# You'll will probably already see this what is your opinion



## jesse3398 (Apr 2, 2015)

*Uber Driver Pepper Sprays Violent Passenger!*


----------



## jesse3398 (Apr 2, 2015)

This Uber driver was anal poor customer service. If the guy was vomiting in his car or being loud and belligerent that one thing. This guy really over reacted, I wonder if Uber will keep him on as a driver.


----------



## ColdRider (Oct 19, 2015)

Drunk white boy had some hands! Hahahahahahaha dude maced him like a betch! Rider had it coming though lmao!


----------



## RainbowPlate (Jul 12, 2015)

One more time: Pull into a parking lot (not the curb), turn off the car, remove the keys and sound the car alarm on the fob.

The pax WILL be arrested for at least criminal trespass, possibly more.


----------



## Backdash (Jan 28, 2015)

https://uberpeople.net/threads/caug...eing-attacked-pax-arrested.43128/#post-568299


----------



## ColdRider (Oct 19, 2015)

SECOTIME said:


> I would have beat the shit out of that ******bag. The driver should have shot him. Lmao pepper spray. Wtf
> 
> Pepper spray is for rabid dogs. Someone attacks me like that barehanded it'll be their last night breathing.
> 
> Then the driver gets out and talks shit I would have been all over that dude.


I know right? Lol at him! He seemed like a little pansy following the rider after the fact and yelling "you got MACED" motherf*cker!" like he was some type of badass for doing that lmao


----------



## Dontmakemepullauonyou (Oct 13, 2015)

jesse3398 said:


> This Uber driver was anal poor customer service. If the guy was vomiting in his car or being loud and belligerent that one thing. This guy really over reacted, I wonder if Uber will keep him on as a driver.


Totally agree. You're on the clock keep driving TIL the pax figures it out.


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

The guy in the backseat was such a puss.. Slapping him and pulling his hair. It goes to show you though it happens in the blink of an eye..it could have been a lot worse for the driver. I just can't believe after he maced him and got the upper hand that he did not take advantage of it and tear that guy to pieces.

In now way it justifies the paxs actions but the driver did handle it very poorly.

Looks like he's been reading these boards them just fed up with it after seeing all the posts around here about kicking people out lol.

It seemed like he got upset because the guy didn't have an address in and couldn't give the driver any help because he was wasted.

Driver 1 pax 0 

Nothing better than assault on tape.


----------



## D Town (Apr 8, 2015)

SECOTIME said:


> I would have beat the shit out of that ******bag. The driver should have shot him. Lmao pepper spray. Wtf
> 
> Pepper spray is for rabid dogs. Someone attacks me like that barehanded it'll be their last night breathing.


And you'd rightly be in prison.

I don't know why this is a strange idea to anyone but
*
YOU DO NOT SHOOT SOMEONE UNLESS YOUR LIFE IS IN DANGER!
*
Someone taking a swing at you is NOT a cause for deadly force. If someone does by all means beat em into the ground or pepper spray them. I prefer pepper spray because why the hell do I even want to risk a broken hand or getting some some jack-a$$'s STD riddle blood all over me when I can spray them, body slam them, and then sit on em before calling the cops?

I'm not even going to address the whole, "poor customer service" idiocy. That is a waste of my breath.


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

Lol are you kidding me???



Pepper spray would have been replaced with my glock 9mm. Stand your ground I would never see prison over it in Florida...

What good is a cwp and a pistol if you can't defend yourself when attacked..lmao especially in your own car.


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

SECOTIME said:


> What good is a cwp and a pistol if you can't kill someone in public when attacked


Man I hope this isn't how you really feel, If so then you are the very reason why we need stronger gun laws in this country. You are not the solution, you are the problem.


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

Me and 100s of 1000's of other people.

You mean to tell me that if you had a firearm and that guy attacked you from behind you would not shoot to kill?

What if he had a knife and punctured your jugular?

What if he reach around and gouged that guys eyes out?

What if he had a gun and after he got out of the car he pulled it out and started shooting?

This scenario the driver was extremely lucky. But what you don't see is all the videos of people getting killed (innocents and assailants) and it happens every damn day.


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

SECOTIME said:


> You mean to tell me that if you had a firearm and that guy attacked you from behind you would not shoot to kill?


No.

If I own a gun I'd better have absolutely zero options remaining before I would ever consider shooting to kill. This guy was inexcusably drunk and aggressive, not sure this qualifies him for the death penalty. "What if" seems to be a poor defense for murder. Also, if someone decides to put knife through my jugular from behind I'm not sure a concealed weapon is going to improve my odds.


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

It wouldn't that's why if you're attacked you shoot to kill if given the chance. Wake up.

You wouldn't have killed these guys? If I was this driver I would have opened fire long before it go out of hand.

No offense to your beliefs but you sound like someone that would not be ready for a life threatening situation and passing out gluten free cookies or offering likes on Facebook aren't going to be enough to survive in this cold hard world we live in nowadays.


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

Davesway10 said:


> No.
> 
> If I own a gun I'd better have absolutely zero options remaining before I would ever consider shooting to kill. This guy was inexcusably drunk and aggressive, not sure this qualifies him for the death penalty. "What if" seems to be a poor defense for murder. Also, if someone decides to put knife through my jugular from behind I'm not sure a concealed weapon is going to improve my odds.


Zero options left usually means too late. Whoops you've been killed. Or at least seriosuly injured.


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

SECOTIME 
Do you have kids ? I do, 2, t both are drinking age. I wonder what side you would take if 1 of your kids got into a bar fight and someone else decided their life was in jeopardy ? Certainly you would feel that that person would be justified in taking the life of your child? And, based on the testimony you have provided today you would probably publicly acknowledge that your child did in fact deserve to die ? Mace did in fact deter the situation, a gun was not needed, and yet you still maintain that deadly force should have been applied. I don't like gluten free anything, I do value life. But hey, keep that gun handy, we will eventually be watching the video of the UBER driver that shot his obnoxious drunk passenger.


