Road rage shooting - both drivers claim self-defense

Bartholomew Roberts said:
Any ideas on how to keep the advantage without getting all the disadvantage?
Click to expand...

Drive away.

Back off and get away from someone who "brake checks" you.

Don't brake check people.

Control your temper?

Don't carry a gun if you can't control your temper.

Take anger management training if you can't control your temper.

There is simply no excuse for "opting-in" to a violent confrontation. Violence is for when we can no longer opt-out.
 
Ads w/o dis

I think the number thing I see is the vehicle of choice for 21 yo male, not that I think all should drive suburban's but having a vehicle with a real bumper capable of taking that hit would help. Second, always leave yourself an escape route, distance equals time. Third, treat your gun like a uchigatana, only remove it from it's scabbbard if you really mean to use it ie: willing to kill, it not for show or threatening.
 
Peetzakilla -

Drive away.

Back off and get away from someone who "brake checks" you.

Don't brake check people.

Control your temper?

Don't carry a gun if you can't control your temper.

Take anger management training if you can't control your temper.

There is simply no excuse for "opting-in" to a violent confrontation. Violence is for when we can no longer opt-out.
Click to expand...


Bingo! Idiots with guns, it rarely ends well.
 
I thought this incident was interesting because from a legal perspective (see Chapter 9 of the Texas Penal Code regarding self-defense, both men felt they were justified in claiming self-defense but neither one has a strong case for it.
Click to expand...
put it in bold and underlined it but that is a word for word quote from the first post in this thread. Am I missing something kn the meaning of what you wrote? Wasn't one of the men in the altercation killed? How is it that now you say he is claiming self defense, I mean you did say both men felt justified in claiming self defense. I just don't get it.

As for the shooting, it is, in all likelihood murder or at least man slaughter. The guy who was killed did have a gun out but apparently put it away and got back into his car. The incident was over except that the guy in the pick up then escalated it and attacked twice with deadly force, once with his vehicle and then again with his gun. Then again, if Mr. David still had his gun exposed when he got back in the car and was still pointing it at the driver of the PU truck, well that could make a lot of difference and it could be found to have been a justifiable homicide. My bet though is that the sympathy vote goes to the dead guy who was a wanna be SWAT member (then again that could sway a Grand Jury in favor of the other guy).

The dead guy's family may try to say he was acting in self defense against the guy in the pick up so that they can claim any insurance but the dead man himself - well he is not about to claim anything and you have no way of knowing what he would have claimed had he not been shot.

All the best,
GB
 
Last edited:
"Would either Driver have been better off just staying in the vehicle in the first confrontation?"

It seems like they both would have been better off just staying in bed that morning.


Clearly, the whole story isn't in writing yet. But it's obvious they both entered a stupid contest, and the guy in the truck won.

*EDIT*
Also, they both forfeited the right to claim self-defense when they got out of their cars to yell at each other. At that point, they both became aggressors.
 
Last edited:
Don't carry a gun if you can't control your temper.
Click to expand...

People should take this to heart. If carrying a gun makes you feel tougher and more willing to engage in a confrontation, you really shouldn't carry, in fact you should probably sell your guns.

Guns aren't for everybody, if you have a short fuse, don't put youself in a bad situation.

These guys may have been average joes.
 
Well, it certainly looks like both drivers A&B are going to be spending a lot of time "separated" from loved ones NOW.

I feel really special. My vehicle must be THE ONLY ONE IN THE WORLD
with
-cushy, soft seats

-personal sound system

-climate control

It's the most comfortable environment I'll be in ALL DAY.
I feel sorry for the rest of you guys, you're all in SUCH A RUSH,
the interiors of your cars must SUCK, you're all in such a hurry to get to
point B.:confused:
 
Totally avoidable.

Other than one driver tapping his brakes the rest is all defenseless. For tapping your breaks, when has that been illegal? I personally would have slowed and let the guy pass. Wave him on politely. He if is having that bad of a day, why escalate the situation? Now, if I could only get my girlfriend to do that, we would be safe. Of course she does not have a PTC to lose if things go south.
 
I think the number thing I see is the vehicle of choice for 21 yo male, not that I think all should drive suburban's but having a vehicle with a real bumper capable of taking that hit would help.
Click to expand...

