What the hell did you just shoot me with?

[Canarr]

Agreed, although the OP didn't know that fact yet, if I'm not mistaken.

Still, confronting someone who just splashed you with an unknown liquid, yelling "Gun!" in a crowded place, getting into a scuffle with a guy carrying a kid on his shoulders, trying to pull said kid off said shoulders... all dangerous actions that should've been avoided. I know that if someone shot a potentially dangerous liquid at me, I wouldn't be very keen on getting closer to him and giving him another shot at me - literally. What if it had been bleach, I go for the gun and the next shot hits my eyes? No, I'd be heading back inside my store, trying to get the shirt off while asking one of my coworkers to call security on the crazy guy out there splashing an unknown liquid around. After all, that's what they get paid for, right?

I'd probably also be sniffing my shirt a lot, in fact, to try and find out what I just got hit with.

Yes, the guy was irresponsible, and idiot and an asshole.
No, I don't condone in any way what he did, and wouldn't try the same stunt myself (especially not in the US).
No, I don't think he should go to jail over that, because ultimately, there wasn't any harm done.

[friendofjimmyk]

If the police and mall security were already aware of this guy, the proper response is to walk away and quietly inform them of his presence.

But the OP didn't know that they were involved until after he had squirted her twice. It wasn't until the cops, who were near by on a call about this guy, heard the ruckus and came over. OP was not aware of their involvment until then.

[friendofjimmyk]

No, I don't think he should go to jail over that, because ultimately, there wasn't any harm done.

He probably won't do any jail time over this. Yes, he got hauled off, but I'm sure he could post bail on this one. He'll have hefty fines but probably no jail time....but then again IANAL.

The thing with assault is any unwanted contact, in most states, can be construed as assault. In this day and age, shooting unknown liquids at someone is not a good idea. Especially stateside. Yes, most are all too fearful these days - waaaayyyyyy to fearful in some cases, but you just can't do what this guy did.

[Canarr]

I agree with you - it was a dumb stunt he pulled, and he should've been old enough to know better.

To me, it just seems ridiculous to arrest someone for what in the end amounts to a childish prank. Yes, it wasn't obvious immediately that the guy wasn't dangerous. But if I or my family were in need of the police, then I know that I wouldn't appreciate being told that it will probably take a while because the nearest cops are busy arresting a man for illegal discharge of a waterarm.

There's one reason for courts being backlogged, no matter if you're in the US or in Europe, and that is people's tendency to sue, or file charges, over nothing.

[Ree]

Well, to be fair to Hon'ya-chen, this wasn't really "nothing".
It wasn't a major physical assault and there was no actual physical or bodily harm in the grand scheme of things, but the situation shouldn't be trivialized, either.

It was an unwelcome act by someone old enough to know better.
If he wanted to shoot off his watergun then he should have done it in his own yard with family and freinds who were in on the joke.

You just don't go around shooting liquids at unsuspecting strangers, and when you are asked to stop, you be the adult and stop.

[Samaliel]

Well, I don't think anybody would have liked to be soaked and, though I am no woman and thus not in the best place to judge that, I think most females who would get soaked by a random stranger enough for anybody to see their bra would find the situation embarrassing, to say the least. I'm willing to bet some might find that kind of exposure humiliating.

No harm done ? I wouldn't be so bold in my statement.

Still, I agree with those who think the situation could have been handled a lot better. The way it's been handled left far too much space for this story to get really, really ugly.

Also, as for the child being taken by the social services, I think there are a lot of situations where it would be the procedure while his father is in custody. No where it is written that the kid was taken forever.

Anyway, what kind of jerk do you have to be to do that sort of things while your kid is looking ? Or at all, really ? Was trying to train him to be the perfect fratboy jock ?

[BaristaTrav]

Here's how it could have been "handled differently." Once Joe McJerkoff realized his little "joke" didn't exactly go over well with his target, he could have: put his kid down, handed over the gun, apologized profusely, slinked off like the schmuck he is. But he chose to "escalate" it with the kid on his shoulders.

[Canarr]

You just don't go around shooting liquids at unsuspecting strangers, and when you are asked to stop, you be the adult and stop.

No, you don't, absolutely. As I said, I don't condone what he did, it was stupid, and he should - at the very least - have stopped when asked to.

But: I don't need to trivialize the matter, because it IS trivial. Sure, throw him out of the store, of the mall, ban him, whatever - if he can't behave in public, he shouldn't BE in public.

But being charged with - IINM - felonies for splashing water around? How adult is that?

[Boozy]

It seems there is the misconception that criticizing Hon'ya-chan's actions is the same as condoning those of her attacker. Nothing could be further from the truth. This man was a complete idiot and possibly a pervert, and I'm very pleased he was arrested. He needs to understand there are serious consequences to acting like such an asshole. But situations need two parties in order to escalate.

I'm not so quick to take 'the child' out of the equation. Think of the situation through his eyes: He would have been terrified at these two strangers attacking his dad and trying to take him away from him. How could he know that his dad was at fault?

I still don't see how walking away and calling security could be considered an inadequate response. It would have been the smarter and safer move, and the result (the attacker being arrested) would have been the same.

[Samaliel]

I fully understand that this would have been a smarter and safer move, but having your shirt soaked and bra exposed is far more than enough for most people to lose their temper and smart and safe might not be the priorities in their order of action.

Had he be alone, I would have slapped my soaked shirt in his face. The OP, being female, would probably have not gone this way. Factoring the kid in, I would have thrown quite a fit, beginning : "Now, sir, you might want your kid to cover his ears, because your in for a serious yelling, which might include some crude language, if you don't hand me that water pistol RIGHT NOW."

[blas]

And now, let's think of the child. How much do you want to bet old daddy's going to reach to higher levels of stupid, like stalking and peeping, or dare I even suggest things that a sexual predator would do......and the little kid is going to grow up wondering where is dad?

Or the kid is gonna grow up around this type of obnoxious behavior and be the pervert who gets caught looking up girls' skirts and drilling a hole in the wall to peep into the girls' locker room.

I'm really not trying to be dramatic here.....but a man who squirts a woman in the BREASTS with a squirtgun? You can't aim to miss breasts. He is obviously some kind of immature pervert.

[Becks]

Why, why, why did the guy think that doing walkby squirtings was a good idea?

And having a child with him, to boot.

[zzapp the witch]

TO CLARIFY a point in procedure I think most of you may have missed: When a parent is arrested, or detained, Children's Services is automatically called to supervise the child while the parent is otherwise occupied.

The child would have been taken by children's services if this guy was hauled off after just the squirting of the tourist.

The child was taken by children's services after this guy squirted Honya.

THEY DO NOT NECESSARILY *KEEP* THE CHILD. They'll find the child's mother/grandparents/any other legal guardian. They did not take this guy's kid away, they removed the child from the situation and will supervise that child until another guardian/family member is contacted to retrieve the child. If a cop pulled me over for whatever on the road, and decided that he needed to arrest/detain me, he would call CSD, NOT to take my kids away, but to take care of them until family members were contacted.

At this point, all Children's Services is is an interrim emergency babysitter.

Thank you.

[Canarr]

zzapp, thanks for clearing this up.

Another question (apologize for my ignorance of American laws): are assault and sexual harassment felonies or misdemeanors? Meaning, would he have a criminal record if he were found guilty of one, or both, charges?

[poofy_puff]

Maybe we should check with Dear Abby about this, "LOL" (I am only on page 2 right now though).