Biker Brake Checks SUV, SUV Runs Over Bikers

[guapo]

I have a RAM 1500 and would have used it as a ram and got more of them than the SUV he was justified to protect his family. There were over 200 phone calls to the police during the day about this biker group.

[PT145SS]

Originally Posted by 11BEE

You are EXACTLY correct. In any scenario, the LAST thing you do is pull a weapon or fire one. In order to fire the gun, we would have to exit the car or at least roll a window down. This driver did exactly what he should have done. Plan and execute an escape .

He obviously did not plan it or execute it well. He still got dragged out of his vehicle and beaten. In hindsight, we know he was not killed, but at the time, one might think one’s life could be in danger. Personally, I don’t know if I would gamble my life and/or my family’s.

Originally Posted by 11BEE

One great life point, always have an exit when in a car. Pull into the right or left most lane with at least a car length empty in front of you. If someone approaches, you can drive off. This is far better than firing a weapon.

This I can agree with. It allows for more options without taking any options away.

Originally Posted by 11BEE

The average person who fires a weapon in self defense pays $27,000 in legal fees. You will be brought in front of a grand jury so you need a lawyer. The other person or family of that person WILL sue you for wrongful death resulting in civil defense attorney fees. If you don't think I am wrong google it. Castle doctrine will not prevent the civil suit.

In Texas, simply firing a weapon in self-defense does not mean a visit with the Grand Jury. Only if that shot results in death will it be mandatory for the grand jury. Anything short of that and it is up to the DA if it goes or not.

Correct, castle doctrine does not prevent anyone from filing a civil suit. What it does do is give a defense to such law suits in the case where the shooter is no billed or not guilty. Meaning, a civil suit against a no billed/not guilty shooter in self-defense will not last long… It might not make it through first contact.

Originally Posted by 11BEE

You should always de-escelate first, retreat second, shoot last.

I really disagree with this. In a situation where someone breaks into my house, taking the time to deescalate might get you killed. In this same situation, I might have a window to retreat out of but by doing so I could be leaving my family by themselves inside with no protection.

Years ago many states went to a retreat requirement. This is because they thought it would reduce the number of homicides stemming from burglaries. But time proved two things, one that this requirement resulted in innocent victims ending up in jail because they shot an intruder without jumping out a window first and/or two, innocent victims ended up dead because they were afraid to protect themselves in their own home. As a result of these unintended consequences, many of the states that adopted the retreat requirements are now repealing them for a more common sense stand your ground laws.

[Goo]

Deleted videos of bikers on Jalopnik: http://oppositelock.jalopnik.com/the...ium=socialflow

[Camaro_Corvette]

Originally Posted by Goo

Deleted videos of bikers on Jalopnik: http://oppositelock.jalopnik.com/the...ium=socialflow

Looks like a great group of honest straight shooters....

[nyrfan]

Bunch of punks on bikes. I would have done the same exact thing while emptying my clip(s).

This crap really pisses me off. What if there was no video of this? The poor driver that was simply scared and protecting his family would have been in a heap of trouble. I seriously think I am going to look into getting a dash cam.

[PoorMansCamaro]

I guess they couldn't wait for GTA V to go online...

[Jay_LHD3]

I like this post:

[christianmotox]

Originally Posted by Jay_LHD3

I like this post:

Attachment 561390

WIN

[syn-ack]

Originally Posted by irocnroll

there is no way a a gun would have changed this scenario.

I've been in this scenario, and based on my personal experience, you are wrong.

[nyrfan]

Originally Posted by Jay_LHD3

I like this post:

Attachment 561390

Epic!

[Mr Twisty]

Originally Posted by Goo

Deleted videos of bikers on Jalopnik: http://oppositelock.jalopnik.com/the...ium=socialflow

Nice!
Here's a vid from the rapper, Jay Sneeze, (close enough) ... he's the one that got squished by the suv...



This is his alleged record:

Edwin E. Mieses, 26, of 17 Bernard Ave., Nov. 28, charged with operating a motor vehicle after license was revoked, illegal possession of a Class D narcotic, operating a motor vehicle with defective equipment and on five outstanding warrants;
Arrested Again in May, Since 1999, he has been ticketed by police 16 times, in Lawrence, Methuen, Roxbury, Andover, and New Hampshire, according to registry records.
In June, the Registry notified the National Driver Register that Mieses was a habitual traffic offender whose right to drive in Massachusetts was revoked until 2017, records show."

[kalimus]

Originally Posted by tramtwo

I can not tell you how many Camaro owners I see doing this same type thing.

You don't have to tell me I'd believe it.

[Edwin320]

Originally Posted by 11BEE

Stand your ground will prevent them for suing you for damages inflicted in the shooting. It will not prevent a wrongful death suit. It is happening how in the Zimmerman case.

Incorrect. "A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force..." Fla. Stat. § 776.032. A wrongful death suit is a civil action resulting from the use of such force. Accordingly, in a stand your ground case, there can be no wrongful death suit.

The Court in the Zimmerman case held that Stand Your Ground didn't apply, which is why there was a prosecution in the first place. (In a stand your ground case, an initial hearing is held to determine whether a prosecution should take place. The Zimmerman defense team elected not to seek a stand your ground hearing at the outset, because they felt the law didn't apply).

[Mr Twisty]

Sneezy's mom & wife said he selflessly stopped to help a fallen biker, but no bikes went down on the initial stop. The one that brake checked the car can be seen still upright afterwards.

If the city crushes the confiscated bikes, does that make them rice patties?