No. I mean forcing the conversation into *this *thread doesn’t work. See, your post, too, looks embarrassing and out of place to me.
I’ll live…
I hope you live long enough to start a thread about how haaaard, lawd, how haaard it is fo’ da po’ white man to catch a fair break, lawd, lawd, fo da white man to catch a fair break!
All You who suggested the driver should’ve left - do You really think that would’ve calmed her down? Of course not, she would’ve felt invincible and would’ve taken another victim. ( And of course if the driver would have forgotten the ignition key… )
I notice that’s a song you seem to sing a lot around here…
(((Nzinga, Seated)))
I think it’s safe to say, if that uppercut didn’t calm her ass down, *nothing *would!
MPB, did you just internet hug me?
That’s battery! Uppercut him!
Honestly, it’s just a sad situation. I get slapstick comedy and people falling down and whatnot. But this is just straight up violence. What is so funny about this?
[ul]
[li]Woman mouths off to a person they think won’t fight back. [/li]
[li]Woman dares this person to hit her. [/li]
[li]Person hits her. [/li]
[li]Comedy![/li][/ul]
I don’t get it either. That was a vicious, vicious, vicious hit to a person not defending themselves. They’re both lucky she wasn’t seriously injured. That’s a type of hit where someone gets knocked out, hits their head on the way down, and dies. I’m all for angry, annoying people getting their comeuppance. I just prefer less viciousness and chance of death.
She “wasn’t defending herself” by virtue of the fact that she was the one on the offense, and they’re both even more lucky that the driver wasn’t seriously injured.
She wasn’t on offense when she got decked. There’s no way to justify the driver’s actions here. He clocked her because he was angry, and did so rather brutally.
The bus driver hit her one time and threw her out of the bus. The fight was over and she had the chance to walk away. Instead she got back on the bus to assault him again. That was illegal and not self defense. That was retaliation. That’s against the law.
So by score: Bus driver= 1 retaliation that is assault. Passenger= 1 initial assault + 1 retaliation of her own. So the passenger is the most guilty of the two?
Lets say the bus driver was younger with better reflexes. She hit him while he was sitting. He immediately strikes back with equal force as her, 1 time. She loses balance and falls over hitting her head on the hand rail and is dead before she hits the floor, would the driver be in trouble?
The fight which she had started wasn’t over yet, therefore she was still the one on offense. The fact that the bus driver’s defensive action was extremely effective doesn’t change that.
Your analogy is legally and rhetorically false.
There are two tests that must be passed before we can use force:
-
Does the victim perceive a threat?
-
Would a reasonable person believe the response is necessary and proportionate to ending the threat?
Given the evidence at our disposal (the video), it appears that there was no continuing threat that would prevent him from calling the police, and that the driver’s response was neither necessary nor proportionate. If the driver did perceive a continued threat, and did believe his actions were necessary, he must explain these beliefs to the jury and prosecutor. They will then decide whether they agree that what the driver did was reasonable.
You have proposed a wildly different hypothetical. If the exact same situation unfolded, the sole exception being the woman was armed with a knife and stabbed him, then it would be entirely reasonable and necessary to use any force to disarm her and/or escape the situation.
The law never says that there is a set response that is appropriate for every situation, and the driver does get a chance to explain his actions.
And given that the appropriate response depends on the situation, YES, a fist is very different from a knife.
How can you conclude that there was no continuing threat? There was still a loud and disorderly rider on the bus that (assumingly) has a history of hitting a seated driver? IMO, the driver was perfectly correct in believing that a threat still existed. As far as proportionality is concerned, he returned one punch (presumably) with one punch. If he had continued to beat the girl while she was down, that would have been disproportionate. It is not his fault that he is good at punching. When you hit another person, you are taking the risk that they will throw a haymaker in retaliation. That is your fault, not theirs.
As for explaining your actions to the justice system, of course it works this way. No one thinks otherwise.
I’ve met those morons and You can’t just walk away. The script is always the same: they follow ‘‘Hey, where do You think You’re going? I’m talking to You! Don’t ignore Me! You think You’re better than Me?’’ ( add some swearwords and name-calling ) and then they try to stop You by grabbing or walking in front of You. They smell the fear ( true or imagined ) and they won’t let go easily.
The driver had two options: standing up for himself ( and for the others ) or running away as fast as he could. In that situation a man just can’t run and be respected by himself or by anybody. Also he would’ve been fired and who’s going to hire him. He didn’t want to be a famous coward. He didn’t want to change his name and move to another state. He didn’t want his kid to be bullied in school and so on… His situation was pretty impossible and he chose losing just some instead of all.
And for the force he used. He had to do it with one punch. Had he used less force it might not have been enough and he would’ve needed another, and maybe the third. So make it clean and fast.
As much I hate guys hitting women, he really had no choice. How about grabbing her arms, some might say. More spit on the face and knee on the groins. She was far from harmless when the punch left.
I’ve been in that situation few times, so I know ( never a woman though, but some drunken kids about fifteen years old ).
I think this is really the issue. Say that, while she is choking him and spitting, he elbows her as hard as he can in the face. Is that justifiable self-defense? I would think so. Now, let’s say 1 second passes. Three seconds. Fifteen seconds… This is the fuzzy area.
Nm. Missed a lot of posts somehow.
Regarding the victim’s perception of threat: is it correct that the initial victim (the driver) should perceive a threat if a person who has already struck him is still present and unrestrained?