The effect of attitude

[casp625]

SNIP As far as I can tell the driver or his gf were not wearing Helmets I think the motor cycle driver needs to additionally be charged with reckless endangerment causing bodily damage.

Actually, both the motorcyclists are wearing helmets but the male takes his off after the crash.

In regards to the incident (and not directed at MONGOOSE), I fail to see how a minor traffic violation justifies Mr. Crum's felonious actions. After he was confronted for intentionally hitting the motorcycle, he states "I don't care." After being told it was all on camera, he again states "I don't care." Mr. Crum then goes on to explain that he was being illegally passed in a double yellow situation. So after he "doesn't care" about hitting the motorcycle, he justifies his actions that he was being illegally passed. Then he tries to say that a spider or wasp stung him on his left leg which caused him to jerk his car... yea seems legit.

[MONGOOSE]

SNIP As far as I can tell the driver or his gf were not wearing Helmets I think the motor cycle driver needs to additionally be charged with reckless endangerment causing bodily damage.

Actually, both the motorcyclists are wearing helmets but the male takes his off after the crash.

In regards to the incident (and not directed at MONGOOSE), I fail to see how a minor traffic violation justifies Mr. Crum's felonious actions. After he was confronted for intentionally hitting the motorcycle, he states "I don't care." After being told it was all on camera, he again states "I don't care." Mr. Crum then goes on to explain that he was being illegally passed in a double yellow situation. So after he "doesn't care" about hitting the motorcycle, he justifies his actions that he was being illegally passed. Then he tries to say that a spider or wasp stung him on his left leg which caused him to jerk his car... yea seems legit.

I don't justify Crim's actions in anyway if they are proven intentional. I wasn't there........were you ? You judge and jury ?

[casp625]

They don't have to proven it was intentional, look up PC 22.01 and 22.02... all the DA has to prove is he was reckless. Is there any doubt about it?

[MONGOOSE]

They don't have to proven it was intentional, look up PC 22.01 and 22.02... all the DA has to prove is he was reckless. Is there any doubt about it?

So, prove that it was reckless and let the guy rot in jail. That goes for the crotch rocket drivers also, they showed they don't have any respect for laws either. They could just as easily cause a reck or loss of life.

[Charles L. Cotton]

They don't have to proven it was intentional, look up PC 22.01 and 22.02... all the DA has to prove is he was reckless. Is there any doubt about it?

I didn't see anyone trying to justify what the driver did. To the contrary, everyone including me seems to want him in prison.

However, some people seem to be minimizing the motorcycle "driver's" fault in this situation. He should be charged with and convicted of Deadly Conduct pursuant to TPC §22.05(a). Just as there's no excuse for Mr. Crum's intentional conduct, there's no excuse for the motorcycle "driver's" intentionally doing something that could easily, in fact did, result in serious bodily injury to his passenger. While I would argue that having a mad driver swerve and hit your bike was not foreseeable, it is quite foreseeable that passing in a no passing zone could get your passenger seriously injured or killed.

The only innocent victim in this is the poor woman on the back of the motorcycle.

Chas.

[Oldgringo]

They don't have to proven it was intentional, look up PC 22.01 and 22.02... all the DA has to prove is he was reckless. Is there any doubt about it?

I didn't see anyone trying to justify what the driver did. To the contrary, everyone including me seems to want him in prison.

However, some people seem to be minimizing the motorcycle "driver's" fault in this situation. He should be charged with and convicted of Deadly Conduct pursuant to TPC §22.05(a). Just as there's no excuse for Mr. Crum's intentional conduct, there's no excuse for the motorcycle "driver's" intentionally doing something that could easily, in fact did, result in serious bodily injury to his passenger. While I would argue that having a mad driver swerve and hit your bike was not foreseeable, it is quite foreseeable that passing in a no passing zone could get your passenger seriously injured or killed.

The only innocent victim in this is the poor woman on the back of the motorcycle.

Chas.

We were under a Stage II Fire alert this past summer in NW Montana.....forest fires everywhere. I saw a guy on a eargessplitten Harley, decked out in the uniform that many wear to look different, roaring down the road with a lit cigarette in his mouth.

Attidude, it's all about attitude.

[AJSully421]

0% chance what that guy did had anything to do with a bug bite. His actions and the timing with his quick return to his proper lane position and how he sped up and took off right after, combined with his "I don't care" in the seconds following tell the entire story.

MC driver was also being an idiot.

[Abbreviated profanity deleted. Next time the entire post will be deleted.]

Car driver needs about a 3-5 year time out. You just DO NOT do stuff like that to a motorcyclist that is not shooting at you.

[Charles L. Cotton]

This isn't a gun story, but it illustrates the reaction some people have to others.

