General Discussion

SWTORFanatic

(385 posts)

139. Nope, suburbs of Milwaukee, WI

Mon May 28, 2012, 08:36 PM

May 2012

As for why hit her... I wasn't there for that particular incident, but my partner HATES driving with her mother. She flips people off, chases them down at 100 mph (yes 100 mph in a minivan), cuts them off and brake checks them, forces them almost off the road or into a guard rail, etc... does things far more dangerous than a punch.

If someone almost ran me off the road (LITERALLY) I'd want to deck them too, even if they were twice my age. But since I'm an athletic 31 year old 6'2 inch woman, if I socked someone 55+ years old (even after they almost ran me off the road and after they asked for it) and I got shot they'd probably consider me the sole instigator.

I'm not saying that's what happened in this case but I can see something like that happening.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

194 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Man, 65, shoots motorcyclist in road rage incident [View all] proud2BlibKansan May 2012 OP

"Motorcyclist Shot After Assaulting 65-Year-Old Man at Traffic Light" seems more accurate to me. cherokeeprogressive May 2012 #1

That certainly seems to be the case here. proud2BlibKansan May 2012 #3

OTOH I'd happily see the 65-year-old prosecuted if he were carrying the gun illegally. cherokeeprogressive May 2012 #6

Exactly. Aerows May 2012 #11

funny how they try to push the blame on the motorist and not the cyclist. WI_DEM May 2012 #63

Here's a clue for you.. sendero May 2012 #65

Here's a better clue. Clames May 2012 #77

At a stop light, *after* the incident?!? X_Digger May 2012 #83

You approve of taking the law into your own hands? L0oniX May 2012 #126

+1 4th law of robotics May 2012 #94

And you know this how, Professor ? Kingofalldems May 2012 #116

Because they left out key details 4th law of robotics May 2012 #143

I disagree with the term "road rage" for this incident. ZombieHorde May 2012 #2

I see your point. FarPoint May 2012 #4

You misread the article. ManiacJoe May 2012 #108

Foolish thing to do in the 1st place oldernwiser May 2012 #122

+1 L0oniX May 2012 #127

Amen to that n/t deutsey May 2012 #178

Oh..... got it now....thanks FarPoint May 2012 #164

Just another thug Life Long Dem May 2012 #5

Which one, the shooter or the assaulter? Ikonoklast May 2012 #9

The guy who cut off the wife needs glasses or needs to look out for motorcyclist Life Long Dem May 2012 #16

Perhaps, but does that give the motorcyclist the right to beat the crap ... spin May 2012 #43

"...and police said the motorcyclist assaulted the 65-year-old driver..." BiggJawn May 2012 #7

An armed man never gets the beating he deserves. Robb May 2012 #10

An armed man Aerows May 2012 #12

Ah, thank goodness an eyewitness has stepped forward! Robb May 2012 #14

No, obviously not Aerows May 2012 #17

Insurance companies call them "crashes" because they say there are no "accidents" WriteWrong May 2012 #124

You think old men who cut people off should be beaten. Union Scribe May 2012 #34

You think motorists should kill whoever they please. Robb May 2012 #40

Yeah you seem to have a real grasp of the situation Union Scribe May 2012 #41

Your take is only slightly stupider than mine, in coming first. Robb May 2012 #60

Right, because basing a "take" on the report is stupid, while Union Scribe May 2012 #103

I commend you for defending the shooter. Robb May 2012 #109

I'm defending a realistic look at the reported facts Union Scribe May 2012 #114

Within which Union Scribe reveals bias. Robb May 2012 #132

Did the guy get shot outside that car or not? Union Scribe May 2012 #135

Again, according to the shooter's statements to police. Robb May 2012 #138

But is that enough to use deadly force on him? treestar May 2012 #141

You think the 65-year-old motorist WANTED to kill the motorcyclist? slackmaster May 2012 #71

He isn't the only one suggesting that, either. Union Scribe May 2012 #105

Why was he carrying a gun if he didn't have the intention of killing someone? baldguy May 2012 #115

Holy Shit. PavePusher May 2012 #144

Yes, isn't it obvious that's the case? baldguy May 2012 #154

Sounds like projection to me slackmaster May 2012 #171

Do people who carry fire extinguishers in their cars intend on having fires? X_Digger May 2012 #157

A gun is more akin to a match than a fire extinguisher. baldguy May 2012 #162

That's not an answer, that's a dodge. X_Digger May 2012 #173

His intention was to stop the threat to his life. Nothing more, nothing less. hack89 May 2012 #163

The only lawful purpose of carrying a gun is for self-defense slackmaster May 2012 #168

Do you wear your seat belt with the intention of getting into an accident? metalbot May 2012 #177

One of the points that pro gun people make constantly is this.. Fumesucker May 2012 #146

