- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: a-hole driver of the year award
Posted on 10/18/15 at 10:51 pm to LouisianaLady
Posted on 10/18/15 at 10:51 pm to LouisianaLady
quote:
Where's your evidence? Isn't that what you're looking for?
I saw illegal passes in the video, and a motor vehicle collision (also video). The rest, is pure speculation. I haven't asked that anyone be prosecuted/charged. i haven't claimed that either party is clearly more guilty than the other.
If you're trying to say the old man was clearly the guilty party, then I'm sorry, you're going to be disappointed.
quote:
Because I know if I was just strutting along and heard a frickING BODY hit my car, I'd be crying and flipping the frick out.
Yes, maybe YOU would, but this is not you. This is someone else entirely, and not only do you have no idea about who this man is, but you have no idea about what his reactions are like outside of this video alone. Your perspective is very very very limited.
quote:
Or he realized the stupid decision he made in the heat of the moment during his road rage.
Can you prove to me he was angry? I'd love to see that argument.
This is all I'm reading: speculation, guess, guess, maybe, probably, speculation.
Simply will not work in a court of law.
1
Posted on 10/18/15 at 10:54 pm to tiggerthetooth
quote:
He might have been psychologically shaken from the impact of the incident, and maybe his natural disposition is indifferent.
"I don't care. Double yellow line."
I admire his fund of traffic knowledge and ability to synthesize an escape clause on the spot.
But, res ipsa loquitur. Posted on 10/18/15 at 10:56 pm to LouisianaLady
quote:
Are you saying the old man is drunk?
Or are you trying to say that hitting a human body with his car made him on the same level as a drunk person?
Posted on 10/18/15 at 10:57 pm to sleepytime
Needs to happen more often.
You want to get all Mad Max on a public highway? Bring it on, bitch.
You want to get all Mad Max on a public highway? Bring it on, bitch.
Posted on 10/18/15 at 10:57 pm to tiggerthetooth
Alright Mr. Law school.
What I wonder is.. (not a question aimed at you or anyone in particular)..
If the old man didn't break any laws (say both lanes were the same direction and there was no double line and biker hopped into the lane last minute), it would be 100% the bikers fault.
If biker didn't break any laws (say the same but the old man jumped out when he did), it would be old man's fault.
Whose fault is it when they BOTH break the law?
Both crossed double lines bUT only one got hurt. Wouldn't that make the old man more likely to be the person in trouble? It's not like biker broke the law and old man didnt.. homicide attept or not.
What I wonder is.. (not a question aimed at you or anyone in particular)..
If the old man didn't break any laws (say both lanes were the same direction and there was no double line and biker hopped into the lane last minute), it would be 100% the bikers fault.
If biker didn't break any laws (say the same but the old man jumped out when he did), it would be old man's fault.
Whose fault is it when they BOTH break the law?
Both crossed double lines bUT only one got hurt. Wouldn't that make the old man more likely to be the person in trouble? It's not like biker broke the law and old man didnt.. homicide attept or not.
Posted on 10/18/15 at 10:58 pm to tiggerthetooth
Cute. Your gifs don't make you win, kid.
Posted on 10/18/15 at 10:58 pm to LouisianaLady
LL I obviously see that you are a compassionate person but unfortunately when lawyers get involved compassion can go out the window. Depending on how much money the old fart has he will either be found guilty or not guilty. As stated by tiger tooth legally and morally are totally opposites in the legal world. Money talks bullshite walks. Personally if that old man got out on some legal flaw or some other reason and that was my kids riding on that bike I would definitely pay him a visit unofficially of couse. Welcome to America the greatest judicial system in the world they say. 
Trust me I know how it works
Trust me I know how it works
Posted on 10/18/15 at 10:59 pm to FLBooGoTigs1
true enough.. I dont know that I'd be banking on hillbilly McGee in his 1990 ride having bank. Posted on 10/18/15 at 11:08 pm to FLBooGoTigs1
quote:
LL I obviously see that you are a compassionate person but unfortunately when lawyers get involved compassion can go out the window. Depending on how much money the old fart has he will either be found guilty or not guilty. As stated by tiger tooth legally and morally are totally opposites in the legal world. Money talks bullshite walks. Personally if that old man got out on some legal flaw or some other reason and that was my kids riding on that bike I would definitely pay him a visit unofficially of couse. Welcome to America the greatest judicial system in the world they say.
Trust me I know how it works
What would you say the "moral" thing to do is? What if the man genuinely had no idea how the impact would go?
Definition of morality.
quote:
a particular system of values and principles of conduct, especially one held by a specified person or society.
So what system was agreed upon in this scenario? Are not the state and federal traffic laws this agreed upon system?
Seems like the biker thought it morally okay to disregard traffic laws, and the old man never showed clear intent.
The only clear non-accident in the entire interaction was the biker making the illegal pass. Unless of course you want to argue that he thought he was in danger...blah blah blah.
Who knows if the old man even saw the biker considering he was driving close to the vehicle behind him, and he was having to view him from behind through mirrors if he was able to see him at all, and the biker had clear full frontal vision of what was in front of him (unless of course he wasn't looking forward).
Could have just been a simple case of wrong place, wrong time and the biker unfortunately along with his traveling companion suffered the consequence of a bad mix of maneuvers. Lucky they weren't killed.
Posted on 10/18/15 at 11:10 pm to LouisianaLady
You never know that old fart could have a mattress full of cash. I have seen enough legal cases to know that all the evidence in the world sometimes that would seem to put someone away for a long time only to have one juror have a reasonable doubt and boom not guilty or a lesser charge. Anything happens to jones Lawyer up. My advice
Posted on 10/18/15 at 11:13 pm to LouisianaLady
quote:
Cute. Your gifs don't make you win, kid
Win what exactly? You've showed a clear lack of sense regarding how the justice system works in terms of evidence and proof when accusing/charging someone of a crime. I thought that was common knowledge in the US, but clearly you were taught wrong by your school system, or where ever you accumulated your knowledge. I hope you never get charged with anything based on your own views of "justice". I'll stick to the evidence based convictions.
