guy tries running motorcyclist off road
- Thread starter card16969
- Start date
MelodicMetalGod
Registered
The pickup driver was wrong, for sure, but the riders weren't exactly in the right either.
sanket_420
Registered
Ive seen this video before. If Im not mistaken this is couple guys from the org. I maybe wrong as its been a while since first viewed this video.
SKnight
Registered
Yeah this came across the radar a couple of years ago. Not sure if it was this forum or not but the debate was about whether or not the truck driver could have been shot since he got out with a tire iron.
The answer was no, per a lawyer I know. Despite what happened on the road until he actually tried to hit someone with the iron it's no threat thus not a legal shooting situation.
The answer was no, per a lawyer I know. Despite what happened on the road until he actually tried to hit someone with the iron it's no threat thus not a legal shooting situation.
Yeah! This one is old. I believe they were from the r6 forum.
From the net:
"He was sentenced to two years in jail on each of two wanton endangerment counts, 90 days in jail for menacing and a $100 fine for reckless driving. The sentences run concurrent for a total of two years, court officials said."
From the net:
"He was sentenced to two years in jail on each of two wanton endangerment counts, 90 days in jail for menacing and a $100 fine for reckless driving. The sentences run concurrent for a total of two years, court officials said."
TreyYoung
Registered
Your Lawyer friend is right and wrong. It all depends on how far the guy with the tire iron closed the gap. I am sure a tire iron could be used as a deadly weapon. And yes, this video has been posted many times. Pretty sure it was not two Org members, but we had 2 members (I think Lankee & Rollin20's) have a similar incident with some KY rednecks. I believe they still have the entire town of about 20 out looking for them.
SKnight
Registered
Deadly weapon, yes. Actual threat per the video, no. It's the within reach and actively swinging part that makes the difference. What the truck guy with the iron did is issue a terroristic threat. Fine lines that are hard to draw plus state laws vary and all that.
The forum it came up on got a resounding "Have a firearm handy, drop him as soon as you saw the iron." response which is absolutely wrong. Every situation is different but until he started closing the gap he wasn't a "Threat to life or limb."
And what people say doesn't bother me, until you're standing there you have no real idea how you'll react so claiming they'd drop him and not lose a moments sleep carries no merit. But in our tenuous times with the 2nd amendment on life support anti gun groups use those types of statements to strengthen their case against our rights.
But man dude in the truck sure was a douchebag. The riders earned pissing him off but truck guy really pushed it. However until the riders were being pursued they were shown getting up to their own shenanigans, I wonder what they got.
mracer29
Registered
Motorcyclist just shot a guy over the weekend over road rage...,,,
http://m.myfox28columbus.com/news/Former_OSU_Football_Player_Suspected_in_Delaware_Shooting
http://m.myfox28columbus.com/news/Former_OSU_Football_Player_Suspected_in_Delaware_Shooting
lankeeyankee
Banned
You can bet your azz I would have fired my handgun at this truck!!!
Assault with a deadly weapon with intent to harm or kill in this case a 3000lb vehichle is the deadly weapon.
This was not any org members. But me and rollin20z had a similar situation happen to us but ended with 3 vehicles getting involved
Assault with a deadly weapon with intent to harm or kill in this case a 3000lb vehichle is the deadly weapon.
This was not any org members. But me and rollin20z had a similar situation happen to us but ended with 3 vehicles getting involved
He could have easily thrown that tire iron at anyone and killed them.
If you can look the police in the eyes and say beyond the shadow of a doubt you were in fear of your life than deadly force would have been justified. Distance makes no difference in threat level when someone is wielding an object that can kill a person.
But that being said the video is damning for the bikers as they made no real attempt to diffuse the situation.
When they came to the stop they could have rode off but instead they dismounted and antagonized the situation.
If you can look the police in the eyes and say beyond the shadow of a doubt you were in fear of your life than deadly force would have been justified. Distance makes no difference in threat level when someone is wielding an object that can kill a person.
But that being said the video is damning for the bikers as they made no real attempt to diffuse the situation.
When they came to the stop they could have rode off but instead they dismounted and antagonized the situation.
MelodicMetalGod
Registered
Looking police (or anyone else) in the eyes and earnestly stating fear for your life has nothing to do with it, as everyone has their own opinion, valid or not. (Ex: Anyone ever hear of some Zimmerman character that's been in the news recently?) As for distance not being a factor, that also comes down to opinion. Unfortunately, in terms of the law, it is only the law and the jury that truly matters in terms of the outcome. We must always remember: The law and right & wrong are not the same thing. Not the same thing at all.
Again, the riders are not without fault here anyway. Technically, they initiated the encounter by riding illegally (speeding/reckless driving, crossing lane lines, illegal passing). Technically, they continued the encounter by following the truck, stopping with the truck, dismounting and approaching the truck in a hostile manner. Technically, the driver of the truck could also argue "self defense" since he was followed and then approached in a hostile manner and outnumbered. IMHO, if the rideres had harmed the truck driver in ANY way, the law would have favored the truck driver.
Did the riders have a right to be angered about the drivers intial reaction (swerving/crowding the bike)? Yes, IMHO.
Did the riders have a valid complaint/reason to call the cops about it? Yes, IMHO.
However, as soon as the riders decided to engage by following the truck, they weakened their legal position significantly. Fortunately, they were smart enough to a) not harm the driver and b) to disengage once the driver pulled the tire iron and c) call the cops while keeping their distance.
Again, the law and what's right/wrong are not the same thing at all. It can be right as rain, but if the law says otherwise, all the right in the world won't keep you outta jail.
Melodic I was a firearms instructor for eight yrs in Florida.
Deadly force in Florida is justified if you believe your life to be in danger. Period.
