Road Rage at it Best - Good Grief!

[Mike Williamson]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

yeah I know, I mis typed-- I was thinking "shooter" and "other guy" when I wrote that.


I do not justify the shooter's actions.

I do state that if he is caught, the punishment that would be carried out by the courts (speculation) against this guy would not address the entire situation.

So it wouldn't be "fair", in the strictest sense of the word.

We want to lock this guy up for a long time, fine him a large amount of money when he was simply "reactive" in a bad situation.

Yes, he was "reactive"...He SHOT a man over a traffic incident. If someone running him off the road is all it takes for him to shoot someone, he NEEDS to be locked up...You seem to think he was pushed into doing this....That it is somehow justified..

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

There is a man in Texas who is "scot free" for shooting and killing someone who was breaking into his neighbors home. The burglar was leaving the property, the neighbors were not home, the emergency dispatchers told the guy to not shoot the burglar but he did it anyway-- killing the guy who was not even a threat to him.

His actions were praised.

The courts did not punish him at all.

I've heard that clip. What's that got to do with a man shooting someone for a traffic incident? I had a guy slam on his brakes in front of me tonight on the way home from church and swerve to the shoulder because he apparently thought I had my brights on. I almost hit him, and then he turned his brights on after I went around him... Made me angry. Should I have shot him? I mean, he sure pushed me!

Apparently it's ok to hurt people if they push you.

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

Here you have a good man who was provoked, could have been severely injured or killed, he responds and because of Mississippi law, he could get some serious time in the slammer.

While the man who provoked the whole episode walks away "scot free".

If his actions were inadvertent, then why didn't he stop to make sure that his victim was alright?

Because he did not care.

You make this sound like the guy ran the other guy's car off the road, off a cliff, into the trees, or whatever...sounds more like the guy had to hit the shoulder to avoid hitting the "idiot" driver. His car certainly couldn't have been damaged much, if at all...He didn't have a problem catching up with the offender. I wouldn't have stopped either if there was no damage...You're assuming a lot with this incident.

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

He didn't call the cops or emergency personnel because he did not care.

He did what he did and we would have never heard about any of this, if his victim did not decide to shoot the idiot that didn't care about his actions that could have severely injured or killed an innocent man.

The idiot would have kept driving, as if nothing is wrong, only to cut someone off again, cause another accident and injure someone else.

"Justice", in the truest sense would not be served if the shooter in this case was tried in our court system.

What makes you think this person would have ever run someone else off the road? You miss the point. One act was an accident. The other was intentional.