----------



## ColdRider (Oct 19, 2015)

SECOTIME said:


> It wouldn't that's why if you're attacked you shoot to kill if given the chance. Wake up.
> 
> You wouldn't have killed these guys? If I was this driver I would have opened fire long before it go out of hand.
> 
> No offense to your beliefs but you sound like someone that would not be ready for a life threatening situation and passing out gluten free cookies or offering likes on Facebook aren't going to be enough to survive in this cold hard world we live in nowadays.


Dey din du nuffins tho! Dey sum angelz!!!


----------



## Tim Selleck (Sep 22, 2015)

I would have been out of the car in two seconds with my firearm pointed at the car demanding those guys get out. 

For the first video, he was being a baby. Just keep driving and collecting that $. He probably got back in the car and went to a gas station to collect himself, turned the app back on and had to wait 15-20min for his next rider.

I would have driven the dude where I 'thought' he gave me directions and then eventually getting him to where he needed to be. Could have been a potential $50 ride.


----------



## ChicagoHeat12 (May 6, 2015)

jesse3398 said:


> This Uber driver was anal poor customer service. If the guy was vomiting in his car or being loud and belligerent that one thing. This guy really over reacted, I wonder if Uber will keep him on as a driver.


So from all of this the only thing you get is that somehow the driver is at fault? He overreacted? Travis would love you.


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/21/us/child-road-rage-death/index.html

Yep, shoot first. But I'm sure this is justifiable to you.


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

Davesway10 said:


> SECOTIME
> Do you have kids ? I do, 2, t both are drinking age. I wonder what side you would take if 1 of your kids got into a bar fight and someone else decided their life was in jeopardy ? Certainly you would feel that that person would be justified in taking the life of your child? And, based on the testimony you have provided today you would probably publicly acknowledge that your child did in fact deserve to die ? Mace did in fact deter the situation, a gun was not needed, and yet you still maintain that deadly force should have been applied. I don't like gluten free anything, I do value life. But hey, keep that gun handy, we will eventually be watching the video of the UBER driver that shot his obnoxious drunk passenger.


My children would never act like this guy did. This guy is a danger to society. He thinks he can put his hands on anyone whenever he wants. I wonder what he'll do next time he gets drunk. He deserves what he gets. This time he got lucky his driver never had to upgrade past mace. Next time it might be much different.

This driver better be prepared for far worse than what this sissy did. There are monstereous people all around you. Some not affected by pepper spray whatsoever. You just pissed them off even more now what are you going to do?


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

SECOTIME said:


> Lol are you kidding me???
> 
> Pepper spray would have been replaced with my glock 9mm. Stand your ground I would never see prison over it in Florida...
> 
> What good is a cwp and a pistol if you can't kill someone in public when attacked..lmao especially in your own car.


Prosecutors in "stand your ground" cases would most likely love to get a hold of statements like this. They could easily convince a jury that you're intentions were never to just "stand your ground" your intentions were to kill. I'll bet you would see plenty of jail time.


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

SECOTIME said:


> My children would never act like this guy did


Lol, said every parent ever.


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

I have a 16 year old daughter I highly doubt she would ever attack someone like this animal.

This guy was nothing. There are far far FAR worse out there.

I've been tested, quite a few times. I know what I'm made of. Do you? 

Good luck when you find out.


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

SECOTIME said:


> I have a 16 year old daughter I highly doubt she would ever attack someone like this animal.


This in no way shape or form answers the question I presented to you. All speculative reason aside, If this situation happened would you feel the person who killed your 16 year old daughter to be justified in doing so. I find your reasoning for not answering this question extremely ironic considering that as a driver you know full well how the "my daughter wouldn't do that" theory doesn't quite pan out. You need only drive on any college campus anywhere to shoot holes(pun intended) in that particular ideology. Was the road rage guy justified in taking the life of the 4 year girl ?


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

Davesway10 said:


> This in no way shape or form answers the question I presented to you. All speculative reason aside, If this situation happened would you feel the person who killed your 16 year old daughter to be justified in doing so. I find your reasoning for not answering this question extremely ironic considering that as a driver you know full well how the "my daughter wouldn't do that" theory doesn't quite pan out. You need only drive on any college campus anywhere to shoot holes(pun intended) in that particular ideology. Was the road rage guy justified in taking the life of the 4 year girl ?


Of course not. That has very little to do with being attacked by someone..

The attacker in the vid was much much bigger than the driver.

Ill break and say the driver using the mace worked in this situation. But this situation is only one of millions happening day in and day out. Mace won't always work. A firearm is lethal for a reason.


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

There were 53 Taxi and limousine fatalities in 2014. 32 of those were by violent acts from either a person or animal. This situation being one of millions day in and day out seems a bit exaggerated in order to strengthen your position, which has already changed.


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

I don't mean millions just in the taxi industry.

Uber man lol

Check this out


----------



## AceManShow (Sep 24, 2015)

jesse3398 said:


> This Uber driver was anal poor customer service. If the guy was vomiting in his car or being loud and belligerent that one thing. This guy really over reacted, I wonder if Uber will keep him on as a driver.


I woulda just kept driving. "It's not my fault we drove for 6 hours in circles, the guy just kept saying turn left" lmao


----------



## AceManShow (Sep 24, 2015)

SECOTIME said:


> It wouldn't that's why if you're attacked you shoot to kill if given the chance. Wake up.
> 
> You wouldn't have killed these guys? If I was this driver I would have opened fire long before it go out of hand.
> 
> No offense to your beliefs but you sound like someone that would not be ready for a life threatening situation and passing out gluten free cookies or offering likes on Facebook aren't going to be enough to survive in this cold hard world we live in nowadays.


UBER ON !!! Lol


----------



## Frank Martin (Nov 12, 2014)

This is why you stop the car, takes the keys, get out of the vehicle, and force him to leave.

Having your back to a red flag passenger is a dangerous risk as this poor driver found out.


----------



## rocksteady (Mar 19, 2015)

jesse3398 said:


> This Uber driver was anal poor customer service. If the guy was vomiting in his car or being loud and belligerent that one thing. This guy really over reacted, I wonder if Uber will keep him on as a driver.


