as a rider who has been hit 3 times on a bike and nearly hit 20+ times I can tell you right now that when someone in car nearly kills you because they aren't paying attention and just keeps on going pretending that nothing had happened and refuse to even look at you it can make you pretty fracking angry. adrenaline + sheer anger can help make some pretty snap decisions. The kind that you will regret the rest of your life.
SUV driver runs over bikers
- Thread starter Drew99GT
- Start date
- Status
Could be the RR driver hit a biker by accident.
However, with dozens of bikers swarming and riding in a fashion that disregards the rules of the road, which rider should the RR driver be avoiding?
I understand that some motorists are blissfully unaware of bikes (both motor and pedal powered.)
However, in the circumstance, it would appear that it would be almost impossible for a motorist to dodge every one of those bikes, given the right circumstances.
I don't think this case was a problem created by an inattentive motorist. It was a problem created by out of control, unpredictable and lawless operation of motorbikes.
Originally Posted By: brave sir robin
I ride motorcycles in fact I love motorcycles. I cannot stand most other riders though and do not understand the group/mob mentality a lot of riders have. I don't really like clubs or groups of anything for that matter.
Maybe Im missing something but this situation doesn't appear to be nearly as cut and dry as a lot of you are thinking. The guys involved in this incident are complete idiots and tools but lets not forget that (according to reports) the driver had just ran into one of the riders on accident. If the driver just kept on driving instead of stopping perhaps um I don't know maybe the riders were attempting to get him to stop to acknowledge what had just happened? (I freaking hate typing anything that attempts to defend these morons btw)
These riders were not some sort of sons of anarchy type gang they are just a bunch of semi organized idiot stunters.
However, with dozens of bikers swarming and riding in a fashion that disregards the rules of the road, which rider should the RR driver be avoiding?
I understand that some motorists are blissfully unaware of bikes (both motor and pedal powered.)
However, in the circumstance, it would appear that it would be almost impossible for a motorist to dodge every one of those bikes, given the right circumstances.
I don't think this case was a problem created by an inattentive motorist. It was a problem created by out of control, unpredictable and lawless operation of motorbikes.
Originally Posted By: brave sir robin
I ride motorcycles in fact I love motorcycles. I cannot stand most other riders though and do not understand the group/mob mentality a lot of riders have. I don't really like clubs or groups of anything for that matter.
Maybe Im missing something but this situation doesn't appear to be nearly as cut and dry as a lot of you are thinking. The guys involved in this incident are complete idiots and tools but lets not forget that (according to reports) the driver had just ran into one of the riders on accident. If the driver just kept on driving instead of stopping perhaps um I don't know maybe the riders were attempting to get him to stop to acknowledge what had just happened? (I freaking hate typing anything that attempts to defend these morons btw)
These riders were not some sort of sons of anarchy type gang they are just a bunch of semi organized idiot stunters.
I know pack riders who will pass cars on both sides of them, travelling from behind them at twice the legal limit...then complain about how stupid car drivers don't pay attention to bikers...
Just plain dumb
I thought that guy the got hit was the "check brake" guy, who deliberately got himself hit.
Just plain dumb
I thought that guy the got hit was the "check brake" guy, who deliberately got himself hit.
Originally Posted By: brave sir robin
the driver had just ran into one of the riders on accident.
On accident??? Were you watching a different video than the rest of us? It clearly shows the biker pulled right in front of the SUV and then was slowing down ON PURPOSE. How can you call it an accident?
The only thing unknown in this story is what happened before the camera started rolling. Another words, was there something the SUV driver did earlier that produced this type of biker behavior?
I am a biker myself and becoming one has changed my perspective quite a bit and I now see bike riders in a somewhat different light. Yet, I have no sympathy for this mob. But again, maybe we still don't know the whole story.
the driver had just ran into one of the riders on accident.
On accident??? Were you watching a different video than the rest of us? It clearly shows the biker pulled right in front of the SUV and then was slowing down ON PURPOSE. How can you call it an accident?
The only thing unknown in this story is what happened before the camera started rolling. Another words, was there something the SUV driver did earlier that produced this type of biker behavior?
