Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Whose side would you take in this road rage example?
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1569
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 5:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

sugar wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
sugar wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
sugar wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:

Look harder then, and read the articles.


oh right. It's actually NOT in the video.

It's actually in the video, but if you can't see it, it's also in the articles. Don't be such a turgid phallus.


the article is only a few sentences long, and says nothing about the cyclist blocking the road of the bus.

Are you blind?
Quote:
The court was told the incident started on the morning of 5 April 2011 when Hill had driven too close to Mr Mead on the nearby St James Barton roundabout.

Moments later the bus stopped outside Bristol Magistrates' Court and Mr Mead propped his bike against the front of the vehicle.

He continued to argue with Hill, who remained in his cab.


this isn't in the article that was posted.

Yes, it is. It's the first article posted. The one in the OP. Your Internets are weak, grasshopper. Really weak.

sugar wrote:
also, the front of the vehicle could mean any part of the edges of the bus that are on the forward side of the bus. For example, you can sit in the seats at the front or at the back of the bus, but this doesn't mean you're necessarily sitting at the first row or the last row of seats.
If I was on a bike and was going to abuse the drive, I'd lean the bike against the right hand side, at the front of the bus, so I could abuse the driver through his window.

Quibble-quibble-quibble... it's obvious what he did. One can see it in the video, and one can read it in the articles. Your ignorance is no excuse for blabbering a misinformed opinion.
_________________
"The accumulation of all power, legislative, executive, and judiciary in the same hands...may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny."
--James Madison, Federalist 46
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
notageek
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 05 Jun 2008
Posts: 120
Location: Bangalore, India

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 5:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah, he's run out of arguments so he wants to change the fact that cyclist wasn't at fault.
_________________
There is no guarantee a stupid Dalai Lama won’t come next
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sugar
Guru
Guru


Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 579
Location: Morrinsville, New Zealand

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 5:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:

Yes, it is. It's the first article posted. The one in the OP. Your Internets are weak, grasshopper. Really weak.

sugar wrote:
also, the front of the vehicle could mean any part of the edges of the bus that are on the forward side of the bus. For example, you can sit in the seats at the front or at the back of the bus, but this doesn't mean you're necessarily sitting at the first row or the last row of seats.
If I was on a bike and was going to abuse the drive, I'd lean the bike against the right hand side, at the front of the bus, so I could abuse the driver through his window.

Quibble-quibble-quibble... it's obvious what he did. One can see it in the video, and one can read it in the articles. Your ignorance is no excuse for blabbering a misinformed opinion.


http://omploader.org/vY3VsYw
and it isn't. Have you watched the video?
_________________
Jesus Could Be Their Candidate and the Republicans Would Still Lose
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1569
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 7:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

sugar wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:

Yes, it is. It's the first article posted. The one in the OP. Your Internets are weak, grasshopper. Really weak.

sugar wrote:
also, the front of the vehicle could mean any part of the edges of the bus that are on the forward side of the bus. For example, you can sit in the seats at the front or at the back of the bus, but this doesn't mean you're necessarily sitting at the first row or the last row of seats.
If I was on a bike and was going to abuse the drive, I'd lean the bike against the right hand side, at the front of the bus, so I could abuse the driver through his window.

Quibble-quibble-quibble... it's obvious what he did. One can see it in the video, and one can read it in the articles. Your ignorance is no excuse for blabbering a misinformed opinion.


http://omploader.org/vY3VsYw
and it isn't. Have you watched the video?

Yes it is. Right in your own screen-shot it shows the words "Read More" followed by the link to expand the rest of the article. Doh!

No go play in the road.
_________________
"The accumulation of all power, legislative, executive, and judiciary in the same hands...may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny."
--James Madison, Federalist 46
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sugar
Guru
Guru


Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 579
Location: Morrinsville, New Zealand

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
sugar wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:

Yes, it is. It's the first article posted. The one in the OP. Your Internets are weak, grasshopper. Really weak.

sugar wrote:
also, the front of the vehicle could mean any part of the edges of the bus that are on the forward side of the bus. For example, you can sit in the seats at the front or at the back of the bus, but this doesn't mean you're necessarily sitting at the first row or the last row of seats.
If I was on a bike and was going to abuse the drive, I'd lean the bike against the right hand side, at the front of the bus, so I could abuse the driver through his window.

Quibble-quibble-quibble... it's obvious what he did. One can see it in the video, and one can read it in the articles. Your ignorance is no excuse for blabbering a misinformed opinion.


http://omploader.org/vY3VsYw
and it isn't. Have you watched the video?

