Enraged customers fuel a disturbing trend

[mgc1961]

Applebee's, according to its corporate website, is all about good service: "We take pride in having a friendly, welcoming, neighborhood environment for both our staff and guests that makes everyone enjoy their Applebee's experience."

Apparently, not everyone was enjoying their dining experience at the Forestville, Md., location two weeks ago when a customer who had been tossed out the door in a dispute over the meal bill allegedly shot and killed an off-duty state trooper working security for the restaurant.

It is not clear what displeased the customer — be it the food, the service, the prices. Whatever his beef, the resulting violence fits an emerging pattern of recent years: Vengeance has increasingly led many unhappy customers/clients to kill.

The remainder of the article is at http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-06-24-c...


In a related Tennessee news item:

The House on Friday joined the Senate in overriding Gov. Phil Bredesen's veto of a bill that lets handgun carry permit holders take their weapons into bars and restaurants that serve alcohol.

House members voted 61-30 for the override as they tried to wrap up business for the night. The override was expected — the legislation had cleared both chambers by wide margins — and lawmakers held no debate before voting.

"I have a speech prepared here, but ladies and gentlemen, I'm not going to read it," the bill's sponsor, Rep. Curry Todd of Collierville, said when offered the chance to speak. "You know how you're going to vote."

Previous law let people with handgun carry permits take their weapons into restaurants that do not serve alcohol. Under the new law, permit holders will be able to take a handgun into any bar or restaurant, but they are not allowed to drink while carrying.

Bars and restaurants can opt out of the law by posting a sign banning handguns at the door. Nashville attorney David Randolph Smith said servers who work in restaurants considered unlikely to prohibit guns intend to file a complaint stating the new law violates state workplace safety regulations.


More at http://www.tennessean.com/article/20100605/NEWS0201/605...


Editorial note: I had a customer last week who wished for the death of someone in my family.

[X_Digger]

1. Both links are dead.. however..

2 men charged with killing Md. state trooper
http://www.wtop.com/?nid=25&sid=1978059

Both men have extensive criminal records. Police say Williams has a criminal background that includes possession with intent to distribute narcotics, second-degree attempted murder, first-degree assault, burglary and weapons charges. Milton's criminal background includes first-degree assault, reckless endangerment and weapons charges, police say.

Your second link should be.. http://www.tennessean.com/article/20100605/NEWS0201/6050351/Tennessee-House-overrides-guns-in-bars-veto

The second link refers to people who have a concealed carry permit. Those folks commit any crime 6-20x less often than the general public. They've passed a federal background check, been fingerprinted, and taken a class.

Your attempt to try to link ex-felons with CHL holders has been noted and dismissed.

[sinkingfeeling]

4. Where did the OP attempt to link ex-felons and 'CHL' holders?

[X_Digger]

5. First link refers to ex-felons, second refers to CHL holders..

The links are joined with this segue..

In a related Tennessee news item:

eta:

If I had posted two stories, one about the local democratic party's latest toys for tots drive, and in the next breath mentioned the case of a democratic pol who got drunk and shot someone, as a 'related story', wouldn't you see that as a smear?

[sinkingfeeling]

8. First link does not refer to ex-felons at all! It talks about a rise in the number of

violent acts committed by customers or clients.

[X_Digger]

19. First link leads off with ex-felon shooting someone. n/t

[sinkingfeeling]

24. Show me the word 'felon', please. It says the alleged assailant had a criminal record.

[spin]

28. Anothe link with more info about the criminal record ...

2 men charged with killing Md. state trooper
June 14, 2010 - 6:48pm

FORESTVILLE, Md. - Two men have been charged with first-degree murder in the slaying of Maryland State Trooper Wesley W. Brown.

Deputy Chief Kevin Davis said Cyril Cornelius Williams, 27, and Anthony Anderson Milton II, 28, both of Seat Pleasant, are charged with first-degree murder in the killing of 24-year-old Trooper Wesley Brown.

***snip***

Davis said Williams was the original person of interest whom Brown had escorted out of the restaurant over a dispute involving an unpaid bill.

The motive of the killing was because Williams was upset, Davis said. He said the men did not know Brown before the incident.

Both men have extensive criminal records. Police say Williams has a criminal background that includes possession with intent to distribute narcotics, second-degree attempted murder, first-degree assault, burglary and weapons charges. Milton's criminal background includes first-degree assault, reckless endangerment and weapons charges, police say.

Court records show that Williams was charged four years ago with trying to kill a Prince George's County police officer Rickie Adey in 2006.
http://www.wtop.com/?nid=25&sid=1978059

[Euromutt]

46. Said record included convictions for 1st degree assault, attempted 2nd degree murder and burglary

Which are all felonies.

You are, I hope, at least passingly familiar with the idea that different words can share meanings, and that you don't literally have to say a particular thing to mean that thing. Your objection is equivalent to arguing that "a ton of popcorn gravel" is not one possible form of "a large amount of small rocks."

[baldguy]

2. More proof that allowing everyone to walk around armed is both dangerous and stupid.

When is America going to grow up?

[slackmaster]

6. "The alleged assailant at Applebee's had a criminal record"

:wow:

[sinkingfeeling]

9. And now he has a murder charge. And so what? Did he committ all of the increasing

violence against businesses that the article refers to? The article is pointing out a growing trend in people unable or unwilling to control their own frustration in the 'real' world.

"The steady rise in customer/client violence appears to stem from a combination of factors, including worsening economic conditions and greater corporate depersonalization. In a complex, bureaucratic society, more and more citizens are feeling powerless against incessant phone recordings or red tape. Criminologists recognize that frustration increases the likelihood of aggressive behavior."

[slackmaster]

10. The OP is a shallow attack on changes in the law that allow people with permits to carry weapons

More places than they could previously. It's a complete failure in that regard, as a person with a violent criminal record cannot acquire a concealed-weapons permit or even own a gun legally.

[sinkingfeeling]

12. You sure do read things that aren't there.

[slackmaster]

14. What does the expression "In a related Tennessee news item" say to you?

Nothing?

What do you believe was mgc1961's reason for posting the items in THIS FORUM as opposed to GD or the Tennessee forum?

[sinkingfeeling]

22. Probably should have been posted A) alone, just the USA Today article or B) in GD.

I'm interested in the reasons supposedly law abiding or 'normal' people suddenly decide the only way to resolve their personal issues is with killing somebody: Why we've lost either an ability to cope with modern life or just don't care anymore. Most people have built-in mechanisms that prevent us from acting on thoughts of revenge. Why don't these people?

[slackmaster]

27. We may never know with certainty the exact intent of the OP

It appears to be a drive-by.

[Travis Coates]

40. This story isn't about

law abiding or 'normal' people it's about a criminal offender w/ a violent history who was already prohibited from owning a firearm under existing laws.

Also please note that when he decided to kill some one the laws prohibiting him from possessing a fire arm didn't slow him down one whit.

[Euromutt]

47. As has been pointed out ad nauseam, Mr. Williams wasn't "supposedly law abiding"

The man had a fairly extensive prior record of criminally violent behavior, which already precluded him from legally possessing a firearm.

The fact is that "supposedly law abiding or 'normal' people" almost never suddenly decide to inflict lethal violence on somebody. Something in the order of 90% of homicides are committed by individuals with a prior adult criminal record, and an uncertain percentage have prior juvenile records. In the case of murderers who didn't have a prior criminal record, they all too frequently have a history of unreported domestic abuse/violence, stalking, etc. There are always what Gavin de Becker (https://www.gavindebecker.com/) calls "Pre-Incident Indicators"; I thoroughly recommend picking up a copy of his book The Gift of Fear, which has some excellent common-sense advice about our inherent ability to predict violent behavior (and some explanation why we very often ignore it).

Further recommended reading is this article by Don Kates, "The Right to Arms: the Criminology of Guns" http://www.cardozolawreview.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=138:kates201086&catid=20:firearmsinc&Itemid=20 (hat tip to DUer Gorfle for introducing the reference).

Very simply, the notion of the killer who "would generally have been considered a 'law-abiding citizen' up to the moment he pulled the trigger" is a myth, a fabrication, a lie.

[jazzhound]

50. See section #14 which discusses the myth (lie) that

most murders are committed by those who were "law abiding" until the moment they squeezed the trigger:

http://www.guncite.com/journals/tennmed.html

[Euromutt]

16. As slackmaster said, the word "related" has some significance here

Personally, I don't see how a story about a convicted violent repeat felon shooting some moonlighting cop at an Applebee's where he (the shooter) presumably got "dissed" in some way*, in a state where concealed carry permits are extremely difficult to acquire, bears any relevance to a change in the law in another state that would permit holders of concealed carry permits--who have to undergo state and federal background checks to ensure that, at a minimum, they have no felony convictions--to enter establishments that serve alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises, but prohibits them from drinking while carrying.

Geez, here in Washington state, a person legally in possession of a firearm can not only enter any establishment that serves alcohol not been declared off-limits to persons under 21 by the state Liquor Control Board, but can actually legally drink while carrying! As you can readily imagine, the blood and brass mingle in some parking lot every night. Except they don't. So how d'you explain that? (Bear in mind Washington has been "shall issue" for almost forty years.)

* - Though frankly, IMNSHO, if you eat at Applebee's, you deserve any disrespect you get.

[sinkingfeeling]

21. Where in the USA Today story does one find the words 'convicted violent repeat felon'?

[rrneck]

26. Here

The alleged assailant at Applebee's had a criminal record, but so do millions of other Americans who regularly dine at restaurants and shop in stores. His past history of criminality is obviously not the only issue here.

The steady rise in customer/client violence appears to stem from a combination of factors, including worsening economic conditions and greater corporate depersonalization. In a complex, bureaucratic society, more and more citizens are feeling powerless against incessant phone recordings or red tape. Criminologists recognize that frustration increases the likelihood of aggressive behavior.

We could ask a lot of questions here.

How much does the intermingling of people from various socioeconomic strata increase stress and tension within a population?

How does a consumption dominated society based on a customer service model turn anyone with a bit of cash into a "two cent millionaire" with a sense of power and entitlement over service personnel who have responsibility but no authority?

Why does the article in question specifically refer to the criminal history of the individual, but only allude to the vague concept of corporate depersonalization? Who is the real culprit here? Over and over I am reminded of a quote by Jay Gould, a nineteenth century robber baron who said, "You can always hire one half of the poor to kill the other half."

By all means, lets blame citizens of all kinds, those with criminal histories and those without, and treat corporate depersonalization as a force of nature that is simply a fact of life because we live in a "complex, bureaucratic society".

We should be using the power of government against the real criminals who are creating a mercenary, avaricious, divisive world driven by service to anyone with more money than us to treat corporations as the soulless shills for the rich that they are and make people the citizens they should be.

[spin]

29. Update on story wih more info ...

2 men charged with killing Md. state trooper
June 14, 2010 - 6:48pm

FORESTVILLE, Md. - Two men have been charged with first-degree murder in the slaying of Maryland State Trooper Wesley W. Brown.

Deputy Chief Kevin Davis said Cyril Cornelius Williams, 27, and Anthony Anderson Milton II, 28, both of Seat Pleasant, are charged with first-degree murder in the killing of 24-year-old Trooper Wesley Brown.

***snip***

Davis said Williams was the original person of interest whom Brown had escorted out of the restaurant over a dispute involving an unpaid bill.

The motive of the killing was because Williams was upset, Davis said. He said the men did not know Brown before the incident.

Both men have extensive criminal records. Police say Williams has a criminal background that includes possession with intent to distribute narcotics, second-degree attempted murder, first-degree assault, burglary and weapons charges. Milton's criminal background includes first-degree assault, reckless endangerment and weapons charges, police say.

Court records show that Williams was charged four years ago with trying to kill a Prince George's County police officer Rickie Adey in 2006.
http://www.wtop.com/?nid=25&sid=1978059

[Euromutt]

43. Nowhere; that's precisely my point

The McPaper opinion piece (note: opinion piece) doesn't actually mention that both men had prior convictions for first-degree assault (a felony) and weapons charges (most likely felonies), and that Williams, the "enraged customer," also had a conviction for attempted second-degree murder (also a felony), as mentioned in the WTOP piece (http://www.wtop.com/?nid=25&sid=1978059).

As a result, the McPaper piece attempts to feed the myth that homicides are typically committed by "people who would have been considered 'law-abiding citizens' until they pulled the trigger" by obfuscating the fact that the two defendants had extensive prior criminal records, and could by no stretch of the imagination be considered "law-abiding citizens."

This is not a case of some regular Joe Schmoe "just snapping" and committing a homicide he probably wouldn't have if only he hadn't had access to a firearm; this is a case of a drug dealer with a chip on his shoulder dealing with a slight to his self-image in the manner that persons involved in the illicit drugs trade generally resolve conflicts: by killing the offending party.

[Euromutt]

13. It's significant in that the guy had what British cops call "form"

When a news medium is pointing out some perceived "growing trend in people unable or unwilling to control their own frustration in the 'real' world" (and bear in mind that the news media are in the business of making and keeping you scared, so that you'll keep watching/reading), it's less than persuasive when the example they present is an individual who has a demonstrated history of criminally violent behavior, and thus might not be a representative sample of the general population.

Past behavior is the best indicator of future behavior; the people most likely to behave violently are those who have already demonstrated a propensity to violence. As in this case.

[TPaine7]

30. "Did he committ all of the increasing violence against businesses that the article refers to?"

I doubt anyone thinks that a single person perpetrated all of the alleged increase in violence against businesses. That's far from the point.

A (somewhat) more pertinent question would be, "what percentage of the relevant crimes against businesses was committed by permit holders." I don't think the answer would support the OP's position.

As to the alleged "steady rise in customer/client violence", I would really like to see the supporting data. Crime in general is falling. Steadily. I doubt that crime against businesses is rising steadily at the same time.

There is a need for those with certain agendas to find some bad news to trumpet. Imagine that loosening of traffic laws--raising speed limits, allowing some autobahns, licensing drivers at age 13, etc.--were followed by a steady decrease in accidents and fatalities involving cars. Imagine further that I wrote an article about "the alarming rise of accidents involving red Toyota Corollas." In reading it, you might compare my grave concerns to the fact that there was an overall lowering of auto accidents and deaths--you might even doubt the purity of my motives.

But perhaps you wouldn't. Perhaps you would join me in my quest to reverse the policies that preceded and accompanied AN OVERALL DECREASE IN AUTO RELATED FATALITIES in order to reduce the ALARMING RISE IN ACCIDENTS INVOLVING RED TOYOTA COROLLAS--a probable statistical blip.

Only you can say for sure.

[SteveM]

34. Interesting theory you quote. Perhaps best suited for another forum? nt

[Travis Coates]

39. Do you think

a person W/ an extensive criminal background may be more likely to be unwilling to control his frustrations than a legal gun owner?

[Caliman73]

44. This is not new.

Societal factors such as low income, crowding, lack of opportunity, feelings of social isolation, repression and individual physiological and psychological factors such as temperament, pain and frustration tolerance, the presence of psychiatric illness, personality traits, upbringing, etc... have always impacted the likelihood of some people to commit violence rather than others. We can make educated guesses that people under more stress and with more societal load are more likely to be perpetrators and victims of violence, but in terms of prediction, the information has limits.

The problem with the USA today article is that it is vague and prone to be used, as in the OP, as an indictment of the tools with which people commit violence rather than an examination and attempts to mitigate the factors which might increase the likelihood of violence. Politicians are about expedience and gain. Taking away evil guns and violence will reduce. Gun violence may, and I emphasize may go down, but as evidenced in high crime, high violence countries with strict gun laws, other forms of violence remain the same and murder rates are not significantly impacted.

In plain English, to stop violence you have to deal with the violence not the tools used for violence.

[one-eyed fat man]

45. Huh??

"....powerless against incessant phone recordings"

Hearing "...listen closely, for our menu options have recently been changed...." makes people who were the soul of reason turn into homocidal maniacs?

It appears the vast majority of these people unable to control their frustration have been socially maladjusted, abusive, violent and reckless for a very long time. You get some dude who started stealing money from his mother's purse at age six, rolling kids at school for their lunch money at 11, stealing cars at 14, beating up old women for their Social Security checks by 16 and the first homicide they get arrested for is a complete surprise?

Instead we supposed to believe a divorced engineer for the defense industry gets stuck in L.A. traffic and finally snaps. He gets out of his car and begins a walk through central L.A., toward Venice, where his daughter is having a birthday party. Never mind, they did that already....

[Euromutt]

11. Carry permits in Maryland are as rare as hens' teeth

And chances are the shooter didn't have one, even if he hadn't had a criminal record prohibiting from possessing a firearm at all. The problem in this instance was not that the law governing private ownership of firearms was too lax; it was that this guy had an over-developed sense of entitlement and was, not to put too fine a point on it, a homicidal asshole.

[jazzhound]

23. "When is America going to grow up?"

Gee.......I don't know. Maybe right around the time you grow up and develop the ability to check your ego at the door while looking at the statistics re. the low violence rate among concealed carry holders?

Which will likely be when llamas fly.

[baldguy]

32. You don't get it: criminals & so-called "law-abiding" gun owners get thier guns from the same places

America isn't the wild west, and hasn't been for a very long time. We should stop playing cowboys & Indians.

[friendly_iconoclast]

36. Class, can we say "The violent crime rate in the US has declined quite a bit in recent years"?

Good! I just knew we could!

Next, you'll be agitating for 'sensible' gun laws like the ones in peaceful places like Jamaica, Mexico, or Chicago.

Making it next to impossible for the law-abiding to buy guns really caused crime to decline in these places, amirite?

[rrneck]

37. Well, miz school marm,

Do you have a self defense solution for someone assaulted by another not using a firearm but rather, a knife, a club, fists or feet?

School us and we can all go home.

[jazzhound]

38. Actually, it's you that doesn't "get it".

It's not O.K. to argue on the basis of emotion-driven speculation rather than facts.

[Travis Coates]

41. criminals & so-called "law-abiding" gun owners get thier (sic) guns from the same places

Please feel free to quote your source for this information also could you elucidate on the "so called" law-abiding gun owners?

[pipoman]

42. I think this quote is quite appropriate

"Irrational fears based on ill-informed hype does not constitute "fact"

No matter how often propagandists repeat it. If you need to talk out of your ass, all you're doing is spewing shit all over.

Actual facts are based on study, real-life experience and knowledge."

Care to guess who penned this very appropriate rebuttal to your repeated spewing of propaganda, even in the face of "actual facts"?

[Euromutt]

48. Got any evidence to support those assertions?

To wit, a) that gun owners in general are only supposedly "law-abiding," and are in actual fact inclined en masse toward criminal violence; and
b) that criminals get their guns "from the same places" as legal gun owners?

Because, frankly, I think you're just (as the Dutch say) sucking that out of your thumb, i.e. fabricating it with zero evidence to back up your claims. Speaking as "so-called 'law-abiding' gun owner," I invite you to either produce some evidence, or have the common fucking decency to crawl back under your rock and keep your bigoted thruthiness to yourself.

[SteveM]

33. Gross straw man. Again...

"More proof that allowing everyone to walk around armed is both dangerous and stupid."

Since no one is advocating this position, this is a complete and intellectually disingenuous statement. In light of that, you may wish to answer your own question about your neck of the woods.

[friendly_iconoclast]

35. It's sad, really. You've been reduced to producing strawmen in support of clumsy propaganda

I suppose that "declining violent crime rate in the US" thing cramps your style.

We weren't to notice that the OP had conflated violent felons with law-abiding permit holders.

Do you prfer wheat, flax, or broom corn for your source material?

[proteus_lives]

49. Criminals often don't grow-up.

It's one of the reasons they're criminals.

But I assure you, millions of legal and responsible firearm owning Americans (like myself) are very mature.

[Walk away]

51. +1

[sinkingfeeling]

3. USAToday article is at this link...

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-06-24-column24_ST1_N.htm

[one-eyed fat man]

15. Hmm, let's see..................

We get felons killing an off-duty cops with guns the law said they can't have. (Breaking NEWS: Crooks have blatant disregard the law! Film at eleven!)

We get an addict with a violent criminal history "shopping doctors" enraged at a doctor who won't write a prescription for oxycontin.Perry doctor killed by patient

We get an article that says "From 1997 through 2008, according to figures....." then appears to throw in an incident from 1993 to inflate the count. 101 California Street Shootings

Now is someone trying to point out that bad or whacko people sometimes use guns to do bad things to innocent people or are they claiming that guns turn otherwise ordinary, normal and innocent people into latent homicidal maniacs?

The "USA Today" article does not appear conflate all gun owners or concealed carry permit holders with bad and wacko people. That little twist had to wait until the article got posted here. You'd think that a crime free Utopia AND the Age of Aquarius would descend on the planet as soon as all them 'ebil gunz' were banned. Maybe casual observation of the social dynamic in the gun free communities of San Quentin, Attica or Leavenworth are illustrative. No gang rapes? No assaults? No murders? No extortion? No stealing? What? Violent criminals are violent even without access to guns? Who would have suspected that?

[Euromutt]

17. As I love to point out, homicide rates in 14th century Europe were a multiple of the worst US rates

Seriously, the least bad 14th century European homicide rates were double the US homicide rates at their height in the early 1990s. And that's during the first half of the 14th century, when man-portable firearms didn't even exist in Europe!

[one-eyed fat man]

20. Dang!!!

The next thing you'll be telling me all those castles along the Rhine really weren't filled with fairy princesses? Probably some revisionist crap about they were really fortresses built to keep other 'noblemen' from robbing your serfs and peasants blind before you could.

[Callisto32]

31. Strangely enough...

this: "... fortresses built to keep other 'noblemen' from robbing your serfs and peasants blind before you could." still continues.

[SocialistLez]

7. Hasn't anyone heard of writing a letter or an email to the person "in charge"? NT

[rrneck]

18. In the USA Today article...

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-06-24-column24_ST1_N.htm
In 1997-98, 60 homicides were committed by disgruntled customers and clients; in 2007-08 the figure was as high as 133. Overall, 500 such cases occurred from 1997 through 2008, more than half of which took place in public buildings, such as restaurants, banks or retail stores. Of these homicides, 20% involved office workers or health care and social service employees.

I don't do numbers very well but let's see. The intent of the OP seems to indicate that the carry of firearms in restaurants is a danger to the public. By linking the tragedy at Applebees (as if the food weren't tragic enough), to the carrying of firearms he or she would like to see that practice regulated. I assume the intent of that regulation would be to eliminate the needless deaths of 133 people. In a country of three hundred seven million.

If the new regulations were 100% successful in eliminating firearms from public businesses, that would still not eliminate all the danger since some of the offenders would still use knives, clubs fists or feet.

Any law or regulation, good or bad, has an impact on people's civil rights. Thus, these regulations will impact the lives of some eighty million gun owners. Of that eighty million I'm guessing, (and there are others who have better figures than I do), about a million or two carry firearms into businesses. Surely, even taking into consideration my lack of statistical expertise and probable innacurcies, well more than 133 of those gun owners who would be denied the ability to carry would lose their lives or be severely injured as a result of the new regulations.

Furthermore, the implementation of public policy is not free. It demands resources from government that could be put to better use actually improving people's lives and making better citizens instead of simply disarming people, the vast overwhelming majority of whom would never hurt anybody anyway.

[safeinOhio]

25. I'm a CCW holder

and have never been arrested in my life. We all know that makes me a non-bad guy and law respecting citizen. So, it makes no sense, statistically, to pass a law that won't allow me to drink in a bar while carrying, as long as I don't drive. I mean WTF?