I am a biker myself and becoming one has changed my perspective quite a bit and I now see bike riders in a somewhat different light. Yet, I have no sympathy for this mob. But again, maybe we still don't know the whole story.
The court alleges a biker brake-checked the Range Rover.
Originally Posted By: Blaze
the biker "looked back" at the SUV driver right before he braked checked him.....this was a PLANNED ASSAULT
.
Not a planned assault, just reckless driving under the law.
Worthy of the Darwin Award of the Day though.
the biker "looked back" at the SUV driver right before he braked checked him.....this was a PLANNED ASSAULT
.
Not a planned assault, just reckless driving under the law.
Worthy of the Darwin Award of the Day though.
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
But again, maybe we still don't know the whole story.
No maybe about it. There's still a lot of traffic camera video and other evidence to be examined. The last I heard was that the police interviewed the guy who was punching the rear window of the truck, but didn't arrest him. NYPD usually does a through investigation, although they're not always quick to respond to initial traffic calls unless there's injuries involved.
But again, maybe we still don't know the whole story.
No maybe about it. There's still a lot of traffic camera video and other evidence to be examined. The last I heard was that the police interviewed the guy who was punching the rear window of the truck, but didn't arrest him. NYPD usually does a through investigation, although they're not always quick to respond to initial traffic calls unless there's injuries involved.
The more that comes out, the worse the motorcycle mob looks.
From the NY Times this morning:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/02/nyregi...region&_r=0
Quote:
Detectives were looking into the possibility that the motorcyclists involved in Sunday’s episode had been trying to clear cars from the parkway — in an effort to perform tricks and ride unencumbered — when they encountered the Range Rover. The video appears to show motorcyclists at entrance ramps, possibly in an effort to block oncoming vehicles.
This is corroborated by accounts of drivers being forced toward the right hand lane by the mob and into exit-only off-ramps.
A plausible theory of the mob's focus on the Range Rover, one that is mentioned in the article, is that the driver refused to be pushed into the right lane and chose to hold his position in the center lane, which irritated the mob to the point that they tried to bring him to a complete stop and "discuss" the situation.
Of course, nobody in the mob has come forward with any explanation. Maybe that's because if they were bullying motorists off the expressway, any glimmer of support they may have would evaporate.
From the NY Times this morning:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/02/nyregi...region&_r=0
Quote:
Detectives were looking into the possibility that the motorcyclists involved in Sunday’s episode had been trying to clear cars from the parkway — in an effort to perform tricks and ride unencumbered — when they encountered the Range Rover. The video appears to show motorcyclists at entrance ramps, possibly in an effort to block oncoming vehicles.
This is corroborated by accounts of drivers being forced toward the right hand lane by the mob and into exit-only off-ramps.
A plausible theory of the mob's focus on the Range Rover, one that is mentioned in the article, is that the driver refused to be pushed into the right lane and chose to hold his position in the center lane, which irritated the mob to the point that they tried to bring him to a complete stop and "discuss" the situation.
Of course, nobody in the mob has come forward with any explanation. Maybe that's because if they were bullying motorists off the expressway, any glimmer of support they may have would evaporate.
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: brave sir robin
the driver had just ran into one of the riders on accident.
On accident??? Were you watching a different video than the rest of us? It clearly shows the biker pulled right in front of the SUV and then was slowing down ON PURPOSE. How can you call it an accident?
LOL that's exactly what I wanted to say - that biker passed the SUV, LOOKED BACK at the SUV, and MADE SURE he would be knocked by the SUV, THEN braked - ON EFFING PURPOSE! Watch the [censored] video !
Anyone who cannot see that or deny that is an idiot or just plain blind !
Originally Posted By: brave sir robin
the driver had just ran into one of the riders on accident.
On accident??? Were you watching a different video than the rest of us? It clearly shows the biker pulled right in front of the SUV and then was slowing down ON PURPOSE. How can you call it an accident?
LOL that's exactly what I wanted to say - that biker passed the SUV, LOOKED BACK at the SUV, and MADE SURE he would be knocked by the SUV, THEN braked - ON EFFING PURPOSE! Watch the [censored] video !
Anyone who cannot see that or deny that is an idiot or just plain blind !