Are you kidding? How would you have reacted? "Gee-whiz, Please stop hitting me sir and I'll take you wherever you want to go!" Overreacted to getting punched from behind (cheap shots) and having his hair pulled while the dude tries and to slam his head into the door? All he said was get out of my car. Macing him was well justified. I haven't looked into it, but with the video evidence I'm certain he wasn't arrested for using mace in self-defense. The dooche is lucky he didn't get shot which is legally justifiable in most states. You're a jackass.


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

He did pull his hair trying to get his head back to the seat and it looked like he tried to push his head into the window


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

Yea that's a normal facial expression for angry and aggressive douc* bags.

This guy ruinied his own life. He's all over the news and lost a pretty higher level job at taco bell. Lol

Good luck finding new employment.

What an idiot. Who gets that drunk by 8pm anyway..

I can't believe this site censors the word douch* too
..


----------



## rocksteady (Mar 19, 2015)

ColdRider said:


> Drunk white boy had some hands! Hahahahahahaha dude maced him like a betch! Rider had it coming though lmao!


No, the betch was the sissy boy who cheap shots from the backseat, slapping and pulling hair


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

Yea hitting the driver from back seat is like punching someone that is looking away from you .. Sucker punch


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

Yea he was arrested and charged with misdemeanor assault on a taxi driver and intoxication. He also lost his job at taco bell where he was a senior advertising exec.


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

You can just hit reply on the bottom left of the post to quote the text in the post. Fyi


----------



## rocksteady (Mar 19, 2015)

D Town said:


> And you'd rightly be in prison.
> 
> I don't know why this is a strange idea to anyone but
> *
> ...


It depends on the state's law. When you're getting your ass kicked from behind and the person is trying to slam your head into the window, yes, your life is in danger. People have died in fist fights. He didn't take just _A_ swing at him, but I think you know that. You were just trying to prove your point so you minimized the action of the aggressor. Don't let the facts get in the way of your impassioned feelz. Dirtbag.

Any state with stand your ground laws, it would have been justified. Especially with the video evidence, had someone used deadly force in this situation, they likely wouldn't be charged anywhere because they were clearly acting in self-defense. At what point do you think deadly force would have been justified? After he was knocked out and bleeding from a head wound? When he's dead? Will you then swoop in, Captain Hindsight, and grant him just cause to act in self defense? "Yes! he should have shot him! Clearly, his life _was_ in danger!"

You have no clue what you are talking about.


----------



## ColdRider (Oct 19, 2015)

rocksteady said:


> No, the betch was the sissy boy who cheap shots from the backseat, slapping and pulling hair


I never said he wasn't. But the driver following the drunk afterwards yelling "yeah! That's what happens. Yeah! You got maced, motherf*cker!" Seemed betchish to be honest.


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

Oh yea that part was. But in his world he felt vindicated. Oh I don't blame him really. The rider is very lucky he didn't pull that shit on someone like me.

That lost job at taco bell and a little bit of jail time is a blessing in disguise for this guy.


----------



## rocksteady (Mar 19, 2015)

Davesway10 said:


> No.
> 
> If I own a gun I'd better have absolutely zero options remaining before I would ever consider shooting to kill. This guy was inexcusably drunk and aggressive, not sure this qualifies him for the death penalty. "What if" seems to be a poor defense for murder. Also, if someone decides to put knife through my jugular from behind I'm not sure a concealed weapon is going to improve my odds.


So as someone from behind is slapping you and trying to slam your head into the door you're going to be able to clearly think, "hmmm, have I exhausted all my options here?" "what if" has saved countless lives. You can't "murder" in self defense, jackass. Yes, if the knife to the jugular happened without warning, a concealed handgun isn't much help but say you see him pull it, or say the attacker hits at first and then stops to go for the knife... it takes just as little time to go for your gun. I bet in that moment, you'd be wishing you had a gun. I wonder how many dead people thought in there final moments, "damn, I wish I had a gun."


----------



## rocksteady (Mar 19, 2015)

Davesway10 said:


> http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/21/us/child-road-rage-death/index.html
> 
> Yep, shoot first. But I'm sure this is justifiable to you.


Good gawd, your arguments are really pathetic. All non-sequiturs and ad-hominoms. But thats what emotionally driven people do when their beliefs are based solely on their feelings.

Oh yeah, well you know who else thought citizens shouldn't have guns? Hitler! So I'm sure YOU LOVE HITLER!!! So I'm sure the millions he murdered were justifiable to you!!!!


----------



## DieselkW (Jul 21, 2015)

After taking a life, for whatever reason, you will cherish the last time you slept through the night. 
After taking a life, you will feel hypocritical in church, you might seek forgiveness but never really believe you have it.
After taking a life, you will always and forever regret having done so, no matter the circumstances.

Taking a life changes you. You lose a part of yourself you used to like. You will never be the same. You will always wonder if that life had as much value as your own.

If you don't feel profoundly sorry for having taken someone's life, if it doesn't affect you deeply and bother you every day for the rest of _your_ life, well - then you're a sociopath without a conscience.

Please, consider these things before you kill someone. Threatening to kill someone is very different than actually going through with it.


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

Lol half way through your post I was about to reply and say I'm a sociopath but you mentioned it before I got the end.

I have a conscience but its not wasted on certain people or the consequences of their actions.


----------



## rocksteady (Mar 19, 2015)

ColdRider said:


> I never said he wasn't. But the driver following the drunk afterwards yelling "yeah! That's what happens. Yeah! You got maced, motherf*cker!" Seemed betchish to be honest.


Yeah, if I had done that I'd be embarrassed. But he was getting his ass beat by someone who was bigger than him yet sucker punching from behind and the driver was able to exact justice and come out on top. He was hopped up on tons of adrenaline and rightly pissed off so I think its understandable that he ran around yelling some stupid shit.


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

Rocksteady do we have the same damn brain lol


----------



## Frank Martin (Nov 12, 2014)

I don't think he was trying to kill him. He was so upset he wasn't being taken home, he wanted the driver to step out so he could fight him.