Slight correction sarisataka May 2012 #150

+1000 baldguy May 2012 #152

"center of mass" =/= "shoot to kill". PavePusher May 2012 #161

Oh bullshit.. Fumesucker May 2012 #167

Your unfamiliarity with firearms and their capabilities in real life is obvious. PavePusher May 2012 #183

No Fumesucker, you have it COMPLETELY wrong slackmaster May 2012 #169

In theory theory and practice are identical.. Fumesucker May 2012 #172

As I suggested previously, take a self-defense class slackmaster May 2012 #174

The class would be theory.. Fumesucker May 2012 #175

Doing something that you know is likely to kill someone is not the same as WANTING to kill someone slackmaster May 2012 #176

But often an armed man is able to stop the beating he didn't deserve... spin May 2012 #42

If an 18-year-old kid knocks your daughter off her bike into a ditch Robb May 2012 #61

What else is different about your scenario and the actual story -- oh yes an actual physical assault aikoaiko May 2012 #75

A *reported* physical assault. Robb May 2012 #76

Yes, a reported physical assault. aikoaiko May 2012 #82

That's why the man left the scene of the shooting.. Fumesucker May 2012 #86

Target fixation? n/t LACarMan May 2012 #179

Interesting scenario ... spin May 2012 #91

What if the 18 year old was physically disabled, a paraplegic for instance? Fumesucker May 2012 #110

In that case there would be a significant disparity between the two ... spin May 2012 #119

Are you endorsing 'beatings' for traffic violations? X_Digger May 2012 #85

An unarmed man never gets to beat an armed man. Incitatus May 2012 #118

Busier than one legged man in an ass kickin contest nolabels May 2012 #166

Having a loaded gun means never having to say you're sorry? :) oldernwiser May 2012 #125

So the court system should give the old guy a beating? L0oniX May 2012 #129

Yep. n/t Aerows May 2012 #13

Very possible gramps helped instigate the situation. Whatever happened to SWTORFanatic May 2012 #21

How many 65 year old boxers have you seen on TV? spin May 2012 #46

Doesn't matter, many don't know their limitations or instigate anyway. My SWTORFanatic May 2012 #67

Why would the guy hit her? spin May 2012 #93

Nope, suburbs of Milwaukee, WI SWTORFanatic May 2012 #139

I have encountered such people ... spin May 2012 #160

There's no detail in the article about the assault treestar May 2012 #84

It's not like the movies where you get to beat up people for any reason... L0oniX May 2012 #128

Cagers imperil motorcyclists all the time ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #8

That's why I quit riding. BiggJawn May 2012 #90

Here in CA where we can legally lane split, the harassment is often overt and nasty ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #92

Never got into line dancing, and it's not legal here. BiggJawn May 2012 #112

Why did the 65 year old feel the compunction to argue with the motorcyclist? Broderick May 2012 #15

Hello? Life Long Dem May 2012 #18

Like I said I wasn't there Broderick May 2012 #19

You mean you didn't "stand your ground" with a total hedgehog May 2012 #20

Precisely Broderick May 2012 #22

A lot of what ifs with a gun Life Long Dem May 2012 #27

Lol. I had a gas pedal to move if necessary. Broderick May 2012 #31

Or ended the situation. Life Long Dem May 2012 #32

I wouldn't want blood on my hands Broderick May 2012 #33

You're comparing this guy to Zimmerman? Union Scribe May 2012 #35

In a sense both were emboldened Broderick May 2012 #38

They were stopped at a red light... Kaleva May 2012 #44

Ok Broderick May 2012 #50

That's what the news article said. Kaleva May 2012 #53

say the gun was not present sarisataka May 2012 #45

Someone downthread would have said... cherokeeprogressive May 2012 #49

Good grief Broderick May 2012 #51

I can no longer win the virtue of guns question Broderick May 2012 #54

I am not looking to "win" sarisataka May 2012 #55

It's not a knee jerk reaction Broderick May 2012 #185

For myself sarisataka May 2012 #186

Great point Broderick May 2012 #188

I agree, there are those sarisataka May 2012 #189

Fair enough Broderick May 2012 #190

It has been a pleasant conversation sarisataka May 2012 #191

Lol Broderick May 2012 #193

No, it's not a question of "virtue", rather your attempt at mentalism Marengo May 2012 #97

Where are you getting "two deaths" from? Clames May 2012 #80

The situations are very comparable treestar May 2012 #98

No, they aren't. Union Scribe May 2012 #101

Yes they are also contrastable treestar May 2012 #106

You're a little off track. Union Scribe May 2012 #107

They both involve self defense treestar May 2012 #111

Thank you. Broderick May 2012 #184

"This guy shot someone who was assaulting him." Life Long Dem May 2012 #123

And because of Zimmerman it can't ever really happen? Union Scribe May 2012 #130

No. I'm saying we can compare the two incidents. treestar May 2012 #136

"The old man should have done more than just blow him away" Scootaloo May 2012 #24

