What the hell did you just shoot me with?

[poofy_puff]

As for the guy with the water pistol: I gotta ask, how severe are charges of sexual harassment and assault? I mean, is he looking at community service, or probation, or several years in prison? If the latter - probably meaning loss of his kid, too - then that's excessive. Yeah, the guy was being an idiot and an asshole, but you shouldn't have to go to prison - and your kid into foster care or whatever - just for making a dumb joke that, ultimately, didn't do any real harm.

It probably depends on how many OTHER times he's been arrested for doing stupid shyt like this, and whether he pleads guilty or not.

[zzapp the witch]

Fine and a lecture.....some pansy ass sensitivity training....yeah, that kinda stuff. (Never seen that training work, if anything I've seen it make things worse).

[eltf177]

It probably depends on how many OTHER times he's been arrested for doing stupid shyt like this, and whether he pleads guilty or not.

It was mentioned that both the police and security were already looking for this cretin for the first squirting, I'm willing to bet there were more victims as well.

And non-violence aside, I'm surprised he didn't loose some teeth. I doubt he had the guts to shoot anyone who could beat him to a pulp.

[BaristaTrav]

And non-violence aside, I'm surprised he didn't loose some teeth. I doubt he had the guts to shoot anyone who could beat him to a pulp.

If it was my wife and I was there (had I been unfortunate enough to have been dragged to the mall in the first place) then yes, I'd be the one getting bailed out of jail and he would be missing several teeth, if not other body parts.

[Falconess]

I've seen dangerous substances mentioned, like bleach or acid, and to be honest, had the gun been filled with something more dangerous than water, then she'd have been worse off, if she had tried to take the gun away. Please know, that safety is important, and when it comes to chemical burns, you HAVE to be smart. If he had been shooting some chemical at her, all the more reason to run to the ladies room, and rip her shirt off, calling for another female co-worker, while having another coworker dial the authorities.

I do not, just because I don't agree with the way the OP handled the situation, condone the jerk's actions. I am glad that he was arrested, he got what he deserved. Chances are, he won't have his child taken away. While he did commit sexual harassment, it's still not severe enough for him to have his kid taken.

Again, when faced with this situation, the smartest thing to do is make a mental note of exactly what he looks like and what he's wearing (incase he wanders off), then contact the authorities. You never know when the person you are arguing with is going to have more combatative training, or a more deadly weapon on them. Especially if they don't have a kid on their shoulders (added because of the comments of "if he hadn't had the kid, he'd have been fair game"). Personal safety is very important. A wet shirt is a lot better than what could have happened. I'm very glad that everything turned out, as it did, because no one was seriously hurt, and Hon'ya doesn't seem too upset that her shirt was see-through, given how detailed she was with what bra she had been wearing (I don't care how wet the shirt got, no one is going to know exactly what size it was, and where it was made, unless VS has started printing it across their cups).

In the end, please be smart, act smart, and think of your safety, and the safety of those who can't defend themselves (ie. the child).

[Samaliel]

Zzapp already clarified why the Children's Services were called. And once again, would the gun have been actually filled with some chemicals, like acid or bleach, I'm pretty sure the OP would have reacted differently because it would have hurt.

Yet, when some random idiot catches you off-guard and soaks you with unidentified liquid, to the point your bra are actually exposed, I think assuming the worse and trying to get back at the culprit right there, right then, is a rather logical reaction, even if it is indeed not the smartest.

I know I would be pissed off. And while what I stated I would say in that particular situation included no foul language, I can't swear I'd manage to keep my temper enough to preserve the innocent ears of the kid.

Anyhow, we shouldn't begin to "What if... ?" the whole thing, because it could go a long way. What if the OP was hydrophobic ? What if the guy was actually a terrorist spreading a biological weapon ?

The "What if... ?" don't matter. Yes, the OP could have handled it a lot better, but I can't say I blame her for getting mad at this idot.

[NightAngel]

Personal opinion:

First let me say this:
Yes, the guy was a jerk- I agree. You should not shoot people you don't know with water guns.

BUT:
It was water- in a water gun. (If it was a Super Soaker Honyachan would've been completely soaked straight out.) It was WATER- it wasn't something else- so why is there any discussion about it being something else?

If it had been me I would have FIRMLY told the man to stop or I'd call the police. I might've even given him my patented 'evil glare'. If he hadn't I would've done exactly what I said I'd do.

Honyachan turned an annoying/stupid situation into a potentially dangerous fiasco, paniced people who didn't need to be and placed herself, coworkers and a child into harms way.

