Page 1 of 1

Road Rage part ll

Posted: Fri Aug 26, 2011 10:53 pm
by Medic624
Odd...in relation to Road Rage topic... This is exactly what NOT to do... :shock: :banghead: :shock:

He's lucky he didn't "allegedly" point his weapon at another "carrying" driver or this may have been a whole different outcome!

Please read: http://www.yourhoustonnews.com/pearland ... 88c50.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Re: Road Rage part ll

Posted: Fri Aug 26, 2011 11:07 pm
by Limey Hooligan
Wow..... up to 20 years and $10,000 fine... :shock:

Puts a WHOLE 'nother perspective on the importance of avoiding a road rage incident while carrying. Sounds like I'm not going to be pulling my gun unless it's crystal clear that I need to use it in self-defense.

Re: Road Rage part ll

Posted: Sat Aug 27, 2011 5:21 am
by DONT TREAD ON ME
Limey Hooligan wrote:Sounds like I'm not going to be pulling my gun unless it's crystal clear that I need to use it in self-defense.
Is there another reason to pull a gun on someone?



I just hope that this moron is not a CHLer.

Re: Road Rage part ll

Posted: Sat Aug 27, 2011 9:39 am
by speedsix
...doesn't look the least bit contrite, either...

...PC46.035(a) and (h) make it clear when a CHL can "intentionally fail to conceal" or "display" our weapons...and not get our picture taken by the po-po...

...I don't think the unlicensed citizen gets any more slack than we do in this area...if you can't legally USE it...keep it in your pants...or holster...

Re: Road Rage part ll

Posted: Sat Aug 27, 2011 10:58 am
by AJMag
Limey Hooligan wrote:Wow..... up to 20 years and $10,000 fine... :shock:

Puts a WHOLE 'nother perspective on the importance of avoiding a road rage incident while carrying. Sounds like I'm not going to be pulling my gun unless it's crystal clear that I need to use it in self-defense.
It's one thing to aviod a road rage incident, and another to be the instigator in the event. He had it coming for having such lack of self control that he allowed his emotions to get all jacked up because someone obeyed a traffic light for once. It surprises me that people can be so idiotic.

I doubt he was a CHLer, otherwise the media probably would have used that against him. Well I suppose if the authorities released that info, but I would also expect the charges to include something like unlawful display of a license holder. :nono:

Re: Road Rage part ll

Posted: Sat Aug 27, 2011 11:06 am
by DONT TREAD ON ME
AJMag wrote:
Limey Hooligan wrote:otherwise the media probably would have used that against him. Well I suppose if the authorities released that info, but I would also expect the charges to include something like unlawful display of a license holder. :nono:
I agree with you. I am just hoping that the reporter got the whole story and nothing else will come out e.g., a CHL.

Re: Road Rage part ll

Posted: Sat Aug 27, 2011 11:19 am
by howdy
I'll play the devil's advocate here. We ARE innocent until proven guilty. This very well might be the "victim" falsely accusing the other party in a road rage incident. It might just be the guy had a handgun in his car and never pulled it and the accuser got "lucky" with the accusation. The arrested party has his picture in the paper/TV news, he has to hire a lawyer, etc, etc. This could happen to any of us that carry a gun. I might just purchase one of these, http://www.spytechs.com/Car-Cameras/dual-view-cam.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, or buy a pink handgun. (Officer....have the accuser describe my gun) It would be a great conversation piece at the range.

Re: Road Rage part ll

Posted: Sat Aug 27, 2011 12:22 pm
by clarionite
If it happened the way reported, then I think the guy needs to be charged. But 20 years? I've seen murderers and sex offenders get less than half that.
Doesn't make much sense to me.

Re: Road Rage part ll

Posted: Sat Aug 27, 2011 5:36 pm
by alphonso
I wonder if the two men involved knew each other or knew about each other. Specifically, did the accuser happen to know that the accused routinely carried a gun? If so, it would be a pretty easy accusation to make...

Re: Road Rage part ll

Posted: Sat Aug 27, 2011 6:47 pm
by johnson0317
howdy wrote:I'll play the devil's advocate here. We ARE innocent until proven guilty.
You can spend an awful lot of time being innocent while sitting in a cell.

I do like the idea of there being something obvious and different about your gun. No way the guy could actually describe it without seeing it. I guess they already have only a 50/50 chance of identifying it as a revolver or a semi..so there is some hope there.

RJ

Re: Road Rage part ll

Posted: Sun Aug 28, 2011 4:30 pm
by Zergrush
clarionite wrote:If it happened the way reported, then I think the guy needs to be charged. But 20 years? I've seen murderers and sex offenders get less than half that.
Doesn't make much sense to me.
Sounds like the message is you might as well shoot.

Re: Road Rage part ll

Posted: Mon Aug 29, 2011 4:01 pm
by schufflerbot
same thing happened to me once. i had my daughter in the back seat of my GTO and a guy was tailgating the heck out of me. i dont brake check people, but i will slow down to ridiculously slow speeds of you're on my bumper. he got angry, passed me in the oncoming lane and pointed a glock at me with his passenger side window rolled down.

i slammed the brakes, called the police and pulled into a gas station to distance us from this looney.

i'm hoping they threw the book at him but i never heard anything else about it.