fucking clown.

But for it to be self defense one has to figure that they are in a world of trouble

which then begs the question does the level of self defense used justify the use.

What other weapon should the employees used to defend themselves?

Which they were.

The "level of defense used" is whatever's necessary to escape injury or death. Scalding water was literally the only effective weapon or deterrent available to them. Again..

Literally irrelevant.

Looking at the video it would have been four against two at best. Which would mean unless they had their own weapons there was no reason to use boiling hot water, nor to even go back for a fucking refill.

And again no weapon in some cases would be just fine, self defense isnt defined by use of a weapon only.

Looking at the video it would have been four against two at best.

Which would mean unless they had their own weapons there was no reason to use boiling hot water, nor to even go back for a fucking refill.

And again no weapon in some cases would be just fine, self defense isnt defined by use of a weapon only.

Totally unrelated, but Im trying to understand your position:
If someone goes up to someone and starts punching them, do you see it as justifiable for the victim to shoot the criminal?

Entirely relevant because at that point you have other fucking people/workers around.

Not relevant.

Not how self-defense works.

...what?

If you feel like you will die because you cannot fight back then sure. But thats again based on the circumstances alone.

For this there is bo justification because there was no signs of immediate danger outside customers being bitches.

How many people are around has no bearing on whether you're defending yourself or someone else from an attack. What the fuck are you babbling about?

GOING BEHIND THE COUNTER AFTER EMPLOYEES IS A SIGN OF IMMEDIATE DANGER YOU FUCKING CLOWN.

It again is relevant and again if yog dont understand that you can defend yourself without using weapons then you dont understand how self defense works

No, you don't understand how self-defense works. You are not required to try and "fight" an aggressor if you can deter them or defend yourself with a weapon. Learn how the law works.

Sound of the counter isnt going back there and you k ow some people are all bark and no fucking bite.

*Rolls eyes* Whatever man continue to think that hand to hand combat isnt self defense then.

Sound of the counter isnt going back there and you k ow some people are all bark and no fucking bite. In any cases you joke of a person even if they were in ANY sense of danger then yeah it can be justified but looking at the video no its a hard justification at best.

It's really easy to say that there was no threat when you weren't in the situation and you're looking at it from a third party perspective, after the fact, with details that they did not know at the time. In the moment, those employees had no idea what the customer would do, if they had weapon, none of that.

You don't get to determine the sense of danger the employees felt in that moment.

By that logic neither could the people involved.