Yes it is. Right in your own screen-shot it shows the words "Read More" followed by the link to expand the rest of the article. Doh!

No go play in the road.


following a link doesn't sound like the first article posted.
_________________
Jesus Could Be Their Candidate and the Republicans Would Still Lose
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Muso
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 657
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

So you don't click the "read more" when presented with information generally? If so, that explains many, many things.
_________________
I, for one, am glad to be living on a planet with 776x the mass of the super-massive black hole at the center of the milky way just to keep Neptune in its daily orbit around the Earth.
auf alten Schiffen lernt man Segeln.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1569
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

sugar wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
sugar wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:

Yes, it is. It's the first article posted. The one in the OP. Your Internets are weak, grasshopper. Really weak.

sugar wrote:
also, the front of the vehicle could mean any part of the edges of the bus that are on the forward side of the bus. For example, you can sit in the seats at the front or at the back of the bus, but this doesn't mean you're necessarily sitting at the first row or the last row of seats.
If I was on a bike and was going to abuse the drive, I'd lean the bike against the right hand side, at the front of the bus, so I could abuse the driver through his window.

Quibble-quibble-quibble... it's obvious what he did. One can see it in the video, and one can read it in the articles. Your ignorance is no excuse for blabbering a misinformed opinion.


http://omploader.org/vY3VsYw
and it isn't. Have you watched the video?

Yes it is. Right in your own screen-shot it shows the words "Read More" followed by the link to expand the rest of the article. Doh!

No go play in the road.


following a link doesn't sound like the first article posted.

It's the rest of the article, Einstein. :roll:
_________________
"The accumulation of all power, legislative, executive, and judiciary in the same hands...may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny."
--James Madison, Federalist 46
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sugar
Guru
Guru


Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 579
Location: Morrinsville, New Zealand

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
It's the rest of the article, Einstein. :roll:


which is linked to the first article.

So, it's not on the first article, it's on a link on the first article that was posted, yes?
_________________
Jesus Could Be Their Candidate and the Republicans Would Still Lose
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1569
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why can't you be a man and just say, "Oh, I didn't realize that was the rest of the article and that I had only read the first few words." People might actually mock you less for making a mistake you freely admit, like a man. It might even relieve some of your embarrassment and humiliation. Just try it.

Here. Say it with me: "Oops. I didn't realize that was the rest of the article. Sorry about being such a penis earlier when it was actually I who was misinformed, because I wasn't smart enough to figure out how read the article, other than first few words."

See? That wasn't so bad, now, was it?
_________________
"The accumulation of all power, legislative, executive, and judiciary in the same hands...may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny."
--James Madison, Federalist 46
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sugar
Guru
Guru


Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 579
Location: Morrinsville, New Zealand

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
Why can't you be a man and just say, "Oh, I didn't realize that was the rest of the article and that I had only read the first few words." People might actually mock you less for making a mistake you freely admit, like a man. It might even relieve some of your embarrassment and humiliation. Just try it.

Here. Say it with me: "Oops. I didn't realize that was the rest of the article. Sorry about being such a penis earlier when it was actually I who was misinformed, because I wasn't smart enough to figure out how read the article, other than first few words."

See? That wasn't so bad, now, was it?


Why would you assume that I didn't click on and read the link?
_________________
Jesus Could Be Their Candidate and the Republicans Would Still Lose
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1569
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

sugar wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
Why can't you be a man and just say, "Oh, I didn't realize that was the rest of the article and that I had only read the first few words." People might actually mock you less for making a mistake you freely admit, like a man. It might even relieve some of your embarrassment and humiliation. Just try it.

Here. Say it with me: "Oops. I didn't realize that was the rest of the article. Sorry about being such a penis earlier when it was actually I who was misinformed, because I wasn't smart enough to figure out how read the article, other than first few words."

See? That wasn't so bad, now, was it?


Why would you assume that I didn't click on and read the link?

If you had clicked on it, you'd have realized it was the same article. One would have to be illiterate, brain-damaged, or mentally retarded not to, given that before we click the link we see:
Quote:
A bus driver who deliberately knocked a cyclist down in Bristol using his bus "as a weapon" has been jailed.

Gavin Hill, 29, of Frome, previously pleaded guilty to dangerous driving and causing grievous bodily harm.

Bristol Crown Court heard that after an altercation, Hill deliberately knocked Phillip Mead off his bike by swerving the bus into him.

Sentencing Hill to 17 months in jail, Judge Mark Horton said his action "was not an accident".

