freeway motorcycle shutdown - SUV runs them over (graphic)

[Polokid69]

Also, these guys used a knife to spike these tires, how do we know they wouldn't have used same knife on the driver or his family ?

[WillK675]

... It has to be tied in with an objective state that involves some very specific parameters, such as the brandishing and use or threatened use of a deadly weapon with the intent of producing potentially lethal harm. ...

Those specific parameters were met... When they pull knives and start slashing your tires, They have brandished a deadly weapon, and shown intent to use. There is no way in hell, you can tell me, that once that is happened to you, you can seriously think to yourself "oh, it's only my vehicle, I'm going to be ok." Weapons have been shown, and your property is under attack, use of deadly force is fully justifiable, both morally, and legally.

Take the same scenerio, but move it to your home. A mob has sorrounded your home, are beating on your door and windows, threatening to break in, and they pull knives and start slashing the tires on the cars in the drive way, cutting up the patio furntiure, etc... NO different. I'm going to shoot the guy standing beating on my front door. Even though he's not the one with the brandishing a knife.

That character lives mostly in video games and in the minds of the paranoid.

Actually, there is a case of this right here in Texas. A guy got road rage, got out of his truck, walked up to the guy's car in front of him (that he was mad at) reached through the window, grabbed the buy by the collar with one hand, and started beating him with other. The guy getting beat shot him. And fully morally and justifiably so. The guy already showed intent to inflict bodily harm... to what extent? Who knows, but in this situation, what I'm I suspposed to do, take the beating until he pottentially beats me to death, or defend myself in the one way I can and shoot him?

That's the same thing with the "ass beating" the SUV driver took. He's ganged up on and getting beat, is it morally unjustified to use deadly force to stop it, just because it's a so called "fight." The ass beating was to the point of the guy needing stiches in his face. They could have easily beat him to the point of killing him. So how does that speak to the morals and justified use of force by the bikers?

And on that note... lets reverse the incident. An accident happened, a minor rear end collision. The driver of the SUV (at fault) stopped and pulled over, and showed no intent of "fleaing the scene of an accident" .... So now does thatm morally justify the bikers to start attacking the SUV? Not just no, but Hell no. Does them attacking his his vehicle morally justify him in using any means to escape the scene... YES.

[Polokid69]

Thats just it, I want to know where the morality is with the bikers smashing this guys windows in and yanking him out! Vigilantly justice is not the answer! Why didn't the bikers call 911 about this guy if he tapped one of them ? They had his plate and could have easily followed him and told Police where he was .

[DarcShadow]

Mob mentality. You think you're invensiable when you're in a mob. When else would you think it a good idea to stand in front of a vehicle on a highway and not expect to get hit.

[U-Turn]

The Weirding.

[Striple]

Those specific parameters were met... When they pull knives and start slashing your tires, They have brandished a deadly weapon, and shown intent to use. There is no way in hell, you can tell me, that once that is happened to you, you can seriously think to yourself "oh, it's only my vehicle, I'm going to be ok." Weapons have been shown, and your property is under attack, use of deadly force is fully justifiable, both morally, and legally.

I disagree. There is a significant difference between somebody kicking my car and slashing my tires, and myself being at risk of death. I don't care if its Crocodile Dundee out there with a big knife--unless he first breaches his way into the car (in which case the scenario changes), he does not pose a direct risk to my life. A gun, on the other hand, is a lethal threat to me regardless whether I am inside of the car or not, so those two are very different levels of threat.

Take the same scenerio, but move it to your home. A mob has sorrounded your home, are beating on your door and windows, threatening to break in, and they pull knives and start slashing the tires on the cars in the drive way, cutting up the patio furntiure, etc... NO different. I'm going to shoot the guy standing beating on my front door. Even though he's not the one with the brandishing a knife.

If I shot every asshole that was banging on my front door, then my driveway would be paved with the bodies of sales people and the occasional Jehovah's witness. Perhaps I'm not easily frightened, but unless the threat is crossing a very specific threshold, I have zero interest in killing people, just because there are some angry assholes outside. Again, once they actually break into my home and carry weapons, then the scenario changes.

Actually, there is a case of this right here in Texas. A guy got road rage, got out of his truck, walked up to the guy's car in front of him (that he was mad at) reached through the window, grabbed the buy by the collar with one hand, and started beating him with other. The guy getting beat shot him. And fully morally and justifiably so. The guy already showed intent to inflict bodily harm... to what extent? Who knows, but in this situation, what I'm I suspposed to do, take the beating until he pottentially beats me to death, or defend myself in the one way I can and shoot him?