Overreact much?

[crazylegs]

Honyachan turned an annoying/stupid situation into a potentially dangerous fiasco,

Emphasis my own.

Yes it could have been dangerous, but on this occasion it wasn't. To be honest I think the reaction to the thread is more out of proportion that the OPs reaction to the initial incident.

Yes the guy was a scuz bag, especially after she said 'no'. There is no grey area with the word 'no', once it's said you cease and desist. Scuz ball dude crossed a big fat hairy line, he wasn't shooting a 'girls gone wild' video so as soon as 'no' was said he should have backed down (and if he was a semi decent chap) apologised.

As it was this didn't happen and the situation as initially described occured. This was not the fault of the OP, it was the fault of the chap.

[Finance Gopher]

I agree with crazylegs here.

If I was out wearing my utilikilt and some random person wearing a child-carrier-thing tried to flip my kilt up I'd push them away and call the cops. I would press charges. And I would be correct to. It's not the same situation, but it's analogous enough. Assault with a sexual overtone. There is no de minimis exception to assault.

[Lace Neil Singer]

I wonder, would people be getting so hot under the collar if this guy, instead of soaking the OP's shirt, had ripped it off her back?

[Broomjockey]

I doubt the guy was carrying a water cannon, so the level of soakedness was a humorous exaggeration. Putting the child he was carrying in danger like that was not cool, and if the cops were already there, then they should have been involved first, not attacking someone. Sorry, I call OTT reaction. Coulda been handled way better.

[kibbles]

First off, ITA with everyone that the guy was an idiot. But to the question on if people's opinion would have changed if there had been no child; personally, my opinion wouldn't change.

Even if there was no child, sexual harassment charges for a water pistol is a monumental overreaction IMO.

[jayel]

I think the OP has every right to press whatever charges are available against the guy. Why in the freaking world is anyone saying that she overreacted by pressing these charges? Aren't we all the time saying that the reason people keep trying to pull stunts is because they are allowed to get away with it the first time, and the second time, etc.?

Broomjockey, why are you so quick to assume that she was exaggerating how wet her shirt was? As another posted pointed out, there are some heavy duty water guns out there. I find it hard to believe he was armed with a rinky dinky little water gun. More than likely it was one of the bigger, more powerful styles.

And again, regarding 'the child', I guarantee anyone out there that if it comes to defending myself or disarming someone who is using a weapon of any kind on me, I will not let a child get in my way of doing so. That child is no more important than I am, and it's feelings no more important than mine. If you let someone get away with something on the grounds that there is a child involved, they will only continue to use that to enable themselves to get away with whatever they want (again, something complained about commonly on this site). It was the guys own fault for instigating an altercation while the child was nearby. It is the parents' job, not mine, to protect their offspring.

[kibbles]

I still stand by my opinion, JMO of course. I agree the guy was an idiot, and agree with other posts that said he should have been banned from the mall or thrown out.

[Record Store Tough Guy]

Most of you here have seen me mention that I'm a martial arts student. (If there are any others here, please chime in.) One of the things taught in a reputable Martial Arts school is the philosophy of Proportional Response. In a nutshell, this pretty much means you're not going to kill somebody for throwing a punch at you in a barfight. Four guys mugging you on the subway? Go ahead and break bones, rip off body parts (don't ask which ones), gouge eyes, use lethal force, whatever it takes. Same if someone assaults you with a weapon.

With this in mind, while it is firmly my opinion that the water-gunman was firmly in the wrong, Honya's reaction was disproportionate. He wasn't physically assaulting her by grabbing her arm, he was standing a few feet away with a kid on his shoulders. Any threat he posed was not immediate, and easily escapable. There were several preferable options to physical violence that could have resulted in the same outcome, since he had already committed the deed.

Had Honya called security, he likely would have faced the exact same charges, but without the options for retaliation that have been opened up for him.

What options? Well, let's take a look:

Honya could now potentially be charged with assault and child endangerment.
Honya was on the clock. Now her store can be sued, and Honya could potentially be fired.
Honya may be sued personally.

These aren't "what might have happened." These are "what might now happen." If this guy is enough of a farkwad to squirt her shirt with his kid with him, he's probably the type of douchetard that refuses to take responsibility for his actions and is looking around for someone else to blame. Or maybe he's just the type that may want to bring down as many people with him as possible, out of spite.

I hope he doesn't do that, and I don't mean to be the bearer of doom and gloom, but those thoughts would certainly cross my mind in a similar situation.