Author Topic: Maryland road rage killing (Read 2462 times)

Matthew Carberry · « **on:** January 10, 2014, 05:11:17 PM »

I note that the Maine (could have had a CCW) resident was chased for 15 miles from Maryland (where he could not carry nor even have accessible his Maine-legal CCW) before being forced, disarmed in principle and fact by act of Maryland law, off the road in Pennsylvania and killed.

Even if Maine and PA had reciprocity, or he had had a FL or Utah CHL, MD's requirement that the weapon (had he had one) be absolutely inaccessible would still have made it impossible for him to have re-armed himself in time to defend himself.

Even given the "ifs" (did he have a permit, would he have had the gun, would he have had time and ability to use it), even if all of those answers were "yes", Maryland law and Maryland law alone would -still- have prevented his opportunity to defend himself.

Maryland owns his death.

Scout26 · « **Reply #1 on:** January 10, 2014, 05:18:40 PM »

Link??

Matthew Carberry · « **Reply #2 on:** January 10, 2014, 05:54:57 PM »

CNN? Fox?

Nick1911 · « **Reply #3 on:** January 10, 2014, 05:58:50 PM »

This? http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=news/local&id=9388920

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #4 on:** January 10, 2014, 06:23:21 PM »

Ahhhh, gun control. The felon's right arm.

Pharmacology · « **Reply #5 on:** January 11, 2014, 01:10:08 AM »

WWwwwhhhhwwwwwhhhhhhwwwwhwhwhwhwhhhhwwwwhhhoooaaaaaa
GUISE.
GUIS.
A guy could have maybe possibly been able to have a CCW but was prevented by a commie state!

IT'S JUST LIKE IF THE STATE WAS THE ONE THAT MURDERED HIM. NO GUIS FOR REAL THAT'S NOT A RIDICULOUS JUMP IN LOGIC.
GUIS FOR REAL

freakazoid · « **Reply #6 on:** January 11, 2014, 05:30:24 AM »

Quote from: Pharmacology on January 11, 2014, 01:10:08 AM

I'm sorry, were you saying something?

griz · « **Reply #7 on:** January 11, 2014, 08:07:08 AM »

The article says the victim didn't know of anything he did to incite the attack. That doesn't rule out road rage, but it does make it doubtful.

Anyway, they covered 15 miles despite the 911 call? Makes you wonder about the what ifs. I guess it comes down to it's very difficult to defend against a brazen attack in a public place such as a sidewalk or a roadway.

Tallpine · « **Reply #8 on:** January 11, 2014, 10:33:56 AM »

Quote from: griz on January 11, 2014, 08:07:08 AM

The article says the victim didn't know of anything he did to incite the attack. That doesn't rule out road rage, but it does make it doubtful.

Anyway, they covered 15 miles despite the 911 call? Makes you wonder about the what ifs. I guess it comes down to it's very difficult to defend against a brazen attack in a public place such as a sidewalk or a roadway.

Especially without a gun.

freakazoid · « **Reply #9 on:** January 11, 2014, 11:26:34 AM »

Quote from: griz on January 11, 2014, 08:07:08 AM

The article says the victim didn't know of anything he did to incite the attack. That doesn't rule out road rage, but it does make it doubtful.

Road rage people aren't exactly logical people.

Tallpine · « **Reply #10 on:** January 11, 2014, 11:35:05 AM »

Quote from: freakazoid on January 11, 2014, 11:26:34 AM

Road rage people aren't exactly logical people.

We had a bizarre experience in western Michigan. The guy must have been on drugs or something. He was driving something like 40 mph in the left lane and we passed on the riight at the speed limit. Next thing I know he is right on our bumper in our lane, swerving back and forth, and grimacing like some sort of cartoon villain. I thought he was going to ram us. By then we couldn't just run away because we were approaching a town there was traffic in both lanes in front of us.

Worst part is that if our car had been rammed and disabled, and I used a gun that I wasn't supposed to have accessible in the car to defend us, then I would probably be in more trouble than the attacker.

AJ Dual · « **Reply #11 on:** January 11, 2014, 12:44:33 PM »

Makes me want to set up a Chevy Suburban like the State Dept. Diplomatic Protective service, with two of my daughters in chopper door-gunner harnesses, with M4's in the rear tailgate.

Tallpine · « **Reply #12 on:** January 11, 2014, 12:55:35 PM »

Quote from: AJ Dual on January 11, 2014, 12:44:33 PM

Makes me want to set up a Chevy Suburban like the State Dept. Diplomatic Protective service, with two of my daughters in chopper door-gunner harnesses, with M4's in the rear tailgate.

Makes me want to stay home, or else drive a heavy armoured vehicle

RoadKingLarry · « **Reply #13 on:** January 11, 2014, 02:38:30 PM »

Quote from: griz on January 11, 2014, 08:07:08 AM

The article says the victim didn't know of anything he did to incite the attack. That doesn't rule out road rage, but it does make it doubtful.

Anyway, they covered 15 miles despite the 911 call? Makes you wonder about the what ifs. I guess it comes down to it's very difficult to defend against a brazen attack in a public place such as a sidewalk or a roadway.

Seems to me like most of the "road rage" stories I see imply that since it was road rage both parties are equally guilty since it was road rage. From my limited experience a road rage incident only has to involve one psychotic nut job. The 2nd party can actually be unaware of what the hell is going on till psychotic nut job goes off. As far as what sets off the nut job goes, sometimes nut jobs get set off by stuff the nut job only imagines is a rage worthy offense.