Yeah, because car choice has so much to do with this scenario. I've never had to worry about anything remotely as dangerous as this scenario in my Mustang, why? I don't know, I've never pulled a gun on anyone for passing me before for starters, I'm sure that has a lot to do with it.

You could insert any 2 vehicles of your choosing in this scenario and it still ends up with one getting killed because neither knew how to grow up.
 
I suspect that the shooter will be indicted and claim self defense at his trial. It'll be interesting to see how his lawyer tells the story and makes the pitch for justification. But from little information we have, it looks like a mutual fight to me; and that would torpedoe any self defense plea.
 
Peetzakiller said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy88Fingers
it's obvious they both entered a stupid contest, and the guy in the truck won.
Click to expand...
I'd wager that by the time this plays out he will not likely feel like he won anything.
Click to expand...

I think you misread. He didn’t win a contest that was stupid. He won the contest of being the most stupid. ;)

At least that’s the way I read it.

I think the driver of the Mustang was within his rights in “brake checking” or whatever you call it when he was tapping the brakes. That’s pretty much a universal signal for, “hey, I’m not comfortable with you following that close.” Getting out with a gun wasn’t too bright, but Mr Pickup had already been demonstrating aggression by tailgating and approaching Mr Mustang when they were stopped.
 
Last edited:
The shooter is screwed. No grand jury is going to buy a self defense claim. I wouldn't. I wonder if the idiot thinks his pride was worth a good 10-20 years (or worse) in prison?
 
Anytime you decide to get out of your car to confront someone, no matter how big of an idiot he's being, you just stepped into some bad doodoo. You have a much better tactical advantage of being inside of a vehicle. You can choose to drive off in any direction, or you can decide to take cover inside of your vehicle if you are being fired upon. By leaving your vehicle in this type of situation, you are giving up your tactical advantage, giving up your ability to drive away, and giving up a pretty solid legal defense if you are forced to use your firearm.
 
I think the driver of the Mustang was within his rights in “brake checking” or whatever you call it when he was tapping the brakes.
Click to expand...

I hate tailgaters as much as the next guy, but there's absolutely no "right" to brake check. It can cause serious or even fatal accidents, or as in this case, serve to further escalate road rage.
 
I don't have any problem tailgateing slow-pokes who ride in the left on the highway. But, I also don't mind getting brake-checked either - comes with the territory. I admit, when I'm on the road for 8 hours straight, I'm looking to do a hair under 80mph and make time, and it is anoying when slow-pokes who are jut a bump-bump'n along get in my way.

But, if I got mad at every idiot on the road, or everyone who brake-checked me for tailgating them I wouldn't be long for this world.
 
Tailgating and brake checking are BOTH bad joo-joo.

There is no need for either and there are universally acceptable ways of signaling other drivers to avoid doing such.


Don't tailgate. Flash your headlights from a reasonable distance. MOST people will move over. If they don't, tailgating them will just make them angry, or they're oblivious and it will just make YOU angry. Don't make people angry. Slow down and wait for an opportunity to pass them.

If someone tailgates you on the highway, get out of the way if you can (getting out of the way BEFORE they tailgate you is better), speed up if it's safe to do so and move over OR SLOW DOWN (slowly, without braking) if it's safe to do so and move over. Don't brake check people. It's not safe and it's illegal.
 
not really

I don't see anything to be confused about ... The shooter initiated the confrontation.. Then he used his truck to attack possibly with the intent to kill.. At any point he could have left.. Then he gets out and shoots the guy.. Whether the victim had any weapon at all seems to be a moot point.. All I see is the shooter murdered him in a road rage.
 
We were talking about this yesterday and it certainly isn't good evidence for the upcoming campus carry debate in Texas. Young folks, CJ - in school, with guns and a total lack of emotional control and smarts.

After the Naples guy!

Geez.
 
Glenn E Meyer said:
Young folks, CJ - in school, with guns and a total lack of emotional control and smarts.
Click to expand...

Is there a general consensus in your discussions that the young person is largely at fault here? I'm curious because it seems to me like age is a moot point, being that it appears, from what information we have, that two people both acted equally stupidly... one being 21, the other 40-something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top