228412 Bullies, 4347 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 11 to 20 of 165
Page 2 of 17 FirstFirst 12 345612 ... LastLast
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. cam4276 is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Donegal, Ireland
    Posts
    310

    Posted On:
    9/29/2009 12:58pm


     Style: MMA / BJJ / Judo

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Actually over here (Ireland) I am allowed to physically remove someone if i ask them to leave and they refuse.

    Obviously the level of force I am allowed to use must be reasonable.
  2. tgace is online now
    tgace's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Western New York
    Posts
    1,329

    Posted On:
    9/29/2009 1:03pm


     Style: Arnis/Kenpo hybrid

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by cam4276 View Post
    Actually over here (Ireland) I am allowed to physically remove someone if i ask them to leave and they refuse.

    Obviously the level of force I am allowed to use must be reasonable.
    I don't doubt it.

    I should have qualified that I was referring to US law in general. There is some variation between our state laws but overall there is a thread of consistency.
  3. MoccaMastah is offline

    Featherweight

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Trondheim (Located in Norway)
    Posts
    30

    Posted On:
    9/29/2009 2:00pm

    Bullshido Newbie
     Style: Kickboxing, BJJ, exTKD

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Next to common sense, i think boxing for getting used to people hitting you in the face. And Judo for grabbing people and controlling them.
  4. FictionPimp is offline

    Sexiest Punching Bag Alive

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    2,147

    Posted On:
    9/29/2009 2:03pm


     Style: BJJ/Judo/Boxing

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by tgace View Post
    I know what you are getting at and I dont want to sidetrack your thread, but on bouncers....

    Im of the opinion that bouncing is an “at your own risk” activity in regards to criminal/civil liability. A bouncer has no more “right” to lay hands on someone than any other person. And unlike police officers, they have no “qualified immunity” regarding their actions while working.

    This guy has an interesting site regarding bouncers and their training.



    State by state mileage may vary, but unless you are defending yourself or effecting an arrest, you risk arrest using force on someone. Some states allow bouncers to enforce trespass charges within the bar/club, but that can be a fine line. If a person is being rowdy in a movie theater, the ushers dont rush in and beat the crap out of the guy and toss him to the curb.

    This being said, MOST of the bouncers I have dealt with (professionally), use common sense and typically just usher a loudmouth out w/o having to lay hands on him. If it looks like a fight they call us. If he starts a fight than they do what they have to do and then call us to have him arrested.

    IMO the best martial art is "common sense-do".
    A lot of the bouncers in the clubs by my house are off duty police. How does that pan out then?
    "a martial art that has no rules is nothing but violence" - Kenji Tomiki
  5. tgace is online now
    tgace's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Western New York
    Posts
    1,329

    Posted On:
    9/29/2009 2:17pm


     Style: Arnis/Kenpo hybrid

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by FictionPimp View Post
    A lot of the bouncers in the clubs by my house are off duty police. How does that pan out then?
    I would have to say "it depends". Uniform or plain clothes?

    Much depends on their state law and their dept. policy about off duty employment and arrest powers. Technically, if they have 24/7 arrest powers and the establishment gives them "agent power" then they can make a trespass arrest. Of course I am referring to how "trespass" as a penal law violation is dealt with in NY.

    My personal work "rule of thumb" is: if I have to lay hands on you you are going to jail. I would NEVER strike, choke or throw somebody unless I was going to charge them with something, with few exceptions like forcing a mental evaluation.

    I am not allowed to work off duty at an establishment that serves alcohol. Situations like that are prime for what we call "shitters"...the risk of career effecting situations isnt worth the extra money.
  6. CoffeeFan is offline
    CoffeeFan's Avatar

    Certified Personal Trainer and Drinker of Coffee

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Sherwood, OR
    Posts
    2,180

    Posted On:
    9/29/2009 2:31pm

    supporting member
     Style: SAMBO/BJJ/Judo and others

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    There was an incident a few years ago where a guy attempted to leave on a $1,000 bill at a local strip club, a fight ensued, was restrained and pinned by two very large bouncers. Unfortunately, the gentleman died due to "chest Compression" and the gentleman having a heart abnormality. The bouncers did not have charges filed against them, but a civil suit was filed.