I mean he had a right to blow him away. Life Long Dem May 2012 #28

I started legally carrying a handgun 15 years ago ... spin May 2012 #47

I carry and have found the same attitude change in myself. L0oniX May 2012 #131

That's a very creative interpretation of the events as described slackmaster May 2012 #70

I'm a bike rider. I avoid getting off my bike at the light to assault retirees. lumberjack_jeff May 2012 #23

That always worked for me when I was riding. BiggJawn May 2012 #25

One more gun finds its victim. baldguy May 2012 #26

nah.... gunz aren't killing, people are! fascisthunter May 2012 #30

well, guns don't pull their own triggers, do they? nt Skip Intro May 2012 #37

One more man finds his victim? Honeycombe8 May 2012 #39

One more spoon makes a child fat. cherokeeprogressive May 2012 #48

Yep Broderick May 2012 #52

Except that only guns create the situations in which they can be used. baldguy May 2012 #62

You are assuming the cut off was an accidental act.. Fumesucker May 2012 #64

And that brings up the possibility that the old guy was looking for someone to shoot. baldguy May 2012 #74

And that brings up the possibility the wife conspired with the driver to kill her husband aikoaiko May 2012 #78

Typical brain-addled RW response: Blame the victim. baldguy May 2012 #79

You don't really understand sarcasm, do you? Even with the :sarcasm: aikoaiko May 2012 #81

Hint: you and the anti-self-defense brigade already are. nt Union Scribe May 2012 #102

By your logic George Zimmerman is a victim too. baldguy May 2012 #117

Cutting someone off is like hunting down and murdering a teenager? Union Scribe May 2012 #120

If it was intentional, of course it is. baldguy May 2012 #134

Cager logic at its best ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #95

What is a "gunner", who are the "gunners" you refer to, and can you provide proof that ALL... Marengo May 2012 #99

Sorry, but guns don't "create" anything.... PavePusher May 2012 #148

Post removed Post removed May 2012 #29

The gun owner didn't start the fight hack89 May 2012 #36

Imagine if every fistfight ended with someone being shot and killed Marrah_G May 2012 #56

You found what I believe is the key point sarisataka May 2012 #57

Then maybe people shouldn't start fights Union Scribe May 2012 #58

The point is that the presence of a gun makes people behave in ways they would not normally Marrah_G May 2012 #59

What is "normal" behavior for a person being assaulted? Marengo May 2012 #100

Driving away would be one. Marrah_G May 2012 #140

Sounds perfectly reasonable...from and to someone not currently under assault. Marengo May 2012 #170

This is a topic you and I likely will never agree on Marrah_G May 2012 #182

You've intrigued my curiosity... Marengo May 2012 #192

So as a society we should prefer Union Scribe May 2012 #104

So there was no other choice but to shoot? Marrah_G May 2012 #142

So there was no other choice but to shoot? sarisataka May 2012 #145

Exactly true. The whole mentality will lead to more shootings treestar May 2012 #87

People wouldn't be so quick to assault others. JVS May 2012 #159

There would definitely be fewer fistfights. 4th law of robotics May 2012 #187

Some more details JonLP24 May 2012 #66

Given that the motorcyclist's wife was present it seems reasonable to get away from her slackmaster May 2012 #69

Perhaps JonLP24 May 2012 #72

Given that nobody was killed or even seriously injured, the story is quite forgettable slackmaster May 2012 #73

Yes, I think it would be natural to run out of there treestar May 2012 #88

Began to assault the driver treestar May 2012 #89

That too has me puzzled ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #96

It seems in Missouri, intent to assault = assault. Robb May 2012 #113

The Castile Doctrine would apply to that situation in Florida. L0oniX May 2012 #133

From the description of events in the brief article, it looks to me like a justifiable shooting slackmaster May 2012 #68

The fact that he was drunk ... spin May 2012 #121

IT IS AGAINST THE LAW TO BATTER OR ASSAULT ANYONE FOR ANY REASON! L0oniX May 2012 #137

On the other hand there are excellent reasons to shoot people.. Fumesucker May 2012 #147

Yes sarisataka May 2012 #149

But that wouldn't be a good enough reason to hit someone? Fumesucker May 2012 #151

It would sarisataka May 2012 #153

Thanks.. Fumesucker May 2012 #155

I don't see the logical hole hack89 May 2012 #181

You need to quit sucking on fumes before it's too late. L0oniX May 2012 #156

Aww.. Making fun of someone's name.. Fumesucker May 2012 #158

When assholes (almost) collide. n/t Egalitarian Thug May 2012 #165

Vehicular homicide. ooops! My bad. Javaman May 2012 #180

Message auto-removed Name removed Jan 2014 #194