So you're going to shoot anyone who punches you? How could that possibly be morally defensible? Have you ever been in a fight? Did you shoot the other guy?? I'm all for self-defense, but this is insane.

That's the same thing with the "ass beating" the SUV driver took. He's ganged up on and getting beat, is it morally unjustified to use deadly force to stop it, just because it's a so called "fight." The ass beating was to the point of the guy needing stiches in his face. They could have easily beat him to the point of killing him. So how does that speak to the morals and justified use of force by the bikers?

The ass-beating that the SUV driver took was clearly immoral, even though karma dictated that one. Continuing to hit or kick a person once they are out is obviously wrong, and those guys deserve to be punished accordingly. Not to mention, the fact that multiple people are beating a single individual is a cowardly act, to say the least. The only thing that I disagree with in this part is this continued idea of the driver being at risk of dying, simply because he "needed stitches in his face."

And on that note... lets reverse the incident. An accident happened, a minor rear end collision. The driver of the SUV (at fault) stopped and pulled over, and showed no intent of "fleaing the scene of an accident" .... So now does thatm morally justify the bikers to start attacking the SUV? Not just no, but Hell no.

Agreed.

Does them attacking his his vehicle morally justify him in using any means to escape the scene... YES.

This is where I disagree, and strongly so. While it is morally justifiable to remove yourself from the scene, it is not defensible to do so at the cost of potentially fatally injuring another person, unless you need to do so in order to save your own life. In this case, the SUV driver panicked, and then made the poor decision of running over the bikes and people in front of him, paralyzing one of the guys, and he should be punished for that.

[nitzer]

Frankly if someone slashes my tires, I would take that as a threat especially because they did it while I was moving. Slashing my tires while moving could cause my vehicle to lose control and crash. Trying to make me crash is a threat. Even if they were just trying to disable my vehicle, why disable a vehicle that is moving? To get it to stop. Why would they want me to stop I would ask myself? Stopping would leave me surrounded by a mob of bikers that could harm me. That would be my logical thought process. Car windows won't protect you. Keeping moving was the only defense the guy in the SUV had to avoid the threat. Only he knows how threatened he was. You are right that the "threat" level is a perception. Just because no charges are pending on the SUV driver at the moment does not mean he will not be charged. The statute of limitations is probably 7 years. The state could be gathering evidence to charge him too. If they don't get enough evidence, they won't charge him since they won't win. They may want to press charges and can't due to lack of evidence. If evidence of wrong doing is brought to light in the trial of the bikers/cops being charged the implicates that the SUV was in the wrong, the state can still bring charges against the SUV driver.

Why were they slashing his tires to begin with before he ran over the biker that brake checked him?

[DemonDuck]

Take the car and gun out of this. Say the guy is highly trained. A combat vet or whatever. He gets out of the SUV while people are bashing his SUV and slashing tires and such. It would be reasonable to believe that he would be faced with fighting at least 10 guys from the video. In that case even with a bunch of training you don't have great chances and about the only way you might make it out would be to take people out of the fight as quick as possible and hope to make others not want to fight at all.

Say he does this and cripples a couple of guys with hand to hand combat techniques. Is he in the clear?

There are plenty of videos on YouTube of mob mentality that show exactly how far people go once they start. And many of those are started by winning a soccer championship.

Being a person in the profession that I have there are things I have seen that suggest that his life was in danger. I have seen a people die from a beating from 5-10 other guys. We use to have the helicopter land at least once a month for this type of stuff but not all died. One I know of learned to talk again after a year or so. Anyway that is what happens if 10 guys jump you and you don't have other people step in to stop it. This guy would have gotten no help on the interstate like he did on the city road stopped in traffic. People even stopped the bikers from dragging his wife out of the SUV. Without that help all of their lives are in danger.

I can take death if I'm alone. With the family I can not because after they are done with me there is nothing protecting the wife and kids. I will kill anyone that is going to hurt the ones I love. Hell I would kill and die for someone else's kids before I would allow them to come to harm.

[El Diabro]

What you just said. As a father I have my child in the car to think about...I'd rather be judged by twelve than me and my son carried by six.

[nitzer]

[LonestarCBR]

This is why I choose to ride with people that aren't freaking idiots!!!

Can you hook me up with a link on how to contact them?