Part of the problem is that the mushy-headed Toronto media has succumbed to the concept promoted by entitled slime that a criminal who vandalizes someone else's property for kicks is "a graffiti artist."
And it's not a little kid doing this. If the store owner had bashed a child for graffiti, it would be a different matter. but the criminal here is a full-grown adult.
How about if we start calling rapists "sexual performance artists" and see how that flies. Idiots.
The reaction to this story is probably giving trough-feeders an emotional punch in the face as harsh as the actual one received by the vandal from the store owner he victimized. It appears that most people who have seen this support a person's right to defend their property.
Anyway, what's the graffiti "artist" complaining about? The store owner just performed a little "art" on his face.