Crazy crackhead video


PDA






Tall Man
October 14, 2004, 08:35 AM
Achtung, armchair warriors.

What follows is a link to a potentially real event. No need to speculate on what might have occurred, as you would with a news article. You will see what really occurred.

How would you have reacted?

http://members.shaw.ca/fivelitermustang/holdinitdown.wmv

Be advised: pervasive foul language throughout.

TM

P.S. - I did a search, and did not find this link previously posted in THR. My apologies if it was.

If you enjoyed reading about "Crazy crackhead video" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Sisco
October 14, 2004, 08:44 AM
Lacking CCW, I would've disabled him using the car itself.

hillbilly
October 14, 2004, 08:58 AM
Part of me says this looks very, very staged.

Why would he have a crowbar or a tire tool sitting there handy?

Why would someone be sitting in a car, very near the tire tool?

Why would there just happen to be a cameraman right there with the tire tool and the person in the car?

What movie is this part of?

hillbilly

Ktulu
October 14, 2004, 09:20 AM
I would probably drive away if I could. I would not have any problems using the sidewalk or whatever it took to get out of there, even ramming other cars. I can see a prosecutor asking why I shot this guy 5 times when I could have simply driven away. If I couldn't get away, I would shoot the guy until he stopped being a threat.

BTW: This could never happen to me, as I would not be caught dead in a PT Loser.

LiquidTension
October 14, 2004, 09:24 AM
I agree, looks staged.

If it were real, my 1911 would definitely have been drawn. If he broke a window that gave him access to my person with that tire iron, there'd be one less "banger" in the world. In any event, I wouldn't have let him out of my sight until the police arrived, and I'd try to get possession of the tape before the cops got there.

45 Carry
October 14, 2004, 09:27 AM
Kinda sounds like my wanna be stepson. How come people that talk like that keep asking "You know what I'm saying?" Are they ranting so that it's incomprehensible even to themself?

OF
October 14, 2004, 09:49 AM
Lets see: as he approached, my Springfield would be centering its front post on his chest. At the point that he hit the car with the iron, I would have commenced testing the intermediate glass barrier penetration performance of RA45TP. Repeatedly.

- Gabe

OF
October 14, 2004, 09:50 AM
Kinda sounds like my wanna be stepson.Sorry to hear that, knowwhatI'msayin'? ;)

Shoot, shovel and shut up. Some days, I just plain long for the mob to return.

- Gabe

Tall Man
October 14, 2004, 10:13 AM
Hillbilly - I concur that this event could have been staged. I don't know if it was, and I'm not aware if that particular video file is part of a larger file.

My educated guess here is that if the event is authentic, then perhaps a sociologist (or sociology student) was performing field research.

While I'm no fan of those garish PT Cruisers, I still cringed when the Diversity lit into it with that crowbar.

TM

Warbow
October 14, 2004, 10:22 AM
I think it's real.

It looks like something from BumFights (http://www.bumfights.com) (warning: very stupid site). These idiots go around finding stupid street people who do lots of stupid stuff, such as this, and then put all of their footage together and sell it.

OF
October 14, 2004, 10:26 AM
I still cringed when the Diversity lit into it with that crowbar.LOL! :D

- Gabe

Warbow
October 14, 2004, 10:27 AM
Also, would that have been a "good shoot?" It definitely would have put me in fear of sustaining grave bodily injury, but would the state see it that way? (I'm talking about reasonable states, not CA, NY, etc.)

foghornl
October 14, 2004, 10:33 AM
About the time Mr. Diversity got centered in the mirror would have been the proper moment to put tranny in "Race", and stomp pedal to the metal.

AKA "Alternate Crowbar Launch Method"

OF
October 14, 2004, 10:37 AM
Also, would that have been a "good shoot?" I'm betting you'd have a hard time finding a jury that would put you away for that one. Maybe I'm wrong. i don't think I'd have the self-restraint to wait until he got through a window and had access to the cabin. Nor do I think I should have to. I suppose escape via flooring it was a possible option, but in the video it looks like the driver wasn't able to execute that little maneuver with any success...

- Gabe

Mr. Mysterious
October 14, 2004, 10:44 AM
I think that it was staged, but the person in the PT Cruiser was an unsuspecting victim. The guy with the camera didn't have a run of the mill camcorder, judging from his shadow it was a professional model. I think that both the crack head and the camera man and whoever else was there are all as liable.

Shield529
October 14, 2004, 11:17 AM
I have looked into this a little and it appears it is real. This was done during a gang documentry and occured without prompting. I am not 100% sure but this is the info out there.
That said he would have absorbed 14 .40 Cal sabres before he hit the second window.

JamisJockey
October 14, 2004, 11:19 AM
I don't think it was a good shoot. That person could have tried to escape by driving over the sidewalk. Running the person over would have probably been justified during the esacape, though. Now, when the PT Loser gets high-centered on a curb and the attack continues, then its sight picture, sight alignment, all ready on the firing line...

DigMe
October 14, 2004, 11:27 AM
That's really infuriating. What a piece of crap. That has to be in one of the gun-unfriendly states...probably California. I don't think someone would be so brazen in broad daylight in a shall-issue state. I don't know maybe they would...


brad cook

buy guns
October 14, 2004, 11:27 AM
there were a couple opportunities for the PT to crush the guy between the PT and the car in front of or behind it. that is what i would have done because i cant carry yet. if i was carrying i like to hope i would shoot him.

no jury would convict you with the way he was yelling into the camera before hand.

meathammer
October 14, 2004, 11:46 AM
You would think the driver would've shown a little more urgency to escape. If it was staged, very stupid. What if a good samaritan got out of his vehicle and plugged "tire iron man"?

Watching this I was thinking the driver was going to get pulled out of his car and beat. Crazy.

When he was behind the vehicle, the car behind him should've pinned him to the bumper. I would. People don't help each other nowadays. That's really a shame.


--meathammer

American_Pit_Bull
October 14, 2004, 11:55 AM
Looking at the store fronts in the background; this seems to have taken place in Vegas.

45 Carry
October 14, 2004, 11:59 AM
The driver should have noticed the crazed nut and the camera long before the tire iron was picked up and as soon as the nut moved toward the car driven away. Should have done a 45 degree turn to the right and left the area driving foward or backed up. That sould have been done at least with the first hit on the fender. I wouldn't have considered at that point a deadly force situation since I could disengage from the scene. I sure would have liked to have done some gene pool cleaning however.

LynnMassGuy
October 14, 2004, 12:06 PM
What really disturbs me about that video is that could be my wife or sister in the car. I am certain I could handle that situation but what would they do? Human filth. It makes me nauseous. :fire:

TonyB
October 14, 2004, 12:14 PM
I WOULD'VE RAN THIS MORON OVER.

Zundfolge
October 14, 2004, 12:44 PM
Tire Iron = lethal weapon ... ergo good shoot

Judging by the position of the curb and the fact there was a car in front of it (and the PT Cruiser pulled both forward and back) escape wasn't possible ... at the point the crackhead puts his arms out to his sides and says "so [n-word] what you gonna do?" my response would have been two COM shots.

Then after the smoke clears, the guy with the camera gets to give me and my lawyer everything he owns for inciting this crackhead to attack me.



If this was shot in Vegas then its uberstupid since Nevada is a CCW state.


$10 says it was staged (and the guy in the PT Cruiser was in on it)

Powderman
October 14, 2004, 12:45 PM
There are some good replies here, lots of input, and some brainstorming, which is a good thing.

Now, as for me, I will make some assumptions:

1. The thing was staged.

2. There is a possibility that the victim in the car was NOT aware of what was going on.

If that was the case, then (at least in the State of Washington), taking into account:

The hood's demeanor,
His language,
His all too apparent willingness to do bodily harm if necessary,
The repeated attacks on the vehicle;

deadly force in this scenario would have definitely been authorized.

As far as what the person should have done as the victim, for all who are posting, please know this (and this is NOT a flame):

Until you have experienced an attack like that, by a person or people like that, you have NO idea how paralyzing the fear produced by the attack is.

What would I have done?

At the first strike, I would have drawn my pistol. At the second strike, I would have put rounds center mass until the goblin stopped or dropped.

If he had taken off like a rabbit at the sight of my pistol, I would have driven on, and notified the police at the first opportunity.

If he had initially broken off the attack, but returned, I would have engaged with no warning.

Zundfolge
October 14, 2004, 12:55 PM
Until you have experienced an attack like that, by a person or people like that, you have NO idea how paralyzing the fear produced by the attack is.
This is true. Several years ago a friend of mine and I where robbed at gunpoint ... we both stood there like chumps and just handed our money over (and my friend is 6' 4" and lifted weights 8+ hours a day when he wasn't working for his dad moving pianos and was mildly psychotic).

Having been through this kind of thing once (albeit not as intense) I doubt I will freeze again since the memory of the last encounter still haunts me (now whether I will act rashly or stupidly is yet to be seen :p but I will "not go gentle into that good night")

Pappy John
October 14, 2004, 12:55 PM
Idiot with the crowbar....definitely a good shoot. Only question would be, am I justified shooting the jackhole with the camera?

R.H. Lee
October 14, 2004, 01:16 PM
I don't think a crackhead pounding on your fender would justify lethal force. Now if the crackhead had busted a window and was about to dent the driver's head, lethal force would be justified. I can't say I would have exercised the restraint shown by the driver. I may have just run over the perp in my panicked attempt to escape.

middy
October 14, 2004, 01:21 PM
I don't agree with most of the posts on this thread.

I don't think it was staged.

I don't think the camera crew had any idea he was going to do something like that, they were just interviewing a "real live crack pusher". Stupid? Yes. Liable? Not at all.

I do agree that it would have been lawful to draw a firearm in this situation, and to shoot if he continued his threatening behavior.

Derek Zeanah
October 14, 2004, 01:26 PM
Looks like a good instance to bring a tazer to bear.

Thumper
October 14, 2004, 01:30 PM
I don't think it was staged either...

But lets say it was...you think the people in the surrounding vehicles were in on it, too?

45 Carry
October 14, 2004, 01:33 PM
About 15 years ago I was cut off by a guy in a cargo delivery truck, I was driving a Toyota Corrolla, on an entrance ramp. He cause me to drive over the curb and into the grass.
I flipped him off (after what transpired that made it the last time I flipped anyone off). He slowed down (to about 10 MPH on the interstate) so that I'd pass him. He then stayed about one inch from my bumper for about three miles 'til I got off the highway.
I stopped at the light at the end of the exit ramp and he exeted the truck with a tire iron wild eyed and screaming he was going to kill me. I ran the light which he couldn't do because of traffic. I made several quick turns and parked in St. Louis University's Hospital parking garage. I worked at the hospital.
I watched from the roof of the garage as he drove all over the area looking for me. He finally went to a new truck sales lot about two blocks away and parked. I asked a SLPD officer I saw outside the hospital about the incident and he said since I started it and no harm was done nothing would be done. (He was probably just getting off the midnight shift and wanted to go home)
I think the truck driver started it. I escalated it but he put me in fear of my life with the tire iron, which I felt was felony assault. What do you think. I'm glad no one got hurt.
I doubt if I was the last person that individual ever lost his temper with.

