Advocacy & Safety - Biker Rage?

Interesting.

http://www.kval.com/news/34047689.html

Oh Eugene, I miss you.

I know a lot of motorists who could use a good beating. I just hope it was deserved in this case.

He posted in the comments. Too bad none of the cyclists did. I'm positive there was some reason the cyclists did this, and it was probably ugly.

The cyclist were wrong for what they did, but I suspect the motorist did more than just cut off the cyclist.

What are the cops like in Eugene? Do they take cyclist complaints seriously or do they blow them off? Could this act of escalation result, in part, from a repeated lack of police action in solving violance against cyclist.

Troublemaking punks on bikes, that's what anyone's gonna see. Hardly anything to do with typical bike commuters.

Time to go back and read the comments. A witness just posted 30 minutes ago, saying that she saw the driver of the SUV swipe one of the cyclists, try to run down the others, and drove away.

I don't feel sorry at all for the chump.

Considering the eyewitness account the headline should be changed to "Road raging SUV driver commits a hit and run on cyclist but gets a taste of his own medicine"

Well at least the cops know who the Hit&Run driver is this time. Will they arrest him?

Time to go back and read the comments. A witness just posted 30 minutes ago, saying that she saw the driver of the SUV swipe one of the cyclists, try to run down the others, and drove away.

I don't feel sorry at all for the chump.

And I'm sure that eye witness has just oddles of credibility. I could go post contradictory testimony, who'd know the difference.

Four punks on BMX bikes. Whoop

Well at least the cops know who the Hit&Run driver is this time. Will they arrest him?
:roflmao2::roflmao2::roflmao2:
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAAAAAA.....

I had to check if I was in the jokes & humor forum when I read that.

And I'm sure that eye witness has just oddles of credibility. I could go post contradictory testimony, who'd know the difference.

Four punks on BMX bikes. Whoop

As much credibility as the SUV driver, whose version of events you managed to swallow whole with no difficulty.

And why does the type of bicycle they were riding matter? I mean, is someone in your world automatically more credible if they are riding, say, a Schwinn World Tour? What can you tell about the trustworthiness of an individual riding a rehabbed 1967 Raleigh with chrome forks?

Crikey, I can only imagine if these four "punks" were riding RANS crank forwards. Your head would probably explode.

Maybe we could let the police do their jobs. It could be a little street justice or punks going to far. We'll see if the police do a fair investigation.

Such a waste of energy. If all these folks had been properly armed with handguns they'd have been able to settle the matter more efficiently.

So. What duty does Home Depot owe a customer when that customer is attacked on their property? I believe in general terms that a business customer is an invitee and that the property owner owes an invitee a higher duty (e.g., to warn of hazards) than a mere social visitor. But this situation lies sort of outside the usual. I don't believe there's a duty to rescue a stranger from attack on public property, but how about a business invitee on private property?

This is, if I recall correctly, premises liability. Based on the conflicting information, I can't see how either the motorist or the BMXers would benefit from a suit against each other. But by the time the motorist went into HD, the initial altercation was over. All that happened on HD property was the BMXer on motorist attack. I would think that HD owes a business invitee the duty of calling 911 promptly in an emergency. take a heart attack victim in the checkout aisle. When he falls, let him lie until another customer calls 911 or call 911 immediately? I would think that not calling 911 would attract a negligence suit based on a general duty to aid those in trouble at least to the extent of calling 911. It's only a short extension to take that general duty - which I suspect we all think must exist in supermarkets and HD - and extend it to immediately outside the building in an area frequented by employees, as was the situation here.

Will be fun to see what happens.

As much credibility as the SUV driver, whose version of events you managed to swallow whole with no difficulty.

Who said I took the drivers side? A bright person would realize that without credible witnesses its a matter of he said / he said.

The BMX riders are guilty of assault and damaging property though, regardless of the perceived slight.

Who said I took the drivers side? A bright person would realize that without credible witnesses its a matter of he said / he said.

The BMX riders are guilty of assault and damaging property though, regardless of the perceived slight.

Isn't it more like he said / they said? Of course there are those that will discredit the cyclists view point, but there were 4 of them...

How does the SUV driver get singular credibility?

[QUOTE=mandovoodoo;7813430]Such a waste of energy. If all these folks had been properly armed with handguns they'd have been able to settle the matter more efficiently.

So. What duty does Home Depot owe a customer when that customer is attacked on their property? I believe in general terms that a business customer is an invitee and that the property owner owes an invitee a higher duty (e.g., to warn of hazards) than a mere social visitor. But this situation lies sort of outside the usual. I don't believe there's a duty to rescue a stranger from attack on public property, but how about a business invitee on private property?

This is, if I recall correctly, premises liability. Based on the conflicting information, I can't see how either the motorist or the BMXers would benefit from a suit against each other. But by the time the motorist went into HD, the initial altercation was over. All that happened on HD property was the BMXer on motorist attack. I would think that HD owes a business invitee the duty of calling 911 promptly in an emergency. take a heart attack victim in the checkout aisle. When he falls, let him lie until another customer calls 911 or call 911 immediately? I would think that not calling 911 would attract a negligence suit based on a general duty to aid those in trouble at least to the extent of calling 911. It's only a short extension to take that general duty - which I suspect we all think must exist in supermarkets and HD - and extend it to immediately outside the building in an area frequented by employees, as was the situation here.

So far, this post appears to be the most reasonable and less emotional. All we know here, is what we see on the video. All the rest is alleged, third hand information. The bicyclist clearly followed the mostist onto private property and clearly assaulted him. The Home Depot employees clearly had the responsabililty to call 911. They have a legal responsability to invitees/customers on thier property.


Nuff said.

clearly, tracking someone down and beating them up is not a solution that we should promote. OTOH, it is often impossible to get satisfaction using more reasonable approaches. Actually, with 4 of them, they might have had some traction with the cops. It would be interesting to know what this guy did. I'm not impressed with the idea that he just honked at them or something else that is obnoxious but harmless.