Mob of bikers surround SUV and get run over in NYC

[HandyHamlet]

Nail in the coffin. Confirmed. No doubt in my mind.

And yet the unfolding narrative is not in your favor. We'll know the truth I guess after the civil trials against the freak behind the wheel.

Clearly the wife and child were not in danger, as you can even see in the vehicle the bikers only focused on the driver who unlawfully plowed people and vehicles indiscriminately.

What kind of a freakshow tries to kill people with his SUV while his family is in the car. That's messed up.

 

[HandyHamlet]

I am not condoning the actions of Squids.

 

[FBrinson]

I am not condoning the actions of Squids.

This clickbait sure has you furious.


Are you ok?


clickbait.

 

[david.ross]

to the bolded: lmao. Just another case of "play stupid games, win stupid prizes"

To the driver being armed: I keep my arms to stop threats. After trying to escape in my vic, when the guy bashed in my window with his helmet, he would have been met with the business end of my sidearm. I'd like to think that would have stopped the attack. If not, sending lead downrange is the last option which I am sure would have stopped the attack.

Stupid yes, I'm surprised the offroad bikers are even engaged in this event. Many bikes were seized because they weren't even registered or licensed due to people using their bikes on private property. Why they even came to the event is beyond me, most bikers know the law.

In such a situation, at the time where the biker was bashing in the window would be a proper time to use a firearm in order to get a not guilty verdict. Anything before from what I can see in the video and a person would be convicted of a crime with a firearm.

 

[HandyHamlet]

This clickbait sure has you furious.


Are you ok?


clickbait.

I don't know. Fine I guess. I guess I could use a cup of coffee maybe. Thanks. When you've been around here long enough you will come to realize most don't bother reading the posts. Too much trouble. So you have to keep clarifying. Like this...

Point of clarification. It ain't the clickbait I enjoy. it's the irony of self proclaimed "Sheep dogs", protectors of the Universe and better than everyone, that constantly fall for lefty rags. Even thought they hate lefty rags. THAT I find tremendously entertaining. But I've learned any narrative that lets you proclaim to the world you will shoot this, crush that... then it is okay.

 

[Fallschirjmäger]

So did Jalopnik.com. Riding in the opposite lane of traffic, lane splitting... yeah, nothing dangerous or provocative there, to be sure.

 

[onus]

Let me just say this, even if the driver isn't charged, the people who were injured will sue the driver in to oblivion for injuries obtained from the impact.

They will be suing from their jail cell and they will lose.

 

[Fallschirjmäger]

Police received more than 200 calls on Sunday for erratic driving related to bikers who were in town for the event, Mr. Kelly said. He said police confiscated more than 50 motorcycles and issues 68 summonses to those involved in the event

Just from a few minutes of watching...
- lane splitting
- riding on the sidewalk
- wheelies
- passing a stopped vehicle on the right
- going through red lights

They may not have gathered for unlawful purposes, and they may know the law quite well, but that didn't stop them from becoming a mob or violating the law it would appear.
But you gotta love 'em, not everyone cares enough about the law to actually film themselves breaking it.

[EDIT:] Watched a few minutes of a half-dozen videos, a constant stream of motor vehicle violations. I hate to sound judgmental but anyone standing up for the motorcyclists might want to reexamine his concepts of 'peaceful' and 'law abiding'.

 

[HandyHamlet]

They will be suing from their jail cell and they will lose.

Interesting. The paralyzed for life guy is now in jail? Link please.

I hate to sound judgmental but anyone standing up for the motorcyclists might want to reexamine his concepts of 'peaceful' and 'law abiding'.

These aren't "motorcyclists" and no one here has condoned their actions. They are called Squids for a reason. If they live they may eventually become motorcyclists.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=squid

A young motorcyclist who overestimates his abilities, boasts of his riding skills when in reality he has none. }snip{ Squids wear no protection, deeming themselves invincible. This fact compounds intself with the fact that they engage in 'extreem riding'--performing wheelies and stoppies in public areas. Squids wreck alot. Derived from 'squirly kid'

 

[BB62]

...[EDIT:] Watched a few minutes of a half-dozen videos, a constant stream of motor vehicle violations. I hate to sound judgmental but anyone standing up for the motorcyclists might want to reexamine his concepts of 'peaceful' and 'law abiding'.

I may be wrong, but...

I'm getting the strange feeling that these motorcycle riding "gentlemen" weren't going to or returning from choir practice...

 

[georg jetson]

The biker attempted to stop the suv without provocation. There was no traffic ahead of the biker. If he was stopping traffic to get the street clear for "tricks" he may have done so overly aggressive and caused the suv to hit his rear. It is more believable for me that a man with everything to lose(the driver of the suv) would react because his and his family's live was endangered then it would for me to believe that a tap on the rear of the bike would not elicit a violent response from the BIKER MOB. Particularity when that same BIKER MOB is shown acting like a BIKER MOB at the end of the video provided by the perpetrator.