OF
October 14, 2004, 01:33 PM
You're all forgetting that even though the guy takes it right to the very threshold, it's pretty much intimidation and destruction of property.You're kidding...there were people in that car. Intimidation? What does he have to do before he would legally become a threat? Do you have any legal backup to suggest that this is nothing more than 'intimidation'? Is that even a legal term?I'm pretty sure that a DA would have a field day with an armed driver who shot through the glass, or who decided to turn Mr. Gang Banger into a hood ornament.I doubt it, but anything is possible. If the DA presed it, I can't see a jury convicting. I can however, see the DA losing his job after the poo-storm for him trying to throw a couple women in jail for defending themselves against a mad drug-crazed gang-banger.Better to have backed up, dismounted, drawn, and held it on COM and let the bitch make the next move. Odds are he would have backed off.I cannot disagree more. That advice would likely have gotten those people killed. DO NOT get out of the vehicle. 'Odds are that he would have backed off'? You can't be serious? The guy was putting himself between the parked cars and the moving car. If you tried to get out of that car he would be on you like white on rice. What possible tactical advantage could you gain by getting out of the car?

Please do not throw around crazy mall-ninja BS tactical pronouncements around here. There are people reading this board who just might be unschooled enough to take you seriously, thereby getting themselves very very hurt.

- Gabe

OF
October 14, 2004, 01:37 PM
What do you think.You should have gotten the license number and been on the phone to the cops when he ran you off the road. Flipping him (as good as I'm sure it felt at the time) is participating in the altercation. There was a thread similar to this recently here: the guy was looking for trouble. He tried you on for size to see if he could get some trouble going. You obliged. He got what he wanted: an altercation.

Do not participate in altercations. There are people out there who are just looking for people to mess with. Some of them are very dangerous.

License number, call the cops.

- Gabe

PS: If you knew where it was, you should have driven to the police station, not where you work. I believe that was a mistake.

45 Carry
October 14, 2004, 01:40 PM
New truck, no license plate. But I knew where the truck was.

OF
October 14, 2004, 01:50 PM
The farthest I think I would have pushed it would have been to tail the guy and be on the phone with the cops (assuming you had a cell) trying to describe the truck and our location.

Definitely not a good idea to take the guy to either your work or home, though. That's asking for more trouble later on, IMO.

- Gabe

SLCDave
October 14, 2004, 02:01 PM
FYI

They were on the Northwest corner of Sahara and Las Vegas Blvd in Las Vegas.

I think the cameraman and the thug were planning it, but I don't think the driver was in on it. My first reaction is that the driver should have pinned him against the vehicle in front of them when he walked in front of the vehicle. Failing that, a gun, if available to them, should have been presented to the thug to see if he was still intersted in keepin it real, youknowwhati'msayin? If he kept it up, he should have gotten all the ammo available to the driver.

adi
October 14, 2004, 02:24 PM
Even if it was staged/wasnt staged, its sad that all the people around them just kept on driving and did nothing (Although the car behind stayed where it was, which might have helped).

If it was someone from my family in that car, I would hope that bystanders would do something for them. Get out of the car, get the guys attention on you so the woman in the car can get away. I would rather have him attacking me than hear about the woman getting killed/raped later that day in the news, knowing I did nothing.

At what point would lethal force be a good idea? Personal Harm? Are you allowed to protect your property with lethal force? What point would non-lethal force be a good idea? He breaks drivers side window, gets a face full of pepper spray, enough of a distraction to get away maybe.

Brad Johnson
October 14, 2004, 02:38 PM
In most cases, at least here in Texas, fear of imminent serious bodily injury or death is justification for use of deadly force.

A person who appears to have lost emotional control, is possibly under the influence of a mind-altering substance, is armed with a two-foot long half-inch thick metal bar that is hooked on one end and sharpened on the other, and is using said object to destroy items in your immediate vicinity with the apparent intent to gain access to your person is someone who is most certainly capable of inflicting serious bodily injury or death.

The most immediate defense mechanism would have been the vehicle. It was already in gear. All the driver had to do was floor it and squish the bug, ummm... gentleman, in between the bumpers of the subject vehicle and the vehicle to the front or rear. It's hard to swing a crowbar when you are laying on the ground with crushed kneecaps.

Brad

Johnny Guest
October 14, 2004, 02:53 PM
If it WAS staged and done without the knowledge and consent of the driver, it was stupid beyond belief. All that glass shattering going on, even if the "attacker" never intended to clout the driver with the tool, driver could well have suffered permanent eye injury from all the flying glass, safety glass or no.

As the driver, I would HOPE I'd have enough restraint to keep from unloading my pistol at the thug. On the other hand, if partially blinded by flying glass, or if squinting to keep the glass out of my eyes, I might very well drive blindly away. How flippin' tragic that, with my impeded vision, I happened to crush the thug's legs between my bumper and something else . . . .

Again, if staged, you'd think someone would tell the thug to restrict his strikes to metal work, or to merely breaking the glass, but not smashing it out of the frame - - The latter increases the possibility of eye damage, and also the perception that the thug had IMMEDIATE line of attack on the driver.

Best,
Johnny

OF
October 14, 2004, 03:24 PM
Uh, Gabe, I'm not a flippin' mall ninjaSorry, Styles, but did you or did you not advocate as the proper course of action to a madman's assault getting out of the car and trying to back the guy down in the open using your pistol as a threat? That would be, any way you slice it, a 'mall-ninja BS tactical pronouncent' in my book. I did not, if we're splitting hairs, call you a mall-ninja, however. I don't know you from Adam, I can only pronounce judgement on your post. You could be the head trainer for the secret service for all I know, but that advice would still be mall-ninja city.

A move like that will in all likelyhood get you seriously injured or dead via bludgeoning, as well as be completely indefensible in court if you have to shoot the slimeball after leaving your protective environ towards your attacker. To suggest something like that here, where others who may not be so 'experienced' as you, often come for advice on how to react in crisis scenarios is irresponsible.

Frankly, I am not interested in what you would do personally, have at it, I do, however, care what others reading this may come away with as an idea of what constitutes an intelligent response.

- Gabe

PS: I don't mean to bust your balls, Styles, but I tend to take these 'what should I do' threads maybe a little more seriously than I should. Information on what constitutes a 'proper response' is hard to come by, especially for a new gun owner or CCW holder. These threads likely contribute quite a bit to someone's knowledge on the subject (unfortunately).

middy
October 14, 2004, 03:31 PM
Why would you think the cameraman was in on it?

It looked to me like he was trying to prove that he controlled that corner and even the "Metro" couldn't take it from him, no matter what he did.

Valkman
October 14, 2004, 03:40 PM
TRAC is right - I recognized that store immediately. It's at Sahara and the Strip, a very very busy intersection. That was not staged - Mr. Crackhead knows as do the rest of us that police are few and far between in Vegas.

What would I do if that were my Dodge RAM he were smacking on? Tough question, and I'm glad this was brought up as I hadn't thought about something like this before. If he swings and smashes the window next to my wife or me and stays there to swing again I'd feel fully justified in shooting him. If he's running around the truck hitting on it then all you can do is try to drive away - no way to exit the vehicle without escalating the situation.

Oh man this guy needs to be stopped big time.

feedthehogs
October 14, 2004, 03:58 PM
License number, call the cops.

Totaly useless.
Having been involved in two hit and runs and reported rather than chase, both times resulted in the police doing nothing.
Had car description, driver description, tag number. Nothing. Nada. Zip. Zero. No response.

In Florida, the thugs action could be considered attempted car jacking.
That's enough for us to shoot. Period.

Hopefully that was a liberals car. You know the ones who allow this poor misunderstood person to roam around.

Justin
October 14, 2004, 04:14 PM
Gabe-

Depending on where someone carries a gun, exiting the car could be the most expedient way of being able to draw down. An IWB holster at three or four o'clock is nigh on impossible to get to when one is belted into a car seat.

Of course, now that I think about it, this would be a fantastic reason to keep another pistol in the center console.

O.F.Fascist
October 14, 2004, 04:25 PM
In Texas it would have been legal to shoot the crackhead.

There was a road rage incident a while back in Houston.

Guy A cuts off Guy B, stops his car, goes and starts punching the windshield of Guy B's car with his bare hands.

Guy B shoots and kills Guy A.

It was ruled self defense.

Valkman
October 14, 2004, 04:27 PM
To the ones here who say they'd shoot, you'd be charged with murder. Nevada in general is gun friendly but Vegas is not. There are state shall-issue CCW laws in place but the locals delay it as much as possible - my license took longer than they are legally allowed to issue it! They don't care, they're the police! There is also city handgun registration.

In Nevada you cannot shoot to protect property, and that's what the DA'a argument would be. He dancing around the car smashing it - as much as I'd like to shoot him I'd know that I couldn't because of what would happen.

And if you exited the car I'm sure that would be called escalating the situation. If I could I'd exit while he was approaching with the crowbar - that would then make it his move and if he raised the crowbar then you'd have a reason to shoot him. Once he's hitting the car I think you're only legal choice is to drive away - over him if possible.

OF
October 14, 2004, 04:28 PM
Having been involved in two hit and runs and reported rather than chase, both times resulted in the police doing nothing.But now there is a record. And what's the alternative?exiting the car could be the most expedient way of being able to draw down.If you absolutely can't get your pistol out to save your life and the guy is coming in through the passenger side window, I could see the point. But getting out of the car should be the absolute last resort in a situation like this. You are putting yourself in very serious jeopardy by getting out of the vehicle, both physically and legally.

- Gabe

Top_Notch
October 14, 2004, 04:31 PM
I don't think it was staged.

I believe a sheep was driving the car and was just too intimidated, dazed, confused, and scared to figure out what was going on.

What's the saying...a Conservative is just a one-time Liberal that's been mugged...

OF
October 14, 2004, 04:33 PM
To the ones here who say they'd shoot, you'd be charged with murder.Charged, possibly...but with the video evidence and all, I think a DA would have to have a political death wish to charge a woman with murder for shooting that "guy" through the windshield while he was inches from bashing their heads in with a hooked steel rod. But even if, I'm having a seriously hard time believing you would get convicted of anything other than taking out the trash.

I see your ability to defend your actions in the event of a shooting being exponentially more difficult if you exit the car first to get a better shot at him or goad him into attacking you directly to be able to justify the shoot.

- Gabe

Zundfolge
October 14, 2004, 04:55 PM
To the ones here who say they'd shoot, you'd be charged with murder...
In Nevada you cannot shoot to protect property, and that's what the DA'a argument would be. He dancing around the car smashing it - as much as I'd like to shoot him I'd know that I couldn't because of what would happen.

Once he came around to the driver's side of the car the DA's argument disolves ... plus with that video I seriously doubt you'd get a jury to convict.

Valkman
October 14, 2004, 05:10 PM
The problem with these arguments is you have to put your whole life on the line to test your theory. Do you really want to lose your house, job and everything else to test it? I don't, and it was drummed into us very well at CCW class that if you shoot someone in LV that will happen. Then you get the civil suit from Mr. Crackhead's family. 5 years down the road after you've lost everything and the court proceedings are over you'll wish you hadn't chose to shoot.

If I feel my life or my wife's is in danger I will shoot - but I would not get away with shooting if I were in that car. Maybe that woman would but not me, a 6'3" male. My only choice would be to stop him before he got there or to drive away.

Jake
October 14, 2004, 05:12 PM
Depends on the situation. If I'm buy myself in the vehicle then I would make every attempt to simply drive away. OTOH, if I have my kids in the vehicle then it probably just became open season on crackheads.

Zundfolge
October 14, 2004, 05:42 PM
The problem with these arguments is you have to put your whole life on the line to test your theory.

Same thing with YOUR theory ... you have to put your actual life on the line and hope the crackhead will stop with bashing your windows/fenders or that traffic will get out of your way so you can escape before he gets to bashing in your head.


As for me ... I'd rather live and have to go to court then die.

no_morelipfrom_you
October 14, 2004, 05:47 PM
Probably pre-planned but without the drivers knowledge.


As for those saying its simply destruction of property, things happen SO fast and it quickly could have escalated into lethal force (ie a tire iron on your skull instead of the car) in just 1 second and with no warning. At that point your reaction time is behind in the game and youre in way over your head. Especially considering how fear paralyzes. For an example of fear paralyzing - consider how long it took that driver to respond and try to get away.

It’s a crying shame if that did not justify lethal force. I cosign powderman’s post.

Valkman
October 14, 2004, 05:59 PM
Same thing with YOUR theory ... you have to put your actual life on the line and hope the crackhead will stop with bashing your windows/fenders or that traffic will get out of your way so you can escape before he gets to bashing in your head.

Seems obvious to me that she could have turned the wheel to the right and drove away - that means shooting would not be a last resort. That means you're going to jail.

I always get the feeling that alot of the guys that say "I'd shoot" don't even have a CCW and haven't been to a CCW class, and don't know the laws. Yes, this guy needs shooting. No, this is not a clear cut situation that warrants shooting.

dustind
October 14, 2004, 06:11 PM
How come people that talk like that keep asking "You know what I'm saying?" Are they ranting so that it's incomprehensible even to themself? Someone should add subtitles. What he was saying could help us figure out his motive.

It should have been a legal shoot the moment he intentionally hit her car with the tire iron.

Zundfolge
October 14, 2004, 06:17 PM
Seems obvious to me that she could have turned the wheel to the right and drove away

Thats not obvious to me ... go rewatch the video, she pulls forward and back and the forward again before the car in front of her gets out of the way. Seems to me the driver TRIED to leave the scene and couldn't. (are we sure the driver is a "she"?)



So does anyone know the real source of this video? I'd love to know the story behind it ... looks like its being hosted on some Canadian punk/wannabe gang-rat kid's webspace, but I doubt he's the guy who filmed it.

JimJD
October 14, 2004, 06:24 PM
:fire:

Oh God... please strike that waste of DNA down. Tonight if possible.

It's a tough call in some ways, but I think the tape might be real.
I knew some guys back in NYC who would make films and such. They would film and interview people of all types. Sometimes they would "interview" bums and the insane that walked the streets of New York. Nothing like that happened, but some crazy stuff was caught on tape. :what:

Seems to me the driver TRIED to leave the scene and couldn't.

I agree Zundfolge. It bothers Me that it appears that no one came to the drivers aid.

If I was in that situation alone, in My car... He'd probably get shot. Would'nt be happy about it, but I don't think I would sit there and just take the attack sitting down. At that point in time, I'd think I was going to be killed or maimed. God forbid if My family was in the car. I'd have to protect them.
Hmmmm... fifteen rounds of GoldDot 124 Gr. +P 9MM + moron with a crowbar = no more moron.
*shrug*

Anyone think the cops in Las Vegas have a copy of this? Maybe they should get one if they don't.
*wink, wink*

Valkman
October 14, 2004, 07:01 PM
She pulled up and back because she didn't know what to do. She could of turned the wheel and escaped even if it meant hitting the car in front of her. Several people in this thread have mentioned that she could have drove away - and that's why you'd be arrested.

You must find a way out without shooting if you can - and being an observer here I think she could have gotten away sooner.

If this happened to me out of the blue I don't know that I wouldn't have shot him, especially if he busted the window next to my wife. I just know what would probably happen if I did. Is it right? Hell no! They told us if a guy is standing 10 feet away with a knife demanding your wallet to throw it over his head and go the other way - but don't shoot. I still have problems with that one and can't imagine my gun not coming out if a guy is that close with a knife.

Powderman
October 14, 2004, 07:05 PM
Seems obvious to me that she could have turned the wheel to the right and drove away - that means shooting would not be a last resort. That means you're going to jail.

Not necessarily.

Remember that the law hinges primarily on the "reasonable man" doctrine, as in, "What a reasonable person would believe given the circumstances".

So, what would a reasonable person believe in this instance?

1. There is a goblin present.
2. This goblin has approached--and encroached--into your personal space.
3. Said goblin has in his hand an object which is being used as a weapon, and which at the distance the video represents, can cause death or serious bodily harm.
4. The goblin has also manifested malicious intent toward you by repeatedly striking the vehicle with great force, and by his language and actions.

Thus, would a reasonable person believe the following:

1. Is there a threat? Yes.
2. Is the threat immediate? Yes.
3. Is the threat directed at you or your person, or another person close by? Yes.
4. Is the threat capable of killing you, or causing you serious damage? Yes.

And, the most important points:

Has the person who is posing the threat, threatened YOU? Yes.
Has the person who is posing the threat manifested mens rea, the "evil mind"? Absolutely.

Given the totality of the circumstances, does the mens rea, together with the physical acts of the goblin pose a clear and imminent danger to you? ABSOLUTELY!!!

Solution: Deadly force authorized.

The nature of the threat is such that no warning is necessary--or, judging from the video, even possible.

Draw your weapon, and engage with rounds aimed center of mass. Also, from the looks and demeanor of the goblin, he's "cracked up", or perhaps on a bit of bathtub crank. Be prepared for a failure to stop.

And, given the circumstances, the victim would probably not even be arrested, with consideration given to the immediacy of the threat, the presence of witnesses, the visible damage, and the videotape! Officer's discretion would definitely apply.

I always get the feeling that alot of the guys that say "I'd shoot" don't even have a CCW and haven't been to a CCW class, and don't know the laws. Yes, this guy needs shooting. No, this is not a clear cut situation that warrants shooting.

I wouldn't be too sure of a blanket statement concerning the expertise of the people on this board, either.

As for me, what do I know? Heck, I'm just a street cop. ;)

no_morelipfrom_you
October 14, 2004, 07:11 PM
anyone think the cops in Las Vegas would have drawn their guns on him? Anyone think they would have shot him if he did not immediately put that tire iron down?

I dont know about Las Vegas but the cops here in San Diego dont play. They have shot people for weilding less dangerous objects than an iron club.

Seems obvious to me that she could have turned the wheel to the right and drove away - that means shooting would not be a last resort. That means you're going to jail.

Are you watching the same video? There was a car in front of her, blocking her path - that much is clear. Also clear is that by the time she DID pull up and turn right, that car was gone. Also clear at the end of the video is there were more than 2 carlengths in front of her, so probably at least two cars were in front of her. To the immediate right? You dont know what was there blocking her path.

Aside from a pedestrian with a camera.

Valkman
October 14, 2004, 07:14 PM
It bothers Me that it appears that no one came to the drivers aid.

Here? It shouldn't suprise anyone. 50% are so stupid just getting from light to light is a huge task, and the other 50% are on their cell phones and wouldn't notice. We rarely go down that way just because of the traffic and low-lifes. I have been to that store though - it's all crap but there's alot of it! :)

Valkman
October 14, 2004, 07:25 PM
Are you watching the same video? There was a car in front of her, blocking her path

Again, she wasn't blocked enough to keep her from getting away until she rolled forward. If she had cut the wheel and gone she'd of hit the car in front of her - and escaped. That's all the police need to say to make it a bad shoot. Hey, you guys can shoot all you want - I'm just telling you what'll happen here if you do.

Metro cops shoot people all the time here - what does that have to do with anything? The rules for us and them are completely different, and they ain't gonna be there when you need them.

I wouldn't be too sure of a blanket statement concerning the expertise of the people on this board, either.

I see way too many "I'd shoot in a second" responses in this board in situations where you just can't shoot. Situations where they're in a bank or store and think they need to defend everyone. People are unaware of the law but that doesn't stop them from SAYING they'd shoot.

JamisJockey
October 14, 2004, 07:34 PM
That's all the police need to say to make it a bad shoot

I'm with Valkman. While deadly force is probably okay here, your first moral and legal obligation is to descelate the situation. If you can't reasonably descelate the situation, then deadly force is okay.
I'm no lawyer, but I did stay awake during my CCW class. Here in Utah that would have not been a clear okay shoot.
Now, if in the process you clip the goblin with your car...hey you were trying to escape a tire-iron wielding attacker!
:neener:

Lets say the car was completely boxed in. Then it'd be a good shoot.
Or you got stuck or the vehicle became disabled while trying to escape, and the attack continued. Yet another good shoot.

DRZinn
October 14, 2004, 07:42 PM
What disturbs me here is the number of it's-a-legal-justified-shoot-no-sweat and no-don't-do-it-you'll-go-to-jail posts from all over the country. The only people who should be making that kind of posts in this situation are CCW holders or cops or the like who do or have lived in Las Vegas. Anyone else is dreaming.

Did the guy deserve to be shot?
Yes.

Would you be morally justified in shooting him?
IMO, yes.

Would the cops and the court system ageree with me?
I don't know. I don't live in Vegas.

Daemon688
October 14, 2004, 07:44 PM
The minute that tire iron hit anywhere near the driver (when he went to the drivers side bashing it) I think they would be justified in shooting them. Otherwise I would have just curbed the car and got the hell outa there.

Did anyone even understand a word that man said?

Societal low lifes
:barf:

JamisJockey
October 14, 2004, 07:53 PM
Seems to me the driver TRIED to leave the scene and couldn't.

Tactical mistake on her part. Before she pulled up she could have easily (judging by the video) pulled around the traffic, using the sidewalk, or hung a very hard right turn (possibly a 3-point turn) to turn into the parking lot. Of course, the camerman would have had to move, and the driver wouldn't be justified in hitting the camerman.
Anyone that thinks that PT cruiser wouldn't fit between the traffic and the electrical box, using the sidewalk, obviously hasn't done much off-road driving.
:neener:

The only people who should be making that kind of posts in this situation are CCW holders or cops or the like who do or have lived in Las Vegas
:scrutiny:

Well since deadly force laws across the country are pretty much inline with each other, I think any CCW holder will typically have an idea of what the law states.

mdsteele
October 14, 2004, 08:15 PM
PAGE NOT FOUND
The web page you are trying to access doesn't exist on members.shaw.ca

:confused:

I wanna see.....

KaceCoyote
October 14, 2004, 08:23 PM
I dunno folks, heres MY hypothetical here...

Your on vacation, your wife or loved one is in the hotel and your heading out to grab the take out you ordered earlier. Your not too familar with the location, your focused on the directions. You dont have your CCW peice on you, and then all the sudden here it comes.

This guy, comes out've NOWHERE and starts beating on your car. You're nearly lost, your confused. Its an incredibly high stress situation, this guy has a bar and is beating on you NOW. Car infront, car behind...and your expected to see a turnoff thats not in the LOS? Lets examine whats happening here, tunnel vision, an adrenaline rush....


CCW or not, your all forgetting the weapon at hand here car. It may be a plastic play car, but I'll promise you three thousand pounds of plastic bashing into your shins before it runs you over wont be fun. Your vehicle is a deadly weapon, who cares about shoot or no shoot. Either ram him, run him over and speed away or just speed away. THis is why I'm always surprised with guys spend tons of scratch on tons and tons and tons of additional CCW classes and fail to take even one proper combat driving course. Yes, handling a Pistol, rifle or shotgun to its fullest extent is very important however is it suddenly less important to be able to defend yourself with your vehicle?


Overspecialize, and you breed in weakness. Train with only firearms and when theres a crisis situation, all you'll have to respond with are firearms.

Ryder
October 14, 2004, 08:35 PM
I always get the feeling that alot of the guys that say "I'd shoot" don't even have a CCW and haven't been to a CCW class, and don't know the laws.

It's just a feeling because you know better. The explanation lies in the fact that there is no time for consideration of these things when the sudden shock of something like this happens. You do what you have to do when you have to do it. At least I do! I can't help other than to operate on instinct. It's saves my life. Maybe I am not normal? ;)

I've had a tire iron shaken in my face while backed into a corner. I found it very easy to read the other person's intent. You do what you have to do BEFORE it's too late. You will know when that is. Apparently the prosecutor agrees with this because I was never charged.

The BG in this video seems well focused on the car but at the point where he is standing near the drivers window he'd best not look at my person because that's what I'd be watching for. Barring loss of focus on the vehicle, breeching the integrity of my refuge would be enough for me. With any luck he have hit the ground with the glass. That's just how it is, like I said, being judged by anyone would not have been a consideration. I've been through crap like this too many times to know any different.

GigaBuist
October 14, 2004, 08:41 PM
http://members.shaw.ca/fivelitermustang/holdingitdown.wmv

If it goes down again I'll mirror it.

Headless Thompson Gunner
October 14, 2004, 09:23 PM
Pardon my laziness; I didn't thoroughly read all of these posts. I skimmed most of 'em, and got one genreal impression:


It would be a legal shoot if the driver couldn't have driven away.
It would have been an illegal shoot if the driver could have driven to safety, but instead chose to pop the twit.


I've tried rewatching it afew times, and I really can't tell with any certainty if a car could have slipped through and driven away. I can tell you that if I was behind the wheel of that car, I doubt I would have had the presense of mind to think of trying to jump the curb or squeaze past on the right.

I probably would have started ramming things (other cars in my way, the attacker, whatever) until I felt safe again. Pulling a gun probably wouldn't have occured to me until after the fact.

JimJD
October 14, 2004, 09:32 PM
I think part of the issue that I have with some of the Ramboid responses is the name-brand dropping—15 rounds of this to COM—instead of an analysis of what's going on.

I'm sorry You feel that way.
It was not meant to portray a "Ramboid" attitude in any way. Not to mention, some people engaged in a SD shooting have emptied their weapon when in the heat of the moment. It's not exactly the best thing to do, but it does happen. It sometimes happens to trained professionals as well.
It was a statement that was somewhat tounge in cheek too.
Not to mention, it's My favorite load of choice when I have My pistol in My car. It's a good load, why not mention it? My other mag is loaded with FMJ's by the way. Winchester white box just so You know.... Ooops! I just dropped another name brand. Silly Me.




How many of you have had your door panels kicked in in the projects? There's a lot about territorialism that can't be understood by people who have never had direct contact with folks who live and breathe the idea that living on one street, or one block, or in one neighborhood, or wearing a certain color, or even having one pant-leg up or down actually means something.

*Jim raises hand*

Unfortunately, I understand it all too well. Growing up and living in a bad neighborhood in NYC can do that to You.

Sylvilagus Aquaticus
October 14, 2004, 09:42 PM
I know what I'd do if it were my car and it happened at the intersection of Commerce and Houston in Dallas.

They'd have to take my statement.

They'd have to get the perps statement with a squeegee and sponge.

Regards,
Rabbit.

Regards,
Rabbit.

Valkman
October 14, 2004, 10:11 PM
This would have been a very dangerous place to shoot - I mean there's people everywhere.

Even if everyone agrees to shoot there are still a couple of big problems here. So the guy is on the drivers side and you whip out your piece and (since most shots miss in these things) OOPS kill the woman in the next car over. Now you really have some big problems! Then you kill the guy and now his family has their way with you in civil court. I don't have tens of thousands of dollars to defend myself from the DA and in civil court, do you?

I've had a tire iron shaken in my face while backed into a corner.

Believe me, I would have no problem shooting in that case. I'd have no problem shooting the crackhead either, but the DA probably would.

ilcylic
October 14, 2004, 10:17 PM
I can't wait to move back out of Vegas.

If this happened back in Albuquerque, there would be no question about it being a good shoot, unless you missed.

-Ogre

Average Guy
October 14, 2004, 10:20 PM
I don't know what he's sayin'. But seriously...

I gotta go with DocZinn here. Pure speculation from outside LV. Anyway, I just ran this by my Personal Police Consultant. Her quickie analysis was that once the BG had broken the driver's window, the BG could reach the driver and then the driver would be OK to shoot.

On the other hand, she said that there's more leeway if she'd just run over the guy "while trying to get away." The magic words: "He moved."

I watched the 92 LA riots from the very beginning and it was amazing to see people pull up to that intersection at Florence and Normandie and NOT just race away when they got pelted and punched. I kept thinking, "What's wrong with those people?" But I understand the driver's initial paralysis because I had one of those flip-off/cut-off situations happen to me when I was 17 or so, and wayyy unaware. Believe me, I've solved and resolved that scenario many times since then. It takes time just to comprehend that "Gee, there's someone who's trying to beat up my car. Huh? That's not right..." And once you're aware there's a problem, now you need a solution. And if you've never thought about anything like it before, you're way behind the power curve.

Remember, kids: Search, Predict, Act (and don't forget your after-action analysis) :D

El Rojo
October 15, 2004, 12:39 AM
What is wrong with stepping out of your car and telling him to stop and get away. If he then chose to approach you with the crow bar, you don't have much time to react. Bang bang bang. I don't think it would be unreasonable t get out of your car and ask the guy to stop and the video is right there to back up everything you do.

The real question is what would have yuo done with your CCW if you were in your car witnessing this happen to the PT Cruiser? Probably just call the cops on my cell phone.

dustind
October 15, 2004, 12:44 AM
Sorry, but I don't buy that this would have been a justifiable shooting in the eyes of the court system unless the actor had concentrated his efforts on attempting to cause harm to the driver or even had been attempting an out and out carjacking. From standing still he could have hit her in under a second without warning. By the time he "concentrated his efforts" on her she would be dead and unable to respond in any fashion. One hit to the noggin and it is lights out. Tactical mistake on her part. Before she pulled up she could have easily (judging by the video) pulled around the traffic, using the sidewalk, or hung a very hard right turn (possibly a 3-point turn) to turn into the parking lot. Of course, the camerman would have had to move, and the driver wouldn't be justified in hitting the camerman. Actually any reasonable person should have saw the guy coming, leaped out of the window and done some super ninja move disarming him in a split second without having caused the slightest discomfort. Then held him until the police arrived. :D

Ok, seriously. If someone came and hit your vehicle, would you have immediately driven forward and away? I seriously doubt it. I doubt almost anyone, including people with training would have done any better than she did.

To anyone who thinks she could have exited the vehicle and ran: Have you ever tried to jump out of a vehicle that was in gear while wearing your seatbelt? Try it some time in a large empty area. I do it every year while road hunting and I have my routine down to a science. I would not have tried to run on foot.

cthulhu138
October 15, 2004, 12:57 AM
I'd suppose most folks in that situation would be busy staring at the car in front of them and the light above them, wondering when it was time to go. Not seeing the fellow with the crowbar except as a flash in the mirror as he came behind them. I'd assume the first strike of the crowbar would be taken as an accident too. So, all in all, that old girl did pretty average.

Having had an angry driver get out of his car and head for my car before, I'd probably do what I did last time, and just haul ass. If you can't haul ass, then you do what you can to steer clear of the crowbar, namely getting into the middle of the car. That's when you can start thinking about pointing guns and stuff. If you can just keep a mindset to take any available cover in a bad situation, you'll usually get a little extra thinkin time. And thinking time is what can keep you out of jail. If there's no thinking time, you just default to your level of training.

Run fast like young bunny.

Powderman
October 15, 2004, 01:54 AM
My condolences to all of you that live in jurisdictions where you have to take almost extraordinary measures to ensure that you are acting in self defense.

However, even in light of these circumstances, I am seeing something common in all of these replies.

This is not meant as a flame, but I am not too sure that many of you have ever witnessed--first hand--or been subjected to--first hand--the savagery of an all out attack on the street.

This crackhead had in his possession a deadly weapon, that is capable of pulping your brains in a split second. That justifies deadly force.

If you do attempt to block the iron, your arm will in all likelihood be maimed to the extent that you will NEVER be able to use it normally again. That--in most jurisdictions--is also justification for deadly force.

Those who suggested the three-point turn--with all respect, get real. What this guy is doing is a direct assault on the vehicle in which you are riding. This is, in and of itself, not a justification for deadly force. But the guy's demeanor is telling you that in all likelihood, you are next in line for his undivided attention.

And get out of the car? Please. Folks like that are the closest live example to what it termed as "ninja-like quickness". You would not be able to get fully out of the car before this person could be on you, taking your life with that crowbar or tire iron.

And, don't even think about running. This guy will be on you before you take two steps.

This post is not meant as a flame toward anyone. But please understand that (again, with all respect) if you have never seen the speed in which you can lose your life at the hands of one of these animals, you will in all likelihood not understand why deadly force is almost a necessity in these circumstances.

Now, in these cases, there is also a saving grace, believe it or not. Street urchins like this guy have a remarkably well developed sense of self-preservation.

Thus, when the guy finds himself staring at the muzzle of your legally carried firearm, in all likelihood, he will take off like a rocket.

However, there is also the chance that, considering the great possibility of his being on drugs, that it will enrage him to come directly after you.

So, it's time for a gut check, folks.

I am aware that there are lots of folks who treat themselves to the latest ubertactical handguns, in Kydex, leather or the holster of the day. These folks practice, and practice incessantly until they are capable of amazing feats of marksmanship and speed--at the range.

Reluctance to shoot someone is a great credit to the integrity and humanity of most people. But please, for your sake, evaluate coldly and seriously if you are able to take human life. Please consider this in solitude, with lots of reflection and thought.

Please realize that when the rubber meets the road, you won't have ANY time for self reflection. You will have to act.

You will have to draw that ubertactical firearm, you will have to aim it, and you will have to fire upon another human being, with lethal intent.

And yes, you will probably have to go to trial. Yes, you will spend money on your defense. Yes, you will probably go into debt.

The alternative is to have your brains beaten out on the street; to fall victim to the robber's bullet, fists or feet, or perhaps to stumble forward, trying to hold your intestines into your body cavity because someone just took a swipe across your gut with a straight razor or knife. In your last moments of consciousness, possibly of life, you will hear your cry of pain and terror and wish desperately that you were somewhere, ANYWHERE, but where you are at that time.

There is, to me, no sound on earth that is as heartwrenching or as chilling as the wail of a soul breathing their last breath, if their life is being taken by force.

And, may merciful God help you if your family is with you! Especially your wives or your children--or both!! Some of you have NO concept of the horror that can befall them if the threat comes through you.

If you are that worried about the legality of the act, please, PLEASE contact your local prosecutor. Show them the clip from this thread, and ask them if you were in the car, would deadly force have been justified. I'll bet I know what the answer will be.

And, lest I impeach myself, DON'T just take the word of the cop you know, or don't know. The prosecutor is the one who will determine if you will go to trial, or appear before a grand jury.

