TexasCHLforum.com

drjoker wrote:sjfcontrol: he drove so close to me that his rear view mirror hit mine. The crazy idiot destroyed both our rear view mirrors. It was very expensive to fix. Ugh....

Some people call those sideview mirrors, referring the the mirror inside mounted on the windshield as the rearview mirror. It's odd, since all your mirrors allow you to see to the rear, but I can understand the confusion.

DISCLAIMER: I don't agree with either of these morons' actions.

I think the shooter should have exited or found some other way to avoid the incident. The reckless driver is just stupid. However, the shooter was also where he was allowed to lawfully be, no matter how dumb it was to still be there after 8 minutes of horseplay. Legally, why wouldn't he be covered by the castle doctrine since he had no duty to retreat while having someone acting in a way that could easily be interpreted as an assault with a deadly weapon (car)?

Not saying he was in the right, but legally, how was he in the wrong? Besides not using common sense, of course.