Charges considered against driver in bicyclist's shooting in Taylor, MI

[Hotdoger]

You cant just shoot everyone who hits you.

Why not?

 

[Gun Bunny]

While I certainly don't condone the actions taken by the cyclist, I do believe that people make decisions (usually bad ones) based on emotion without thinking things through. Are you implying that everytime someone gets in a fist fight, a gun can and should be used for defense? If that is the case, that sounds more like an argument from the antis. "People escalate arguments and resort to guns over simple matters if they are allowed to carry them." Back in the day you just fought it out and call it a day, not anymore I suppose.

Don't put words in my mouth!

I am talking about people who lose control, open car or houses doors and just start beating someone! What you are trying to say that I am implying is very different! You just can't go around hitting people just because you can't handle yourself!

I would try to leave, but if I couldn't because someone got mad over a fender bender, opened my door and started hitting me, well, they will not hit anyone again! I will protect myself with all means possible!

Let me ask you this, in your post you seem to imply that the motorist lost his control so he shot, is that correct?
" I do believe that people make decisions (usually bad ones) based on emotion without thinking things through."

 

[femurphy77]

I have no trouble whatsoever unleashing lead on someone that is in the process of doing me bodily harm.

So, everyone that disagrees with that is somehow sure they can overcome any aggressor at any time? I do not fight anymore, if you wish to fight I may just choose to shoot your dumb ass, because I am to tired to have my ass kicked while I am sitting in my car, or anywhere else for that matter.

I'm with BK on this one! I had an opportunity to incur the wrath of some drunk butthole in a bar one night, seems I resembled somebody that owed him money (poor bastard). I told him that he was mistaken, I wasn't in the mood and asked if he was prepared to risk dying over $20? We both went home that night! (Even drunks are capable of at least a little rational thought)

 

[Hoosier8]

I think the driver is in trouble on this one. Of course we only know a snippet of the story but one on one, both about the same age, probably did not know each other so the driver needed to do whatever possible to avoid shooting him. We don't know the size difference but let's just assume they are similar. If he could get to his gun he could have moved the car or rolled up the window. Even in a case like this, pepper spray would have been a better choice and it made me reassess the idea of carrying some.

It does not look good in court if you could have avoided it somehow and in this case, people will be asking that. For instance, if it were two against one, or the guy hitting him was known to the driver to be dangerous of possessed some deadly skill, or had a weapon on him and the ability to use it, he would have a much better chance of not being charged.

The guy was released but is still under investigation and if charged, it will be up to a plea deal or jury. One is accepting blame and with the other, you never know what will happen.

 

[pack-indy]

Let me ask you this, in your post you seem to imply that the motorist lost his control so he shot, is that correct?
" I do believe that people make decisions (usually bad ones) based on emotion without thinking things through."

Nope, I was referring to the dead guy.

 

[daddymikey1975]

I think the driver is in trouble on this one. Of course we only know a snippet of the story but one on one, both about the same age, probably did not know each other so the driver needed to do whatever possible to avoid shooting him. We don't know the size difference but let's just assume they are similar. If he could get to his gun he could have moved the car or rolled up the window. Even in a case like this, pepper spray would have been a better choice and it made me reassess the idea of carrying some.

It does not look good in court if you could have avoided it somehow and in this case, people will be asking that. For instance, if it were two against one, or the guy hitting him was known to the driver to be dangerous of possessed some deadly skill, or had a weapon on him and the ability to use it, he would have a much better chance of not being charged.

The guy was released but is still under investigation and if charged, it will be up to a plea deal or jury. One is accepting blame and with the other, you never know what will happen.

Does the 'reasonable man' perspective still apply? I'm sure (given ALL of the circumstances, which we aren't privy to) the right thing will be done.

 

[Steeler]

I'm somewhat suprised at how many here would shoot another for swinging on them. I realize you have the right to defend yourself but I believe we would quickly lose our right to carry if we start shooting at every fistfight. (not that this applies in this case)

 

[Bunnykid68]

Why not?

I am with you.

Read my sig line. I really feel that way about my property, how do you think I am going to feel about protecting myself?

 

[Bunnykid68]

I'm somewhat suprised at how many here would shoot another for swinging on them. I realize you have the right to defend yourself but I believe we would quickly lose our right to carry if we start shooting at every fistfight. (not that this applies in this case)

I think you are missing the point. I have not had a fist fight in over 24 years, if you wish to fight/attack me I will shoot you to defend myself.

I am not 25 years old anymore, I am not Bruce Lee, and I am not an MMA fighter. I am going to fight back any way needed to stop you from attacking me, its just that simple.

 

[Steeler]

I think you are missing the point. I have not had a fist fight in over 24 years, if you wish to fight/attack me I will shoot you to defend myself.

I am not 25 years old anymore, I am not Bruce Lee, and I am not an MMA fighter. I am going to fight back any way needed to stop you from attacking me, its just that simple.

I don't plan on fighting either. I will do my best to diffuse the situation, heck I may even run away from some punk with an attitude. I just dont want to take the life of some jackass who is feeling spunky.
That being said, I believe as handgun carriers we forfeit ourselves from getting involved in fights. You just can't risk rolling around with someone and your firearm falling out.
I hope I never find myself in the situation though.

 

[daddymikey1975]

I'm somewhat suprised at how many here would shoot another for swinging on them. I realize you have the right to defend yourself but I believe we would quickly lose our right to carry if we start shooting at every fistfight. (not that this applies in this case)

Taking a poke at me is one thing. Pummeling me while I'm still seat belted in my own car is another. I promise if you're pummeling me, and I can draw, the situation will neutralize. (not you specifically, just a generalization).

 

[griffin]

I think the driver is in trouble on this one....If he could get to his gun he could have moved the car or rolled up the window.

Really?

After the cyclist ran into the vehicle, the driver stopped the car and put it in park with the intent to check on the cyclist and make sure he wasn't injured. In a mad rage, the cyclist ran around the car and began pummeling the driver, hitting him seven or eight times in quick succession as reported by witnesses. The driver leaned back toward the passenger side as far as he could to escape the blows, but he was restrained by his seat belt. He was pressing on the gas pedal to get away, but of course the truck was in park, and he couldn't move back into position to roll up the window or put it in gear without putting his head/neck/body closer to his attacker. The cyclist was coming after him through the driver's side door.

Not much he could do at that point.

So tell me how the driver is in trouble and how he could have simply rolled up his window and drove away.

 

[Steeler]

Taking a poke at me is one thing. Pummeling me while I'm still seat belted in my own car is another. I promise if you're pummeling me, and I can draw, the situation will neutralize. (not you specifically, just a generalization).

Not disagreeing with that, if I'm getting pummeled then I'm shootin!

 

[Captain Morgan]

Really?

After the cyclist ran into the vehicle, the driver stopped the car and put it in park with the intent to check on the cyclist and make sure he wasn't injured. In a mad rage, the cyclist ran around the car and began pummeling the driver, hitting him seven or eight times in quick succession as reported by witnesses. The driver leaned back toward the passenger side as far as he could to escape the blows, but he was restrained by his seat belt. He was pressing on the gas pedal to get away, but of course the truck was in park, and he couldn't move back into position to roll up the window or put it in gear without putting his head/neck/body closer to his attacker. The cyclist was coming after him through the driver's side door.

Not much he could do at that point.

So tell me how the driver is in trouble and how he could have simply rolled up his window and drove away.

We must not have read the same article, because the linked article didn't say anything about number of punches, the driver trying to step on the gas pedal, leaning toward the passenger side, truck in park, etc. If all of that is true, then yes, shooting the attacker may have been the only option. However, I didn't read any of that in the article that was linked.

 

[griffin]

There are many articles on this incident. It's like the Trayvon Martin shooting. You can't believe just one article has all the info, especially the first one. Here, you can listen to an interview of his attorney where he talks about some of these things.

Audio On Demand « CBS Detroit

article didn't say anything about number of punches

"The pedestrian light was red. He wasn't supposed to be crossing and ran into the side of the truck," said witness Michelle Noffsinger. "He jumped up, he got up, and he ran around the front of the truck to the driver's side and he just started pounding on this guy. He hit him ... maybe seven times or so."

http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/...gery/-/1719418/16418434/-/gped3u/-/index.html

 

[Stang51d]

It's just as well it happened like it did, he would have got ran over by a Peterbilt sooner or later anyway.

 

[actaeon277]

I'm somewhat suprised at how many here would shoot another for swinging on them. I realize you have the right to defend yourself but I believe we would quickly lose our right to carry if we start shooting at every fistfight. (not that this applies in this case)

There's a difference between a fight, and being pummeled.
I can't find the page, but somewhere here on INGO I saw a page quoting the CDC on causes of death.
Annual deaths due to rifles were something like 300+.
Annual deaths due to being beaten to death was 700+.

 

[actaeon277]

Well, this isn't a source document. But it's an article.
MILLER: Dispelling gun myths - Washington Times

"The most recent FBI figures show just 358 of the 8,775 murders by firearm in 2010 involved rifles of any type. By comparison, 745 people were beaten to death with only hands that year, but no one has called for outlawing fists."

I'm not saying to shoot at the drop of the hat.
But, I wasn't there.
So I don't know if he received a punch.
Or was beaten so bad he feared for his life.

 

[griffin]

I'm somewhat suprised at how many here would shoot another for swinging on them. I realize you have the right to defend yourself but I believe we would quickly lose our right to carry if we start shooting at every fistfight.

The law does not require me to engage in a fistfight if I have to defend myself.

 

[daddymikey1975]

The law does not require me to engage in a fistfight if I have to defend myself.

^ This

In fact, I believe (IIRC) by engaging in the fight, you must retreat before using deadly force (or announce the retreat, or surrender or something like that).. (someone correct me if I'm wrong)