Stay safe out there, folks.

Average Guy
October 15, 2004, 02:37 AM
Tough act to follow, Powderman. Wow.

What is wrong with stepping out of your car and telling him to stop and get away.

Um...everything? :D (I keed.) But you've just traded your cover for...what, exactly?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the first question out of the DA's mouth is going to be "Why didn't you leave when you had the chance?" I think this is a tricky scenario because although you're in effect stuck in a little metal box with nowhere to go, that little metal box itself is capable of moving.

OF
October 15, 2004, 09:58 AM
Thank you for your two lucid and pointed posts, Powderman.

To those in LV saying that you'd be charged with murder for shooting this guy, I would love to see some evidence of similar situations (if that's possible) that resulted in charges of murder.

I'm having a hard time believing that if the cops found these two women (I believe you can hear them on the tape) in the beat-to-snot car with that cracked up waste of life dead on the ground outside and the video showing him just prior they would sink so low as to even arrest them. Maybe I'm wrong, I'd love to see some cases to the point.

- Gabe

PS: Pardon me for my earlier offensive Rambo-esque use of the product number for my carry ammo and brandname of my pistol. It was a moment of blood-thirsty insanity. What was I thinking...

OF
October 15, 2004, 10:01 AM
I just watched it again. Are you kidding me? The guy was talking about murders he's done in the past just before assaulting these people. If you listen, it even sounds like someone yells "mommy!" from inside the car...

If this isn't justified use of deadly force, I don't know what is.

- Gabe

El Rojo
October 15, 2004, 10:02 AM
I just thought of another effective move. Very hard to think of until you are arm chair quarterbacking, but something to remember. As the guy is continuing to beat the crap out of your car, you have enough space to back up and move forward quite a bit. What would have been cool is if the person would have cranked their wheel hard left, waited for Diversity to come around next to the front right bumper. With the car in reverse, hit the gas hard, bringing the nose suddenly into the side of him, and knocking him over rather hard. You can use the force of your car without having the mess and damage of flipping him up onto your hood as you ram him.

In hindsight, I think I would have most certainly run him over if he had stepped in front or behind my vehicle. Maybe not drive over him, but at least rammed him good. This is the reason I also carry a good can of OC in my car too.

JamisJockey
October 15, 2004, 10:13 AM
I'm sorry but I stand by my original assessment. The driver passed up on any opportunity to get out of dodge. When the attacker was on the passenger side, initiating the attack. Now, if there actually isn't room to get out as it appears to me in the video, then its a good shoot immediately.
Like I said, shooting in that situation even as I called it
probably would be a good shoot, but if you don't meet the moral and legal obligation to descelate the situation immediatley then you might be liable.
As for executing a turn out of that spot...those who are naysayers probably haven't driven a car to the edge of its performance abilities and back.

Zundfolge
October 15, 2004, 10:20 AM
As for executing a turn out of that spot...those who are naysayers probably haven't driven a car to the edge of its performance abilities and back.

Keep in mind its a freakin' PT Cruiser ... heck, my Welsh Corgi has more horsepower then a PT Cruiser :p

no_morelipfrom_you
October 15, 2004, 10:22 AM
As for those asking what he was said, here's the gist:

I'm a bad man
I'm a gangsta
I've been here for x years
I'm not afraid of anybody and
I will mess up ANY one of these mofos out here.
Here let me show you.

JamisJockey
October 15, 2004, 10:24 AM
Keep in mind its a freakin' PT Cruiser ... heck, my Welsh Corgi has more horsepower then a PT Cruiser

I delivered pizzas in a Chevy Chevette for almost a year, and owned it for almost 4. Compared to that little car, a PT cruiser might as well be a supercharged nitrous boosted hummer. :neener:
And I was put in a few tight driving situations while in that car, back when pizza joints used to gaurantee (sp) 30 minutes or its free....

OF
October 15, 2004, 10:53 AM
The driver passed up on any opportunity to get out of dodge.I'm a little suprised that the after-action critique here is lacking in respect for the sheer level of panic in the victim. What you have here is likely a soccer mom sheeple with her kids in the car who thinks she is going to be bludgeoned to death at any moment. Life is existing for her in a moment-to-moment time-warp haze of sheer terror and frozen panic. She is likely sitting in a puddle of her own urine, as are her children. Her life experience with 'tactical driving' is most probably limited to an unsafe lane change or two on the way to the shopping mall. She has most likely never been in a situation where she was in fear for her life or faced real aggression and very possibly has never given so much as a moments thought to what she would do if assaulted.

Look at what the car is doing: back and forth, back and forth. She's barely hanging on to reality. It's obviously all she can do to keep her hands on the wheel and the car in gear. And she's supposed to be evaluating the situation dispassionately and seeking an 'out'? Not all the world lives in Cond. Yellow. A fraction of a percent.

If this woman had a firearm available, and shot this POS, I cannot imagine in a million years her being arrested for it, let alone charged, let alone convicted. I can hear the DA's opening statement: "If you examine the video, you can clearly see that Susan had an escape angle available to her here. When the subject moved around to the drivers side, she clearly could have maneuvered out the opening and waited for her turn to enter traffic, after properly singnaling her intent by engaging her turn signal, of course."

:barf:

- Gabe

OF
October 15, 2004, 10:59 AM
Here's a taste of the scumbag's pre-assault soliliquy:

"I been gang-bangin', killin', stealin', robbin MF'ers. Sellin' crack wit my hoe's in the back. I don't give a F about nobody's MF'ers. At any given moment I can go out there and F up any-goddamn-body of these MF'ers..."

Blah blah blah. Metro (cops) can't get me off this corner...blah blah blah.

- Gabe

Powderman
October 15, 2004, 11:06 AM
Life is existing for her in a moment-to-moment time-warp haze of sheer terror and frozen panic.

And that is the sum total of the incident--at least from the victim's point of view.

With regard to driving out of the situation--well, that would definitely be an option IF the vehicle has any room to maneuver.

Bear in mind, though, that pursuit/evasion driving is like any other skill--it is learned through practice and repetition. It has been said that it takes an average of 3,000 repititions of a movement to commit it to muscle memory--the groove where you will do something automatically without conscious thought.

Yes, a jury will take into account your level of training and experience--or the lack thereof.

molonlabe
October 15, 2004, 11:15 AM
If I was in the car the only thing you would have heard was thump...thump...................thump...thump. And maybe Switch gears thump...thump...................thump...thump switch gears thump...thump...................thump...thump

ctdonath
October 15, 2004, 11:34 AM
Finally watched it.

Looks real enough: kinda "cool" idea to go interview a thug, he gets hyped up on the attention, wants to prove his toughness, grabs tire iron conveniently left nearby (easily accessable in his turf with plausable deniability), and proceeds to demonstrate how cold/tough he is.

Anyone arguing "don't shoot" is a fool.

Car occupants are stuck in a metal box. Mobility is limited by tight quarters and seat belts (presumably worn). At least two windows have been completely smashed in, spraying broken glass; occupants may very well be cut and bleeding already. Distance between face & crowbar closes to inches frequently during attack.

If they get out, they are exposed to a strong, fast, armed, violent man - someone at the top of any threat continuum. If unarmed, victims only have speed and cover at their disposal - easily thwarted by attacker. If moderately armed (spray, club), attacker will likely exert dominance - we cannot seriously expect victims to win this round. The "get out and tell him off" comment is preposterous.

Driving away is barely an option: vehicle is blocked by traffic & obstacles on all sides. Victims obviously attempted to repeatedly, but were blocked. Aggressive evasion would at minimum cause significant property damage, and would likely cause bodily harm to others in surrounding vehicles. Drivers are deeply trained to NEVER deliberately contact another vehicle, so don't expect the driver to do otherwise under such stress.

Trapped & vulnerable, deadly weapon swinging within inches (recall the Teuller Drill), lack of harmful contact only due to good graces of violent madman ... ability (strong, fast, armed), opportunity (close, attack is happening), jeopardy (crowbar swinging within inches, glass shards flying, no sane reason why) - draw & fire. Stop him NOW. Somehow I don't think the police would object...

citizen
October 15, 2004, 12:22 PM
Guys, I live there (LV) and my former job required me to traverse that intersection frequently; at night. He (it!-animal) seems familiar, and a regular inhabitant of that territorial domain. I've seen them staked out on their individual corners, often approaching and negotiating with others.....
That lane, in that direction, at that intersection is amongst the WORST in town to traverse....
Now that everone has opined sufficiently, the only real point to ponder is whether there was any follow-up. I've never seen any info, regarding the perp or the victim......when this occurred ('98? '01? '03?????), or even IF a police or damage report was filed. THAT is where the resolution and correct analysis of this event resides.
As for using deadly force, it's still an open question.....Too many variables locally to make a definitive conclusion. Interesting entertainment, and perhaps not as rare as we'd like; but that's it. We'll probably never learn of the conclusion here, but feel free to speculate to your heart's content.

(I'm refraining from relating my own experiences locally; they have nothing to do with THIS event; and each situation MUST be weighed individually, legally..)

S Roper
October 15, 2004, 12:22 PM
Here's a transcript as near as I can figure:

"Hey you know I’ve been on this mofo. street for ten mofo. years strong, you know what I’m sayin’?. [Unintelligible] L.A. rollin’ six down this mofo. I’ve been gangbangin’ killin’ stealin’, [unintelligible] mofo. Sellin’ crack at my hos in the back. I don’t give a f. ‘bout nobody’s mofo. At any given moment I can g.d f. up any g.d. body’s mofo! You understand what I’m sayin’? I have mofo. [unintelligible], n., and they started, we’ll take your mofo. [unintelligible] if they wanted to. It’s straight gang town, this mofo.! I’ve been on the corner for years, n; selling all kinds of mofo. dope on this b. Know what I’m sayin’? All these mofo. hos out here saying they’re bringin’ down this mofo.: this is my g.d. corner! This is my mofo. corner for ten g.d. years! Metro can’t keep me out of this mofo. corner, n.! Metro can’t even keep me out of this corner, nobody can! And they know I can do any g.d. mofo thing on this mofo.! Let me show your a. up!"

S Roper
October 15, 2004, 12:28 PM
In high school my friend and I did a few "art" films. In one of them we "interviewed" a homeless guy who really just ranted about the police. He was very different from the individual in this video, but I think it's very likely that this wasn't staged. Most likely it was a young cameraman looking for "interesting" folks to interview.

R.H. Lee
October 15, 2004, 12:32 PM
OK. I've got a question for LEOS and/or LV residents. How about running this type of criminal out of town? If you have habitual crackheads/street people/panhandlers/thugs hanging around why can't you simple put them on a bus to somewhere else? I lived in Irvine (Orange County) California for awhile, and the cops there don't put up with this crap. If some derelict even drives through that town, they get stopped and written up for any possible violation and are shown the city limits. As a result, you don't see human trash on the streets. If I were police chief, I'd give them $20 and put them on a Greyhound bus to San Francisco or some other liberal craphole.

tcsd1236
October 15, 2004, 12:38 PM
OK. I've got a question for LEOS and/or LV residents. How about running this type of criminal out of town? If you have habitual crackheads/street people/panhandlers/thugs hanging around why can't you simple put them on a bus to somewhere else? I lived in Irvine (Orange County) California for awhile, and the cops there don't put up with this crap. If some derelict even drives through that town, they get stopped and written up for any possible violation and are shown the city limits. As a result, you don't see human trash on the streets. If I were police chief, I'd give them $20 and put them on a Greyhound bus to San Francisco or some other liberal craphole.

And simply move the problem from town to town? What sense does that make?

"Putting them on a bus out of town" went out 30 years ago, and I am not sure that my job wouldn't be at risk if I were to try it today.

You can't "show them to the city limits", either. Sure, they have a vehicle that has some violations. You cite them and release them. You have no legal justification that would stand up in court for "showing them to the city limits".

Average Guy
October 15, 2004, 12:43 PM
Most likely it was a young cameraman looking for "interesting" folks to interview.


I guarantee it was a for-profit video in the tradition of "Bumfights." There's another movie on the same site called "funnybrawl.wmv" which looks to be from the same source.

See also: http://www.realfight.com/ghetto.html

R.H. Lee
October 15, 2004, 12:43 PM
You have no legal justification that would stand up in court for "showing them to the city limits". OK. What about vagrancy laws? Disturbing the peace violations? Urinating on the street? Panhandling? Menacing passers by? Are those no longer violations?

JamisJockey
October 15, 2004, 12:56 PM
"Putting them on a bus out of town" went out 30 years ago,

Nope. Salt Lake City did the same thing just before the 2002 Olympics...sent all the bums and vagrants to Vegas....
:neener:
I seem to remember a clip of the LV mayor on TV pitching a fit about it....

R.H. Lee
October 15, 2004, 12:56 PM
It's a sad commentary when the rights of street vermin trump the rights of law abiding productive citizens and law enforcment's hands are tied by foaming at the mouth leftist lawyers.

no_morelipfrom_you
October 15, 2004, 01:05 PM
The more I think about it - if this incident didnt justify a shooting then why do you even bother to carry at all???

It only takes ONE hit with that bar to kill you, and you ARENT gonna get ANY more warning of the injury to come than having two windows smashed in your face.

And whats scary is if CCW holders cant even agree on that then how are you going to convince the tentative, gun shy general public of that? Or of any reason to shoot and/or carry for that matter.

SLCDave
October 15, 2004, 02:21 PM
OK. What about vagrancy laws? Disturbing the peace violations? Urinating on the street? Panhandling? Menacing passers by? Are those no longer violations?


Riley, the North end of the strip and the surrounding area is nowhere that you want to be. I grew up in Las Vegas, and if all my family weren't still living there, I wouldn't go back. Of course there are laws against these things, but with a legal system that is overtaxed and under funded, and with these criminals spending less if any time in the revolving door prisons, by the time you arrest the last criminals from the area, the first ones you arrested are showing up right after them. These criminals can make a better (or easier) living on the corner, and with nothing really to deter them, what's to keep them from doing this? I'm all for enforcing laws, but the root of the problem is deeper than this, and not the point of this thread.

To those that said the driver should jump the curb, I have a question: Are PT Cruisers built differently where you are from? Let's say the driver tries that, and gets high-centered, what then? Now they are immobile, and left to the devices of this feller, and assuming they are not armed, they must appeal to his good graces (if he has any). Sure, if they can get away by jumping the curb, great, but since we can't truely appreciate the height of the curb from this footage, maybe it was too high, and the driver was aware of this. You say, hypothetically, jump the curb. I say, hypothetically, the curb may be too high to jump in a passenger car. I'll go measure the curb next month when I'm down there, if anybody really cares.

It's easy to pick this apart from our end. I'f I'm fearing for my life, which *I* would have been, he get's whatever amount of force I can deliver, whether it's by running him over, or shooting him.

(Anyone else think this might be Gary Payton? ;D )

bigjoegood1
October 15, 2004, 02:24 PM
"....when this occurred ('98? '01? '03?????), or even IF a police or damage report was filed...."



Citizen,



This appears to be of 2004 vintage as there is a white/cream? colored 2005 Chrysler 300C just ahead of the PT Cruiser. That model was just released earlier this year.



Now, *zipping up nomex*



Justified or not, I think anyone of us would have found great pleasure in shooting that piece of chit but I could not guarantee the BG as a target and backstop so no joy. Given his state of mind, drawing a weapon would not have only fanned his flames as he truly feared no one and there is no way for me to know that so I would not have a lot of time to think on it before he attempted to do me further harm. In this case drawing would immediately have to have been followed by a couple of quick doubletaps to COM. Since I dont have CCW, running him over would have been the best thing to do to stop the attacker with the least amount of repercussion (no smoking gun, etc.) and it would have been a fitting means to an end (BG hits car, car hits BG) but BG could have easily sidestepped and clocked me in the bing-bong. Evading with vehicle would have probably been the safest alternative from a legal point of view if nothing else. In summation, that guy is a domestic terrorist who used intimidation to his benefit. I would have attempted to run the BG over while making an escape explaining, "he got in the way".

thorazine
October 15, 2004, 05:51 PM
She could of turned the wheel and escaped even if it meant hitting the car in front of her.

Hmmmmm... you mean the car directly in front of the PT cruiser?

The car at the instersection?

Okay so...

The car gets pushed in to the intersection.

<Big Accident Occurs>

Lot's of children and a puppy dog die resulting from the accident.

Bad news.

feedthehogs
October 15, 2004, 06:21 PM
A few here have mentioned moral issues in their posts.

If you have moral issues about protecting yourself or worse your family, while you contiplate in your head the morality of the issue in front of you, you may very well get yourself or worse others killed.

The very first question out of my mouth when giving CCW classes is "Does anyone have moral issues with taking the life of someone else in their own self protection".
If there are, I send them home and allow them to think about those issues.
If they can't clearly define the difference between murder and killing someone in self defense, they have no business carring a firearm in my opinion.

Those who live in states where the right to self defense is so neutered down, whats the sense in going thru the motions of carrying when the fear of protecting yourself and others is so overwhelming?

That's why I live in Florida were we can shoot this guy as an attempted car jacker and our assets are protected from lawsuits from the scumbags family.

ctdonath
October 15, 2004, 10:54 PM
To simplify the video:

You're strapped in your car in a parking lot. There are vehicles surrounding you not really moving much if at all. Driving away isn't much of an option.

Out of friggin' nowhere, a crazed freak starts smashing in your windows. One wrong flick of the crowbar and you're dead.

"Reflective contemplation is not required in the presence of an upraised knife."

You'd better be ready to stop him NOW, 'cuz running away is not a guaranteed option. Decision better be made ahead of time.

I'm with the others here who observe dismay that a disturbingly large number of posters would not fight back, even having seen that video. He's smashing in your windows with a crowbar inches from your head, you can't drive away without severe harm to others, and you wouldn't COM him pronto?!?

Preacherman
October 16, 2004, 07:22 AM
I've read this thread very carefully, and I respectfully submit that many of our more gung-ho members urgently need a testosterone-reduction program! :fire:

Points to ponder:

1. You may use deadly force only when there is an immediate and otherwise unavoidable danger of death or serious injury to yourself or to those legally under your protection. Whilst this threat is certainly immediate, it's directed against your vehicle, not against you: and there is another means of avoidance open to you, even if it means driving over a curb. In many jurisdictions in the USA, you would face charges if you shot this guy - no ifs, buts or maybes about it. Sure, there are some jurisdictions that would congratulate you, but I daresay they're in the minority.

2. You are responsible for the effect of every bullet you fire. At close range, in a crowded city street, you are likely to have some overpenetration problems: and with the perp moving around as he was, you may well miss with one or more shots. There's an excellent chance that one or more of your bullets may hit someone else - and then you're up the creek without the proverbial paddle!

3. You have a much stronger legal case to use your car as a defensive weapon than you do to use a gun. Is he standing in front of your car, bashing it? "My foot slipped off the brake, and the car rolled forward, pinning him between my car's front bumper and the rear bumper of the car ahead of me." Is he moving around your car? "I attempted to evade his attack, and unfortunately he placed himself in a position where he was impacted during my manoevres. I did not deliberately target him - I was steering the car towards an escape route." These are MUCH more defensible options, legally, than the use of a firearm.

4. You have to consider the long-term consequences as well. Do you travel to that area regularly? Do you live nearby? If so, remember that this crackhead has buddies, customers and suppliers, all of whom are going to be VERY unhappy with you, and may well come looking for evens. Are you prepared to face this very real possibility? If one or more of them try to assault you on the streets, you will very likely end up using lethal force to defend yourself. This may happen more than once. Guess what the justice system is going to do to you? "Well, now, let's see... John Doe has run over one guy, shot two more, and threatened another, all in the space of a week. This guy is a menace to society! Let's take him down!" (And if any of you think that the cops will deal with this situation in any other way, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you... their priority is maintaining order, and they'll do it in the most expedient way possible - FOR THEM!)

Think about these things.

OF
October 16, 2004, 09:05 AM
I'm sorry, Preacherman, but we're going to have to disagree. And I absolutely disagree in the most stringent terms with your #3 suggestion to lie to the authorities about using your car in self-defense. I cannot disagree more strongly with that advice. "My foot slipped off the brake and the car rolled forward"? I am actually a little shocked that you would suggest it. and there is another means of avoidance open to youThis is not clear from the video. In fact, the inability of the driver to escape, while obviously trying with all their being, would show how escape was not available to this victim. Even if there were an avenue, which the video does not show exists, this person was incapable of escaping. The element of fear the incredibly sudden and violent attack created in the victim paralyzed her. This is the reality of it. This victim was unable to escape and survived only because this particular killer, on this particular occasion and in this particular moment decided to stop short of murder, although he had the opportunity, the ability, the history and the potential for crossing that line in the blink of an eye.

However I do agree that given the dangers of stray rounds and the crowded environ, it may make more sense to use the cruiser instead of the firearm. Although the angle is such that I think you're safe from impacting innocents, although rounds would certainly leave the area.

Your #4 concerns are, to be blunt, a little silly. I am far, far, less concerned with hypothetically pissing off scum-of-the-earth gang-bangers in some possible future than I am with getting my and my families heads bashed in in the here and now.

And I suppose we'll just have to disagree about the prosecution issue. My kingdom for a cop or attorney from Vegas to chime in on that point.

Whilst this threat is certainly immediate, it's directed against your vehicle, not against you: An odd observation. You obviously have a far better understanding of this particular insane drug-addled criminals inner workings than I am capable of mustering. I am actually stunned, more than stunned, that people are evaluating a crack-sucking self-professed violent murderer smashing in your side window with a crowbar as not really a serious threat of harm to your person.

I would love to roll back time here and show people not the entire clip, but only up until the guy takes the first swing at the windshield. Without the benefit of the entire episode, I wonder if people would be so quick to 'know the mind' of this walking horrorshow.

And I take a mild offense at being described as in need of a 'testosterone-reduction program'. Disagree all you want, that's why we're here, but please leave the personal insults at the door, if it's not too much trouble.

- Gabe (do I get to invoke the flaming anger smiley now? :fire: ;))

OF
October 16, 2004, 10:42 AM
That grey line is pretty fine, but some of us just can't make it out because of our graphite fiber-impregnated sunglasses.Another thinly-veiled insult. A good discussion about a serious question is going to get locked down here because some people can't contain their rabid contempt.

- Gabe

OF
October 16, 2004, 11:10 AM
and called an unknown a mall ninjaI didn't call you a mall ninja, Styles. I described your advice as 'mall-ninja-ish'. I clarified that point early on. My point, that I made clear, was that getting out of the car and 'facing down' the guy is a 'mall-ninja' move.

Not to mention it was after you threw the 'rambo' thing out.

This horse is dead and there is no progress being made here. The debate has stalled and the only place to go is down. Lock it.

- Gabe

molonlabe
October 16, 2004, 11:14 AM
I'm in agreement with preacherman. I'd use the car. He put himself in front of it setting himself to be decapitated at the knees. I agree that this person (the driver) was frozen in time in sheer terror. I would not have. and in answer to.

If you have moral issues about protecting yourself or worse your family;

None whatsoever but a firearm at a crowded intersection was not the best form of protection at that time.

Desert Dog
October 16, 2004, 12:13 PM
Stopping the threat via BF Goodrich... :fire:

He placed himself in harms way (in front or in back of the car a couple of times). It is hard to swing a crowbar when a tire/wheel attached to a car, is sitting on or driven over part of your anatomy.

No, I wouldn't have shot. The weapon of choice was already "at hand" :rolleyes:

The next person to be dealt with would be the moron with the camera, and he/she would be dealt with legally ...

ilcylic
October 16, 2004, 12:17 PM
Dimensions of the area!

Ok, so, being the intrepid reporter that I am, I went down there last night.

It's a regular 6 inch curb. After the sidewalk (coming "back towards" the cameraman from the street) there is another 6 inch high by 8 inches wide bumper barrier curb-like-protrusion (presumably to keep parked cars from rolling out onto the sidewalk).

There's no parking lot entrance on that entire section of sidewalk, and before you can get to the corner, right on the curb, there is a light pole. So there's really no way to go halfway up the sidewalk and go around the car in front of her until you're past that.

The newspaper boxes might interfere. I'm not sure. Also, I dunno if a PT Cruiser could straddle that curb. They're pretty short.

Hrmmmm. I shoulda taken some pictures of the area from the other side.

-Ogre

WhiteKnight
October 16, 2004, 04:29 PM
Am I the only one who can't see the video?

JPL
October 16, 2004, 05:16 PM
I get a page not found.

I wonder if all the hits killed the bandwidth or something...

tcsd1236
October 16, 2004, 05:19 PM
OK. What about vagrancy laws? Disturbing the peace violations? Urinating on the street? Panhandling? Menacing passers by? Are those no longer violations? You lock people up for those types of offenses. You don't "escort them to the city line". Officers have no legal authority to do that sort of thing.

tcsd1236
October 16, 2004, 05:22 PM
Nope. Salt Lake City did the same thing just before the 2002 Olympics...sent all the bums and vagrants to Vegas....
And if they actually did that, they are lucky to not have found themselves at the receiving end of a lawsuit.

Powderman
October 16, 2004, 05:43 PM
Something to ponder:

NRS 200.120 “Justifiable homicide” defined. Justifiable homicide is the killing of a human being in necessary self-defense, or in defense of habitation, property or person, against one who manifestly intends, or endeavors, by violence or surprise, to commit a felony, or against any person or persons who manifestly intend and endeavor, in a violent, riotous, tumultuous or surreptitious manner, to enter the habitation of another for the purpose of assaulting or offering personal violence to any person dwelling or being therein.

So, there it is in black and white.

Seems to me that this person was definitely "manifesting intent".

Zundfolge
October 16, 2004, 09:32 PM
Ok, so, being the intrepid reporter that I am, I went down there last night.

You sir are more intrepid then I :p

So did you see our grining crackhead? Shoulda got his autograph ... he's probably famous now (this is the 3rd forum I've found links to the video ... I imagine thats why the link keeps dying)

Nick1911
October 16, 2004, 09:56 PM
I found one mirrored here:

http://www.prism.gatech.edu/~gte580u/holdinitdown.wmv

I'm really curious what the actual legal side of this is - aside from opinions is it a good shoot or no? (CCW holders need to know! ;) )

As one who dosn't regularly carry (heh, or drive) I don't even know how I'd react to this situation - probably about like what was shown in the video.

Nick

joab
October 16, 2004, 10:39 PM
Years ago , when Fla had first adopted CCW, a local news station did a series called Shoot Don't Shoot. Each night for a week they profiled a different scenario.

This was one of them or at least something similar. In theirs a guy was standing at the drivers door with some type of tool getting ready to break the window. The ruling was as soon as the window broke shoot.

In this case the BG had already smashed the car including the windsheild when he approached the drivers window and drew back. This would give any rational person the belief that he would do the same to the driver's window at that point I believe he would have been shootable. And at many points afterward.

Red Rook
October 16, 2004, 11:40 PM
Some of the people posting here need to watch the video a few times. I have read the entire thread and would like to add a few points.

1. The bg at first attacked with the crow bar towards the DRIVER SIDE WINDOW/DOOR. This is near the victim and would constitute a means.

2. The driver attempted to escape.

3. Contrary to what some on here may seem to believe, a crow bar is a deadly weapon; indeed, it just as dangerous or moreso than a bat or knife.

4. Go through the list of what constitutes a legal use of deadly force.

The defender in question must be innocent of provoking the occasion for the act of self defensive - check

The threat defended against must be deadly (intended or likely to cause death or grave bodily injury i.e. wielding crow bar into victim) - check

The threat defended against must be imminent or immediate - check

Ability on the part of the aggressor(s) to deliver on a threat of grave bodily harm (disparity of force, or a deadly weapon) - check

Opportunity to deliver on the threat (proximity in time or distance) - check

Jeopardy (evident intent to act upon the ability and opportunity that poses imminent jeopardy of death or grave bodily harm) - check

The circumstances would in my eyes elicit the use the deadly force. Two things to consider: the bg did not just go to the front bumper and start hitting it, he was attacking the victim on all sides (including the driver side). This is not just an attack on a vehicle, this was an attack on the victim when glass was broken, elevating the level of both means and intention of harm. Second, the escape route was attempted, the victim has then tried to retreat, and thus has his or her back against the wall. One way in which an imminent deadly threat might be otherwise avoidable and the defender's use of deadly force, therefore, not necessary would be in case the defender both had and saw an opportunity to retreat. The law on the duty to retreat holds, roughly, as follows. In virtually all American jurisdictions, a defender has no duty to retreat from her own premises (her home or business premises, or those of another where she's permitted to be). On the other hand, in public places, it is generally held that a defender has a duty to retreat, but only if she knows that she can escape with complete safety to herself and to others. This was extended. Summingly, the victim had all legal grounds to justify the use of deadly force. Indeed, would I have used deadly force, I don't know, but for the poor lady, or perhaps a family member of mine or yours for that matter, it would be very suprising and exasperating to see a DA pursue an unjust use of deadly force in these circumstances.

dkochan
October 17, 2004, 12:42 AM
Considering how much I value my life and the lives of my wife and daughter I would not hesitate shooting this criminal. Based on what I saw in the video, it appeared impossible to drive away from the threat.

itgoesboom
October 17, 2004, 11:43 PM
I think many people are over analyzing this video.

Think of it this way.

You are stuck in traffic, behind other cars, unable to move forward, turn around, or pretty much go anywhere.

A man runs up to your car, hits your windshield with a crow bar, comes over to the drivers side and swings at your window there, with what can be considered a lethal weapon.

Forget everything past this point in the video.

At this point the vagrant has shown the means, the opportunity and the motive. He is actively attacking at you, with a lethal weapon, hitting the window to get to you. At least, that is your perception. Any reasonable person would feel that as well.

At that point, lethal force is more than just justified.

As for the comments about busing vagrents out of town, and the officer who claimed it doesn't still happen. Maybe not in your town sir, but it does still happen.

I once worked in a large S. Cal city as a photojournalist, and went on a ride along with an officer who admitted to this very practice. He would find a vagrant, take them to the trolley, pay for the ticket with his own money, and send them to another part of the county. Let other officers deal with them.

And they would do the same thing.

I.G.B.

dustind
October 18, 2004, 04:26 AM
I think trying to ram the crack head would be a death sentence. There is no way that car could gain enough speed to do any damage. He would probably jump onto the hood and then be *very* angry and even more crazy. He could kill her very quickly after that.

molonlabe
October 18, 2004, 07:34 AM
Of course not. You would have to pin him between the car in front of you, or behind you, either way you have terminated the attack.

Squish.

JamisJockey
October 18, 2004, 07:41 AM
And if they actually did that, they are lucky to not have found themselves at the receiving end of a lawsuit.
It was an accusation made by the leadership of LV, and that several Olympic trust or advocacy groups were doing it.

dwestfall
October 19, 2004, 01:57 AM
It would be a difficult decision for me, since I would probably have my 3.5yr old son or 1.5yr old daughter in the back.

Either crash my way out, driving an uninvolved party into the intersection...

Or shoot, possibly damaging my children's eyes and years with the decibels, burning powder and shattering glass...

Or try to run him down, which is probably harder than it sounds...

Or get out to draw him away from the kids, and put myself well within the Tueller danger zone.

Suffice to say, I don't like my options. But I think I'd have to draw, get out and open fire. Unless he decided to remain at the driver side window, which would be a big help. :)

xenophon
October 19, 2004, 03:30 AM
Ok, most of the analysis of this video has been from the perspective that you are inside the car. What would you have done if you were in an adjacent car to the victims car in this video? (1) carrying and 2) not carrying.

I think I saw one or two people on the cell phones on what I would assume be calling 911. As for my response, I would have been a good witness and pulled off ahead of traffic to help point out the guy to the cops. If he would have started to penetrate the car, i.e. start swinging at just her on driver side or try to drag her out, it's intervention time, and I would be out of my car with pistol in hand, but damn if that would be a very tough shot with him right in front of the driver side door....other option would be to charge him pepper spray in hand, and tackle from behind. Being 25 and fast, if he see's me, I have no trouble with him giving chase to me as I guarantee he won't catch me and it'll draw attention away from victim, and if he does catch up, it's Mr. glock for him.

x

Bobothebigdog
October 19, 2004, 04:47 AM
Did a little researching..... This video is part of a series called "Bum Fights Volume 3". Many of the participants in the videos have been charged with felony's. The preview of it has a clip of the situation.

http://www.bumfights.com

cracked butt
October 19, 2004, 09:27 AM
I wouldn't feel any remorse about pinning the gas pedal to the floor and flattening the gentleman.



As bad as the assault on the car was, I've seen worse done by striking union goons to the cars of office workers who have to cross the line to get to work.:fire:

Joe Demko
October 19, 2004, 11:53 AM
Gabe very nicely stated anything I might have said. If I had been in that situation, especially with my three year old child in the car, that crackhead would have been shot dead on the spot.

R.H. Lee
October 19, 2004, 12:30 PM
Our objectives are twofold, and not interchangeable:
1) Prevent our death or serious injury.
2) Do so in a way that insulates us from felony prosecution.

Each person's response or 'fear reflex' may be different. Some would come completely unglued at the sight of the vagrant shouting and pounding on the fender. Others may not become seriously alarmed, or really fearful until the crowbar broke glass, making them vulnerable to the next blow. Some would become extremely angry at some point in the attack. Few would have the wherewithall to think through the actions they are about to take. Getting out of the car is not an option, although someone very experienced in hand to hand combat could probably disarm the crackhead. (But they would do so at their own peril, who knows what blood borne diseases this guy has?).