    It's interesting on how careful a bouncer has to be in regards to using force.


    http://www.independent.com/news/2007...t-rhino-death/
    No Charges in Spearmint Rhino Death
    Wednesday, March 7, 2007
    By Ethan Stewart (Contact)

    More than six months after David Klotz died outside the Spearmint Rhino Gentlemen’s Club, the Santa Barbara District Attorney’s office concluded their investigation Wednesday—opting not to file any charges in the death. After reviewing video tape of the incident, several eye witness accounts and the findings of two separate though occasionally conflicting forensic pathology experts, the district attorney ruled that there was “insufficient basis in fact or law” to press charges against the two bouncers who forcibly removed the 26 year-old Klotz from the club and physically detained him for some 21 minutes until police arrived. Though nothing is official yet, sources close to the Klotz family state a civil case will be brought against the club in coming weeks.

    An accountant from San Francisco, Klotz tangled with bouncers at the strip club shortly after 3 a.m. on September 2, 2006. After disputing an approximate $1,000 bill he had rung up while receiving more than an hour of private lap dances, Klotz, according to witness accounts, was attempting to leave the cub in order to use an ATM machine when the dispute turned physical. Punches were thrown and general chaos ensued with two bouncers eventually forcing Klotz out of the club and driving him down into the ground. Once outside, two bouncers—whom police estimated were respectively 240 pounds and 6’ 3” and 460 pounds and 6’11”—used their larger frames and a variety of holds to restrain the struggling 180 pound, 5’7” Klotz face down in a wood chipped area near the sidewalk. As witness Kyle Hembree later explained it, “The guy was struggling and kicking, just fighting back for a while. But then he went limp and they just stayed on him.” Autopsy reports later stated that Klotz had a blood alcohol level of .19 at the time of his death—more than twice the legal limit had he been driving. (For a more detailed description of events surrounding the night read ""Vice and Violence", the September 7 Independent story on the event.

    According to the DA’s statement, responding officers detected a “weak” heart rate on Klotz shirtless, limp body and—after initially handcuffing him—attempted to revive him while waiting for an ambulance, though CPR was not initiated until paramedics were on the scene. Tests at Cottage Hospital indicated that Klotz’s brain activity had ceased and a short time later his parents, who had to travel from several hundred miles away to make the decision, opted to stop life support. Klotz was pronounced dead at 1:32 p.m. on the September 2.

    Referencing the California Penal Code statute that governs involuntary manslaughter, the DA’s statement concluded that Klotz’s initial resistance—coupled with testimony and corroborating video that the bouncers never appeared to strike him or intentionally choke him—prevent the case from rising to the level of criminal negligence. Interpreting the legal standards of the use of force by security personnel, the DA’s statement says, “Like all private persons, security employees can arrest or detain an offender for a public offense…The person making the arrest may use reasonable force in arresting and detaining the arrestee. What is ‘reasonable force’ depends on the facts of the given incident.” David%20Klotz.jpgThe DA statement continues that “the law is also quite clear that the person being arrested has a duty to remain passive. Since the person being arrested has a duty not to resist the arrest, such resistance will affect the amount of force that will be considered reasonable.”

    In the estimation of District Attorney Pat McKinley, the reason for the delay in his office’s ruling was the contraction in findings between the initial autopsy report by Dr. Robert Anthony and a second more thorough report by Dr. Ronald O’Halloran. “It would have been much easier if [O’Halloran] had said the same thing as the first guy,” explained McKinley. The first autopsy—performed by Anthony as he is the county’s go-to doctor for autopsies—claimed that Klotz’s death was the result of a heart attack caused by a pre-existing heart condition known as a severe atherosclerotic occlusion and not the result of strangle holds or any other type of physical restraint.