Originally Posted By: 97tbird
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: brave sir robin
the driver had just ran into one of the riders on accident.
On accident??? Were you watching a different video than the rest of us? It clearly shows the biker pulled right in front of the SUV and then was slowing down ON PURPOSE. How can you call it an accident?
LOL that's exactly what I wanted to say - that biker passed the SUV, LOOKED BACK at the SUV, and MADE SURE he would be knocked by the SUV, THEN braked - ON EFFING PURPOSE! Watch the [censored] video !
Anyone who cannot see that or deny that is an idiot or just plain blind !
you might want to re read this article. specifically the part where it says
"Alexian Lien's Range Rover was the man attacked by motorcyclists after he accidentally hit a biker
Lien, 33, then crash through the mob in his vehicle, fearing for the safety of his wife Rosalyn Ng, and their 5-month-old child
Bikers chase the SUV, carrying couple and young child, and try to attack it
Lien speeds off hitting motorcyclists for the second time
It eventually grinds to a halt in NYC traffic and bikers smash the window
Lien was treated in hospital for lacerations to his face and body
Police said, contradictory to online comments, there were no other injuries "
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: brave sir robin
the driver had just ran into one of the riders on accident.
On accident??? Were you watching a different video than the rest of us? It clearly shows the biker pulled right in front of the SUV and then was slowing down ON PURPOSE. How can you call it an accident?
LOL that's exactly what I wanted to say - that biker passed the SUV, LOOKED BACK at the SUV, and MADE SURE he would be knocked by the SUV, THEN braked - ON EFFING PURPOSE! Watch the [censored] video !
Anyone who cannot see that or deny that is an idiot or just plain blind !
you might want to re read this article. specifically the part where it says
"Alexian Lien's Range Rover was the man attacked by motorcyclists after he accidentally hit a biker
Lien, 33, then crash through the mob in his vehicle, fearing for the safety of his wife Rosalyn Ng, and their 5-month-old child
Bikers chase the SUV, carrying couple and young child, and try to attack it
Lien speeds off hitting motorcyclists for the second time
It eventually grinds to a halt in NYC traffic and bikers smash the window
Lien was treated in hospital for lacerations to his face and body
Police said, contradictory to online comments, there were no other injuries "
Originally Posted By: brave sir robin
you might want to re read this article. specifically the part where it says
"Alexian Lien's Range Rover was the man attacked by motorcyclists after he accidentally hit a biker
Again, look at the video.
you might want to re read this article. specifically the part where it says
"Alexian Lien's Range Rover was the man attacked by motorcyclists after he accidentally hit a biker
Again, look at the video.
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: brave sir robin
you might want to re read this article. specifically the part where it says
"Alexian Lien's Range Rover was the man attacked by motorcyclists after he accidentally hit a biker
Again, look at the video.
ok this is my fault I didn't put the word "accidentally" in quotations in my original post sarcasm doesn't go over very clearly when typing.
The man clearly ran the smacktard rider over.
Just to be 100% clear
1. Stunters are annoying but are not a violent biker gang. It's just a semi random bunch of dim wits doing tricks on the road. They aren't exactly hells angels or freaking mad max...cheese and rice
2. Dude didn't have to run the rider over.
3. Riders get violent when they watch a guy get squashed right in front of them.
4. Dude gets beaten because he just ran over a fellow rider. This part isn't exactly rocket surgery here guys.
its a series of bad decisions made by all involved.
Originally Posted By: brave sir robin
you might want to re read this article. specifically the part where it says
"Alexian Lien's Range Rover was the man attacked by motorcyclists after he accidentally hit a biker
Again, look at the video.
ok this is my fault I didn't put the word "accidentally" in quotations in my original post sarcasm doesn't go over very clearly when typing.
The man clearly ran the smacktard rider over.
Just to be 100% clear
1. Stunters are annoying but are not a violent biker gang. It's just a semi random bunch of dim wits doing tricks on the road. They aren't exactly hells angels or freaking mad max...cheese and rice
2. Dude didn't have to run the rider over.
3. Riders get violent when they watch a guy get squashed right in front of them.
4. Dude gets beaten because he just ran over a fellow rider. This part isn't exactly rocket surgery here guys.
its a series of bad decisions made by all involved.
