Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Question for all. Would you try to kill somebody if they kicked your car while it was parked someplace? If the answer is yes, then you're just as crazy as the guy that tried to kill the motorcyclist on the road.
Problem here is that people in cars get nuts with motorcyclists and think they can "get the upper hand" by using their car as a weapon. If the guy in the car had killed the motorcyclist, he would be charged with murder because someone kicking your car is no justification for murder.
If the guy in the car had gotten killed after he made the attempted murder move and crashed, then that one is on him. Should the guy on the motorcycle have kicked at the car ... no, but the move of the car trying to kill the motorcyclist went way overboard.
Why did he kick it at all? Why attempt vandalism? Particularly when the car has all the advantages?
Why get in a fight when the other guy has mass and protection?
No one captured the "cut off", which happens in traffic every day, so I don't see any justification for the kicking.
I am absolutely not supporting the driver in this conflict, but if the biker had just left the driver behind, there would be no crash.
Why did it make sense for, and why do you continue to support, the biker to take a traffic conflict into the physical?
Sure, if I saw you kicking my car in a parking lot, we would have words. But if you knew I was there, and ten times your size, while I don't have the right to kill you over property, you could only be called an idiot for vandalizing my car and inviting the conflict.
You are right, no one should kill over minor property damage. But, why damage the property in the first place?
Just leave. Ride on.
Start a fight that you will very likely lose, and you could be both perfectly right, and quite dead.
Question for all. Would you try to kill somebody if they kicked your car while it was parked someplace? If the answer is yes, then you're just as crazy as the guy that tried to kill the motorcyclist on the road.
Problem here is that people in cars get nuts with motorcyclists and think they can "get the upper hand" by using their car as a weapon. If the guy in the car had killed the motorcyclist, he would be charged with murder because someone kicking your car is no justification for murder.
If the guy in the car had gotten killed after he made the attempted murder move and crashed, then that one is on him. Should the guy on the motorcycle have kicked at the car ... no, but the move of the car trying to kill the motorcyclist went way overboard.
Why did he kick it at all? Why attempt vandalism? Particularly when the car has all the advantages?
Why get in a fight when the other guy has mass and protection?
No one captured the "cut off", which happens in traffic every day, so I don't see any justification for the kicking.
I am absolutely not supporting the driver in this conflict, but if the biker had just left the driver behind, there would be no crash.
Why did it make sense for, and why do you continue to support, the biker to take a traffic conflict into the physical?
Sure, if I saw you kicking my car in a parking lot, we would have words. But if you knew I was there, and ten times your size, while I don't have the right to kill you over property, you could only be called an idiot for vandalizing my car and inviting the conflict.
You are right, no one should kill over minor property damage. But, why damage the property in the first place?
Just leave. Ride on.
Start a fight that you will very likely lose, and you could be both perfectly right, and quite dead.
Last edited: