Motorcyclist pulls gun in road rage incident. His target had better aim

[AnnieA]

Definitely the shooter would be arrested on the spot, and taken to the police station to undergo questioning about how and why he killed someone..

Did you expect the police to just tell him to go home and put his feet up for a while ?

Look at the report above (#21). The shooter is cooperating. No need to arrest a person who is cooperating with the investigation. A victim of road rage who had to use a gun to protect self and children from a person aiming a gun at them in a self defense situation with witnesses isn't exactly a flight risk since the law of the land is innocent until proven guilty.

 

[win231]

Motorcycle laws? Aren't you avoiding the bigger problem?
Both men were armed and dangerous.
How would changing the road rules overcome that problem?

Uh, s'cuze me. Both men were not armed and dangerous. Only one moron was armed and dangerous and a criminal thug.
The other man was armed & prepared to protect his family.
Please think. Having a gun does not make someone "dangerous."

 

[ohioboy]

Here is a scenario of my own, Ohio.

This is an actual scenario my husband used in conversation with me just last week.

You're in a corner store, you're shopping down one of the isles when you hear, bam, bam, bam.

You draw your sidearm, make your way to the front of the store and see a man standing at the checkout with a gun in his hand, and at his feet is a dead man on the floor.

Are you going to ask the man with the gun, excuse me, Sir, did you just shoot that man? Then proceed to take the time to ask the man, why did you shoot him?

My husband said if it were him in the store, the shooter would be laying on the floor next to the dead man.

Reality tells me my husband isn't the only one that thinks the way he does.

So when the police happen upon this scene, my husband just walks off, no questions asked?

That's not self defense.

 

[Verisure]

Definitely the shooter would be arrested on the spot, and taken to the police station to undergo questioning about how and why he killed someone..

Did you expect the police to just tell him to go home and put his feet up for a while ?

This is only a film but the arrest of "the hero" is in order.

 

[Aunt Marg]

That's not self defense.

You're right, it's not, but food for thought for those who carry.

Think twice before you act, because you don't know who has you in their sights.

 

[Verisure]

That's not self defense.

Hmmm. Neither is the man in your scenario.

 

[ohioboy]

You're right, it's not, but food for thought for those who carry.

Think twice before you act.

I concur.

 

[hollydolly]

Look at the report above (#21). The shooter is cooperating. A person who had to use a gun to protect self and children in a self defense situation with witnesses isn't exactly a flight risk since the law of the land is innocent until proven guilty.

I have agreed all along with that Annie... I was just saying that according to the link the shooter was not arrested.. and he would have been in the UK

 

[Aunt Marg]

Uh, s'cuze me. Both men were not armed and dangerous. Only one moron was armed and dangerous and a criminal thug.
The other man was armed & prepared to protect his family.
Please think. Having a gun does not make someone "dangerous."

I beg to differ with you on that, but I'll leave it at that.

 

[Verisure]

I have agreed all along with that Annie... I was just saying that according to the link the shooter was not arrested.. and he would have been in the UK

And ought to have been.

 

[AnnieA]

I have agreed all along with that Annie... I was just saying that according to the link the shooter was not arrested.. and he would have been in the UK

Well, knowing you, I thought at first that you were agreeing ....then got not so sure! Am very glad we're on the same page!

 

[Verisure]

...... Having a gun does not make someone "dangerous."

I beg to differ with you on that .....

Indeed, yes. Do these two phrases sound familiar?

* "He's got a knife!"
* "He's got a gun!"

 

[AnnieA]

And ought to have been.

That you have to minimize the font of the part of @hollydolly s quote agreeing that she doesn't think the victim of road rage should've been arrested for defending self and family in order for you you to interject your view counter to hers is ludicrously convoluted, but does provide a spot of humor in the middle of a very sad discussion.

 

[win231]

Well, he did shoot a man multiple times and the man died.
Bail would probably be denied in Australia too.

Police officers also shoot a man multiple times & he dies.
Do you feel the same way about it?

 

[win231]

Too many motorcyclist ignore all laws especially traffic laws frequently thinking as long as they fit in a space not a passing lane they'll do it along with the speeding and aggressive in and out manuevers. There is also an issue now in many US cities anyway with scooters, dirt bikes and off road vehicle participating or being used in crime.

Some laws are stupid. Example: Lane splitting is legal in CA. Legal, but stupid.
Sometimes when I'm changing lanes, a speeding biker will suddenly appear alongside me. Since they're going much faster than traffic, they can't be seen until they're really close. One co-worker who rides a motorcycle told me he made his bike really loud so drivers can hear him coming when he splits lanes. That often doesn't work in heavy traffic when cars are going 10 mph & the biker is going 60 mph. By the time the driver hears the motorcycle, it's too late.

 

[AnnieA]

Some laws are stupid. Example: Lane splitting is legal in CA. Legal, but stupid.
Sometimes when I'm changing lanes, a speeding biker will suddenly appear alongside me. Since they're going much faster than traffic, they can't be seen until they're really close. One co-worker who rides a motorcycle told me he made his bike really loud so drivers can hear him coming when he splits lanes. That often doesn't work in heavy traffic when cars are going 10 mph & the biker is going 60 mph. By the time the driver hears the motorcycle, it's too late.