This incident is a reminder if you don't have a destination address, the trip will most likely not end well.


----------



## D Town (Apr 8, 2015)

SECOTIME said:


> Me and 100s of 1000's of other people.
> 
> You mean to tell me that if you had a firearm and that guy attacked you from behind you would not shoot to kill?
> 
> ...


You're either a dangerous lunatic or a troll. Either way there's no point in even trying to respond to you are your idiocy.


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

Now that you've chimed in we can all see who the idiot is.


----------



## AZdriver921 (Aug 11, 2015)

That dude turned bat sheet crazy in half a second! I'm so glad the driver was okay, it's certainly made me think about what I would do in a situation like this. I probably would have drove him around in circles for 6 hours like someone else said. It's a good thing he had that camera and they mace.


----------



## ray cash (Oct 22, 2015)

from Davesway 10 who list his location as No Where....


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

That must be a safe a pleasant place to live.


----------



## rocksteady (Mar 19, 2015)

SECOTIME said:


> Rocksteady do we have the same damn brain lol


we should really just take turns replying and save ourselves some
time.


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

rocksteady said:


> Good gawd, your arguments are really pathetic. All non-sequiturs and ad-hominoms. But thats what emotionally driven people do when their beliefs are based solely on their feelings.
> 
> Oh yeah, well you know who else thought citizens shouldn't have guns? Hitler! So I'm sure YOU LOVE HITLER!!! So I'm sure the millions he murdered were justifiable to you!!!!


Lol, Thank you for applying Godwin's law.


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

SECOTIME said:


> Rocksteady do we have the same damn brain lol


Yes, you two certainly do share a brain. Not sure if that's a compliment though


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

ray cash said:


> from Davesway 10 who list his location as No Where....


And, your point here is.


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

Id take wild guess and say you're from California


----------



## rocksteady (Mar 19, 2015)

Davesway10 said:


> Lol, Thank you for applying Godwin's law.


I was mocking you.


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

rocksteady said:


> I was mocking you.


Ok.


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

SECOTIME said:


> Id take wild guess and say you're from California


I hope your aim is as good as your guesses. Truly


----------



## rocksteady (Mar 19, 2015)

Davesway10 said:


> Lol, Thank you for applying Godwin's law.


But I guess I should have known that mocking your argument would go over your head. You don't see the obvious similarity between what I said mockingly--associating you and your argument with Hitler and your attempt to lump someone who argues for lethal self-defense in this specific situation, where someone is trying to smash a guys head into a window repeatedly, in with a road rage incident where an innocent child was killed. That's one step away from a Hitler reference. Feelz and logical fallacies are made for each other. You're a feelz based person. So of course your arguments are too. No facts or reason. Appeal to the feelz. Just call 'em a baby killer. derp derp


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

rocksteady said:


> You don't see the obvious similarity between what I said mockingly--associating you and your argument with Hitler and your attempt to lump someone who argues for lethal self-defense in this specific situation


You're right, I don't, there are absolutely zero similarities between my argument and Adolf Hitler. Mockingly or otherwise. I would argue that life is sacred and should be preserved. Lethal force should be the last resort, not the first. I'm fairly certain Hitler didn't share my views. But hey, if that's your interpretation of history.... UBER on I guess.


----------



## Uber Kraus (Jun 10, 2015)

This thread is hilarious. Some of you think killing a guy is OK. Some of you seem to know the actual implications of that. Stand your ground is by farthe most dangerous and reckless law I've seen passed in my lifetime.


----------



## Uber Kraus (Jun 10, 2015)

The original video.... The PAX clearly wasn't trying to kill the driver. He was just an angry drunk asshole venting his rage and although clearly out of line he in no way deserved to die for what he did.

Getting maced, fired and banned from Uber is enough, don't you think? The courts will also hand down some sort of punishment likely involving AA classes or anger management which he clearly needs.

All this talk about guns is ridiculous. The poster who first brought it up has been playing that same card in various other threads. That scares me more than the drunk PAX. Just knowing there are people out there who are so ready to escalate to killing so quickly....


----------



## rocksteady (Mar 19, 2015)

Davesway10 said:


> You're right, I don't, there are absolutely zero similarities between my argument and Adolf Hitler. Mockingly or otherwise. I would argue that life is sacred and should be preserved. Lethal force should be the last resort, not the first. I'm fairly certain Hitler didn't share my views. But hey, if that's your interpretation of history.... UBER on I guess.


Holy Shmokes! I'm not sure if you're playing dumb or are really this dumb, so let me dumb it down for you a little more. I'm not associating the subjects of the argument but the type of argument i.e. logical fallacies--non sequiturs and ad hominems. You twist what the opponent is saying in order to gain the upper hand. It's pathetic trickery because the facts are not on your side or your ability to think rationally is trumped by your egocentric fee-fees. So again, your opponent was speaking of a specific situation, the topic of this thread, and said in this case, lethal force would be justified. Instead of arguing with facts and sound reason, you went with shaming by creating a false dichotomy between your position (good) and your opponents (bad). You wrote, if you think lethal force is justified here, then you think its justified in a road rage incident were a 3 year old was killed. Basically you're saying if you don't agree with me then you're a baby killer. It's a cheap tactic and is completely baseless. It's fighting dirty. So I mockingly said you were like hitler because for the logical fallacy of xyz. Same fallacious tactic--a non-sequitur (an inference that does not follow) that casts your opponent on the evil side of your false dichotomy. The insinuation being you are on the good or right side. Ad hominem--you don't argue the facts of the specific case. Instead you insinuate he's an evil baby killer (or on the side of evil baby killers). This is exactly what I mockingly did by falsely inferring you side with evil hitler in the lethal force/concealed carry issue. It does not matter that the subjects aren't the same. That was not the point of the lampoon. I was making fun of the _way_ you argue. Got it, you Nazi cow?


----------



## Uber Kraus (Jun 10, 2015)

Wow you guys...


