Charges considered against driver in bicyclist's shooting in Taylor, MI

[shortyforty]

You know for a group of gun owners who on other posts say there should be no duty to retreat or run, now all of a sudden you say he had a duty to retreat from a fight he didn't start? Bottom line the bicyclist thought he was attacking an unarmed man who was restrained in a vehicle and found out the hard way he was wrong. This is cut and dry self defense

 

[griffin]

the bicyclist thought he was attacking an unarmed man who was restrained in a vehicle

Much like Trayvon Martin, he won't do that again.

 

[Steeler]

You know for a group of gun owners who on other posts say there should be no duty to retreat or run, now all of a sudden you say he had a duty to retreat from a fight he didn't start? Bottom line the bicyclist thought he was attacking an unarmed man who was restrained in a vehicle and found out the hard way he was wrong. This is cut and dry self defense

I`m not saying he had a duty to reatreat, I`m saying thats what I would have done.

 

[griffin]

I`m saying thats what I would have done.

How?

 

[Steeler]

Much like Trayvon Martin, he won't do that again.

I agree, I would have shot Trey Trey everytime in that scenario.

 

[sgtonory]

^ He will have to prove that he was fearing for his life; hard to do against an unarmed opponent and you are in a car. Given the information, I can't see lethal force being justified.

Maybe the guy on the bike had a huge physical advantage over the guy in the car. All i know i was not there its a shame someone died. But ya hard to say you felt your life was at risk when you can just drive away.

 

[TopDog]

^ He will have to prove that he was fearing for his life; hard to do against an unarmed opponent and you are in a car. Given the information, I can't see lethal force being justified.

In fear for his life. How about he has a gun on him, the perpetrator is physically assaulting him. If he becomes unconscious because of the beating then the gun is vulnerable, he will no longer be in control of a deadly weapon. I dont know if that would fly. I dont think I would use that reasoning. I would have just drove away, especially since there were witness's to him assaulting the driver.

 

[griffin]

hard to say you felt your life was at risk when you can just drive away.

Really?

After the cyclist ran into the vehicle, the driver stopped the car and put it in park with the intent to get out, check on the cyclist, and make sure he wasn't injured. In a mad rage, the cyclist ran around the car and began pummeling the driver, hitting him seven or eight times in quick succession as reported by witnesses. The driver leaned back toward the passenger side as far as he could to escape the blows, but he was restrained by his seat belt. He was pressing on the gas pedal to get away, but of course the truck was in park, and he couldn't move back into position to roll up the window or put it in gear without putting his head/neck/body closer to his attacker. The cyclist was coming after him through the driver's side door.

So tell me again how the driver could simply have driven away.

 

[PriestEG]

having read all the post in this, i think it boils down to a "situation dictates" decision to be made by an individual. say this was my 115lbs wife getting beaten by some mad cyclist, there would be no question in the legal right to exercise deadly force as view by an outsider. change that to me, 250lbs, young and able to defend myself, people would question this differently. i would say that i would try everything possible to avoid pulling that trigger, but this man may have only had 3 or 4 seconds to think about such a thing... how long would it take for you (generally using you) to walk up to someone sitting in their car and hit them 7 or 8 times in rapid succession. probably less than 3 seconds. and while seeing stars, having your head rung, and adrenaline flowing the ability to use fine motor skills to undo your seat belt or find the button to roll up the window may not have been a possibility.
this man must have genuinely fear and probably felt serious bodily injury in those short terrifying seconds to make the call to use deadly force, and id say it was justified

 

[PriestEG]

I`m not saying he had a duty to reatreat, I`m saying thats what I would have done.

how do you know for certain that you would be able to drive in a safe manner after being hit 7 or 8 times in the face? ive taken some good shots to the face from drunk marines and know that driving after being smashed real good a time or two can make a simple task like driving a dangerous feat.. just because you while sitting in your house and relaxing, reading this story thinks that you could easily retreat from a situation does not prove that it can be done without endangering others

 

[Steeler]

how do you know for certain that you would be able to drive in a safe manner after being hit 7 or 8 times in the face? ive taken some good shots to the face from drunk marines and know that driving after being smashed real good a time or two can make a simple task like driving a dangerous feat.. just because you while sitting in your house and relaxing, reading this story thinks that you could easily retreat from a situation does not prove that it can be done without endangering others

Not saying this guy was in the wrong because I wasn't there, but picturing myself in a similar situation I'm telling ya seatbelt and all that guy is gonna have to have freakish long arms to reach my ass leaning over into the passenger seat.

 

[Ted]

^ This

In fact, I believe (IIRC) by engaging in the fight, you must retreat before using deadly force (or announce the retreat, or surrender or something like that).. (someone correct me if I'm wrong)

If one is the initial aggressor, yes.

 

[griffin]

picturing myself in a similar situation I'm telling ya seatbelt and all that guy is gonna have to have freakish long arms to reach my ass leaning over into the passenger seat.

Are you just being obtuse on purpose or what?

The bicycle guy guy ran around the truck and began pummeling the driver before he knew what was going on. He leaned over in his seat to get away from the blows and stepped on the gas pedal to drive away, but the car was in park. This happened in the first few seconds.

The attacker began opening up the driver's door to climb into the cab to get the guy. This happened in the next second.

The driver shot the idiot. This happened in the next second.

My God I hope you are never on a jury because you are oblivious to, well, anything.

 

[Ted]

After reading a bit upon Michigan's legislative intent and law, its obvious that the legislation was based upon Florida's statute. Though there are clear differences between the two, as Florida's law allows dismissal before trial.

After the Zimmerman/Martin debacle that didn't result in Zimmerman's immediate arrest, I'm convinced that the police didn't wish to take the heat from the perception of police inaction.

Of course, the former governor who signed the law into law in 2006, as well as a number of Dem state legislators, support the law's repeal these past few months, due to the increasing number of justified homicides within the state.

If this incident were an attempted rape instead, I'm convinced that not one politician would have objected to this law. Instead, the Monday morning quarterbacks and naysayers use a bully's death as a call to arms, to place those who defend themselves from harm into the line of legal fire.

Perhaps each lawmaker should be placed in a similar situation, just so they can experience the honor of being victimized a second time.

 

[jgreiner]

Charges? Clear cut case of self defense. Plus, the guy on the bike caused the wreck.

 

[WC Deer Hunter]

Lots of Monday Morning Quarterbacks that can always do it better than the person that did it. Ya'll should volunteer to take some of these peoples places so that you can show them how it should be done.

 

[Steeler]

Are you just being obtuse on purpose or what?

The bicycle guy guy ran around the truck and began pummeling the driver before he knew what was going on. He leaned over in his seat to get away from the blows and stepped on the gas pedal to drive away, but the car was in park. This happened in the first few seconds.

The attacker began opening up the driver's door to climb into the cab to get the guy. This happened in the next second.

The driver shot the idiot. This happened in the next second.

My God I hope you are never on a jury because you are oblivious to, well, anything.

Look dude, I was going off of info in the first article posted. I hadn't heard of the door being opened and all, chill out we are both on the same side of the fence.
Just because I may have responded differently doesn't mean I don't believe he was justified.

 

[chuckp]

If he was getting pummeled in his car he most likely could have been in fear of stomping on the gas and going blindly into traffic and being struck and killed by an oncoming vehicle, defending himself was the best choice. If he gets charged I hope a jury will find him innocent. Sounds like the biker thought he was above the laws of the road in the first place, among others.

 

[griffin]

I hadn't heard of the door being opened

He was trying to open the door when he began leaking.

 

[daddymikey1975]

.... when he began leaking.

I laughed out loud for real when I read this