For reference, http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2015/10/20/driv ... cle-crash/

A couple out on a motorcycle, riding too aggressively, get attacked by a motorist in a car. If I understand the situation correctly, the car driver, going a little slow and starting to pile up traffic, hits the "boring" button on a sport motorcyclist who passes in a no passing zone. It looks like he had visibility to pass, considering his acceleration and the slower speed of the two cars he was passing, but he was out of line. He shouldn't have tried to pass there.

Which didn't give the slow driver any right to nail the guy, sending his girlfriend into surgery.

There's obviously some blame on the part of the motorcycle pilot. He passed illegally. But more to the point from an armed citizen perspective, it's probably a really wise idea not to be an irritant. It's also true the car driver crossed the same yellow stripes the motorcyclist did. Pot and kettle, perhaps a case of homochromatic cookery, but with overzealous fun answered by calamitous intent.

Keep calm, carry, maintain situational awareness and the skills to answer deadly threat with precision, and keep a smile on your face if there's not a reason otherwise. Grin and be sociable, if for no other purpose than to confound your detractors and confuse your enemies.

My takeaway - I shouldn't be a jerk, someone could put my girlfriend in a hospital, and she's the only one for me these past 30 years.

Don't overreact for the obvious moral reasons, not to mention the legal entanglements.

Excellent analysis.

Chas.

[The Annoyed Man]

While it appears to me that the car driver may be guilty of a Felon , I wasn't there. I have no idea of his speed or if he was impeding traffic. I have no idea if he had set the cruise button (Which this lead foot drives by). I have no idea if he was bitten. Seems to be a large bias to the car driver. Now the motor cycle driver was obviously passing in a no passing zone (had a lot of concern for his girl friend). As far as I can tell the driver or his gf were not wearing Helmets I think the motor cycle driver needs to additionally be charged with reckless endangerment causing bodily damage. I think we need to let the courts figure this incident out.

Yeah, they were.....or at least, she was. It's on the video. She's laying on her back on the grass, knocked out, with a blue/white helmet on her head.

[MONGOOSE]

I see that now.

[casp625]

They don't have to proven it was intentional, look up PC 22.01 and 22.02... all the DA has to prove is he was reckless. Is there any doubt about it?

I didn't see anyone trying to justify what the driver did. To the contrary, everyone including me seems to want him in prison.

However, some people seem to be minimizing the motorcycle "driver's" fault in this situation. He should be charged with and convicted of Deadly Conduct pursuant to TPC §22.05(a). Just as there's no excuse for Mr. Crum's intentional conduct, there's no excuse for the motorcycle "driver's" intentionally doing something that could easily, in fact did, result in serious bodily injury to his passenger. While I would argue that having a mad driver swerve and hit your bike was not foreseeable, it is quite foreseeable that passing in a no passing zone could get your passenger seriously injured or killed.

The only innocent victim in this is the poor woman on the back of the motorcycle.

Chas.

In this incident, I can see Deadly Conduct being reasonable... However, couldnt most traffic violations fall under 22.05(a), such as speeding, running a red light, failing to yield right of way, etc.? Especially if any result in an accident?

[Jim Beaux]

The video enraged & sickened me. It was obvious that this wasnt the car driver's first rodeo. I met someone similar years ago. They both have something missing in their makeup.

[MONGOOSE]

They don't have to proven it was intentional, look up PC 22.01 and 22.02... all the DA has to prove is he was reckless. Is there any doubt about it?

I didn't see anyone trying to justify what the driver did. To the contrary, everyone including me seems to want him in prison.

However, some people seem to be minimizing the motorcycle "driver's" fault in this situation. He should be charged with and convicted of Deadly Conduct pursuant to TPC §22.05(a). Just as there's no excuse for Mr. Crum's intentional conduct, there's no excuse for the motorcycle "driver's" intentionally doing something that could easily, in fact did, result in serious bodily injury to his passenger. While I would argue that having a mad driver swerve and hit your bike was not foreseeable, it is quite foreseeable that passing in a no passing zone could get your passenger seriously injured or killed.

The only innocent victim in this is the poor woman on the back of the motorcycle.

Chas.

In this incident, I can see Deadly Conduct being reasonable... However, couldnt most traffic violations fall under 22.05(a), such as speeding, running a red light, failing to yield right of way, etc.? Especially if any result in an accident?

If a traffic stop or heaven forbid an accident, the Police here have been charging the driver with child endangerment if a young child is a passanger

[SA_Steve]

There are some folks who see their life's mission is to teach someone a lesson whenever possible.
In the car driver's case there is a nasty criminal penalty for that sort of thing.

[Abraham]

Sociopaths drive cars too...