----------



## rocksteady (Mar 19, 2015)

Uber Kraus said:


> The original video.... The PAX clearly wasn't trying to kill the driver. He was just an angry drunk asshole venting his rage and although clearly out of line he in no way deserved to die for what he did.
> 
> Getting maced, fired and banned from Uber is enough, don't you think? The courts will also hand down some sort of punishment likely involving AA classes or anger management which he clearly needs.
> 
> All this talk about guns is ridiculous. The poster who first brought it up has been playing that same card in various other threads. That scares me more than the drunk PAX. Just knowing there are people out there who are so ready to escalate to killing so quickly....


Thank you, Captain Hindsight. It's easy to say that retrospectively, yes, mace was a good decision. The problem is in the moment it's happening you don't know how far it's going to go or what the outcome will ultimately be. He was trying to bash the drivers head into the door/window. Had the attacker been successful, knocked him out, ***** took off, driver's brain swelled or bled then he slipped into a coma and it was too late by the time he received medical help and he died, you would have been in here saying, yeah, lethal force was justified. So at what point would shooting him be justified? After he was incapacitated and no longer able to? Of course not. It only has to be proven that it was reasonable to assume it could have been much worse. The dash cam proves that had the driver pulled out a gun instead of mace at that same point, California law would have upheld his right to self defense with a deadly weapon because it supports an individual's right to do so under fear of death OR serious bodily harm (see attempt to head bash). Luckily he flipped the dash cam because had he used a gun instead it would have been a lot harder to prove the attacker was trying to slam his head into the door.

"Just knowing there are people out there who are so ready to escalate to killing so quickly..." hopefully prevents violent drunk aholes from thinking they can assault unsuspecting victims because they just might get shot.


----------



## Uber Kraus (Jun 10, 2015)

rocksteady said:


> Thank you, Captain Hindsight. It's easy to say that retrospectively, yes, mace was a good decision. The problem is in the moment it's happening you don't know how far it's going to go or what the outcome will ultimately be. He was trying to bash the drivers head into the door/window. Had the attacker been successful, knocked him out, ***** took off, driver's brain swelled or bled then he slipped into a coma and it was too late by the time he received medical help and he died, you would have been in here saying, yeah, lethal force was justified. So at what point would shooting him be justified? After he was incapacitated and no longer able to? Of course not. It only has to be proven that it was reasonable to assume it could have been much worse. The dash cam proves that had the driver pulled out a gun instead of mace at that same point, California law would have upheld his right to self defense with a deadly weapon because it supports an individual's right to do so under fear of death OR serious bodily harm (see attempt to head bash). Luckily he flipped the dash cam because had he used a gun instead it would have been a lot harder to prove the attacker was trying to slam his head into the door.
> 
> "Just knowing there are people out there who are so ready to escalate to killing so quickly..." hopefully prevents violent drunk aholes from thinking they can assault unsuspecting victims because they just might get shot.


Your posts are getting increasingly aggressive in this thread. Name calling and all. Not going to engage you here because we usually have a good back and forth. Cheers!


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

rocksteady said:


> you don't argue the facts of the specific case


No. I am arguing the specifics of this case. Lethal Force was not necessary. You are arguing none specific "what ifs". Your nice diatribe seems to take a lot of liberties for granted as if they are absolute truth, such as


rocksteady said:


> your opponent was speaking of a specific situation, the topic of this thread, and said in this case, lethal force would be justified.


When what my opponent really said was


SECOTIME said:


> I would have beat the shit out of that ******bag. The driver should have shot him. Lmao pepper spray. Wtf
> 
> Pepper spray is for rabid dogs. Someone attacks me like that barehanded it'll be their last night breathing.


and then


SECOTIME said:


> Pepper spray would have been replaced with my glock 9mm. Stand your ground I would never see prison over it in Florida...
> 
> What good is a cwp and a pistol if you can't kill someone in public when attacked..lmao especially in your own car.


Pretty sure my "opponent" wasn't advocating the rare necessity of Lethal Force so much as she was advocating taking someone's life simply because she could. It's legal in Florida after all it must be ok.



rocksteady said:


> "Just knowing there are people out there who are so ready to escalate to killing so quickly..." hopefully prevents violent drunk aholes from thinking they can assault unsuspecting victims because they just might get shot.


Ah yes, the MAD approach.


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

The final outcome proved pepper spray was enough...this time he was lucky.

Those posts you qouted of mine were my initial thoughts in shocke and awe of what I just watched.

When you watch the video its easy to argue that shooting to kill doesn't apply to this incident. We see the assailant get maced and that sense of being relaxed and everything is OK now sets in.. But what if it had gone further.. Just what if he pulled a knife or even a pen out and used that as a weapon. As he's maced he violently lunges forward with a blade and stabs you right in the neck. What if... It didn't happen here and thankfully so.

If I were attacked I wouldn't use mace.. All out of mace, sorry.

After more debate I would agree with you that having a mentality of shoot first may not always be right. My mentality is I'd rather be safe than sorry.

One thing I've learned from all this is if you want to get a maniac to stop punching you just try to knock his hat off.


----------



## Uber Kraus (Jun 10, 2015)

SECOTIME said:


> The final outcome proved pepper spray was enough...this time he was lucky.
> 
> Those posts you qouted of mine were my initial thoughts in shocke and awe of what I just watched.
> 
> ...


Just remember your initial thoughts are on the Internet for all to read... Cheers!


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

Uber Kraus said:


> Just remember your initial thoughts are on the Internet for all to read... Cheers!


That's the beauty of the internet. You can broadcast your own free thinking opinions.

Just remember to pack that mace before Mr I don't give a shit about who I attack puts your name in an obituary for all to read... Cheers.


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

rocksteady said:


> Instead you insinuate he's an evil baby killer (or on the side of evil baby killers).