For sure, if a number of vehicles(not visibly marked POLICE) working in unison attempts to stop me, I am on high alert and will be thinking fight or flight. In this case I would have everything to lose as well and would only make a move if I reasonably felt that great bodily harm would come to me or my passengers. I think that is what this suv driver felt.

HH, you're trying to make a point about "clickbait" and you've chosen the wrong story. You're repetitive attempt to claim that you don't condone "squids" behavior yet refuse to see that the responsibility of this whole event lies with the biker that decided to slow down into someone's bumper. Shame on you. Until this thread I had more respect for your viewpoints. Maybe you're just having a bad week.

 

[JustaShooter]

I may be wrong, but...

I'm getting the strange feeling that these motorcycle riding "gentlemen" weren't going to or returning from choir practice...

But they are such nice young men, why they would never do anything like that without good reason now would they?

http://oppositelock.jalopnik.com/did-hollywood-stuntz-attack-this-prius-driver-in-2011-1430929682

 

[eye95]

Mobs rarely know each other before becoming a mob. Mob is a mentality that grows out of a group dynamic.

This was a MOB. It behaved like a MOB.

 

[georg jetson]

Read a latest update to this story here:
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/10/01/nypd-suspects-sought-in-attack-on-suv-driver/

I'm absolutely appalled at the responses online and in this thread.

Then you're really gonna hate this one.

Let me make this very clear, the bikers were not mob or gang related, they were people who ride bikes from every neck of the woods from touring to sports. An innocent man was paralyzed for life attempting to help after the SUV rear ended a biker.

They portrayed MOB or GANG related actions when they smashed the suv window and proceeded to beat down a man instead of calling the police.

There's plenty of blame to go around here both to the SUV driver and many of the bikers. I'd hope the SUV driver would be charged, he didn't need to be so reckless by plowing people indiscriminately. The bikers who harassed, followed and attacked the SUV driver were acting unlawfully as well. There's a point where the victim can become the assailant.

Who instigated this incident? Was it the suv or the bikers?

Also, clearly many don't know what the bikers were doing, so I'll explain. The point of slowing down and stopping traffic was to clear the road ahead in order to perform bike tricks. Clearly this is a lacking fact which many are ignorant of in this situation.

Ummmm... so an illegal act by the biker is the excuse to continue perpetrating illegal activity? Do you not see that normal people may be a bit intimidated and threatened by a MOB of BIKERS stopping them for no apparent reason?

I'm also seeing, "The driver should've been armed." Even if the incident happened in Pennsylvania, I'd like to see a person win a case shooting another from within a vehicle. You see road rage cases all the time where a firearm is used, the person who fires the gun is charged and convicted. Clearly the wife and child were not in danger, as you can even see in the vehicle the bikers only focused on the driver who unlawfully plowed people and vehicles indiscriminately.

I agree with this. The driver of the suv did not need to be armed (though that's irrelevant). He could and DID flee and did so without running them ALL over... just the ones that were in the way of him getting his family to safety. He simply failed to backup over his assailants at the end of the video... training training training.

Let me just say this, even if the driver isn't charged, the people who were injured will sue the driver in to oblivion for injuries obtained from the impact.

Let's see... You say "Gays are prominent members of firearm rights, we do more via the courts, don't like it? Leave." So, do you think he's gay? Maybe since the MOB BIKER perpetrators might be GAY then they may do more via the courts. Maybe your gay supremacist a$$ should go help him since gay's do more via the courts. Right?

Maybe people shouldn't pay attention to the opinion of a gay supremacist in the first place, correct? ....my bad.

 

[eye95]

http://www.wnd.com/2013/10/black-biker-gang-beats-suv-driver-in-nyc/

You are looking awfully hard to see something that is not there.

 

[HandyHamlet]

HH, you're trying to make a point about "clickbait" and you've chosen the wrong story. You're repetitive attempt to claim that you don't condone "squids" behavior yet refuse to see that the responsibility of this whole event lies with the biker that decided to slow down into someone's bumper. Shame on you. Until this thread I had more respect for your viewpoints. Maybe you're just having a bad week.

I'm sorry, I thought that by stating over and over again that I did not condone their actions actually meant I did not or do not condone their actions. As in any of them. From riding like morons to the biker slowing down in front of the SUV. Don't know how many times I have to say it... Or how many times I could refer to them (Squids) in a derogatory fashion.

No. What really pisses people off is I won't say other's deserved to be run over and paralyzed for life. Or that it's open season on anyone on two wheels. Or I'm gonna whip out my gun for the childrenz... blah blah blah. The typical Internet bravado. And no I do not think the responsibility lies solely on one person. The SUV had plenty of options besides mowing over people. More than once. This is a case of road rage pure and simple. On both sides. The clickbait is essential because everything in it is pure BS. As in no credibility at all. And designed purely to elicit an emotional response. I chose the perfect story. As one sided as you could possibly get. It worked flawlessly as evidenced here.

