syn0n

I don't think it's sad that at least some users on this forum aren't insane enough to peg the driver as an attempted murderer simply because he almost hit a guy on a bike, and then applaud the they who shot him as a hero. Look at the thread in the commuter board; it's disgusting.

I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that someone who shoots people and flees the scene is a criminal at all. For those of us who don't live in a complete state of paranoia and fear of the police, even shooting a person should be nothing to worry about if it was, in fact, legitimate self defense.
He's WANTED by the police as it is. Self defense statutues typically distinguish between deadly physical force and physical force, and this is important because typically you're supposed to use "reasonable force". Now, many people on this forum have said that the vehicle is a weapon. I don't really care if it is or not; the guy wasn't in it when he was shot. Here's where you assume he threatens the cyclist with a tire iron or something. Even then, the guy shouldn't have necessarily opened fire. With the exception of Florida and Louisiana, all states have a "duty to retreat" as part of their self defense statutues. Out there on the street, the guy probably would have been found obligated to have done something other than open fire on the guy immediately.

But I don't really even care about that either. Why? Let's look at the facts:

* An incident occurs in which the cyclist falls, and the motorist stops to assist.
* The motorist is shot
* The cyclist leaves
* No witnesses describe an altercation.

So tell me how you get "motorist was attempting to finish what he started" from that? It's very clear how my postition fits the facts. All you've done is offer pretty much insane conjecture based on personal, and incredibly biased perceptions of motorists and the police, as well as entirely unrelated news stories. My theory is pretty much based on the way law works, and a basic understanding of human behavior. The innocent don't typically do not evade the law. This cyclist shot a guy, left the scene, and is still evading the police.

If I have a reading comprehension problem, then you have a reality comprehension problem.

aydo

it was a noob gangster who has been riding on the sidewalk their whole life and first time ever riding the road they were feelin awesome, until they got cut off and it was the single most terrifying experience in their life...

maybe playing too much GTAsanandreas n ****.

bmclaughlin807

Right. And the story told by three teenage punk riding in one of their daddy's brand new SUV's was that the cyclist (me) came up and kicked the side of their truck while they were waiting at a red light minding their own business.

That story was enough to get the DA to drop assault charges on all three kids. Well, why not? There were three witnesses to that story, and only myself to tell of how they came up behind me and blasted their horn, revved their engine, then accelerated along side, threw a bottle out the window, then the driver attempted to force me off the road.

Never mind that all three 'witnesses' to their version were all inside the truck and were all being charged with various degrees of assault and/or vehicular assault.

I had multiple independent witnesses to the assault that followed. But that didn't matter. I 'caused' the assault by kicking the side of their truck. After all, what reason would they have to lie?


I think there's most likely a lot more to this story than is being told by the motorist... but we'll probably never hear about it. Even if they DO find the cyclist, what paper or news channel would truly be interested in it? I mean, hell... a cyclist shoots a motorist! That's NEWS! But another motorist trying to force a cyclist off the road or something? Meh... that doesn't even make the police logs.

As far as this particular story... I'd have to say there's not enough information for anyone to make any judgements... Just because the bicyclist hasn't turned himself in doesn't mean that at the time he wouldn't have been justified... he could just be scared... if there's no witnesses to what happened, who do you thing the police are going to believe? I can pretty much guarantee it's NOT the cyclist.

Then again... it could have been some wanna be gangster on a bmx bike that might have shot the driver because he looked at him cross eyed. Maybe his pants sagged too low and got caught in the chain, and that's the REAL reason he fell... and he just shot the guy because he laughed.

CB HI

So why don't you or syn0n give us the exact quote and link to the law. You are both sure it exist but neither of you can find it.

It appears you guys make as many assumptions on the law as you do with what actually happened between the motorist and cyclist.

You sound as bad as the JAMs that yell "get on the sidewalk" because they THINK that is the law.

dedhed

+1

11th & Burnham, 10:45 PM. Most likely a gang banger who stole the bike - and the pistol for that matter. Probably riding the wrong way too - without a helmet, or lights, not very VC. Don't think I'll blame the motorist for this one.

Dchiefransom

You are assuming the motorist stopped and got out to assist the cyclist. The cyclist might have thought that the motorist put him on the ground on purpose, and was getting out to finish it. Why would he then disappear? Because today's version of "reasonable person" seems to be someone that curls into a fetal position and whimpers when confronted by a criminal in any way, shape, or form, and the guy on the bike could very well fear going to prison for what he sees as defending himself.