I insinuated nothing of the sort. A. I theorized a similar situation substituting family members and asked if my "opponent" would still feel the same and B. I asked if my "opponent" felt the real world situation with the 4 year old was justifiable. My "opponent" chose not to answer either. You then began insinuating. The road rage incident occurred because a dumb ass with a gun decided his life was in danger and that he needed to take matters into his own hands."


rocksteady said:


> The dash cam proves that had the driver pulled out a gun instead of mace at that same point, California law would have upheld his right to self defense with a deadly weapon because it supports an individual's right to do so under fear of death


You better read up on what the courts of this land feel about Lethal\Deadly Force.
"When deadly force is used by a private citizen, the reasonableness rule does not apply. The citizen must be able to prove that a felony occurred or was being attempted, and that the felony threatened death or bodily harm. Mere suspicion of a felony is considered an insufficient ground for a private citizen to use deadly force."


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

Davesway10 said:


> I insinuated nothing of the sort. A. I theorized a similar situation substituting family members and asked if my "opponent" would still feel the same and B. I asked if my "opponent" felt the real world situation with the 4 year old was justifiable. My "opponent" chose not to answer either. You then began insinuating. The road rage incident occurred because a dumb ass with a gun decided his life was in danger and that he needed to take matters into his own hands."
> 
> You better read up on what the courts of this land feel about Lethal\Deadly Force.
> "When deadly force is used by a private citizen, the reasonableness rule does not apply. The citizen must be able to prove that a felony occurred or was being attempted, and that the felony threatened death or bodily harm. Mere suspicion of a felony is considered an insufficient ground for a private citizen to use deadly force."


If the incident here ended lethaly by the defense of the driver and he was in a SYG state he wouldve walked.

He's pinned in his own vehicle and a seatbelt while being attacked.
If he produced a firearm and opened fire during the attack he would rightfully walk?

Now if he got out of the car and shot the dude while he was in the back seat he would be charged with murder.

Assuming each situation was caught on video.

The other video of the 3-4 black guys beating up on the driver is another example.. He's pinned in his vehicle with very little chance at fleeing. I don't think that video was real but in syg state he could've produced a legal firearm and defend himself.


----------



## rocksteady (Mar 19, 2015)

Uber Kraus said:


> Your posts are getting increasingly aggressive in this thread. Name calling and all. Not going to engage you here because we usually have a good back and forth. Cheers!


Really? Good grief! It's crazy how ultra-sensitive people are becoming over words... especially over the internet (or maybe it's just a cop out reason). And I thought I was sensitive. Someone can call me all the names they can think of online, only limited by their own creativity, and it's not going to bother me, because my mom taught me when I was young, "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me." Now, that was harder to live by as a child and name calling was done in person! It remains just as true and easier to implement today... as an adult... on the impersonal innerwebs where I can choose to maintain some anonymity.

I'm more offended by bad arguments than name calling. Name calling is just a bit of color. It's not the substance. Sometimes ridicule is appropriate. I will no longer engage you as well, El Capitàn Fràgil


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

It's any easy way to expose someone's weakness. I tend to try harder and not resort to name calling


----------



## Huberis (Mar 15, 2015)

SECOTIME said:


> If the incident here ended lethaly by the defense of the driver and he was in a SYG state he wouldve walked.
> 
> He's pinned in his own vehicle and a seatbelt while being attacked.
> If he produced a firearm and opened fire during the attack he would rightfully walk?
> ...


The guy was being slapped and had his hair pulled. Hard to believe he would have needed a gun or a gun would have been of use. The pepper spray did the trick. It slowed the pax from fleeing and made him easier to arrest. By keeping him on the scene, the driver didn't need to present the video to the police and then rely on the police getting trip info from Uber in order to arrest the guy.

Taco Bell canned the guy, Uber may not have turned over the name of the pax to the police, though by now I find it hard to believe they could have prevented that.


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

His name was Benjamin golden of Newport Beach. 32 years old.

Yea mace worked. He was lucky, this time.


----------



## rocksteady (Mar 19, 2015)

Davesway10 said:


> I insinuated nothing of the sort. A. I theorized a similar situation substituting family members and asked if my "opponent" would still feel the same and B. I asked if my "opponent" felt the real world situation with the 4 year old was justifiable. My "opponent" chose not to answer either. You then began insinuating. The road rage incident occurred because a dumb ass with a gun decided his life was in danger and that he needed to take matters into his own hands."
> 
> You better read up on what the courts of this land feel about Lethal\Deadly Force.
> "When deadly force is used by a private citizen, the reasonableness rule does not apply. The citizen must be able to prove that a felony occurred or was being attempted, and that the felony threatened death or bodily harm. Mere suspicion of a felony is considered an insufficient ground for a private citizen to use deadly force."


HaHa..."Theorized"? Hilarious. The situation was completely different. Uber driver: getting pummeled from behind. attacker attempts to smash his head in to the door. Your "similar situation": guy drives up next to car and fires shots into vehicle indiscriminately killing a child. He was not acting in self defense. Where are the similarities? They are completely different. The uber situation would have been self-defense. He was being attacked. In the road rage incident the shooter was the aggressor--driving up next to the car and firing shots into the vehicle. They would have actually been similar if the uber driver told the taco bell ***** to get out of the car and then the taco bell ***** shot him.

And no you didn't ask your opponent if he thought it was justifiable. You he assumed he would--insinuating that he thinks it's okay to drive up next to car and fire at it, resulting in the death of a child. You linked to a very different use of force where the user of lethal force was NOT acting in self-defense and then you said something to the effect "I bet you think this was a justifiable use of force as well"
So the non-sequitur: if you think uber driver had just cause to use a gun in self defense, then (the inference) you probably think this story of a guy pulling up next to a car and shooting at it, killing a child, is justified" There's the passive aggressive implication intended to discredit: he probably condones killing small children (ad-hominem attack). But it's built on a baseless non-sequitur. It's an emotional argument, not a logical one.

Oh so when someone is getting beat on from behind and the attacker is trying to smash their head into a door there suppose to use their omnipotent powers to know in that instant what behavior the legal authority will interpret as a felony assault? "Yeah, he's trying to bludgeon my head with the car door. Now, if he does and I know for certain it will cause serious bodily harm, that will be a felony assault. So I better wait to incapacitate him with my firearm because... Ouch! There it is, a felony has been committed! Oh wait, too late, I'm dead.