What would be the overwhelming response if you were attacked like this? Would it be fear or anger? Different people may react differently. It is easy to sit behind a computer and dispassionately analyze the scenario over several days. I think I know myself well enough to know I would attempt to escape by any means possible, failing that, I would attack and not stop until somebody was dead. YMMV.

The Rabbi
October 19, 2004, 08:24 PM
Some of the differences of opinion I think mirror different state laws.
Here in TN the standard is "reasonable fear of death or bodily harm." There is, by statute, no duty to retreat. So all the posts about driving around him are not applicable here in TN. Maybe NV is different.
I think anyone in that situation would be afraid of death or bodily harm. That justifies shooting, at least in this state. And if the victim is justified then anyone else would be as well. It's a tough call but if I were in the next car I think I would be justified in neutralizing the threat.

The Rabbi
October 19, 2004, 08:58 PM
I'll add that getting out of the car seems like good tactics--better opportunity for a clean shot, less deafening blast, less possibility of glass shards going into eyes.
For the people who advocate ramming, what is the difference between running him over and shooting him? I dont see any.

Firethorn
October 19, 2004, 10:26 PM
I think that it's because you're not using a gun, which is designed to *kill*, but using a car, which is a means for getting around. The fact that you had a gun doesn't have to come up at all. After all, most people have a car, but probably don't carry. A good defense lawyer (remember, no matter what, get one!) could argue that you were seeking *escape*, and the goblin got in the way.

cracked butt
October 19, 2004, 10:43 PM
Did anyone who advocates getting ut of the car actually see how fast the nice man with the crowbar moved? If a person so much as opened the door, they would have found a very large dent in their head before they could even get their feet on the ground.

The car is litterally a suit of armor, armor slows you down and limits mobility, but it also absorbs blows and keeps you alive. Why get caught vulnerable while taking the armor off, or why take it off at all?

Watchman
October 19, 2004, 10:55 PM
Why get caught vulnerable while taking the armor off, or why take it off at all?


Easy.


You step out of the vehicle with your .45 held behind you. When you confront him and he raises his crowbar in a fit of rage you EMPTY your stuff while falling to the ground on your back. This does two things....

One...It gives you a defensive position from which to reload if he is still up, with your legs out front to absorb any possible blows...

Two... All the witnesses will testify in court that you appeared to be hit, thus using the criteria of "fearing for your life" would be very easy to prove.

And three...

you would have removed him from society, and although we all hear that some people NEED to be killed to protect society...

...it is a sad fact.
:what:

ctdonath
October 19, 2004, 11:26 PM
You step out of the vehicle with your .45 held behind you. When you confront him and he raises his crowbar

Someone has an overblown sense of his own dominance of the situation.

Assuming you even get out of the car "with .45 held behind" without getting your skull smashed in, once he starts moving his crowbar while standing inches from you, you're done - first move wins. Time his movements, then time your own - who gets smashed first?

Dude: this guy is out to kill you if you resist. He is crazy, armed, and moving fast.

Don't fall for the "I shall stand my ground, reason with the barbarian, and put him in his place if he attempts harm" BS. The attack has already begun.

Gabe
October 19, 2004, 11:45 PM
Within three feet a tireiron has way more "knockdown power" than any 45.

Ryder
October 20, 2004, 05:45 AM
Would I feel fear or anger? Unlikely for me. It interferes with my ability to negotiate the situation. I would best describe my feelings as disgust. Disgust that this person would force me into shooting him. I draw the line (already explained) and wait for it to be crossed. I am defending my SELF. There's plenty of time for anger and fear after the situation is resolved.

Mr. Clark
October 20, 2004, 06:39 AM
For the people who advocate ramming, what is the difference between running him over and shooting him? I dont see any.

As it was explained in my CCW class, exactly none. If the situation warrants the use of deadly force, what you use to inflict that force is irrelevant. Screw driver, hammer, car, gun - it's all the same. If you are justified in using deadly force it is OK, if not, it isn't - no matter what you use.

The car is a deadly weapon if you use it to ram him. If you are not in a situation that would allow you to shoot him you are not in a situation that would allow you to ram him. The only benefit would be that if you were not in a situation that warranted deadly force you could claim you "accidentally" ran him over while trying to escape. The cop, DA, or jury might "believe" that (wink, wink), or then again they may not. If they don't, you are in just as much sh*t as you would have been had you shot him.

The Rabbi
October 20, 2004, 09:27 AM
Did anyone who advocates getting ut of the car actually see how fast the nice man with the crowbar moved? If a person so much as opened the door, they would have found a very large dent in their head before they could even get their feet on the ground.

Obviously there is a certain amount of judgement in the situation. Yes, if he is at the driver's side getting out of the car would be a serious mistake. But when he went around to the passenger's rear window and smashed that that would be the opportunity to get out, again depending on how fast you thought you could do it.
The "armor" of a car, even an armored car, buys you time, measured in seconds usually, to do something. A car trapped in traffic like that one was is not armor but an impediment to response.

Again, on reflection the situation meets all the demands of a "good shoot." The next question is how to do so responsibly, without endangering others.
I am astounded at those who either would not shoot if they were in the car or even if they were in the car next to it. (I would add the no-shoot crowd is probably the Libertarians, but thats another topic) If CCW was not made for situations like that, what were they made for? The fact that the person in the car was able finally to get away is irrelevant--just like the cop who shoots the guy in a dark alley and then discovers the guy was only going to pull out ID.

HKGuns
October 20, 2004, 10:47 AM
I think Red Rook nails it.......

I can't see the video anymore, but from the descriptions a very similar incident of road rage happened within the last month right here in the Detroit area.

Guy gets cut off, guy pulls up behind car and starts honking for him to pull over. He pulls over and the guy and two girls get out....guy is carrying tire iron and girls are carrying other implements.

Guy (39 yr old) smashes passenger window with tire Iron...driver pulls pistol out and shoots guy in the head. Two girls now wonder where they are going to get their nookie tonight.

No charges filed against the shooter. (He was a probation officer if my memory serves)

BTW: Running him over with the car is the LAST thing you would want to do....that is unless you're into handing your paycheck over to him in his wheelchair for the rest of your life.

Valkman
October 20, 2004, 04:16 PM
Local news this morning said the tape was a total fake, and that the driver of the PT Cruiser was in on it. That's why he only hit one car - I don't think he'd last too long doing that to random cars. :)

OF
October 20, 2004, 04:38 PM
Performances like that are out there they still give an oscar to Sean Penn...I demand a recount! :D

- Gabe

Zundfolge
October 20, 2004, 04:49 PM
Valkman, you have a source on that?

The Rabbi
October 20, 2004, 05:10 PM
For our purposes it doesnt really matter whether it was staged or not. It could just as easily happen, right?

Valkman
October 20, 2004, 10:09 PM
The source was KLAS TV channel 8 here in Vegas. I was in bed at the time and the wife saw it. She thought it was phony from the beginning so she couldn't wait to tell me what they found. They located the "crackhead" and he admitted he was paid to do the whole thing. Now they're looking for whoever taped it.

I've looked on the station's website but can't find anything.

http://www.klas-tv.com/KLAS TV (http://www.klas-tv.com/)

carpboy
October 21, 2004, 12:28 AM
Verrryy Intresting ! But I still don`t lke it!I saw the 11pm preview on KLAS but didnt stay up late enuf to see it.So this is a new version of Bumfights?Whats the deal?

Ex-Doc
October 21, 2004, 01:07 AM
It was a bumfight and he was paid the victim was a victim not a participant from what I heard.

OF
October 21, 2004, 08:36 AM
For our purposes it doesnt really matter whether it was staged or not. It could just as easily happen, right?Very true.

- Gabe

OF
October 21, 2004, 08:37 AM
It was a bumfight and he was paid the victim was a victim not a participant from what I heard.That would make sense to me. I'm having a real hard time believing that the Cruiser folks were in on it. A real hard time...I mean, that just makes absolutely no sense.

Absolutely no offense intended, Valkman, but I believe your wife may have discovered via the news that the camera crew paid the bum, and then extrapolated that the Cruiser people were part of the 'staged' event. I mean, he must have done a couple thousand dollars worth of damage to that car...I can't see anyone doing that for no good reason.

- Gabe

HKrazy
October 21, 2004, 04:26 PM
I mean, he must have done a couple thousand dollars worth of damage to that car Twelve dollars to purchase Collision & Damage Waiver insurance on the rental was probably all it cost.

I saw the story on KLAS also, and they said both parties were in on it.

Valkman
October 21, 2004, 04:29 PM
No offense taken, Gabe! I kinda figured this would happen since I'm reporting a story that I not only didn't see myself but cannot find a link to. Argh!

I think HKrazy got it right though, no on would do that to their own ride.

OF
October 21, 2004, 04:33 PM
Well hell, If it's just a rental hand over the crowbar!

- Gabe ;)

dustind
October 21, 2004, 05:08 PM
I would add the no-shoot crowd is probably the Libertarians, but thats another topic I think you got that 180 degrees backwards.

lbmii
October 22, 2004, 05:13 PM
It is unlikely the PT Cruiser was in on it due to it's random spot in the very busy intersection and the timing of the whole thing. It was staged probably in that the cameraman no doubt prompted this nut along hoping something crazy would happen on film. Two out of three were in on it. "Let's go see if we can't get this gangbanger to do something crazy." and damn if he did.

It was not totally planned out. To many variables are involved. It is along the line of Jerry Springer. You create a situation were volatile unstable people are placed before a camera and edged along "to show the world what they are made off" and "tell it and show it how it really is" and then all hell breaks loose and is captured on film.

Valkman
October 22, 2004, 09:39 PM
I called the TV station that had the story about it being a hoax, and they said they never did put it on their website so no link. But according to them, it was ALL phony, and yes the car was in on it.

lbmii
October 23, 2004, 02:40 PM
Crazy! Irresposible jerks! What would had happened if the car in front saw what was happening in the rear view mirror and drove out into the intersection to escape and got hit by on coming trafic? What if a person saw what was going on and shot the Jerk dead or ran over his worthless ?:cuss: Real real stupid! :fire:

artherd
October 24, 2004, 02:44 AM
I was in fear for my life. Lethal force would be justified, and hopefully I'd actually have the presence of mind to gun the engine while he was still infront of the car. Shooting in such a populated scenario would not be desireable.


What would you do if you were in one of the OTHER cars? If he kept hitting the car, I'd call the cops. If he hit the driver's side window, or opened the door, I'd like to think I'd effect a citizen's arreast at gunpoint (and/or pull the trigger.) As I am defending *another person* who is in fear for their life, as a reasonable person would attribute.

joab
October 24, 2004, 10:59 AM
But according to them, it was ALL phony, and yes the car was in on it. Would any jury, in Fla at least, have convicted the good samaritan that dropped this guy.
And what about the mental anquish that he would have gone through after the fact. That certainly would have been worth a big settlement these days.

Come to think of it. What is to stop the witnesses, especially those with small children, from filling suit for mental anquish.

ctdonath
October 24, 2004, 07:13 PM
That's why it's inadvisable to pull the trigger as a "good samaritan" - you don't know what's really going on. The guy coincidentally filming a thug smashing a car may have set up the whole "on-site" movie to look impromptu. The lady yelling "rape" on a sidewalk while being manhandled may be a prostitute resisting arrest by an undercover officer. The large coordinated bank holdup may be for a movie (the case in the original "The Thomas Crowne Affair").

Being a good samaritan can be very rewarding ... or very costly.

If you enjoyed reading about "Crazy crackhead video" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!