Quite a few years ago while on my way to work I had a woman cut me off in traffic to the point that I had to lock up the brakes to keep from hitting her car. Traffic on the highway pretty well kept me right behind her for several miles. She took the same exit I took to get to work and again traffic had me right behind her. 2 stop lights later I was still behind her when she made a sudden turn with no signals. I think she was trying to get away from me. She had turned into the driveway of the place I worked. She probably knew that you could cut through the back of the lot to get to another road. Anyway the driveway snaked back around the bulding and into the parking lot. Just as we got to the back of the building she stoped her car blocking me in and came at me with a big ass can of pepper spray yelling at me about following her. I told her I didn't now what her problem was but this is where I work and if she wasn't an employee she needed to leave the property.

griz · « **Reply #14 on:** January 11, 2014, 11:27:56 PM »

It could seem like somebody was following you in that situation, but I can't imagine a worse response than blocking their car in and approaching an unknown driver, protected by windows, with pepper spray. Probably about equal odds that they would laugh at you or run you over.

RoadKingLarry · « **Reply #15 on:** January 11, 2014, 11:47:13 PM »

While I didn't make any effort to stay on her tail in traffic I didn't make any effort to avoid her. She seemed to get a little nervous when we took the same exit off the highway. I guess she really got nervous when I turned into the driveway behind her.

Tallpine · « **Reply #16 on:** January 12, 2014, 10:53:22 AM »

Quote from: RoadKingLarry on January 11, 2014, 11:47:13 PM

While I didn't make any effort to stay on her tail in traffic I didn't make any effort to avoid her. She seemed to get a little nervous when we took the same exit off the highway. I guess she really got nervous when I turned into the driveway behind her.

Truth is stranger than fiction.

vaskidmark · « **Reply #17 on:** January 12, 2014, 03:15:57 PM »

As strange as it may sound, I agree with Pharmacology's logic that trying to place the blame on the State of Maryland is neither logical nor fair.

Additionally, having had similar (trying to get a state police response to a seriers of 9-1-1 calls about a life-threatening motorist) I am aware that it may take way too much time for the car with the flashing blue and red lights to show up.

Drivers license renewals probably need to start requiring the passing of a high-speed evasive driving course. Possibly including the use of the PIT maneuver. I much favor that to throwing small lead pellets around on the highway. While both can be dangerous to non-involved drivers, evasive driving is usually less likely to have things flying willy-nilly towards those uninvolved drivers. Besides, I do not know how many of you have seen a running gunfight. It is very difficult for other drivers to know what is going on. Driving in and out of traffic with sudden erratic changes in velocity is usually much more easily recognized by other drivers, who can then flood the 9-1-1 call center with please for someone to come out and stop the madness.

AAA needs to add a new Trip-Tik routing for the small percentage of the population that wants to be able to legally travel CC/OC. I have been avoiding Maryland during my travels to Pennsylvania for many years. While it takes me about an hour longer I find it well worth the extra time.

stay safe.

Matthew Carberry · « **Reply #18 on:** January 12, 2014, 04:32:04 PM »

Who was talking about "tossing lead around the highway?"

He was forced off the road and could no longer flee. His only remaining option was self-defense. Against a firearm the only realistic defense in that situation is a firearm. He would have been shooting from a fixed position at a target approaching on foot. The "running gunfight" scenario is not in play.

He could have been legally armed while driving in every step of his trip back from Florida until he hit Maryland. His legal carry of a legally possessed firearm posed -no-threat to any citizen of any state along his route.

FL to PA is also irrelevent. He lives in -Maine-, MD, NJ, NY, and MA with their bans on carry block all road access to ME. If it wasn't MD it could have been in one of the others.

Therefore, every person wishing to be legally and safely armed while travelling by road is forcibly disarmed by those states even when not stopping within them. They hold moral culpability for not allowing effective self-defence to the otherwise permitted.

Much like "parking lot carry" is designed to protect the ability of carriers during their journey to and from work/school; allowing "interstate carry" would have zero negative effect on the states through which the -Federal- interstate passes while retaining the right of legal carriers to the means of effective self-defense during a journey. Particularly given that states have no obligation to protect. I'm tired of them getting a pass, morally they cannot have it both ways.

Tallpine · « **Reply #19 on:** January 12, 2014, 06:16:00 PM »

Quote

Drivers license renewals probably need to start requiring the passing of a high-speed evasive driving course. Possibly including the use of the PIT maneuver.

Sounds like the perpetrator in this incident was well versed in such offensive driving techniques.

SteveS · « **Reply #20 on:** January 12, 2014, 06:25:10 PM »

Quote from: Tallpine on January 11, 2014, 11:35:05 AM

We had a bizarre experience in western Michigan.
Worst part is that if our car had been rammed and disabled, and I used a gun that I wasn't supposed to have accessible in the car to defend us, then I would probably be in more trouble than the attacker.

Depends on the gun. Obviously, if you have a carry permit from one of the 42 states that MI has reciprocity with, you can have a pistol. Otherwise, you can have an unloaded rifle (with loaded mags right by it) in your car if it is in a case. This includes gun socks or similar things.

Tallpine · « **Reply #21 on:** January 12, 2014, 08:21:57 PM »

Quote from: SteveS on January 12, 2014, 06:25:10 PM

Depends on the gun. Obviously, if you have a carry permit from one of the 42 states that MI has reciprocity with, you can have a pistol. Otherwise, you can have an unloaded rifle (with loaded mags right by it) in your car if it is in a case. This includes gun socks or similar things.

A rifle isn't very practical inside a little car

News:

Author Topic: Maryland road rage killing (Read 2462 times)