Oh wait: "The citizen must be able to prove that a felony occurred _or was being attempted._" So that solves that. You're wrong (But that doesn't mean you're not a really good person. Go ask your Mommy. She'll console you and tell you over and over what a good boy you are and that you're super-duper smart!). Attempting to bash someones head into a car door over and over is attempt of a felony because it could cause serious injury or death. The proof of the act is on the video. I rest my case. Score one for the good guys!

So I'm done trying to reason with you. You've proven to be incapable. A lesson in futility. Have fun with your fee-fees in the final retort.


----------



## rocksteady (Mar 19, 2015)

SECOTIME said:


> It's any easy way to expose someone's weakness. I tend to try harder and not resort to name calling


Sometimes it's warranted though I usually do not let it stand alone. In real life I have rarely done it since child hood because I think it's much more impacting. And when I have, I definitely had just cause!


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

rocksteady said:


> Oh wait: "The citizen must be able to prove that a felony occurred _or was being attempted._"


Not my words, thus the quotes, I assumed (erroneously) that someone with your vast intellect would have know that I was quoting something else. But here it is anyway.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Lethal+force
You continue to throw around words like "legal" and "justified" and well, as you so aptly put it, you're wrong.


rocksteady said:


> I'm more offended by bad arguments than name calling


You really ought to be offended at yourself then, every single thing you have argued has been speculative. And the only objection you can come up with is a loose parallel I presented that involved anther moron with a gun who's first reaction is to fire away. And that only because I'm passive aggressively intending to discredit. You and your shared brain are the very reason why we need stronger gun laws in this country. You do dis-credit to responsible gun owners everywhere.


----------



## rocksteady (Mar 19, 2015)

Davesway10 said:


> Not my words, thus the quotes, I assumed (erroneously) that someone with your vast intellect would have know that I was quoting something else. But here it is anyway.
> http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Lethal+force
> You continue to throw around words like "legal" and "justified" and well, as you so aptly put it, you're wrong.
> 
> You really ought to be offended at yourself then, every single thing you have argued has been speculative. And the only objection you can come up with is a loose parallel I presented that involved anther moron with a gun who's first reaction is to fire away. And that only because I'm passive aggressively intending to discredit. You and your shared brain are the very reason why we need stronger gun laws in this country. You do dis-credit to responsible gun owners everywhere.


Holy Shit! Are you just being a troll, bating me with such ridiculous counter non-arguments? I can't quit you! Your reading comprehension skills are impressively low! I know the quote wasn't from you! You used that as the proof that you were right. So I pointed out that what you quoted actually proved you were wrong! "Attempted felony"!!!!! And I explained that ATTEMPTING to bash someones head against metal and glass repeatedly constitutes an attempted felony! I'm not your 4th grade teacher. Go look these words up yourself. You don't seem to understand what that means.

All the rest is just more non-sensical bullsh. Basically, "no, you're dumb." That's your argument... "No, you don't know."? Without ever any articulation as to why. There's no argument there. Just accusations. I broke it down for you step by step. I can't believe anybody could be this thick. What's next, "I know you are, but what am I?"

I've never blocked anybody on any forum but you get my goat! As Ron White says, "You can't fix stupid." I'm going to go attempt to reason with my dog. I'll likely have more success than I did with you.


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

rocksteady said:


> And I explained that ATTEMPTING to bash someones head against metal and glass repeatedly constitutes an attempted felony


_
"Allen Golden was charged today with four misdemeanor counts, including assault on a public transportation property, battery on a public transit employee with injury, assault and battery,"
_
Funny, I don't see any Felony charges here.


rocksteady said:


> I'm not your 4th grade teacher


Thank god.


rocksteady said:


> "You can't fix stupid."


I guess we finally agree on something.


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

Davesway is the kind of guy that thinks he's always right. There is no need to keep feeding him. He's from California and they have totally different views and opinions than that of us east coast/southerners.

He lives by the laws and views of his state and I'll live by mine.


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

rocksteady said:


> Are you just being a troll


Just to set the record straight, you trolled me first.


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

SECOTIME said:


> He's from California


Nope


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

SECOTIME said:


> Davesway is the kind of guy that thinks he's always right.


Did the name give it away ?


----------



## rocksteady (Mar 19, 2015)

SECOTIME said:


> Davesway is the kind of guy that thinks he's always right. There is no need to keep feeding him. He's from California and they have totally different views and opinions than that of us east coast/southerners.
> 
> He lives by the laws and views of his state and I'll live by mine.


His state gives people the right to use lethal force in a self defense situation if attacker is attempting to inflict felony bodily harm or death--as he stated but he's to thick to realize that means the opposite of what he wants to believe. In this case, it's not California. It's just dave. But they do intentionally breed them stupid there--easier to control that way.


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

It was fun sharing opinions.

Good talk, good talk.


----------



## D Town (Apr 8, 2015)

Why are you people engaging the morons? Their trolls. I'm a BIG second amendment guy, have used guns all my life including in defense of my life, and have been in situations like this guy on more occasions than I can reasonably remember and I in no way think the drunk a-hole should die. Anyone saying otherwise is either a troll trying to get a response or is a dangerous lunatic. Block them like I did instead of responding and you'll have a MUCH more pleasant time....I do have to wonder however since the insanity their spewing goes beyond any sort of regular human stupidity if MAYBE they're really anti-gun people who are just trying to smear regular sane gun owners and make us look like lunatic a-holes...either way just use the ignore feature.


----------



## rocksteady (Mar 19, 2015)

D Town said:


> Why are you people engaging the morons? Their trolls. I'm a BIG second amendment guy, have used guns all my life including in defense of my life, and have been in situations like this guy on more occasions than I can reasonably remember and I in no way think the drunk a-hole should die. Anyone saying otherwise is either a troll trying to get a response or is a dangerous lunatic. Block them like I did instead of responding and you'll have a MUCH more pleasant time....I do have to wonder however since the insanity their spewing goes beyond any sort of regular human stupidity if MAYBE they're really anti-gun people who are just trying to smear regular sane gun owners and make us look like lunatic a-holes...either way just use the ignore feature.