I used to work in the NYC area and dealt with usual traffic, but this whole incident has made me reconsider my approach.
Instead of carrying two spare magazines for my pistol, I should probably carry four.
Instead of carrying two spare magazines for my pistol, I should probably carry four.
Originally Posted By: brave sir robin
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: brave sir robin
you might want to re read this article. specifically the part where it says
"Alexian Lien's Range Rover was the man attacked by motorcyclists after he accidentally hit a biker
Again, look at the video.
ok this is my fault I didn't put the word "accidentally" in quotations in my original post sarcasm doesn't go over very clearly when typing.
The man clearly ran the smacktard rider over.
Just to be 100% clear
1. Stunters are annoying but are not a violent biker gang. It's just a semi random bunch of dim wits doing tricks on the road. They aren't exactly hells angels or freaking mad max...cheese and rice
2. Dude didn't have to run the rider over.
3. Riders get violent when they watch a guy get squashed right in front of them.
4. Dude gets beaten because he just ran over a fellow rider. This part isn't exactly rocket surgery here guys.
its a series of bad decisions made by all involved.
You left out two critical bits:
1. Stunters forced an "accident" to intimidate and control vehicle.
2. Stunters then intimidated and controlled vehicle further.
Those actions would cause a reasonable person to perceive a threat of serious bodily injury or harm. The stunters had ability (numbers), opportunity (surrounding vehicle) and intent (see 1 and 2 above) that caused SUV driver to reasonably fear for his family's harm. Don't forget, that the standard by which he is to be judged is that of a reasonable person response to the same circumstances, and knowing what only he knew, not what the press, police, or others have since ascertained.
His response was appropriate - try and flee. He was blocked from flight. So, he used force, proportional force, not to injure but to flee.
Clear, simple self defense.
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: brave sir robin
you might want to re read this article. specifically the part where it says
"Alexian Lien's Range Rover was the man attacked by motorcyclists after he accidentally hit a biker
Again, look at the video.
ok this is my fault I didn't put the word "accidentally" in quotations in my original post sarcasm doesn't go over very clearly when typing.
The man clearly ran the smacktard rider over.
Just to be 100% clear
1. Stunters are annoying but are not a violent biker gang. It's just a semi random bunch of dim wits doing tricks on the road. They aren't exactly hells angels or freaking mad max...cheese and rice
2. Dude didn't have to run the rider over.
3. Riders get violent when they watch a guy get squashed right in front of them.
4. Dude gets beaten because he just ran over a fellow rider. This part isn't exactly rocket surgery here guys.
its a series of bad decisions made by all involved.
You left out two critical bits:
1. Stunters forced an "accident" to intimidate and control vehicle.
2. Stunters then intimidated and controlled vehicle further.
Those actions would cause a reasonable person to perceive a threat of serious bodily injury or harm. The stunters had ability (numbers), opportunity (surrounding vehicle) and intent (see 1 and 2 above) that caused SUV driver to reasonably fear for his family's harm. Don't forget, that the standard by which he is to be judged is that of a reasonable person response to the same circumstances, and knowing what only he knew, not what the press, police, or others have since ascertained.
His response was appropriate - try and flee. He was blocked from flight. So, he used force, proportional force, not to injure but to flee.
Clear, simple self defense.
When I was 5 years old my dad was taking me to the movies in his 71 El camino. While exiting the freeway there was a punk in a mustang weaving in and out of traffic running one guy off the road. My dad caught up to him at the stoplight got out of the el camino grabbed the guy by the neck pulled out the keys from the ignition switch and threw them down the embankment.
for some reason this whole thing reminds me of what could have happened if things hadn't played out the way they did.
for some reason this whole thing reminds me of what could have happened if things hadn't played out the way they did.
Originally Posted By: brave sir robin
When I was 5 years old my dad was taking me to the movies in his 71 El camino. While exiting the freeway there was a punk in a mustang weaving in and out of traffic running one guy off the road. My dad caught up to him at the stoplight got out of the el camino grabbed the guy by the neck pulled out the keys from the ignition switch and threw them down the embankment.
Regardless of how you perceive my driving, I do not recommend that you try this approach on my car.
See my earlier post, you don't have the right to assault someone (and reaching into the car and grabbing a person's neck would be construed as causing the reasonable fear of harm, I.e. assault) just because you don't like their behaviors, or you perceived a crime.
Leave the arrests to the police, the judgement to the courts. What you're advocating is vigilantism...and if carried out against someone prepared to meet your force with equal force, it could easily result in your demise.
When I was 5 years old my dad was taking me to the movies in his 71 El camino. While exiting the freeway there was a punk in a mustang weaving in and out of traffic running one guy off the road. My dad caught up to him at the stoplight got out of the el camino grabbed the guy by the neck pulled out the keys from the ignition switch and threw them down the embankment.
Regardless of how you perceive my driving, I do not recommend that you try this approach on my car.
See my earlier post, you don't have the right to assault someone (and reaching into the car and grabbing a person's neck would be construed as causing the reasonable fear of harm, I.e. assault) just because you don't like their behaviors, or you perceived a crime.
Leave the arrests to the police, the judgement to the courts. What you're advocating is vigilantism...and if carried out against someone prepared to meet your force with equal force, it could easily result in your demise.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: brave sir robin
When I was 5 years old my dad was taking me to the movies in his 71 El camino. While exiting the freeway there was a punk in a mustang weaving in and out of traffic running one guy off the road. My dad caught up to him at the stoplight got out of the el camino grabbed the guy by the neck pulled out the keys from the ignition switch and threw them down the embankment.
for some reason this whole thing reminds me of what could have happened if things hadn't played out the way they did.
I have my doubts about the driver running the guy over being the only possible solution. I mean how many other vehicles were stopped by these guys? Far as I can tell there aren't reports of other cars and trucks running smacktard riders over out of fear.
When I was 5 years old my dad was taking me to the movies in his 71 El camino. While exiting the freeway there was a punk in a mustang weaving in and out of traffic running one guy off the road. My dad caught up to him at the stoplight got out of the el camino grabbed the guy by the neck pulled out the keys from the ignition switch and threw them down the embankment.
for some reason this whole thing reminds me of what could have happened if things hadn't played out the way they did.
I have my doubts about the driver running the guy over being the only possible solution. I mean how many other vehicles were stopped by these guys? Far as I can tell there aren't reports of other cars and trucks running smacktard riders over out of fear.
Originally Posted By: Astro14
Originally Posted By: brave sir robin
When I was 5 years old my dad was taking me to the movies in his 71 El camino. While exiting the freeway there was a punk in a mustang weaving in and out of traffic running one guy off the road. My dad caught up to him at the stoplight got out of the el camino grabbed the guy by the neck pulled out the keys from the ignition switch and threw them down the embankment.
Regardless of how you perceive my driving, I do not recommend that you try this approach on my car.
See my earlier post, you don't have the right to assault someone (and reaching into the car and grabbing a person's neck would be construed as causing the reasonable fear of harm, I.e. assault) just because you don't like their behaviors, or you perceived a crime.
Leave the arrests to the police, the judgement to the courts. What you're advocating is vigilantism...and if carried out against someone prepared to meet your force with equal force, it could easily result in your demise.
Thats kinda what I was getting at. Stuff has consequences. My dad ran the risk of escalating things when he pulled that stunt just like the driver ran the risk of escalating things when he decided to run someone over. Idiot rider ran the risk of getting run over when he stopped in front of the driver. its a series of bad decisions and is not as black and white as people here saying.
Originally Posted By: brave sir robin
When I was 5 years old my dad was taking me to the movies in his 71 El camino. While exiting the freeway there was a punk in a mustang weaving in and out of traffic running one guy off the road. My dad caught up to him at the stoplight got out of the el camino grabbed the guy by the neck pulled out the keys from the ignition switch and threw them down the embankment.
Regardless of how you perceive my driving, I do not recommend that you try this approach on my car.
See my earlier post, you don't have the right to assault someone (and reaching into the car and grabbing a person's neck would be construed as causing the reasonable fear of harm, I.e. assault) just because you don't like their behaviors, or you perceived a crime.
Leave the arrests to the police, the judgement to the courts. What you're advocating is vigilantism...and if carried out against someone prepared to meet your force with equal force, it could easily result in your demise.
