Fair enough, but still not a solution for me. But too far off topic to get into that one.
Fair enough, but still not a solution for me. But too far off topic to get into that one.
One of the cyclists smashed the truck's window and it's "unimaginable" that the driver got physical? Apparently their imaginer is broken. If you escalate to physical violence you'd better be sure to have control of the situation. Really stupid move IMO. Honestly I'd have been on the phone with 911 as soon as the guy got out of the vehicle.
Dude is also a convicted r*pist.. that was probably the victims fault too..
I'm going to play Devil's Advocate here.
- Using Hanlon's Razor as the test on the first one, plenty of drivers cut of cyclists without malice. They are simply idiots. The riders do not know anything about this driver (as we now do with the benefit of hindsight and a bit of research), yet they choose their response by 'swarming' the truck at the next traffic light. Then the cyclist smashes the window when he could have avoided the situation by stopping short and calling the cops.
The cyclists were unlucky to encounter a guy who was going to react badly and severely, but they are not completely innocent there.
In reading the comment section of the article in the OP, it seems that just the mere act of riding a bike can be the catalyst to set off this motorist's anger. Here's an excerpt of one comment:
"To everyone saying "the bikers started it" you were not there and you don't know this man. He is hostile, aggressive, unreasonable and violent. He's also 6'3" and 270lbs. I had a run-in with this same guy, and so did a person I work with, on a completely separate occasion. Neither of us did anything to him, and he even told me that he "hates bicyclists." When he attacked me, we had not had any kind of incident leading up to the altercation. I was simply riding alone when he suddenly brushed me off the road with his truck, then pulled over, got out, and started yelling at me and chasing me. Then he took a metal bar from his truck and started waving it around, kicked my rim in with his big boots when I tried to get away, and then got back in the truck and drove up onto the sidewalk in a crazy attempt to hit me. I was lucky to escape with just a trashed rim. I found out who he was from a neighbor who witnessed this. I looked up his criminal history, and it is long and bad."
I don't believe the bikers "started it", but they had at least TWO clear moments to back off and avoid being dragged further down - yet they, as a group or due to poor 'leadership' by one of them, boldly dug themselves a deeper hole and one of them paid a very dear price.
The fact that ANOTHER cyclist in a SEPARATE incident on a DIFFERENT day had a problem with this a-hole driver does not absolve this group of 4 from being called stupid.
Agree with what you wrote. One thing I notice we don't see in the article is how the cyclists reacted to the driver. It's almost as if this article expects us to believe that the cyclists never communicated with the idiot driver.
A driver buzzed them and yet they rode past him at the intersection. He had a red light which means the cyclists had a red light but didn't stop. You've already got an idiot driver who buzzed them and no doubt they said something to him or looked at him in the way one looks at a idiot or they gave him the one finger salute or a combination of all three as they ran the red light.
It's like waving a red flag in front of a bull.
So he catches up to them and tossed a milkshake. I'm sure there was some more words and gestures given by the cyclist nearest the milkshake. Can't blame them as I would have let loose a string of words/gestures as well if someone threw something at me. The idiot driver obviously had his window down and heard/saw the reaction to his throwing the milkshake and then stopped and got out of his truck.
And yet all four cyclists still approached him and his truck. Close enough that one rider could break a window on his vehicle and close enough for him, the driver, to grab one of the cyclists.
I might be new to riding but after being buzzed on purpose I'm not going to ride past the car running a red light in the process. I might decide to make a right turn and just go for a block or two and then double back. Or if I can't turn I'll stop for a minute or two and let the driver drive off.
If someone throws something at me I'm not going to get close enough for them to do something else because you can't know what the next "else" is going to be.
Are the cyclists victims? Yes.
But not all victims are blameless in what happens to them. Some victims don't stop to think about what they are doing. Some victims keep waving that flag in front of the idiot bull and then they get gored.
I hope this guy goes to jail for life.
But I also hope all the cyclists who where involved realize that they ignored the signs of danger and kept plunging head strong into the final confrontation. They are so lucky this criminal wasn't armed and willing to shoot over a broken window.
I don't see a clear moment where you expect these people to "back off". I don't even think they would have to back off.. if someone starts attacking you, you have every right to defend yourself. Oh wait, never mind, that's "escalating things".. don't want to do anything that might upset your attacker. just relax and take it. it'll be over soon
this dude could run over half of you guys and you'd be like "sorry bro, totally my bad!"
You expect me to believe that after the second incident where he threw a shake and hit one cyclist with it that not one person of the four cyclists said or did anything?
If so I'd say you're the one making things up.
But for sake of argument let's say that the cyclists did nothing after getting buzzed and hit with the shake by that idiot driver.....
That idiot driver threw something at them and hit one of the cyclists. That idiot driver then stopped further down the road and got out of his car and was waiting for the cyclists to come to him. That idiot driver was looking for a physical confrontation.
And not one cyclist of the four stopped short of him or turned around or turned onto another street to avoid a physical confrontation with him. Not one of them pulled out a cell phone and called the cops. (until after the girl was run over)
No they decided to ride past him again. One cyclist as he rode by the car broke a window after the guy lunged at him. That tells me the cyclist already had the u-lock in his hand was ready to use it as he rode up on the guy.
Make no mistake: The cyclists are victims.
But what I've noticed reading this thread is you don't understand that not all victims are equal. These victims were being harassed by an idiot driver and these victims made no effort to get away from him. They continued to travel the same direction as the idiot driver.
These four cyclists had multiple chances to break off the confrontation with the idiot driver.
If the driver had buzzed them and then immediately stop and jump out of the truck then you and I would be in agreement. However that didn't happen. The driver buzzed them and went further down the road. They passed him. He attacked them with the shake. They still rode in the same direction. The driver went further down the road and got out of his vehicle. The cyclists still rode towards him.
Understand this: The cyclists are victims. I hope the girl gets better soon. But I would tell those cyclists to their face that they were stupid to do what they did when it was clear the idiot driver was looking for a fight. I would tell them they are lucky that this career criminal didn't jump out with a gun and start shooting at them. I would tell them in the future that sometimes it's better to swallow your pride and hold back so as to avoid confrontation with an unknown then it is to continue to ride in a dangerous situation.
I wouldn't have run a light right next to him after he buzzed me. I'd hang back. Let the light turn green. Let him drive off. Is everyone in such a hurry that they can't stop for a minute?
He's an idiot. Let him have his stupid "victory" against bikers. Don't aggravate an idiot whose already tried to harm you with his car.
Sudo, I think that it would have been understandable under these circumstances to fight back. But to me, breaking out a window in the vehicle is not fighting back, its escalating the situation, and ultimately whether it was escalation or not, an innocent cyclist was severely injured. Yes, I personally believe that the cyclists could have ducked down a side street, or stopped and not passed by the guy, or some such thing, but for sure, if they decided enough was enough, the first hit should have been aimed to disable the driver, not to damage his car.
Big assumptions against the cyclist need to be made in order to assume it was just escalation. I agree that disabling the driver, if that point was reached, would have been a better course of action, but particularly for people who have never experienced it, violence is a very hard thing for some people to engage in, even when necessary. People get panicky. Who's to say whether the window was busted out from anger, fear, or any number of other visceral reactions you might expect when you're being harassed by a lunatic in a 2 ton steel cage. It's easy for us to criticize from our comfy chairs without tons of adrenaline pumping through us.
"the truck driver stepped out to confront the lead cyclist, Josh Harrington, 31, of Oakland. Harrington swerved around the motorist, then reached back with a U-lock and smashed the driver's-side window."
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/johnso...#ixzz2TsA4ZCt9
Seem pretty clear to me. Your have your read, I have mine
Do not rely on the other person to deescalate a situation. Especially when that other person started the problem.
The driver has already tried to hurt the cyclists by buzzing them which could have caused one or more of them to crash on the side of the road.
It is illogical to think the driver would then back off.
It is best to assume the driver will continue to harass the cyclists and that the cyclists should take action to deescalate the situation.
First we don't know that they did nothing in response. And frankly knowing humans I seriously doubt they let the buzzing and the milkshake slide without some response.Quote:
At least twice they were harassed and did nothing; they continued on their way without retaliating (which is more than a "reasonable person" would likely do). This is a clear indicator that he intended to continue harassing them... why anyone thinks stopping behind the truck would magically stop this continuing harassment is beyond me.
Second since it's clear that he's not going to back off the cyclists should have realized that and backed off themselves for their own safety.
Third it is possible that stopping behind his truck would not stop the harassment but remember after the initial buzzing he drove further down the road and was stopped at a red light. Had they stopped far enough back he may have just driven off when the light turned green. If he didn't move then they could have called the police and/or turned around and headed away from him. Instead they drove up to his car and ran the red light. Not a smart move IMHO. The idiot has already buzzed them as he drove by. No doubt he's "enraged" that a bunch of cyclists ran the light when he can't. He's already a stupid guy for the buzzing and that's probably exactly what he was thinking when the cyclists blew through the light.
The cyclists could not have known about the previous incident. Nor could they have known this guy was a former felon with a long and violent criminal record.Quote:
He got out of the damn truck to go after them. There's allegations from one person that he drove up on the sidewalk to chase down a fleeing cyclist in another incident. So I ask again: at what point is it finally OK to fight back in some way without it being labeled escalation? Because it doesn't sound like this point ever exists until it is too late.
Had they I bet they would have backed off.
It of course depends on state law regarding self defense for your question. The cyclist with the lock would probably be justified at taking a swing at the idiot since the idiot did get out to confront and attack the cyclist. But swerving around the guy and then hitting the window? That's not self defense. That's revenge for the driver being a jerk.
And look at the result. The driver almost killed another cyclist because of it.
Oy... some of the people on the news site commenting on the article are making it all about cyclists versus motorists. It was the rare case of an unstable individual who needs some serious psychiatric intervention, who came upon some cyclists, who just happened to cross the radius of this unstable person's radar. I've had my own run-ins with whack jobs and it had absolutely nothing to do with what I was driving, or riding or what I was doing at all. Random, crazy people are just that. Random and crazy. It's better to make that assessment ASAP, and get away from them in any way possible. And call the police to report it. That way, if said whack job does it again, it's on the record. Some of these people are always looking for something to blame for their misery...
Also, unrelated to the above quoted post, some are saying that the cyclists passed the guy's vehicle against the light running a red light. Although what I know of cyclists behaving badly I certainly consider that possible. I also know a little bit about motorists behaving badly and I've had more then one stop on a green light and position their vehicle either to try to block me or to turn into me "waiting in ambush" for me to try to pass them when they were stopped at a green light. Do we know that the light was red and this guy stopped for the red light and the cyclists didn't, do we know that he stopped for a green light trying to block them from proceeding or waiting in ambush, or do we not know which of the two it was ??? Some facts clarification would help.
So it is possible based on that quote, that the cyclist was swinging his U-lock behind him to hit the driver, missed and got the window instead.
I just found the way the article was slanted was that it seemed to be about how this is an example of how cylists and motorists are "clashing", when it was actually the rare person who was highly unstable who committed a crime against an innocent person. Most drivers aren't that crazy, just clueless. It was a bad example to use, and it just stirs people up... there should be more emphasis on those people who aren't paying attention, or are too impatient to proceed safely. That is the common occurrence. If people were behaving more like this person in this particular incident, I'd probably be carrying a firearm. Or move to Baghdad. :P