Read More
<link>


And then after we click the link we see:
Quote:
Gavin Hill, 29, of Frome, previously pleaded guilty to dangerous driving and causing grievous bodily harm.

Bristol Crown Court heard that after an altercation, Hill deliberately knocked Phillip Mead off his bike by swerving the bus into him.

Sentencing Hill to 17 months in jail, Judge Mark Horton said his action "was not an accident".

... blah blah blah
rest of article...


Before you clicked the link, you were looking at the first few paragraphs of the article. After you clicked the link, you were looking at the whole article. The same article.

Do I need to explain this any more depth? :lol:
_________________
"The accumulation of all power, legislative, executive, and judiciary in the same hands...may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny."
--James Madison, Federalist 46
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
juniper
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 759
Location: EU

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 11:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

there are two things. The cyclists actions were inappropriate, and the bus drivers action was criminal.

I had an incident just yesterday on a bike. A woman just cut me off with her car. I was on the main road and she just pulled out in front of me. The worst thing? She waived to me. She thought by waving she was being polite, but what she was really saying was that my vehicle wasn't worth following the rules for, so fuck you. that type of shit happens all the time.

The flip side of the coin is the cyclists routinely break traffic rules (myself included). I think this is mainly because the rules really don't make much sense for cyclists. for example, riding beside a row of parked cars is dangerous for a cyclist, but routine for a car, yet both are supposed to follow the same rule. I just take the lane in that case, which may or may not piss off drivers. In any case, that is my right and what I am supposed to do, so they have to take it on the chin. The places where I have seen cyclists most adhering to road rules are in places where there are a lot of cyclists and the rules and infrastructure for cyclists were not an after thought. Go to the netherlands or denmark. There is an enormous amount of cycling infrastructure and cyclists really follow the rules there.

In the mean time, many of us live in places where there is a cycling revival and we all have to put up with half assed infrastructure.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 147

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 1:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BK: you're determined to try to turn this around back to front. The cyclist wasn't cut up "just like everybody else". When two vehicles bump together some metalwork gets dented. You saw what happened when a bus collides with a cyclist. Bad driving can be lethal if you're on two wheels and the cyclist was perfectly correct to complain to the bus driver. This is a reasonable response to an extreme personal threat not "road rage". I think we can see perfectly well who was suffering from the latter. Looks like you're suffering from "forum rage", blindly trying to run down anyone who dares to disagree with you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1569
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 1:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcgruff wrote:
BK: you're determined to try to turn this around back to front. The cyclist wasn't cut up "just like everybody else". When two vehicles bump together some metalwork gets dented. You saw what happened when a bus collides with a cyclist. Bad driving can be lethal if you're on two wheels and the cyclist was perfectly correct to complain to the bus driver. This is a reasonable response to an extreme personal threat not "road rage". I think we can see perfectly well who was suffering from the latter. Looks like you're suffering from "forum rage", blindly trying to run down anyone who dares to disagree with you.

This is nothing but your typically illogical blather with some ad hominem to cap it off.

We have no reason to believe there was any kind of "extreme personal threat". All we know is that we have a road-raging bicyclist spreading his road rage by harassing a bus driver and provoking an incident. The scary bus cut off the cyclist in a round-about, probably crowding him over as he changed lanes, and the cyclist got an adrenaline burst from the incident. That much is a safe assumption.

The proper response by the cyclist would have been to note the number of the bus and register a complaint through the appropriate channels. Following the bus, pounding on it, cutting in front of it and blocking it with his bike and person at a stop light, harassing the driver, and then obstructing it by riding slowly in its path and swerving recklessly onto the extreme edge of his lane, even swerving toward the bus as it attempts to pass -- that is not the appropriate response. That's "playing chicken". That is negligent and/or reckless operation, and it's illegal. It also provoked the bus driver into committing his much worse illegal act, a vehicular assault.

I bet if you talked to the bicyclist and said, "What have you learned, Dorothy?", he'd tell you, "I've learned that I should keep my emotions in check when I am on the road." I know that's what I try to do, especially when I am on my motorcycle, which offers less protection from any kind of mishap.

While we're on the subject, maybe you should learn to keep your emotions in check when you're discussing things. I'm not experiencing any kind of "rage" here at all, and haven't given any such indication, so can only assume you are projecting your own emotional state. Maybe then you'd have a chance of coming up with something to say that is logically coherent, relevant to the topic, and adds some kind of insight or information to the discussion. When I see a "mcgruff" post, I know in advance there's only about a 5% chance that any of these things are going to be true, and that's sad, because I imagine you are capable of contributing to a discussion in a more meaningful way.
_________________
"The accumulation of all power, legislative, executive, and judiciary in the same hands...may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny."
--James Madison, Federalist 46
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
notageek
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 05 Jun 2008
Posts: 120
Location: Bangalore, India

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 1:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It is simple really. You bear the consequences of your own action. If you think it is fair for the bus driver to spend 17months in jail for this, then the consequences for the cyclist should also be similar. Since he provoked the attack.

