Originally Posted by
lil brown bat
Who said anything about an accident? People end up in grid-locked traffic all the time. They don't know why. It could be an accident, but it probably isn't, and in any case, they don't know. And it's really rare that you see them flipping out and ramming other cars. Cars get blocked by other cars all the time. A driver who loses it in those situations doesn't have people making all kinds of excuses for him/her. So how, again, is this different?
In the Seattle incident, no one did anything to this driver or his car until he started ramming people. So they got in his way -- they didn't threaten him or do anything to him. What exactly did he "panic" about? If I'm driving and a bunch of pedestrians cross in front of me, against the light, would it be understandable for me to say I "panicked" and start ramming them? Think about what you're saying here.
You expect pedestrians to cross in front of you. A car blocking an intersection because they didn't make the light sucks but you understand what is going on. It is non-threatening.
A group of strangers impeding your path in an unexpected way can easily be interpreted as "threatening" even they don't say a word or act in an overtly threatening manor.
In the fall on my way home, I have on several occasions encountered a group of teenagers playing football in the street. My expectation when I first saw them is that they would temporarily suspend their game, move to one side and allow me to pass. That's what I would have done when I was their age.
I learned quickly that while they might quit playing, they didn't intend to move out of the way. They acted as if they owned that street and weren't about to get out of the way for a cyclist. They let me pass but it was up to me to wind my way through them. Now if they had suddenly lined up across the street blocking my way, you can bet that I would have interpreted that as a threat.
Just because you know that CMers don't intend to hurt anyone, doesn't mean that everyone else does.