Omgosh. I had no idea lane splitting was legal anywhere. It's incredibly dangerous--most of all to those doing it.

 

[Buckeye]

WoW, I'm amazed no charges have been brought to the killer...

I realise it was self defence by all accounts, and the man had a right to defend himself and his children, and I agree on the face of it no charges should be brought .. but in the UK.. if that had happened the defender, would be immediately arrested and jailed until he faced a long drawn out court case to decide his innocence or guilt..

Here in the colonies, we are allowed to defend ourselves, and we are considered innocent until proven guilty. Sorry you don't have the same rights.

 

[Jules]

We have the same system in place here in Canada.

I don't see it as unjust, I instead see it as a no nonsense system.

I approve of it 100%.

Because we’re both in Canada, I’m responding to your posts. Maybe I’m misreading them.

Even if someone shot the other person in self-defense, they would be taken in for questioning.

Do you remember the shopkeeper in one of our BC cities who killed an armed robber. The shopkeeper was charged with murder. He wasn’t convicted but his life was ruined by stress and legal fees.

Here is a scenario of my own, Ohio.

This is an actual scenario my husband used in conversation with me just last week.

You're in a corner store, you're shopping down one of the isles when you hear, bam, bam, bam.

You draw your sidearm, make your way to the front of the store and see a man standing at the checkout with a gun in his hand, and at his feet is a dead man on the floor.

Are you going to ask the man with the gun, excuse me, Sir, did you just shoot that man? Then proceed to take the time to ask the man, why did you shoot him?

My husband said if it were him in the store, the shooter would be laying on the floor next to the dead man.

Reality tells me my husband isn't the only one that thinks the way he does.

So when the police happen upon this scene, my husband just walks off, no questions asked?

Recently someone posted about an American who shot the cop killer. Then he picked up the gun at the scene and the police mistakenly shot him.

In your scenario, your DH heard shots, ran to the front of the store and shot the person with the gun. Hearing is not seeing what transpired and seeing doesn’t explain all the facts. Suppose the dead person was the man who had been raping your child for years. Unless you know all the facts, you don’t have the right to be an executioner.

 

[AnnieA]

Here in the colonies, we are allowed to defend ourselves, and we are considered innocent until proven guilty. Sorry you don't have the same rights.

Read through it again. @hollydolly believes that as well. But victims who harm perpetrators are likely to have a tougher legal time of it in the UK than here. Some in the UK feel victims have fewer rights than criminals according to comments I've read on other sites.

 

[Buckeye]

Read through it again. @hollydolly believes that as well.

??? I was responding to her post about what would happen in the UK. I think it is pretty clear.

 

[Aunt Marg]

Because we’re both in Canada, I’m responding to your posts. Maybe I’m misreading them.

Even if someone shot the other person in self-defense, they would be taken in for questioning.

Do you remember the shopkeeper in one of our BC cities who killed an armed robber. The shopkeeper was charged with murder. He wasn’t convicted but his life was ruined by stress and legal fees.



Recently someone posted about an American who shot the cop killer. Then he picked up the gun at the scene and the police mistakenly shot him.

In your scenario, your DH heard shots, ran to the front of the store and shot the person with the gun. Hearing is not seeing what transpired and seeing doesn’t explain all the facts. Suppose the dead person was the man who had been raping your child for years. Unless you know all the facts, you don’t have the right to be an executioner.

Is this the story you're referring to?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/brit...ho-shot-robber-wants-more-gun-rights-1.817344

The one where the shop-owner was honoured by the Canadian Association for Self-defense? The case that happened back in 2009? The case where public sentiment in Port Alberni supported Galloway's actions?

As for what my husband said, those are his words not mine, but his words should serve as a reminder as to how quickly the tables can be turned.

 

[Jules]

No, not that one and I can’t find a news link. It was the same type of thing.

The Canadian Association for Self-Defense has 2573 members.

 

[Verisure]

Here in the colonies ........

...... we are allowed to defend ourselves, and we are considered innocent until proven guilty. Sorry you don't have the same rights.

Citizens have the right to defend themselves in Europe also. The difference is in the definition of "self-defense". In the US it can mean almost anything at all while in Europe you don't have the right to shoot someone for insulting you or stepping on your foot or walking on your lawn or stealing your bicycle. We don't call that "self-defense".

 

[Verisure]

....... Unless you know all the facts, you don’t have the right to be an executioner.

Bravo.

 

[Buckeye]

Citizens have the right to defend themselves in Europe also. The difference is in the definition of "self-defense". In the US it can mean almost anything at all while in Europe you don't have the right to shoot someone for insulting you or stepping on your foot or walking on your lawn or stealing your bicycle. We don't call that "self-defense".

Nor do we, and you know that. Try again with something relevant to the OP's situation.