Man strikes 25 young police recruits who were jogging with vehicle...released same day

originally posted by: TDDAgain
a reply to: alldaylong
Yes, it was now told to me that it wasn't a sidewalk.

That does not make it right though. I am sure you can bring up a law saying that you can't jog on a road for California. You're like acting it's the peoples fault. For me that's nonsense because I don't think it's the peoples fault.

We can agree to disagree.

I will say this and leave it at that.

" Don't give a criminal the opportunity "

I think you understand my meaning.

a reply to: matafuchs

Even if he was an illegal you would think he would be held and still do time where the crime occurred.
Something is definitely off with this story.

a reply to: GENERAL EYES
I had to undergo such a test too because I applied for a gun, when I was under 25 years. Then you have to go speak to a psychologist. I don't advocate for this but it's the reality here. It's very seldom someone does not pass such a test.

It's less about having any underlying psychologic issues in such tests. It's more to check out if you are responsible. For example if you are caught under MJ influence here, they will check out if you play down the issue or if you repent and not only acknowledge how careless it was, but also reflect on why that came to be and all that.

I know people that had to go through that and if you just say "I smoked a little joint and was caught, it was wrong, I do not do it again" then that word "little" will make them very cautious if you are not playing down and just acting.

Yup, they totally shouldn't have been running on the hardball, IN FORMATION, probably a road guard or two, no way they had reflectors…Im not directly responding to the poster that I sincerely hope was playing devils advocate, but oh deer..they were on the road, so smasheroo. They shouldn't have had on tight bathrobes.

a reply to: alldaylong

Yes I can understand that reasoning too. Like leaving car windows open in the parking lot.

originally posted by: shaneslaughta
a reply to: alldaylong

Don't give it another thought. Either they cant see how being in a roadway for vehicles is dangerous or they are trolling you.

Obviously neither of you bothered to re3ad the article.

The traffic on the road was BLOCKED by two Sherriff's cars.

The car that ran them down was traveling in the opposite bound lanes, and intentionally veered into the other side.

But yeah, you go on gaslighting and making excuses for your overlords.

ETA: I'm sure you feel the same way about people who run down protestors blocking the streets and attacking people in their cars... amirite?

a reply to: tanstaafl

Obviously neither of you bothered to re3ad the article.

Bit difficult to do that when it's blocked in my country.

I went with the OP saying they where running in a " lane " on the roadway.

We can all make mistakes.

a reply to: TDDAgain

Understood.

My father is at the age he has to have tests every three months at the VA to make sure he is doing alright on a cognitive front.

He is doing fine but will have to surrender his firearms and drivers license if he scores below a certain level.

Because of my issues I refuse to own a firearm in any capacity. I could pass the exam these days but I am still overly cautious based on past experiences.

In my area you can not ride a bike, skateboard or scooter weather manually powered, electric or gas on a sidewalk. You can be fined for it. Similarly people can not walk on highways or cross the road out side of crosswalks you can be fined for this also.

In that context, they should not have been in the road. As far as the driver goes, these actions are very questionable barring medical or mechanical issues. I just can not fathom how someone would not be held for mental evaluation or criminal proceedings in this situation.

Is this a matter of legal corruption or a matter of letting the little fish go to catch a bigger fish? This is all I can think of here. Or maybe its a failure of imagination on my part.

originally posted by: tanstaafl
The traffic on the road was BLOCKED by two Sherriff's cars.

The car that ran them down was traveling in the opposite bound lanes, and intentionally veered into the other side.

But yeah, you go on gaslighting and making excuses for your overlords.

Ah there we have it, it was blocked by Sherriff cars. The people had every right to be there and protective measures were taken.

a reply to: GENERAL EYES
I sold my semi automatic around three years ago. Was not actively going to the range anymore and had no use for it but a small child in the house. Here you really do not have to worry about it being needed for defense.

There are other ways that do not need an explosive driven expansion driving something through a barrel. 300 atmospheres air pressure and a bean bag going down the barrel doing 300feet/s, what is complete legal without a license even here, will do a lot damage too.

I think our cops shoot under 200 bullets (all together, whole country) a year in active duty on average. It only got worse because of Muslim immigrants going bonkers and attacking people with hatches and axes.

a reply to: TDDAgain

From what I understand of it, the patrol car was only blocking them from behind about a half a block back at an intersection. The driver came up on them from the front crossing into the wrong lane and striking the group before hitting a pole. The driver is said to still have his foot on the accelerator while being hung up on the pole. The witness even approached the vehicle and tried to break the window while the car is revving up.

The 22 year old Hispanic driver is cooperating with investigators.

a reply to: shaneslaughta

We will have to wait for the video footage to be released to really be able to say anything of value about it.

a reply to: TDDAgain

I watched the video, it was from an odd perspective with the road obscured by a brick wall and a basketball backboard. You can't even see the car swerve nor the relation of the vehicle to the lanes because of the obstructions. Best you can see is a black suv moving fast then a bunch of people flying and some smoke or steam from the suv loosing its radiator from the impact with the pole.

a reply to: TDDAgain

I have no use for a firearm really.

I am in the city limits and on good terms with our neighbors.

I do have a plastic pellet gun...but it looks real enough I still keep it locked up as if it were real.

There were points where my voices kept trying to get me to role-playing outside with it and I have no desire to do so.

Getting shot dead is not my idea of a good time.

Things used to get intense around the same time as active shooters. The last time it happened was Uvalde.

It hasn't been happening recently and I hope it stays that way.

I don't know what happened with this young driver but I know what it feels like to have your mind temporarily hijacked.

Not sure what causes it although I have some theories better suited for it's own thread.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: matafuchs

At some point, people just say "this must be what they want because that's what they voted for."

I thought everyone understood 'treat others how you want to be treated'. So perhaps the best way to deal with the drivee is to run him over with a car.

originally posted by: shaneslaughta
a reply to: alldaylong

Don't give it another thought. Either they cant see how being in a roadway for vehicles is dangerous or they are trolling you.

Let's not forget he went the WRONG WAY down that street! AND pedestrians do have a lot of leeway when it comes to right of way. The trolling is coming from somewhere else.

a reply to: shaneslaughta

Can you send me a link or post it, so I can try again watching it. I am ready for a complicated multi VPN & proxy hop to get my hands on it.

nm

a reply to: TDDAgain

ktla.com...

When you get to the part with the crash rewind and watch a few times. You can get an idea that he was on the wrong side of the road for a long time. You can see a glint of a cars roof in the lane he should have been in only moments before he hits them. To me is seems as if he had not swerved but wandered into the other lane inadvertently. Tell me what you think.