The bus driver didn't attack any random cyclist, 20 blocks away. He attacked the cyclist. It is reasonable to say that, if this cyclist were absent the incident wouldn't have happened. Therefore the cyclist bears as much responsibility as the bus driver in causing this public nuisance.
_________________
There is no guarantee a stupid Dalai Lama won’t come next
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aidanjt
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 20 Feb 2005
Posts: 1102
Location: Rep. of Ireland

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 2:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You people are completely deranged psychopaths.

Bus nearly runs over cyclist. Cyclist flips off at the bus driver for nearly putting his life in jeopardy (yelling at someone for almost running you down is not a crime, shock, horror). Cyclist moves on. Bus driver again tries to murder cyclist. And you seriously think the cyclist deserves an equal sentence/run over/anywhere near the given derision?

Seek help.
_________________
juniper wrote:
you experience political reality dilation when travelling at american political speeds. it's in einstein's formulas. it's not their fault.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1569
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 2:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

aidanjt wrote:
You people are completely deranged psychopaths.

Bus nearly runs over cyclist. Cyclist flips off at the bus driver for nearly putting his life in jeopardy (yelling at someone for almost running you down is not a crime, shock, horror). Cyclist moves on. Bus driver again tries to murder cyclist. And you seriously think the cyclist deserves an equal sentence/run over/anywhere near the given derision?

Seek help.

That's not even close to being an accurate rendition of the sequence of events. The cyclist didn't "move on". He followed the bus, pounded on it, cut in front of it at a traffic light, leaned his bike up against the bus, told the driver off, snapped the windshield wipers, then rode in front of him slowly, and when the bus passed him, recklessly swerved over to the very edge of his lane.

However, the cyclist does not deserve the same sentence. He does not even deserve the same charges. The bus driver committed vehicular assault (possibly aggravated vehicular assault). The cyclist was guilty only of being an asshole and spreading his road rage by provoking the other driver. That's not a crime. Technically, he could be charged with reckless and/or negligent operation, and that would be appropriate.

The bus driver is losing his job and spending time in jail. The cyclist should be getting a serious traffic citation for his behavior, to acknowledge his role in creating the situation which led to the incident (and to establish his contributory negligence in case he decides to try to sue the bus driver).
_________________
"The accumulation of all power, legislative, executive, and judiciary in the same hands...may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny."
--James Madison, Federalist 46
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
notageek
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 05 Jun 2008
Posts: 120
Location: Bangalore, India

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 2:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just to keep this in context, the driver is 29yr old with 10yr experience and excellent track record. Because of this incident he will not be able to get a job as a driver in the future. And all because of this cyclist.

The sentencing of driver seems one-sided.
_________________
There is no guarantee a stupid Dalai Lama won’t come next
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1569
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 2:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

notageek wrote:
Just to keep this in context, the driver is 29yr old with 10yr experience and excellent track record. Because of this incident he will not be able to get a job as a driver in the future. And all because of this cyclist.

The sentencing of driver seems one-sided.

It's not "all because of the cyclist". It's because he lost his cool and ran the guy off the road. He didn't "nudge" him either. He hit him with some force. What he did is equivalent to shoving somebody down a flight of stairs or throwing somebody off a moving train. Any reasonable person would expect it to cause serious injury, and possibly even death.

I do think the media, in its eagerness to create a sensational story, neglected the role of the cyclist. Consequently, so did the public -- just like the lemmings who read that story and reacted to it in here without really considering what went on and the causal factors. The sentence leads me to believe that the court did the same.

Maybe when their heads cool off, the city will charge the driver. He should get a reckless driving citation or the like, serious enough to cause a temporary suspension of his right to be on the road (except for necessary travel like work), until he completes a safety class. He should also be evaluated for anger control problems and probably be sent to a mandatory anger management class.
_________________
"The accumulation of all power, legislative, executive, and judiciary in the same hands...may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny."
--James Madison, Federalist 46
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BonezTheGoon
Bodhisattva
Bodhisattva


Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 1375
Location: Albuquerque, NM -- birthplace of Microsoft and Gentoo

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

notageek wrote:
. . . . If you think it is fair for the bus driver to spend 17months in jail for this, then the consequences for the cyclist should also be similar. Since he provoked the attack. . .


