Women Against Guns Part Deux

[Glock Girl in CA]

Ok, I just can't stay away from this biking site. Probably because my political beliefs are so radically different than theirs that it makes their perspectives so entertaining to me. Check out their newest thread involving a cyclist who was (rightfully, I think) shot. The poster who calls herself Smiling Cat has the most idiotic response so far. I didn't say much but backed up the ONE person who stood up for the gun owner. Can't just leave it alone, can't leave it alone...sigh...

http://forums.teamestrogen.com/showthread.php?p=654673#post654673

[StormRaven]

I skimmed the thread and read the one post you specifically called out. Oy vey.

I'd read more but I should have been in bed an hour ago for work tomorrow, and I can't let my blood pressure get that high right now.

Edit: Okay, too late. Now I'm mad.

[Arisaka]

"guns and hate" lol

[23 Blast]

Meh. I've seen far more wild-eyed, frothing-at-the-mouth responses in other forums I used to frequent. Smiling Cat and most of the others in that thread are undoubtedly anti-gun, but most of what I gleaned was a lamenting of civility in society in general, not really a bald-faced condemnation of gun owners in particular.

But what I get from reading that thread is the tacit assumption that the bicyclist was your stereotypical granola-eating, milquetoast, gentle-soul neo-hippie, while the gun-owning truck driver was your stereotypical flannel-wearing, bushy-bearded, beer-gut-having, Confederate flag sticker wearing, backwoods redneck with an itchy trigger finger.

I've been on sites like these before, and trust me that is their general line of thought.

[MrsRazz]

So, I guess if someone is beating the crap out of you, you're not supposed to defend yourself.

Actually, what I find interesting is that everyone assumed that the intention was to kill the attacker and that punching with bare fists doesn't mean anything.

[masameet]

I just looked at Google Maps for the Taylor, MI, intersection of Telegraph and Northline. The news stories all say the rider was on the sidewalk and disregarded the "Do not walk" sign. But unless that intersection has been upgraded since the Google vehicle camera took photos of that intersection, and I'm guessing it has not been, no "pedestrian" specific signals exist there. So if both the rider and the driver were heading northbound but the driver turned right at the intersection as the bicyclist approached the intersection, he violated the rider's right-of-way. And if he had noticed the rider along Telegraph but still continued to turn right, knowing full well he would impede the rider's path and cause an accident, then he did so with total disregard for the rider's safety.

So if my scenario is close to what actually happened, I can see how the rider would have gotten incensed enough to attack the driver. I'm guessing in the seconds before the assault that the driver admitted he saw the rider but figured either he'd turn before the cyclist got to the intersection or that the cyclist would brake in time instead of the other way around. Or maybe he just had a bad day and said FU to the rider.

And honestly if the rider had been a child on a bicycle, would the driver still have made that left turn in front of the kid?

And getting punched in the face is considered life-threatening?

I don't see the justification for shooting an unarmed man who had just seconds before been made to ride into the driver's passenger side and then crashed onto the ground. The rider's bicycle also appears to be a serious training bicycle, so why he felt safer riding on the sidewalk may have to do something with the way bicycles are perceived in Michigan than his being an alleged sidewalk-riding scofflaw.

And no, I did not read through the opinions in that women's cycling thread. As someone who used to ride seriously and who has become a firm believer in firearms, I find that their opinion makes no difference to me. But I do share their outrage for a fellow rider's unnecessary and violent death.

[KR_H]

So, I guess if someone is beating the crap out of you, you're not supposed to defend yourself.

"If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun." Dalai Lama

(Mrs. Razz, I understand your comment and are mocking the antis) ;-}

[StormRaven]

And getting punched in the face is considered life-threatening?

If someone physically assaulted me, I'd consider that life threatening. I have NO IDEA how far this person who has violated my personal space will go, and I will defend my life.

I don't see the justification for shooting an unarmed man who had just seconds before been made to ride into the driver's passenger side and then crashed onto the ground.

I don't see the justification for reaching INSIDE A CAR WINDOW and PUNCHING SOMEONE IN THE FACE REPEATEDLY. I don't see any justification for assaulting someone unless it is to defend someone else being assaulted by them.

And no, I did not read through the opinions in that women's cycling thread. As someone who used to ride seriously and who has become a firm believer in firearms, I find that their opinion makes no difference to me. But I do share their outrage for a fellow rider's unnecessary and violent death.

Maybe he shouldn't have lost his mind and started a physical altercation. I am sorry a man is dead, but he could have avoided losing his life if he didn't lose his temper and assaulted someone.

[MrsRazz]

So if both the rider and the driver were heading northbound but the driver turned right at the intersection as the bicyclist approached the intersection, he violated the rider's right-of-way.

Nope. The bike rider was on the sidewalk, he had no right of way. Bikes are considered a vehicle and riding on the sidewalk would be considered traveling in the incorrect lane.