Who is saying he should have died? All I'm saying is had he I think the driver wouldn't have been charged or if charged gotten off. Just my opinion. You are paranoid. You're reading into things and creating a boogeyman to rail against. What are you doing or where do you live that you've been in these situations more than you can reasonably remember? That's hard to believe but maybe your an anomaly case. Funny you've posted a few times in this thread before but never mentioned what an experienced gun owner you were who's been in more situations like this driver than you can remember--seems like pertinent information to the topic. Maybe you are an anti-gun person who's setting yourself up as the voice of responsible gun owners in contrast to these"lunatics" to then blab on about "responsible gun ownership" that sounds more and more like anti-gun ownership. A "shill" is what I'm getting at.


----------



## Uber Kraus (Jun 10, 2015)

D Town said:


> Why are you people engaging the morons? Their trolls. I'm a BIG second amendment guy, have used guns all my life including in defense of my life, and have been in situations like this guy on more occasions than I can reasonably remember and I in no way think the drunk a-hole should die. Anyone saying otherwise is either a troll trying to get a response or is a dangerous lunatic. Block them like I did instead of responding and you'll have a MUCH more pleasant time....I do have to wonder however since the insanity their spewing goes beyond any sort of regular human stupidity if MAYBE they're really anti-gun people who are just trying to smear regular sane gun owners and make us look like lunatic a-holes...either way just use the ignore feature.


The old ignore button...


----------



## DieselkW (Jul 21, 2015)

Unemployed, in trouble with the law, looking at a $10k fine and possibly up to a year in jail.
Wonder if he could pass an Uber background check and become a driver?

I don't think he could pass a Chalupa with a roll of toilet paper, this piece of feces.


----------



## JimS (Aug 18, 2015)

I just want to throw this out -

A colleague here in Savannah was assaulted by two passengers at 2AM because she refused to drive them to their drug dealer. They beat the snot out of her head. She will probably not drive again (I don't want to hear crap from the "she's better off" crowd here). She had a taser, but was too scared to use it. No dash cam to record the incident. These attackers will likely never be bothered.


----------



## Old Rocker (Aug 20, 2015)

Anyone who has a CWP should have been taught, in the first hour of the class, a citizen's legal responsibilities and liabilities in regard to use of deadly force.


----------



## Transportador (Sep 15, 2015)

Last I read, the driver is suing the attacker for $25,000. That seems low to me, but is a hell of a lot more than just driving the passed out guy around for a potential $50 fare to nowhere. The driver wins, awesome!


----------



## Old Rocker (Aug 20, 2015)

The real lesson here is that if you plan on tossing a drunk pax, you should have your pepper spray ready to go first.


----------



## Old Rocker (Aug 20, 2015)

It seems the rider is 'remorseful,' (and suddenly unemployed) and wants to apologize to the driver.


----------



## rtaatl (Jul 3, 2014)

Look closer and you'll see its every intention for Golden to slam the drivers head into the window. I'm sure that would constitute a felony....he's lucky he wasn't shot. I don't carry a gun personally, but this guy would have had his wrists slashed from a pistol grip k-bar I keep on me. Some of my other friends in the limo business here in Atlanta would have shot him no doubt.


----------



## Old Rocker (Aug 20, 2015)

rtaatl said:


> Look closer and you'll see its every intention for Golden to slam the drivers head into the window. I'm sure that would constitute a felony....he's lucky he wasn't shot. I don't carry a gun personally, but this guy would have had his wrists slashed from a pistol grip k-bar I keep on me. Some of my other friends in the limo business here in Atlanta would have shot him no doubt.


I wonder if the DA is going to take it to a grand jury and press charges?


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

More charges were just filed but they're just trying to make an example out of him or maybe because he's white?

The latter part of the statement is just speculative hogwash but they're def trying to throw the book at him.

Nearly 2 millions viral views so its a good opportunity for someone to be made an example of.

Some da trying to cash in on the popularity of they case.

He was bonded out on $500. Bond but they jacked it up to $20000


----------



## yoyodyne (Oct 17, 2015)

Davesway10 said:


> Man I hope this isn't how you really feel, If so then you are the very reason why we need stronger gun laws in this country. You are not the solution, you are the problem.


You'd last about 23 seconds in Arizona. How do you go about legally carrying a concealed handgun in Arizona? You put your handgun in your pocket.


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

One of my good friends is from Arizona he used to tell me stories of going into a gas station and people would walk in with dual pistols on shoulder holsters

Most people that advocate gun control do it from their clean, cozy safe neighborhoods.


----------



## SneakyPete (Sep 24, 2015)

Definitely don't want to shoot the guy ... blood spatter all over interior car and possible bullet hole, not good for ratings, + 3 hours in interview room telling cops what happened + can no longer civil suit for 25k !


----------



## D Town (Apr 8, 2015)

yoyodyne said:


> You'd last about 23 seconds in Arizona. How do you go about legally carrying a concealed handgun in Arizona? You put your handgun in your pocket.


----------



## yoyodyne (Oct 17, 2015)

D Town said:


>


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Arizona

Stone cold serious.


----------



## D Town (Apr 8, 2015)

yoyodyne said:


> You'd last about 23 seconds in Arizona. How do you go about legally carrying a concealed handgun in Arizona? You put your handgun in your pocket.





yoyodyne said:


> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Arizona
> 
> Stone cold serious.


Yeeeaaahhhh I wasn't referring to the gun laws.


----------



## yoyodyne (Oct 17, 2015)

D Town said:


> Yeeeaaahhhh I wasn't referring to the gun laws.


Pacifism...it doesn't work in Arizona. By all means, though, give it a shot.


----------



## D Town (Apr 8, 2015)




----------



## ColdRider (Oct 19, 2015)

They had pretty strict gun laws in Chicago and that has worked just fine


Oh wait


----------

