Maelochs

@sirkaos: read the article.

"Deputies say the father and son began yelling at the truck before it turned around and two men, later identified as Antonio and Jose Sanchez-Echague, got out of the truck with a knife and a bat.

"It is unclear in the complaint which brother was armed with which weapon.

"Michael Gallegos told deputies he began to fight with the man armed with a knife and could feel “the knife piercing his side” and “blood running down the side of his body.”" (emphasis added)

If I see a truck that nearly hit me stop, and two armed men get out ... I am on a bicycle and i will leave the scene at 25 mph or so. I will salmon along the edge of the road so the driver cannot follow me in his vehicle. I will cut across traffiic, disappear down a couple side roads, and call the police.

I will not "begin to fight with the man" whether he is armed or not.

If the truck had time to turn around, and then come to a stop, the father and son had time to leave the scene.

Likely they expected a shouting match, and they got a lot more than they had expected.

Road Rage can affect the transgressor and the victim---and in either case, irrational decisions can be made and irrational actions can be taken.

I am not "blaming" the victim. That is a rhetorical trope dishonest people use to 'win" arguments. I instead,try to honestly discuss things.

In this case, it does seem that the father and son Opted for a confrontation they could have fled. Do I "blame" them for getting brutally beaten and stabbed? No, I blame the people who did that.

I do, however, note that in most cases people have a lot more options than standing there waiting for a pair of armed men to walk back from their truck. Shoot, if I had been walking I would have run. If had been riding, I would have ridden away.

Another dishonest bit: You describe these people as "poor, innocent" grown adults, implying that the people here who don't agree with you are saying that the two brothers were right to attack the father and son, because they were verbally assaulted..

That is a lie you made up to try to "win" an argument which is all in your head. Nobody said or implied anything like that.

So ... while you prattle on about "Compassion and Good manners" you also lie blatantly to win a fight on the internet.

There is no "winning" and "losing" versus one another here. We either comport ourselves well, with honesty and compassion and tolerance ... or we make up lies about what other people said. I only compete against my own baser nature here. That is all any of us do.

I think you might want to think about some stuff. But as i say ... your mileage is guaranteed to vary.

Paul Barnard

Why would we express sympathies or compassion when those affected will likely never read our words? I understand that sometimes it helps us to express our own emotions, but that isn't why this sub forum was created.

Maelochs

LOL at that. The internet is for porn, primarily, and second, is a place for people to rant ... excuse me, "to express their own emotions" generally in the most caustic and offensive way possible.

As far as the sense and logic portion of it goes, I 100 percent agree. If a person is moved to wish well of a random person who will never know, no harm done ... but no reason to either, and certainly no need .... it doesn't prove we are cold-hearted.

That was just another cheap debating trick that poster whipped out to try to insult everyone who didn't agree with him---you know, the kind of stuff the internet was made for.

Clyde1820

And people's concerns and feelings shouldn't be assumed.



True, it's impossible to know full details of any situation, strictly from the short list of details presented by any given news report.

Irrespective of that, we can all learn something from using it as the basis of a scenario for discussion. A what-if, using the sparse details as a launching point. About all one can do, really, in a discussion where the goal is to learn something.

Myosmith

No good comes from arguing with ***holes. You aren't going to convince them of the error of their ways. Far more likely is that they will become even more aggressive toward cyclists up to and including the physical assault that occurred. No, you don't have to give them a friendly wave but remaining emotionally stoic and not escalating the situation is a sign of control and maturity. Getting a description and license plate number to report to the local LEOs is good advice. Defend yourself if you must, but know the difference between self defense and escalation or retaliation.

Rollfast

3 pages of arguing of an assault with a deadly weapon case and about the only good advice was not to holler about it and report it.

Still, how do you know the full set of circumstances behind the attack?

And you can't do much about it but curse the attackers.

One comment said that we couldn't do much about it, and that is true.

jemiller31

Some very fine people on both sides kind of argument again?

CAT7RDR

Discretion is the better part of valor.

Cuyuna

Being a victim does not automatically absolve you of your role in the events that caused you to be a victim.

jemiller31

So that's a hard "yes" to my original question.

JoeyBike

Playing X-Box at home instead of getting in people's way and angering them on the highway maybe?

Cuyuna

No...keeping your mouth shut when a stranger or strangers with unknown temperament and unknown armament, driving a vehicle that out-masses you and your bicycle by several thousand pounds.

Cuyuna

The "victims" are responsible for their own safety. Yeah, they played a role in causing their own assault. Tragic, but avoidable had they just kept their fingers to themselves.

hotbike

Maelochs

I think we all know pretty much what happened here.

A stupid pair in a pick-up deliberately or accidentally buzzed two cyclists. The cyclists responded with gestures and profanity. The driver stopped and the two brothers got out.

The cyclists stopped and got off their bikes.

At this point everyone's macho glands were activated. The cyclists had anger plus the adrenaline of fear from the near miss---and fear turns quickly to anger, so they were Really pissed. The two brothers weren't going to be out-machoed by some guys in tights.

The cyclists probably expected a shouting match. The guys in the truck came out heavily armed. I don't know why the two cyclists didn't run at that point, but pretty sure it was adrenaline and testosterone.

Bad stuff ... two brothers, pretty much guaranteed to have been competing all their lives, neither is going to ease up in front of the other. Father and son, multiple levels of reaction--including parent protecting child, and of course, that macho thing.

None of us know exactly how it all went down or what any of the actors were thinking ... but most of us have been alive long enough, and are honest enough, to relate this story to other stories we have heard, seen, or starred in.

The funny part is ... people who weren't there to take part in the fight, are coming here to fight.

Anyway ... everyone lived, and maybe, everyone will learn.

Cuyuna

Yes, a good assumption. However, if they miss you the first time, it would be illogical to yell at them and wave one finger or another thereby incenting them to turn around and take another crack at you.

italktocats

see, carry a gun it works!

Clyde1820

Viewed another way: by playing the "retaliation" card, a person is essentially tossing out the claim that "he was trying to kill me" (injure me, threaten me, whatever), by virtue of commission of such violence upon a person. Pretty much seals the fact that a person who claims legitimate legal fear of crippling injury or loss of life is manifestly NOT in such fear, if that person deliberately goes after the person. One is very likely to have charges of A&B and destruction of property leveled, and very likely to have no reasonable chance at proving otherwise.

Far better to just slow down around others, provide advanced warning at a greater distance, be cautious, and not be a retaliatory sort (for all the obvious reasons). Far safer, all the way around.

italktocats

its even better to not leave the house at all, far safer!

italktocats

what about raping women wearing short skirts, same logic?

oh okay....

JoeyBike

Not sure how you made this connection with close passes on a bicycle. I miss something?

italktocats

just checking in how you use that mentality in every day life

JoeyBike

You mean accepting responsibility for risks taken? Or getting angry and acting out when something happens that I KNEW would happen before i started the activity? If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen. If you are offended by close passes by automobiles, take up tennis or golf.

OBoile

Not nearly as well as just keeping your mouth shut.

Clyde1820

True. But that's apples and oranges, as a comparison.

Deliberate retaliatory actions (or words) beget their own reactions, often. And legally speaking that sets one up for a very difficult row to hoe, if attempting to claim non-participation as a mutual combatant from the outset. Merely heading outside one's home is something else entirely, of course.