Teen jailed in road rage incident.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
My only question is whether or not the man actually hit the kid with his car.

The teen might be lying and getting his father to support him. The man might have followed the kid home and screamed abuse at him, pissing off the kid enough to hit him. In that case, the kid is probably guilty of some degree of involuntary manslaughter.

[Wernazuma III]

Read that after posting, but counts for the others. .

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by Wernazuma III
Quoting Frankychan: "The man got what he deserved." You're basing your opinion on the events and whether that constituted self-defence on basically a thin story that may as well been made partially up by the teen and his family to protect him.


I think it somehow stinks a bit that the teen was hit, landed on his feet with no injuries, walks up to the car where the offender just awaits the teen coming and opens the window for him in order to get beaten to death.
Maybe the teen was a total jackass, the man decided to drive after him, disputing, the teen stopped the car, the man didn't completely break so hit him a bit. Then the teen got to the car killed the man in a fury.
Then again, maybe it was exactly as written in the story, but you're all so sure that this was pure self-defence and that basically the man got what he deserved. You seemingly don't care about the adequacy of means. Should it be taken into account that he was hit by the car before, or tried to be run over? Well, of course, but that doesn't entitle you to do with the offender what you want.


I have noticed that on Internet boards, people jump so easily to judgements based on single stories. There are so many versions of this story I could think of, but it all happened exactly as in that version. It must be true, it's in the newspaper...

I agree with you 100%. It kind of a boring stance though.

ACK!

[SlowwHand]

"I have noticed that on Internet boards, people jump so easily to judgements based on single stories. There are so many versions of this story I could think of, but it all happened exactly as in that version. It must be true, it's in the newspaper... "


As you saw by my response, being the level-headed one of the ACS family, I cited both possibilities of fault.
Damn, I'm so rational and intelligent it hurts, sometimes.
So....BYTE ME, DinoDoc.

[Immortal Wombat]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Horse****. He just hit you with his car intentionally. Fighting back is a reasonable response. Going inside is also a reasonable response. Once you put somebody in a situation where they are in reasonable fear of their life, it's up to them to decide which of these two reasonable responses they'll employ. The guy was still in his car. He remained a threat. Walking away might not have appeared the safest thing to do, as he was obviously a homicidal maniac.

Horse**** right back. The guy was still in his car and therefore not a threat. I would love to see the car that can outmanouver a 17 year old football player from a standing start. Especially one 20 yards from his own - open - front door.

[Guynemer]

Is DinoDoc a DL of Self-Biased?

[Kaak]

The kid was 300 plus pounds. I'm pretty sure that it is obvious whether or not the car hit him.

[SlowwHand]

WOW. Issue at Nation States.

Road Rage Rampage
The Issue

Due to the ever-increasing traffic on Panman Land's highways, commuter tempers are flaring, leading to an increase in road rage related accidents. A recent case in which a very impatient driver attacked and seriously injured a slow driver has brought the subject rapidly to the highest levels of the government.

The Debate

"The problem is that our highway system is sorely in need of an overhaul. Panman Land's highways were constructed with a far smaller number of cars in mind- we've exceeded that traffic load by a substantial amount, resulting in traffic jams. Traffic jams lead to impatience, impatience leads to anger, anger leads to road rage, and road rage leads to violence." Claims social commentator Jazz Jong-Il. "We need to expand the freeway system by adding more lanes to relieve the traffic congestion."
[Accept]


"You add new lanes, even MORE people will drive, putting us right back at square one!" Counters George W. Jones of Panman Land's public transportation committee. "Instead of throwing tons of money at a short-term solution, why not spend it on improving bus and rail service and encouraging carpooling? Oh, and get more highway patrol officers to crack down on these violent drivers who pose safety threats to the rest of us."

This is the position your government is preparing to adopt.


"*BLEEP!* that *BLEEP!*" Zeke Bush yells at the top of her lungs from the window of her very large pickup truck with a gun rack mounted in the rear window. "The government should just *BLEEP!*ing stay out of our daily *BLEEP!*ing drive! They ought to let us *BLEEP!*ing rushed businesspeople go about our daily *BLEEP!*ing business, no matter what *BLEEP!*ing measures we have to take to get to *BLEEP!*ing work on time!
[Accept]
The Government Position

The government has indicated its intention to follow the recommendations of Option 2.

[Imran Siddiqui]

So the guy was trying to kill the kid with his car, but the kid was able to get up and punch the guy from the driver side door? WTF? If the guy was trying to kill the kid and was in control of a car and ran into the kid, the kid isn't getting up... I don't care if he is 300 lbs.

Basically, voluntary manslaughter. The heat of passion. If the guy was backing up to try it again and the kid went and hit him, then maybe self defense. Otherwise, no.

[Urban Ranger]

Imran

[Mrs. Tuberski]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
So the guy was trying to kill the kid with his car, but the kid was able to get up and punch the guy from the driver side door? WTF? If the guy was trying to kill the kid and was in control of a car and ran into the kid, the kid isn't getting up... I don't care if he is 300 lbs.

Basically, voluntary manslaughter. The heat of passion. If the guy was backing up to try it again and the kid went and hit him, then maybe self defense. Otherwise, no.

See this is were i dont get this... The guy cleary hit this kid with his car, was he tryng to kill him prolly not was the old guy scared when the giant jumped out of the car prolly yes. The old guy was the one who followed this kid home he made no attempt to just let it go, there is no record of any damage to the old guys car till after he ran the kid down. i can guarantee had this old guy lived hed be in the cell next to the kid.

[SlowwHand]

Again, where is the root fault ?

[Mrs. Tuberski]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Again, where is the root fault ?

If you ask me the old man

[Boris Godunov]

Meh. The kid should get a meager sentence, if anything. If someone shot me, and was standing there pointing the gun at me with the likely possibility of shooting again, I'd be justified in taking the s.o.b. out. I don't see the difference here, providing the facts given in the article pan out.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Again, where is the root fault ?

That would be the ******* who followed someone home and then hit them with his car while they were walking. Unless you contend that cutting people off justifies such behavior.