Posted on 10/18/15 at 11:15 pm to LouisianaLady
Old man definitely deserves to be charged with aggravated assault/battery at a minimum. It is obvious that his intention was to harm the motorcyclist out of shear road rage. His responses in the video speak for themselves. Motorcyclist deserves a few traffic citations as well.
People defending the old a-hole are either trolls or the a-hole "get off my lawn" type or both.
People defending the old a-hole are either trolls or the a-hole "get off my lawn" type or both.
Posted on 10/18/15 at 11:15 pm to tiggerthetooth
Exactly what I was referring too. The mental state or physical/medical records would have to be pulled. Maybe he has alzhemers(spelled wrong)? I know from the video and the old farts reply about he don't care looks bad but in the courts and in some jurors eyes this may change if they see something in his medical history. I get what you are saying.
This post was edited on 10/18/15 at 11:20 pm
Posted on 10/18/15 at 11:20 pm to LouisianaLady
quote:
If biker didn't break any laws (say the same but the old man jumped out when he did), it would be old man's fault
Based on insurance, the standard rule is if you are hit from behind, the one who hit you from behind is at fault. I posted this earlier in the thread, and maybe talk to your own insurance company if you dont believe me. No one would serve jail time or receive any legal penalty, but the insurance would have the biker at fault.
quote:
Whose fault is it when they BOTH break the law?
I only saw one vehicle clearly break the law. I can't speculate about what laws the other driver MIGHT have broke. Maybe there's other video evidence out there that shows otherwise.
quote:
It's not like biker broke the law and old man didnt
Yes, it is exactly like that. Maybe he should be evaluated to see if he's capable of operating a motor vehicle, but making a split second swerve and then reestablishing your lane isn't breaking the law. Was there something on the road? Was he afraid of the biker for some reason and got caught up looking into his mirror which caused his reaction?
Does this old man have a prior experience with a motorcycle that draws out some anxiety that could potentially cause driving issues?
Maybe he was in an accident with a motorcyclist before and got severely hurt?
I do not know.
Like I said, all we know is the motorcyclist was clearly breaking the law, and there was an impact of motor vehicles.
Posted on 10/18/15 at 11:24 pm to grif82
quote:
It is obvious that his intention was to harm the motorcyclist out of shear road rage
And the evidence is......?????
Please show me how the responses = intent to harm and anger. Please, Im begging you.
Posted on 10/18/15 at 11:26 pm to FLBooGoTigs1
quote:
I know from the video and the old farts reply about he don't care looks bad but in the courts and in some jurors eyes this may change if they see something in his medical history.
So some form of insanity plea due to mental illness? Still doesn't excuse his behavior and shouldn't allow him to walk scot-free. He'll still have some repercussions in civil court if it comes to that too.
Posted on 10/18/15 at 11:27 pm to tiggerthetooth
The thing is.. youre making this thread about legal bullshite like we are in law class.
Last I checked, this is a thread on the OT. No one asked what a team of lawyers and a jury would rule. People are discussing what they see from their POV.
Youre acting like someone who just took their first intro to law course and wants to "educate" everyone else when that isn't the point of this thread as far as I can tell.
That's why I made fun of your cries for evidence earlier.
Why don't you go into the thread about the lady suing Starbucks where your legal knowledge might help more? Why here? Why this thread?
Last I checked, this is a thread on the OT. No one asked what a team of lawyers and a jury would rule. People are discussing what they see from their POV.
Youre acting like someone who just took their first intro to law course and wants to "educate" everyone else when that isn't the point of this thread as far as I can tell.
That's why I made fun of your cries for evidence earlier.
Why don't you go into the thread about the lady suing Starbucks where your legal knowledge might help more? Why here? Why this thread?
This post was edited on 10/18/15 at 11:31 pm
Posted on 10/18/15 at 11:31 pm to tiggerthetooth
Tiger you definitely sound like you know what you are talking about but this video along could bring charges based on testimony from witnesses including the guy filming the video. If the video is used as evidence it could be shown that this old man only veered over when the motorcycle was passing and never not once did he do this prior too the motorcycle trying to pass him. Once again it will depend on the lawyers,witnesses,evidence, and the jury. I am done here.
Posted on 10/18/15 at 11:34 pm to tiggerthetooth
quote:
nly saw one vehicle clearly break the law. I can't speculate about what laws the other driver MIGHT have broke
Wrong. The motorcycle broke the law for crossing a double yellow line. Guess what? So did the man in the car. At a bare minimum he will be charged with crossing a double yellow along with failure to maintain control of a motor vehicle and likely some form of vehicular assault.
I'm not sure why you're so adamant the motorcyclist broke the law by crossing the double yellow when the old man did the same thing. Intent doesn't matter. He (the old man) failed to maintain control of his car and moved into the other lane.
Posted on 10/18/15 at 11:35 pm to tiggerthetooth
quote:
Please show me how the responses = intent to harm and anger. Please, Im begging you.
If you can't decide what his intent was by watching the entire length of video then I can't help you. You're clearly reaching trying to make excuses for the old man's behavior. I don't care what some hot-shot lawyer is going to do by putting a spin to the content of the video.
I'm also not going to waste my time arguing back and forth with you over the old man's intentions. You've shown what a condescending douche you are many times in this thread. I've stated by opinion and stand by it.
Page 6 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News