    For his part Dr. O’Holloran’s five-inch thick report stated that Klotz’s “most likely” cause of death was “chest compression” related to the restraint process. That being said, O’Holloran concluded that, given Klotz’s abnormal heart, it could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that his cause of death was asphyxiation. Noting this contradiction, the DA’ concludes its statement with the following explanation: “This conflict and uncertainty regarding the manner of death was deemed important in the decision regarding the filing of criminal charges.”
  7. tgace is online now
    tgace's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Western New York
    Posts
    1,329

    Posted On:
    9/29/2009 2:39pm


     Style: Arnis/Kenpo hybrid

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by CoffeeFan View Post
    There was an incident a few years ago where a guy attempted to leave on a $1,000 bill at a local strip club, a fight ensued, was restrained and pinned by two very large bouncers. Unfortunately, the gentleman died due to "chest Compression" and the gentleman having a heart abnormality. The bouncers did not have charges filed against them, but a civil suit was filed.

    It's interesting on how careful a bouncer has to be in regards to using force.


    http://www.independent.com/news/2007...t-rhino-death/
    Yup. In this case the bouncers appear to have been attempting a citizens arrest for the larceny/theft of services for the $1,000.

    Unless the establishment is willing to pay the lawsuits they could be screwed.

    I find the DA's statement about resisting arrest interesting. In NY you have to be a LEO to charge resisting:

    § 205.30 Resisting arrest.
    A person is guilty of resisting arrest when he intentionally prevents
    or attempts to prevent a police officer or peace officer from effecting
    an authorized arrest of himself or another person.
    Resisting arrest is a class A misdemeanor.
    Last edited by tgace; 9/29/2009 2:48pm at .
  8. crappler is offline
    crappler's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    1,747

    Posted On:
    9/29/2009 3:24pm


     Style: Judo

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Definitely Wing Chung. FOOM!!!!

    (incidentally, last week we had a "foom foom" seminar. It was cool. Guess who taught it?
    "We often joke -- and we really wish it were a joke -- that you will only encounter two basic problems with your 'self-defense' training.
    1) That it doesn't work
    2) That it does work"
    -Animal MacYoung
  9. Res Judicata is offline

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    1,633

    Posted On:
    9/29/2009 3:58pm


     Style: Judo & BJJ

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by tgace View Post
    Yup. In this case the bouncers appear to have been attempting a citizens arrest for the larceny/theft of services for the $1,000.

    Unless the establishment is willing to pay the lawsuits they could be screwed.

    I find the DA's statement about resisting arrest interesting. In NY you have to be a LEO to charge resisting:

    I'm not sure about Nevada, but many states have a common law doctrine called "Shopkeeper's privilege", codified as merchant's statutes in some places. Basically, the law gives the store owner the right to hold suspected shoplifters or those involved with the theft of services for a reasonable time in a reasonable manner to investigate the theft and call the police. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shopkeeper%27s_privilege

    The establishment would almost certainly be sued, too. They're the deep pocket.

    One of the BBs at my judo dojo has a ton of war stories from his work as a bouncer. Judo works really well.
  10. tgace is online now
    tgace's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Western New York
    Posts
    1,329

    Posted On:
    9/29/2009 4:09pm


     Style: Arnis/Kenpo hybrid

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Res Judicata View Post
    I'm not sure about Nevada, but many states have a common law doctrine called "Shopkeeper's privilege", codified as merchant's statutes in some places. Basically, the law gives the store owner the right to hold suspected shoplifters or those involved with the theft of services for a reasonable time in a reasonable manner to investigate the theft and call the police.

    The establishment would almost certainly be sued, too. They're the deep pocket.
    Yeah, security is granted authority to detain shoplifters here too under our penal law Article 35

    A person may, pursuant to the ensuing provisions of this article,
    use physical force upon another person in defense of himself or a third
    person, or in defense of premises, or in order to prevent larceny of or
    criminal mischief to property, or in order to effect an arrest or
    prevent an escape from custody. Whenever a person is authorized by any
    such provision to use deadly physical force in any given circumstance,
    nothing contained in any other such provision may be deemed to negate or
    qualify such authorization.
    However many merchants have decided that the costs of litigation outweigh the loss due to theft. Most shoplifters just co-operate and if they don't LP will call the police and give license plates, description and direction of travel. I'm thinking that the strip joint wishes they just did that now.

    I'm split on the issue. Tell people to not act, and let crooks know they can get away or say getting involved is a good thing and have people expose themselves to litigation.
Page 2 of 17 FirstFirst 12 345612 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Powered by vBulletin™© contact@vbulletin.com vBulletin Solutions, Inc. 2011 All rights reserved.