The law is that simple. You're right the position of the bikers was weakened by their own actions.
But to address one point had the chase not happened and this trucker simply jumped out with tire iron in hand and threatened them they would have been within their rights here to defend themselves.
And yes I remember Zim, the jury is not even out on that but I still think he will be found not guilty.
Deadly force in Florida is justified if you believe your life to be in danger. Period.
The law is that simple. You're right the position of the bikers was weakened by their own actions.
But to address one point had the chase not happened and this trucker simply jumped out with tire iron in hand and threatened them they would have been within their rights here to defend themselves.
And yes I remember Zim, the jury is not even out on that but I still think he will be found not guilty.
MelodicMetalGod
Registered
Blanca, I certainly don't have the experience for familiarity with FL self defense law that you do. To be clear, I don't have any direct experience with self defense laws or gun laws in any other state either. However, because of the complications of our legal language, I have seen/heard a lot of anecdotal situations where the law comes down to a subjective interpretation of an objective law or set of laws. In other words, for all but the most unambiguous cases, until the case is tried, you just can't be certain of the outcome.
For example, if FL law states that it is self defense if you feel your life is threatened, then how does the law determine how "you" feel? Why would not every murder or assault suspect claim self defense if it is merely a matter of stating their own opinion they they felt their life was threatened? In this particular case, would the driver not be able to make the same claim? After all, he was followed and outnumbered by hostile strangers who may have been armed or simply able to overpower him. And would self defense hold up after the "defender" chased down the attacker for miles?
Again, I'm no expert, but it seems to me that laws complicate matters and leaving many options for the lawyers to further distort any clarity that laws do manage.
Of course, my main point is this: Both parties made mistakes and invited trouble. The smart thing to do in such situations, is to avoid escalation and, if you feel it's worth the time and effort, bring the authorities in ASAP. IMHO, most all of us have far to much to lose to risk such confrontations, EVEN if we are in the moral right. Especially when the "law" just may not see it that way.
SKnight
Registered
If that's what you trained in your course then you created a lot of potential problems. Rewatch the video from 6:00 to the end. He never raised it. He put it down at 7:12 and didn't pick it back up. Had he raised it to strike someone, had he gone after someone, had he raised it to throw it then yes it's a threat. But standing there with it hanging at his side is no different than a firearm in a holster.
And that's the difference. Regardless of what he did in the truck, regardless of what he said to them, it was not a shooting situation once the truck was parked. Threat's over, now it's just a Mexican standoff.
You can't bring emotion into things such as this. To everyone that carries please educate yourself or befriend someone that knows the law. My friend isn't just a lawyer, he's a former cop that is now a defender for law enforcement agencies. This type of situation is what he does for a living. Even he said that the shooter would go to prison for murder because despite what just happened and him having the iron in his hand he didn't actually do anything that could harm or kill, accidentally or otherwise.
Sknight as I said the whole incident negated the bikers right to use deadly force as they themselves antagonized the situation. Had it just been trucker jumping out with tire iron in hand yelling threats at them than it would have been different. I never said they could have or should have shot him, not here nor in original thread. But whether or not he had it raised or not doesn't matter. In his hands threatening someone can be construed as a reason to fear for ones life which here would allow for deadly force. Again that's not an instant green light to shoot someone. Other factors must be considered by the mature mind to determine if that force should be used. Had one of the bikers shot him than yes it would have been wrong and they wound have gone to jail. Using deadly force is a decision one cannot take back. You'd better make damn sure you're in the right or you will wind up in front of twelve jurors. You ask how do judge emotion. Well that is the job of reporting officers on scene. That is why Zimmerman was not arrested initially. Because reporting officers saw enough and heard enough evidence to believe he was justified. It was only after the Sharptons of the world caused an uproar that he wound up getting arrested and charged. Whether or not he should have exited the vehicle has been argued to ad nauseum but after that the actions seem to justify the result.
I taught the law as it here in Florida, not my own personal opinions.
I taught the law as it here in Florida, not my own personal opinions.
SKnight
Registered
OK, the way you originally wrote it sounded like you considered it a shooting situation because he could throw it.
Zimmerman is an interesting situation. I feel it's a justified shoot the problem lies in how threatened was he. Did he get his nose bloodied then decide to shoot him out of anger or was the fight ongoing and he gutted him? Unfortunately we'll never know, it's such a media circus now I'm waiting for the reports that the kid was helping a little old lady home when Zimmerman decided to shoot him for jaywalking. Been a while since I looked into that case, thanks for reminding me.
Zimmerman is an interesting situation. I feel it's a justified shoot the problem lies in how threatened was he. Did he get his nose bloodied then decide to shoot him out of anger or was the fight ongoing and he gutted him? Unfortunately we'll never know, it's such a media circus now I'm waiting for the reports that the kid was helping a little old lady home when Zimmerman decided to shoot him for jaywalking. Been a while since I looked into that case, thanks for reminding me.
Had the chase and the attempted run off the road not happened and the two bikers simply came to the stop and some nut jumped out with tire iron in hand yelling threats than yes most likely they could have. But since all parties seemed to further the situation for the worse they would not have been justified.
card16969
Registered
Holy crap this initiated quite the controversy while i was gone today haha. In michigan if someone is closing in on you with a knife or another weapon that they can incapacitate you and take your weapon from you and use it against you, you have the right to open fire at 28 feet because they can be on top of you before you draw your weapon at any lesser of a distance. The cop that taught our concealed weapons class was telling us that this is going to wind up being a federal deal soon because of some study that the nra did about self defense. I guess the study showed that an average person can close the gap of 28' before a person can draw a gun and fire on them. Ive never seen this study just going by what he told us so dont quote me on this.
Similar threads