This is the same kind of "logical defense" that many men try and use in rape cases. It's disgusting.

[Edit]
It's not like the bus driver is a LION, now that's when I'd accept "provocation" as a reasonable defense. Any person who pretends to be a professional should be expected to handle their emotional state in the face of an asshole. Every day we all deal with assholes, saying, thinking, and even fantasizing about hurting them is reasonably healthy. Putting an assholes very life in danger because you lost your cool is not professional. Yes, I think it is GRAND that this bus driver will never be able to drive again. More and more assholes are on the road every day, be it in cars or on bikes or even on motorcycles. Deciding to use a vehicle as a weapon to discipline an asshole is not sane, legal, or professional. THE END.
[/Edit]
_________________
mcgruff wrote:
I can't promise to be civil.


pjp wrote:
The greater evil is voting for the "lesser evil."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
notageek
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 05 Jun 2008
Posts: 120
Location: Bangalore, India

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That is a strawman.
_________________
There is no guarantee a stupid Dalai Lama won’t come next
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BonezTheGoon
Bodhisattva
Bodhisattva


Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 1375
Location: Albuquerque, NM -- birthplace of Microsoft and Gentoo

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

notageek wrote:
That is a strawman.


What?
_________________
mcgruff wrote:
I can't promise to be civil.


pjp wrote:
The greater evil is voting for the "lesser evil."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
juniper
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 759
Location: EU

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

aidanjt wrote:
You people are completely deranged psychopaths.

Bus nearly runs over cyclist. Cyclist flips off at the bus driver for nearly putting his life in jeopardy (yelling at someone for almost running you down is not a crime, shock, horror). Cyclist moves on. Bus driver again tries to murder cyclist. And you seriously think the cyclist deserves an equal sentence/run over/anywhere near the given derision?

Seek help.


seriously. Frankly, I think BK is trolling. I think notageek really thinks what he says. messed up.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1569
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Provocation is not a "defense". In the context of the bus driver's defense, it should have served as a mitigating circumstance. Consider this: which do you think deserves to be punished more severely:

a) a bus driver who gets harassed and provoked like this one, blows his stack, and runs a cyclist off the road.

b) a bus driver who decides, "He, he. Today I'm going to fuck up some cyclist.", then goes about driving around town, spots a vulnerable cyclist, and runs him off the road.

I think anybody who understands justice will agree that the driver in (b) deserves to be punished more than the driver in (a). Nevertheless, they are guilty of exactly the same actual crime.

So how does a court of law distinguish between the two? By taking into consideration matters of extenuation and mitigation. It is in that context that the provocation is relevant. It is not "an excuse" or "a defense" or "a justification". It is not a claim that he is not guilty, or that he doesn't deserve punishment. Such things are not considered in determining guilt or innocence. They are considered during the penalty phase, when the punishment is being decided.

The real world is not black and white, but a continuous gradient of shades of gray. In this case, maybe it means the bus driver should only have been sentenced to six months instead of 17 (in addition to losing his entire career).

If the cyclist's role in this is completely ignored and he doesn't get so much as a traffic ticket, justice has not been served. If the cyclist's actions are condoned by the authorities, they are saying that it's just fine, when you get pissed off because somebody cuts you off, to pursue that person, bang on their vehicle, flip them off, block their movement, fuck with the accessories on their vehicle, impede their movement, and recklessly drive dangerously close to them as if daring them to hit you. They are saying, "Sure, go ahead and do such things. That's acceptable behavior, and the law will grant you complete and total absolution if anything happens as a result."
_________________
"The accumulation of all power, legislative, executive, and judiciary in the same hands...may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny."
--James Madison, Federalist 46


Last edited by Bones McCracker on Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:52 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1569
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

juniper wrote:
aidanjt wrote:
You people are completely deranged psychopaths.

Bus nearly runs over cyclist. Cyclist flips off at the bus driver for nearly putting his life in jeopardy (yelling at someone for almost running you down is not a crime, shock, horror). Cyclist moves on. Bus driver again tries to murder cyclist. And you seriously think the cyclist deserves an equal sentence/run over/anywhere near the given derision?

Seek help.


seriously. Frankly, I think BK is trolling. I think notageek really thinks what he says. messed up.

I am not trolling at all, and I can't imagine why you would say so. I think my position is completely reasonable. Read my post above, if it's still not clear to you.
_________________
"The accumulation of all power, legislative, executive, and judiciary in the same hands...may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny."
--James Madison, Federalist 46
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 5 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum