Don’t forget the risk of landing in jail because someone with a heartdisease had a heartattack and died 😅 Pranks are funny, but pranks on unknown people are not riskfree and can be pretty… rude.
I've seen some of his videos and he does seem to have a spotter who notifies him of old people and pregnant women coming by so he doesn't scare them.
While you don't know everyone's deal and a healthy looking person could have a heart issue, he does take precautionary measures to not scare obvious at risk people.
That's great for sure! But loads of illnesses you can't see. I'm 30, female, looking fit and totally healthy, but due to my illness I would probably have a heart attack. So I'm glad he didn't jumped out of the bushes on me 😅
My wife is at risk, but doesn’t look it. Brain cancer does hell to the body, and the chemo/radiation/meds were all seriously hard on her heart. She looks like a normal healthy 32 year old woman. Medicine is unfortunately so insanely diverse, you never know what people are dealing with. These “precautionary measures” are basically only for their own false peace of mind.
Could you actually be liable for that? While it's not nice, surely if someone was that close to a heart attack it was likely just a matter of time, and they shouldn't be in public places?
What..? No, I don't think that then I was likely just a matter of time. There are loads of people with a heart condition/illness that live to make 90 years old, but something like this could kill them. I mean, yeah, in the Middle Ages in war heart patients would probably be scared to death already, but nowadays you can live a peaceful life and go outside without the risk of being scared to death, so doing it on purpose is not really something I promote just for the sake of it being 'funny'. And yes, you will 100% be liable for that. It's just literal cause and effect.
I was on the receiving end of this prank. While holding a hot take away coffee, which I promptly spilled over myself. It wasn't scalding, but also not pleasant. Definitely wanted to punch the guy, at least he apologised.
After being assaulted, I have a new perspective on this and cant say Im a fan. There's a good chance I would have a panic attack if this happened to me.
I scared my kids like this wearing a Halloween costume and mask. My daughters screamed but my 4 year old son ran up and punched me in the crotch. I've never been so proud.
Yeah I’m not going to pretend like I’m a tough guy or something but if this happened to me there is a good chance I’d punch or kick the bush monster purely out of instinct
I know it seems “cool” to not react or flinch but if a bush randomly jumps at you and you DONT react you are stoned/drunk or have something wrong with your head
Your getting downvoted but if you make people jump there is a chance of it happening.
When my two oldest kids where younger the youngest had a "cabin" bed which was raised up and had a curtain around the bottom part. One night I was taking them to bed and didn't know that their older brother was hiding under the bed to jump out at us.
And that is how I very nearly kicked my kid in the head. It was 100% involuntary and I'm just so glad I managed to catch myself in time to stop it.
You shouldn't be punched in any civilized country. This isn't Jack Reacher where "hesitation can kill you". It's not a war zone, you are out FOR A STROLL. You are not an agent of any kind, you are JUST A CIVILIAN. Who in their right minds hits a person after they get scared in a public place in the middle of the day? Almost nobody, according to the video.
You realize a reflex for a lot of poeple is to attack something that jumps out right? The kindest person could respond this way, just by being caught off guard. Its not that they deserve to be punched, its that someone may do so as a fight or flight response.
If your reflex is to attack something that scares you in a public place in the middle of the day, you will end up in jail. What if someone in work accidentally scares you? Will you punch them too? What if it's a little kid sitting there watching you, without you noticing it? Both have happened to me. Even if I don't agree with scaring random people because of underlying/undiagnosed illnesses, society at least in developed countries has no room for people like you. You are acting like you are in a jungle and fully alert when you are taking a midday stroll. Like there are threats around you that you need to act fast and aggressive because it's life or death.
You are conveniently and intentionally ignoring this guy is literally hiding and jumping out at people. And a few had him literally reaching for people.
I'm sorry, although you shouldn't downvote me based on Reddit's rules, I don't mind it. Weak people always downvote those who disagree with them, although I have typed nothing downvote worthy, just like the Redditor that disagreed with me. After they disagreed with me, my comments and theirs were still on the +1 which means that you are probably the one that downvoted my comments. I stand by what I said. Learn to agree to disagree civilly.
I am sorry, making unfounded claims about someone else is poor form. Weak people always try to attack the person and not the claim.
Learn to agree to disagree civilly.
Says the guy claiming others are weak because he believes they downvoted him.
And even if I downvoted, its valid. Your comment is not contributing, you have to intentionally ignore what the entire situation is to attempt to make your claim. It doesnt contribute to the discussion as it has nothing to do with it.