 

[georg jetson]

I'm sorry, I thought that by stating over and over again that I did not condone their actions actually meant I did not or do not condone their actions. As in any of them. From riding like morons to the biker slowing down in front of the SUV. Don't know how many times I have to say it... Or how many times I could refer to them (Squids) in a derogatory fashion.

No. What really pisses people off is I won't say other's deserved to be run over and paralyzed for life. Or that it's open season on anyone on two wheels. Or I'm gonna whip out my gun for the childrenz... blah blah blah. The typical Internet bravado. And no I do not think the responsibility lies solely on one person. The SUV had plenty of options besides mowing over people. More than once. This is a case of road rage pure and simple. On both sides. The clickbait is essential because everything in it is pure BS. As in no credibility at all. And designed purely to elicit an emotional response. I chose the perfect story. As one sided as you could possibly get. It worked flawlessly as evidenced here.

What other options did the suv have? We must assume that the bikers are threatening him, either that or he's insane. The first proposition is much more believable right? He's not allowed a firearm in NY so flight is the only option. After the initial contact the suv tries to flee. The only aggressors are the bikers.

As to your point about 'clickbait", how is everything pure bs? That can only be true if the video is staged. Taking the video at face value shows that the bikers initiated the contact.

Ok. I think I understand your point. Are you saying that we should look further for facts as to why the biker initially stopped the suv? Are you indicating that there may be a reason to initiate contact other than clearing the highway for "tricks"?

 

[eye95]

In Fairborn, five thugs broke into a home. Unfortunately for them, one of the college students renting that home was armed. He shot two of them. One died, and one was severely injured. The survivors were charged with murder. They pleaded guilty to manslaughter. The law considered the initial aggressors to be responsible for the death of one of their own--not the person acting in reasonable self-defense.

The biker MOB started this mess. Yes, the SUV driver killed and paralyzed two of the bikers. However, he was acting to defend himself from a MOB that anyone in his situation would reasonably believe presented imminent and grave danger to him and his family. I do not hold him responsible for the death and the injury. I don't think the law will either. I hold the biker MOB responsible for the injury and the death. I think the law will too.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

 

[stealthyeliminator]

Read a latest update to this story here:
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/10/01/nypd-suspects-sought-in-attack-on-suv-driver/

I'm absolutely appalled at the responses online and in this thread.

Let me make this very clear, the bikers were not mob or gang related, they were people who ride bikes from every neck of the woods from touring to sports. An innocent man was paralyzed for life attempting to help after the SUV rear ended a biker.

There's plenty of blame to go around here both to the SUV driver and many of the bikers. I'd hope the SUV driver would be charged, he didn't need to be so reckless by plowing people indiscriminately. The bikers who harassed, followed and attacked the SUV driver were acting unlawfully as well. There's a point where the victim can become the assailant.

Also, clearly many don't know what the bikers were doing, so I'll explain. The point of slowing down and stopping traffic was to clear the road ahead in order to perform bike tricks. Clearly this is a lacking fact which many are ignorant of in this situation.

I'm also seeing, "The driver should've been armed." Even if the incident happened in Pennsylvania, I'd like to see a person win a case shooting another from within a vehicle. You see road rage cases all the time where a firearm is used, the person who fires the gun is charged and convicted. Clearly the wife and child were not in danger, as you can even see in the vehicle the bikers only focused on the driver who unlawfully plowed people and vehicles indiscriminately.

Let me just say this, even if the driver isn't charged, the people who were injured will sue the driver in to oblivion for injuries obtained from the impact.

You're a ******* liar. The only people who could reasonably believe what you are saying are those who have not watched the video a single time - as I've been unable to do until just now after the thread has already grown to 5 pages. You're being extremely dishonest - to the point, yes, of being a flat out liar. Go away.

I am astonished that anyone here, in this place is defending a group of violent thugs. I imagine the only reason they still are is simply because they don't want to admit that their initial reaction may have been wrong. With a single exception for the person quoted above, who I think is just all messed up.

 

[Freedom1Man]

In Fairborn, five thugs broke into a home. Unfortunately for them, one of the college students renting that home was armed. He shot two of them. One died, and one was severely injured. The survivors were charged with murder. They pleaded guilty to manslaughter. The law considered the initial aggressors to be responsible for the death of one of their own--not the person acting in reasonable self-defense.

The biker MOB started this mess. Yes, the SUV driver killed and paralyzed two of the bikers. However, he was acting to defend himself from a MOB that anyone in his situation would reasonably believe presented imminent and grave danger to him and his family. I do not hold him responsible for the death and the injury. I don't think the law will either. I hold the biker MOB responsible for the injury and the death. I think the law will too.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

From what I saw of the video the bikers were the aggressors and the SUV user was trying to defend his and his family's lives.

Our agreements are becoming more common.