I was a witness to an accident very similar to this. The bike rider was deemed at fault and ticketed.

[Glock Girl in CA]

Also noteworthy is that as the cyclist was pummeling the driver, he was heard to be saying, "I'm going to kill you!" Ability, opportunity and jeopardy were all in play at this moment. If the reports are accurate, I think the driver satisfied the requirements of the law concerning using lethal force. I only wish the driver could have just driven away...would have been an easier outcome for everyone, justified or not.

http://www.corneredcat.com/Ability_Opportunity_Jeopardy/

[Sakiri]

Nope. The bike rider was on the sidewalk, he had no right of way. Bikes are considered a vehicle and riding on the sidewalk would be considered traveling in the incorrect lane.

I was a witness to an accident very similar to this. The bike rider was deemed at fault and ticketed.

Correct. Bikes are considered vehicles and subject to the exact same laws that cars are. Riding on sidewalks is generally prohibited(most anyone I see on sidewalks anymore are really little kids in residential areas).

http://www.azbikeped.org/azbss.htm

It's for the state of Arizona, but most of it is valid anywhere, and the road rules are always a good idea to follow. How to make turns, how not to ride and get yourself squished or trapped in an unsafe spot(such as next to parked cars with drivers overtaking to the left).

[nick]

Reminds me of the situation I encountered some years back. It was in Hollywood, so this wasn't anything unusual, of course

I was walking from the office to the bank on my lunch break, and saw a bicyclist pedaling like crazy towards me on the sidewalk. As I was moving aside to let him pass, a BMW began making a right turn into the building's parking lot. The driver either didn't see the bicyclist, or underestimated the bicyclist's speed (the guy was riding very fast), and there were no pedestrians nearby. Either way, the bicyclist had to brake hard in order not to hit the car. I'd say he was skidding for at least 10-15 yds before he stopped a couple of yards from the car. The driver saw him skidding, and also stopped.

What happened next was bizarre. The bicyclist got off his bike, picked up the bike, and started smashing it into the car's windshield, again, and again, and again. The car's driver, a middle-aged guy, just froze. By the time I got to the bicyclist, he stopped smashing the windshield with his bike (the windshield was broken and pushed inside the car, but it only had a few small holes in it, those things are tough!), and proceeded to jab the bike into the car through the open passenger window, trying to hit the driver that way.

I told him that this was enough, he either didn't hear me, or ignored me. I then put a hand on his shoulder, and told him that this was enough. He then took a swing at me, which led to him hugging the ground (he was more angry than skilled). His bike was still sticking from the car's window. By then a small group of people formed a circle around us, but when I asked them to call the police, they all found some urgent business elsewhere. So I had to hold the guy with one hand, and dial the police with the other. Needless to say, that didn't work out well - he wrestled himself free, tried to pull his bike out of the car's window, failed, took off the bike's front wheel instead, and ran away. By then, probably seeing the bicyclist take off, the car's driver unfroze and drove in pursuit of the guy (yeah, with the broken windshield and the bicycle still sticking out of the passenger window), and I was left standing there with the 911 dispatcher finally answering the call. I described the situation and the parties involved, gave them my phone number, and haven't heard from them ever since.

Do you think, the car's driver would've been justified, if he shot the bicyclist, as the guy was smashing his windshield, or trying to jab him with the bike through the car's window? I think, he would've been justified - the bicyclist was clearly not in control of his anger, and the bike, jabbed in the wrong place, could've easily seriously injured or even killed the driver.

And people really need to get a grip on their emotions. I think, not being punished for not controlling themselves in public (and, in extreme cases, endangering the public) is the main reason many people stopped even trying to control themselves. Say what you will (and I know many here will not take this kindly), but an armed society is a polite society.

[masameet]

Nope. The bike rider was on the sidewalk, he had no right of way. Bikes are considered a vehicle and riding on the sidewalk would be considered traveling in the incorrect lane.

I was a witness to an accident very similar to this. The bike rider was deemed at fault and ticketed.

In California and in Michigan it is not illegal for bicyclists to ride on sidewalks outside of business districts.

[Tubbie]

The bicyclist is an assh*ole so he deserves whatever comes his way. I can only hope that he was trying to get away and ran into traffics and got ran over by a truck carrying bicycle parts.

[masameet]

Also noteworthy is that as the cyclist was pummeling the driver, he was heard to be saying, "I'm going to kill you!" Ability, opportunity and jeopardy were all in play at this moment. If the reports are accurate, I think the driver satisfied the requirements of the law concerning using lethal force. I only wish the driver could have just driven away...would have been an easier outcome for everyone, justified or not.

http://www.corneredcat.com/Ability_O...nity_Jeopardy/

Well, the Wayne County DA is looking into prosecuting the driver. It will be interesting to see if any charges are filed.