Angry man smashes up T-Mobile shop in Manchester UK

Really, I think the people have had enough of referring to destruction of property as "violence" It's disingenuous.

It really diminishes the meaning of the term..

Originally posted by paraphi


Getting cheap stars by comparing it to bankers is (er) cheap. We all know bankers are *ankers, but keep to the topic in hand.

Regards

I gave you a star so you don't feel left out.

And I can assure you my stars are not cheap, so you can feel very good about yourself.

reply to post by fleabit


Vandalism ain't violence.

reply to post by BMorris
Duh.

I was talking about the reactive behavior. Comcast gets it all the time...

I love how casual this guy is being about it. "hmmm I'll spray a lil over here, and a lil over there. Get maximum coverage"

You know what, it really wouldn't surprise me if this was merely a T-Mobile Viral Campaign. The way he acts, all that he does, it's not as if he set the place alight or even tried to.

Also, when are the police THAT quick to respond to anything?!

But if it is real, then fair play to him. More people seem to be standing up against things these days, tearing the hypocrisy of it all down with them.

I might have missed a few posts but my thought is, this would be a good time to boycott TMobile. Like the people did when BOA was going to charge asinine fees. There were millions that helped affect a change. This guys behavior is a perfect catalyst. And with all the concurring comments here, I'm sure it is tenfold with the rest of the customers at large. If people united right now and terminated their TMobile accounts, it would send a resounding message, not just to TMobile but to all retailers. It would show how the net can reach out to others to unite and WE CAN AND WILL make a change.....legally. UNITED WE STAND!

Well OP

There you have it.

It seems like the majority has it. We are commonly getting screwed over by businesses. When one man stands up because he's had it, the world watches and applauds, as though he wont a little one for us too... But ya know what..


He did... We didnt.


So we go back to our little world, he goes off to jail, and businesses keep screwing us continualy without missing a beat.


When was the last time someone got your order RIGHT at a drivethrough? Do you sometimes feel that every business singles you out every now and then? Like it's a conspiracy? Might just be because all businesses just suck today and dont care about their customers.

So what do we do? Stop buying? Like that will work, EVER. Never works with walmart, how on earth will it effect the owners if everyone gives in on a daily basis. We of so little memory and care...

reply to post by bigyin


He seems pretty calm and good natured even while running amok and getting arrested for it. Perhaps he simply decided that the only way multinational corporations will ever stop screwing then ignoring their customers is if it costs them a hell of a lot of money in some form that is easier to understand than a small loss of market share that will be meaningless as of the next merger anyway.

Who among us hasn't had that thought, though probably in less dramatic form, and simply didn't feel that it was worth the personal risk to be the one who screws them back? The cops didn't even seem to be particularly upset about the situation- and good for them. They're citizens too and take their share of the economic screwjob- I can see how they might laugh about it as long as no humans were injured (I say humans because corporations are apparently people these days).

If I were better off financially I might invite this guy to the states if he'd agree to help me buy my next cell phone; bet your most closely guarded orifice that the customer service would be excellent in that case.

Originally posted by b6x87
You know what, it really wouldn't surprise me if this was merely a T-Mobile Viral Campaign. The way he acts, all that he does, it's not as if he set the place alight or even tried to.

Also, when are the police THAT quick to respond to anything?!

But if it is real, then fair play to him. More people seem to be standing up against things these days, tearing the hypocrisy of it all down with them.

edit on 3-7-2012 by b6x87 because: (no reason given)

In some shopping areas in the UK we have police hanging around the area waiting for any trouble. So they were probably around the corner somewhere, if so they were actually a bit slow lol.

This guy is a hero.

Look at how many police officers they brought in to handle him even though he's clearly calm and relatively collected, posing no danger whatsoever to the staff. You can bet if he was doing this in your house and you called the cops, they would send round a community officer in a couple of days time, if they could be bothered. Got to save those precious mobile phones banners!

It would be great if this went viral and started a campaign of similar 'calm storms' in multinational chain stores. The only problem would be someone would eventually take it too far.

Originally posted by The Vagabond
reply to post by bigyin

 

He seems pretty calm and good natured even while running amok and getting arrested for it. Perhaps he simply decided that the only way multinational corporations will ever stop screwing then ignoring their customers is if it costs them a hell of a lot of money in some form that is easier to understand than a small loss of market share that will be meaningless as of the next merger anyway.

I loved the idea and the fact that he has a smile in the end as though it was all going to be ok. I loved it more than anything Ive seen lately. I also agree with you, but the problem is... What this guy did by standing up will probably cost him prison time, not simply jail time. I would also guess that they're going to sue him for damages anyways, and will win, not to mention that the insurance company will pay for damages...

So these chumps got off with even more money, via suing and insurance money and some "oh poor us" publicity. Even if they didnt get a dime and had to pay for the damages themselves, that company is so worldwide that it wouldnt even matter. That was a penny in a piggy bank of dollars.


Still appluad the guy, I just wish instead of jailtime, he would be nominated as a high ranking political figure. lol

Fair play to him. But at the end of the day, the only person he has hurt is himself. He will end up doing a long stretch for this, the judge will no doubt make an example of him, to disuade others from taking on the judge's corporate sponsor. Then he'll sit on a rape case and blame society for it.

he got himself a bloody big crowd. i love the comments from the kids aswell. cool video.

www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by 12voltz
everyone is so polite and calm in England even when there is a fire and a special deal on phones
But none in hot pink,like this guy wanted.

yes us brits are so polite

Originally posted by DISINFORMANT
Oh, I certainly agree that he broke the law. I'm not trying to argue that he didn't do that. I'm saying that society as a whole ought to start being supportive of those who are willing to express their discontent - even to the point of breaking the law - so that those in power will start to get the message that enough is enough.

There is expressing discontent and then there is (however you wish to cut it) violent behaviour, which at the end of the day is just going to alienate people from the valid point your trying to make. It would have been far better if he did something that got a laugh, like the Fathers 4 Justice lot that would climb places dressed as superheroes.

I'm all for discontent and showing "them" what you think, but vandalism serves no purpose.

Originally posted by DISINFORMANT
That's what your argument boils down to - that he broke the law and we shouldn't do that.
Following your logic, what would you have people do when bills like Bill 78 get passed

Not at all. Breaking the law is one thing, but destroying property is another, that is my main issue with this. He has failed, massively, to not only get his point across but to even come close to getting his money back which set him off in the first place...

With regards to your Bill 78, that is similiar to the Law passed by Blair which prohibits protests outside Parliament, if I felt the cause I wanted to promote warranted protesting in the prohibited space, I'd do it. But I wouldn't start smashing the place up. That is the distinction I am trying to make and you are failing quite amazingly to grasp.

Originally posted by DISINFORMANT
You really think stripping naked would have done any better? Publicly naked may be ok, but t-mobile store is private property, and he'd only be opening himself up to potential violent action against his person, as well as a sexual assault lawsuit.. Much better plan, I'm sure.. I'm sure T-mobile would have really gotten the message too..

Yes, yes I would. As it is private property there is no law at all governing the state of dress, so he would have been pretty much untouchable by the Law if he sat there naked. They could only then remove him for trespass, not the nudity. The "sexual asault" angle you provide is total non point. Please explain how this would be so?

As for the message, it would have got a lot more publicity if "Naked Protester removed from Shop" was the headline, instead he is just another "violent" crime statistic.

Originally posted by DISINFORMANT
The clerk was clearly unthreatened and the only thing that was damaged was ill-gotten goods to begin with.

Ill "gotten"? How so? The company pays for the goods, they are as fairly "gotten" (it's not even a word dude) as you or I buying them ourselves. Besides, they would claim off insurance and all this achieved was him getting a record, it didn't hurt T-Mobile at all.

Originally posted by DISINFORMANT
Your whole line of reasoning is laughable.

Not at all, your position which promotes damage to property as a valid outlet for protest is laughable. It is precisely the thing "they" want people to do, so they can prohibit protesting even further.

Originally posted by DISINFORMANT
Although I don't reasonably expect a bearer of the cross of St George to be able to follow my reasoning..

And what was the need for the snide remark at the end? Have I done anything to you? What's with the attitude? Whatever happened to civil debate, or is this the online form of your valid protest you're espousing here?

The only things this guy has done..

1) Become a 5 minute internet sensation.
2) Been arrested.
3) Damaged someone else's properties (corporations are considered to be as "people" in the eyes of the law, so "someone else's" is the correct term).
4) Closed a store for a short while.
5) Given the staff a lot of clean-up work.

Lets look what will happen next.

1) T-Mobile will get their repairs paid for, and their damaged stock replaced by their insurers.
2) The gentleman will, in all probability, be ordered to repay the insurance companies, and pay a fine on top of that.
3) He will now have a criminal record, prohibiting visa-free travel to certain countries.
4) He may even get a custodial sentence (knowing the UK justice system, thats unlikely if its a first offense).
5) Under the "proceeds from crime" law, its entirely possible the legal system will twist the law, to deny him any donations people are talking about raising for him.

To top it all off, he's still not got his refund.

So, what exactly, are the positive benefits from this for us? For him?

None.

Most mobile phone retailers in the UK are managed by scruffy scallywags with little to no brains. I've applied for a couple of different companies as a mobile phone retail assistant and had to go through various aptitude tests, and basically all they want is people who are capable of making them money without asking too many questions and able to be a bit of a dick about things.

I wouldn't be surprised if the employee could even string a coherent sentence together, let alone perform a refund. No wonder the bloke was angry.

But I have to say, I've already seen sneaky baiting in this thread already.

1: Jeremy Kyle isn't a 'typical' Brit. Jeremy Kyle guests are the creme de la creme of the lowest class.
2: Personally, I don't think not being able to legally own a gun is a bad thing. We certainly have a lot less crime (though we are a smaller nation), very rarely do you hear about a mad man rampaging about a school or public place with a gun, or 'gang-bangers'. I'm not completely ignorant to the crime in the country, I know there are more than one ways to skin a cat, as they saying goes; but I believe adding guns to the mix makes crime worse.

Having said that, this is the most peaceful 'smash up' I've ever seen

reply to post by article


He should maybe plead not guilty on grounds of diminished responsibility. He clearly has taken a funny turn of some sort. Whatever the store attendant said to him has driven him over the edge, he flipped, he's not acting in a normal way.

A good lawyer will probably get him off with some community service so long as he agrees to attend a therapy clinic a few time for counselling and anger management.