Who was in the wrong here?
Who was in the wrong here?
Probably technically the shop keeper but camera dude seems like douchebag
Camera guy. Despite the text on the video denying it, he sprayed that pepper spray right through the door and into the store. Even if he was in the right, he acted extremely irresponsibly. He was 100% looking for an issue.
Use of pepper spray is typically appropriate in self defense, so in response to a threat of physical violence.
I didn’t see a clear threat of physical violence in the video.
Camera guy probably landed himself an assault charge with that escalation.
The other person was also in the process of turning away and leaving.
Damn that’s crazy, I have the complete opposite conclusion.
Yes, camera guy appears to be an antisocial shithead based on only this video. However, he was standing on presumably a public sidewalk and did NOT use physical force first.
The business owner or manager was clearly the first to use physical force trying to shove away the camera when no threat to their safety was present.
Again, camera guy appears to be in the moral wrong but it’s pretty clear who starts the violence.
The other commenters point is valid as well, when camera guy retaliated, there was clearly no continued threat to their safety.
They’re both idiots and the almighty business owner should have known better than to do the dirty work when the state monopoly on violence was on their side from the start.
Legally, it's location dependant as to whether the shop owner can move someone away like that. Same with whether or not filming would be okay there. Same with whether or not anyone was obligated to retreat before using force.
That being said, the camera guy was the bigger douche, no matter what the legality was. Blocking a doorway, escalating the situation at each step, and then stepping right to pepper spray without moving away from someone else's property. Had the shop owner followed him away, spray would be legit. Camera guy was the initiating party by doing something douchey. Everything else in the video clip stems from him being an asshole in the first place.
That italic section is there because there's most likely a back story to this clip, and may or may not be relevant to an appraisal of the actions in the clip itself. We can only go off of what's there when forming an opinion on the events depicted. Too many what ifs make it dumb to even try.
Cameraman. He was hoping for drama through the whole thing.
Legally, I'm sticking with what the other person said, who knows in that area.
Cameraman. He was definitely a step inside the shop, and the guy repeatedly asked him to go away. He put pressure on him because he didn't move until he did. Respect boundaries, and it would have never happened. The only part I can't tell is if he did actually damage his camera or not, if it was was it done prior to this footage? Because all he did is push it so that's kind of crazy that it just broke from what we saw.
Pretty sure it depends on local jurisdiction. In some places the shop owner would be required to call the police to trespass someone. In others, the owner of the property has nearly the physical authority of a home owner in removing people.