Thats kinda what I was getting at. Stuff has consequences. My dad ran the risk of escalating things when he pulled that stunt just like the driver ran the risk of escalating things when he decided to run someone over. Idiot rider ran the risk of getting run over when he stopped in front of the driver. its a series of bad decisions and is not as black and white as people here saying.
I'm not sure I agree he was "blocked from flight". In the video from the Today show posted earlier it looks as if he might have had a pretty clear path by making a slight jog to the left.
Nothing that I've read about the "why" here makes sense...
The group trying to force the RR into the right lane doesn't really make sense since there are bikes in the right lane.
One of the reports says the group was trying to get the RR to slow down because he was "driving too fast and driving to close to them"... doesn't make sense...
Was this some sort of stunt gone wrong? (Not being a stunter I have no idea what sort of stunt that might be) Just seems like the maneuver and filming of it might have been some stunt...
Vastly varying reports don't make sense either, two broken legs, one broken leg, no critical injuries, torn aorta, rider in coma, never walk again...
Nothing that I've read about the "why" here makes sense...
The group trying to force the RR into the right lane doesn't really make sense since there are bikes in the right lane.
One of the reports says the group was trying to get the RR to slow down because he was "driving too fast and driving to close to them"... doesn't make sense...
Was this some sort of stunt gone wrong? (Not being a stunter I have no idea what sort of stunt that might be) Just seems like the maneuver and filming of it might have been some stunt...
Vastly varying reports don't make sense either, two broken legs, one broken leg, no critical injuries, torn aorta, rider in coma, never walk again...
Originally Posted By: brave sir robin
Thats kinda what I was getting at. Stuff has consequences. My dad ran the risk of escalating things when he pulled that stunt just like the driver ran the risk of escalating things when he decided to run someone over. Idiot rider ran the risk of getting run over when he stopped in front of the driver. its a series of bad decisions and is not as black and white as people here saying.
Then this is where we disagree. The driver's decision to drive forward and run over the motorcycles in front of him wasn't escalatory, it was an attempt to flee from a threat of serious bodily harm. At that point in the video, the SUV driver had been forced into an accident, the motorcycle riders had pulled open the door of his SUV, where his baby girl was seated, he had been forced to the side of the road, and the motorcycle riders were damaging his car.
A clear, present, serious threat to his family existed. Remaining on the side of the road would not have been a reasonable choice in light of this threat to himself and his family. You're not seriously suggesting that a reasonable person should sit on the side of the road after being assaulted and allow further assault to take place, are you? Those guys were trying to get inside the SUV...and it's quite clear that were intent on doing harm from their actions. The proportional response to a threat of serious bodily harm or death is a lethal application of force.
His flight wasn't intended to harm, just to leave, but even if it had been intended to harm those riders, it was still the reasonable, proportional response to the lethal threat that they collectively posed to the driver and family.
Thats kinda what I was getting at. Stuff has consequences. My dad ran the risk of escalating things when he pulled that stunt just like the driver ran the risk of escalating things when he decided to run someone over. Idiot rider ran the risk of getting run over when he stopped in front of the driver. its a series of bad decisions and is not as black and white as people here saying.
Then this is where we disagree. The driver's decision to drive forward and run over the motorcycles in front of him wasn't escalatory, it was an attempt to flee from a threat of serious bodily harm. At that point in the video, the SUV driver had been forced into an accident, the motorcycle riders had pulled open the door of his SUV, where his baby girl was seated, he had been forced to the side of the road, and the motorcycle riders were damaging his car.
A clear, present, serious threat to his family existed. Remaining on the side of the road would not have been a reasonable choice in light of this threat to himself and his family. You're not seriously suggesting that a reasonable person should sit on the side of the road after being assaulted and allow further assault to take place, are you? Those guys were trying to get inside the SUV...and it's quite clear that were intent on doing harm from their actions. The proportional response to a threat of serious bodily harm or death is a lethal application of force.
His flight wasn't intended to harm, just to leave, but even if it had been intended to harm those riders, it was still the reasonable, proportional response to the lethal threat that they collectively posed to the driver and family.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