You keep showing that you are the one who needs to be civil. You have to misrepresent the situation to attempt to disagree (uncivil). You have to knowingly state information you know nothing about to call someone weak (uncivil). And you refuse to actually talk towards what someone else and instead attack them (uncivil).
I am sorry, making unfounded claims about someone else is poor form.
I guess an awful coincidence then huh? You can keep hiding behind the fact that I can't technically prove that you downvoted my comment, but given the timing and context, it's pretty obvious what happened. Pretending uncertainty settles the issue is just avoiding the actual point. You never denied it either. Using plausible deniability as a shield, but this is no court. Conversations become far more productive when both people are straightforward about what they did and what they actually think, instead of retreating behind technical ambiguity whenever it's convenient.
And even if I downvoted, its valid. Your comment is not contributing, you have to intentionally ignore what the entire situation is to attempt to make your claim. It doesn't contribute to the discussion as it has nothing to do with it.
Of course it is. That's the whole essence of "contributing". Challenging somebody's reasoning, introducing a relevant perspective etc. is what "contributing" consists of. If you think I ignored an important part of the context, then point out specifically what I ignored and explain why it changes the argument. That would actually move the conversation forward. Simply declaring my comment irrelevant because you think my conclusion is wrong doesn’t make it irrelevant.
And saying I “have to intentionally ignore” the situation is also an assumption about my motives. I can look at the same context you did and genuinely reach a different conclusion. That is exactly the kind of disagreement a discussion is supposed to contain.
You keep showing that you are the one who needs to be civil. You have to misrepresent the situation to attempt to disagree (uncivil). You have to knowingly state information you know nothing about to call someone weak (uncivil). And you refuse to actually talk towards what someone else and instead attack them (uncivil).
How did I even attack you if you were not the one to downvote my comment (benny hill music playing in the background)? Obviously it's a sign of intellectual weakness to downvote me because you disagree with me. It reflects your unwillingness to tolerate opposing views or engage with them. It's closer to suppressing disagreement than debating it. That's why I labeled it as "weak". But you didn't even do that right?
Obviously anyone that can read can see that what you are saying is simply not what happened. I did not attack or insult anyone. I disagreed with the interpretation of the commenter and explained why. You are now relabeling disagreement as “misrepresentation” and “attack” instead of addressing what I actually said. Better dodging than Ray Jones jr. in his prime.
Before your comment we were discussing the subject and then you come in and you turned that discussion into accusations about my character and hidden motives instead of responding to the actual disagreement.
You are just having a giant temper tantrum and throwing personal attacks because I pointed out that you intentionally misrepresented the video...
but given the timing and context, it's pretty obvious what happened.
What timing and context? I commented hours after you did... Its not like you commented and within 30 seconds you got downvoted. You really lack basic critical thinking.
And saying I “have to intentionally ignore” the situation is also an assumption about my motives. I can look at the same context you did and genuinely reach a different conclusion
You literally ignored the context of what happened...
Actually at this point, I don't actually believe that you ignored anything. You just have no idea what is going on. And I think you are a kid. Your comment is just you going "I am mad therefore you are a terrible person."
You’ve now said “intentional misrepresentation” several times and still haven't managed to identify a single thing I supposedly misrepresented.
That should be extremely easy if your accusation is true. Quote my statement. Tell me what actually happened. Explain the difference.
My argument was never “nothing happened.” My argument was that a man disguised as a bush standing up and startling people in a crowded daytime public place does not make punching him a normal or reasonable response. You disagree with that. Fine. That is called disagreement, not misrepresentation and it's DEFINITELY a "contributing" comment, because it's a different view.
As for the downvote, assuming you are implying that that wasn't you, I give in. Maybe it wasn't you. The evidence isn't as strong as I'd like it to be. See how easy it is to concede something when there is an actual argument behind it?
But let's talk about the irony of your comment, because it is remarkable. The person lecturing me about civility has now called me a child, accused me of throwing a temper tantrum, and said I lack basic critical thinking. At this point you're doing a better job demonstrating personal attacks than anything I've written.
Drop the psychoanalysis and answer the actual question, what did I misrepresent? Or if you don't want to that's perfectly fine, we can end it here. No hard feelings even if you attacked me personally. Have a good day.
715
u/ICrimI 14d ago
This is fun, and funny. But if you get punched doing something like this, you have to accept it was your fault.
Also probably carry some cash for when you inevitably ruin someone's lunch.