ZeSpectre
Member
The non-high road part of me pictured a fire truck sitting at the intersection and when the "mob" blows the red light you just open up the hoses and then arrest 'em while they are picking themselves up.
About 10 of the riders went down
Nice one. Tell me, does hurting people and thinking you're justified
make you feel like a big man?
News: You were in the wrong. Somebody had to break that to you, because
sound judgment seems to be lost on you.
She touched the back of a rider's tire?
Are you kidding me?
Time for some damage to the vehicle.
News: You were in the wrong. Somebody had to break that to you, because
sound judgment seems to be lost on you.
Durruti said:A woman in a car hits a bicyclist.
Durruti said:If someone breaks into my house and threatens me with a gun, do I go kill the offenders family after taking care of him?
Out of 3000 of them, a handful engage in aggressive vandalism and one actually becomes violent. In response, some people here advocate deadly force against all 3000 of them?
A woman is alleged to have tapped a cyclist's tire with her vehicle.A woman in a car hits a bicyclist.
Aggressive vandalism of a vehicle with occupants resulting in $5,300 worth of damage, including running into the vehicle (hit and run), is, by definition, violence.Out of 3000 of them, a handful engage in aggressive vandalism and one actually becomes violent.
P.S. I don't know what kind of bicycle laws there are in CA, but the Law of Gross Tonnage is universal: if something is bigger and heavier than you, it has the "Right Of Way".
And having your car beat on does not alone justify the use of deadly force.
(1) unlawfully entered, or was attempting to enter
unlawfully, the actor's habitation, vehicle, or place of business
or employment;
(2) unlawfully removed, or was attempting to remove
unlawfully, the actor from the actor's habitation, vehicle, or
place of business or employment of the actor; or
(d) For purposes of Subsection (a)(2), in determining
whether an actor described by Subsection (c) reasonably believed
that the use of deadly force was necessary, a finder of fact may not
consider whether the actor failed to retreat.
§ 9.04. THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE. The threat of
force is justified when the use of force is justified by this
chapter. For purposes of this section, a threat to cause death or
serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as
long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension
that he will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute the
use of deadly force.
Breaking out the window of my auto, I would think it reasonable to assume you intended to enter unlawfully.