But you’d have to realize that there are two sides of the story, mine and the guy with his hand slammed in the door. Who are you going to believe? Me, an innocent person trying to mind my own business or that carjacking sonuvabitch? 
Wink at the jury like that and a conviction is pretty much guaranteed.
I repeat my earlier question: how is putting a hand on the door of your car in any way restraining you? You can simply start driving away. Dpes your car have some kind of interlock that prevents it from moving with an open door? Mine doesn’t.
Not for me.
You tell me that you told the guy to remove his hand before you closed it and I’ll vote not guilty 100 times outa 100.
If you said anything approximating that during jury selection, you wouldn’t be on it.
I, personally, accidently closed a car door on my sister’s hand once. And I then had to drive her immediately to the hospital.
And my question still hasan’t been answered? Why would anyone do this in the OP scenario? In fact, you are locking yourself to the panhandler, unless you open the door again or drag him along until you tear his fingers off.
And if your story is, “I didn’t mean to do it – I really thought he was moving his hand”, then if you open the door and leave, it would seem you are leaving the scene of an accident, which might in itself be a crime.
It seems to me if you do this, you are absolutely guaranteeing police involvement, and whether you are ultimately cleared or not, it seems a seriously stupid thing to do.
Maybe a better OP question would be, “Just how aggressive can a panhandler get before I can deck him with no fear of legal consequences, given there are numerous witnesses to what happens?” And my answer would be, a lot more than in the OP.
As soon as a stranger (say, a LDS nertz) makes the transition from “talking at me about something or other” to putting his hand halfway inside my car so as to prevent me from continuing on my way, he’s threatening me and detaining me. Why wouldn’t I slam the door on his fingers? (I don’t carry a gun or know how to administer judo chops to the neck). He’s detaining me unlawfully and, for all I know, his LDS pamphlets are just part of his disguise to allow him to get closer to his victims. I don’t see why there’s ambiguity about this. Placing his hand on my B-pillar doesn’t legally create a relationship with him wherein I have to convince him of the legitimacy of my desire not to spend time with him.
Again, is this really an ambiguous situation? Does anything change substantially if we replace the religious guy with a panhandler? You don’t have a right not to be annoyed, but the hand inside your property detaining you is not an annoyance; it’s a crime.
Nice passive-aggressive interpretation of what was stated. Meanwhile, in the land of the Big Rock Candy Mountain, cigarette trees are to be taxed and licensed; hobo rally in opposition was expected, but bums found passed out on the shore of Whiskey Lake.
Stranger
Just reading the question upset me. Maybe I’m a pacifist (I wouldn’t know, never been in a situation where it would’ve been called for) but I could not be happy hurting someone unless they were tyring to kill me.
If the guy is putting his body parts in your car, how can you be sure he isn’t going to pull a knife on you next? What if he opened up the other side door, and put his hand in your car then? Is that different?
What if you had a 6 year old daughter, and she was with you. Would you be more willing to keep him away if your child might be in danger?
What if he grabs you lightly by the arm or shoulder and wouldnt let go ? Or put his hand in your pocket and wouldnt take it out ? Or took hold of your purse or briefcase and wouldnt let go ?
IMO those are much like putting the hand on the car. You’ve crossed a line and you damn well better step back from that line post haste.
But that’s the whole point of my question. If he touches you, or your clothing, or something you’re carrying, that’s assault, and opens up a whole plethora of responses you can legally make. But if he’s merely detaining you by preventing you from closing the door, it’s a lot harder to interpret that as assault.
Boyo Jim, say I’m parallel parked. The car in front of me has left and another has parked there - this one has backed up so that there is only an inch between our bumpers. There’s a street light or garbage can next to my car, right behind the arc that the driver’s door sweeps when it opens, so I can’t backup to pull out without closing the door first.
(and the car is on fire, and someone has glued my child inside)
What if he shuts the door claiming, “He reached for me and I thought he was going to assault me for money?” Would self-defense, given the persistance of the handler, hold up?
You can get sued or get into legal trouble doing just about anything under the “wrong” circumstances…and often its a damned if you do and damned if dont sorta thing.
Take a relative risk approach to this.
How many times do you think something like the OP scenario was just stage one and two of a criminal act that lead to assualt, rape, robbery or murder ? How many of those do you think there have been ?
On the flipp side, how many people have been sued into the poor house, or sent to rot in the slammer for years because they slammed a car door on somebodies hand ?
Do you encounter panhandlers regularly? I walk a paltry 1/4 mile from the train to the office (and back again) and encounter no fewer than 6 panhandlers each day. Changing the route would be ineffective. In my case it is really reinforcing behavior.
If I were in the OP’s situation, I might shell out the few bucks as a price for my safety, but it would not be out of compassion. That train left the station years ago.
missed the edit window, but you can ignore my post w/o reply. I’ve read enough of your (YogSosth’s) posts to understand and I (respectfully) choose a different path.
Whoa where did that come from? :eek: I’m being passive-aggressive? 
You are the one who came up with some insane scenario about the panhandler being related to a rapist or bully. You claim asking for change is extortion. I didn’t bother reply to those because it was an obvious rant from an angry man.
**Gary T **said my act of kindness encourages shitty behavior. But it is MY act of kindess, not his. I’m not going to turn into some thorn in society’s shoe just because of one or a few bad incidents. If Gary T wants panhandlers to stop their aggressive tactics, then it is up to him to do the shoving and the refusing. I will not. I feel their desperation drives them to that point and I will sympathize with that. Some people wont, but its not incumbent on me to adhere to their dream. If they want the dirty work done, they should do it themselves. Only an indignent narcissist would consider that passive-aggressive
What you think is reasonable can look horrible in a cold court room. Of course his testimony would totally contradict yours. Do not turn an annoying situation into a big problem.
Good grief.
Call 911 . Saying a loud and clear voice “Sir, I interpret you hand on my car door as a sign of aggression. Again, please remove your hand, I will be closing said door in 5,4,3,2,1 SLAM”
Or some such bloviations.
That should document things decently.
I am sure glad that I’m 6’4" and ugly. I don’t have these questions come up in my life. Bawahahahaha
You could have at least paused to get her hand out of the door first!
Thanks to this thread, I’m welding my doors shut. and knocking out the windows.
It’s not a question of whose act of kindness it is. It’s a matter of who suffers for it. And the ones who suffer are the other people that get harassed, and in some cases the panhandlers themselves.
It’s like feeding the bears in a park. The feeder may think he’s being nice to the bears, but he’s actually doing a disservice to both the bears who lose incentive to get their food through normal means, and to the people who become victims of those bears.
I don’t see how refusing to give to panhandlers makes one a thorn in society’s shoe. Quite the opposite, it’s the giving to them that grows thorns.
Perhaps you’re conflating me with others, as I’ve said nothing one way or the other about shoving. I do advocate refusing.