Stop polluting the forum gene pool with this tripe. Were I on a jury deliberating your post, I'd find you guilty of being an idiot.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Man Drives 35 Miles w/ Wife Clinging to Hood!
- Thread starter MacVixen
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Stop polluting the forum gene pool with this tripe. Were I on a jury deliberating your post, I'd find you guilty of being an idiot.
Even if it wasn't moving she's still a moron for jumping on the hood of a car as her husband obviously intended on driving it. Hell she would have had a great chance to jump off when he first started moving it.
She had every right to assume that he would not drive off, and presumably this was the intended result. Once the car was moving, you have no idea if she had an opportunity to jump off. Chances are, if she had he would have run her over and/or she would have been severely injured. In any case, do you think that we should all automatically back down when threatened?
If I'm threatened with a dried rose petal I probably wouldn't back down.
If I'm threatened with a car, or a gun, I'd probably back right down. Without hesitation.
If something is dangerous, it's not a good idea to challenge it.
That sounds like a pretty stupid assumption. I mean the guy left the house in a rage and got in the driver's seat of the car. Why would she expect he wouldn't drive off? Sounds like a very unreasonable assumption actually.
And you have no idea that she couldn't either. Although I'm pretty sure the car doesn't accelerate 0 to 60 in 4 seconds so she probably had a good chance of getting off.
Obviously you have never ridden on the hood of a car.
What point are you trying to make here? That the victim is not a victim if she did not weigh up carefully enough the possibility that her husband might be a homicidal lunatic?
My point is that it takes two to tango and both the morons are to blame. What point are you trying to make? We get it. You side with the lady of the situation because you think it's reasonable for her to believe a car with a driver wouldn't move.
She should have just pulled her pistol, and shot the bastard through the windshield.
That's what Indy would have done.
That's what Indy would have done.
I don't think you do "get it". I side with the view that whether the victim could be reasonably expected to have acted differently in her own interests or not, has absolutely no bearing on the degree of guilt of the lunatic who drove at over 100 mph with his wife clinging to his car. Your opinion of her judgement is utterly irrelevant.
I'm not saying he isn't guilty in the legal sense, I'm just saying she's guilty of being a moron as much as he is.
As is yours since your view has as much influence on this situation as mine. Why you would point out the utterly obvious is a little confusing.
She may, or may not, have exercised poor judgement. We do not know.
He, definitely and 100%, was a homicidal tool. We do know that. He admitted as much.
Only one person is guilty.
He, definitely and 100%, was a homicidal tool. We do know that. He admitted as much.
Only one person is guilty.
We don't know if jumping on the hood of a car with your pissed off husband in the driver's seat is poor judgement? Come now, skunk. Be honest. I understand that you think the wife shouldn't be given any legal charges, this much I agree with, but don't tell me we don't know if she used poor judgement.
Cool. I never argued that wasn't so.
Of what exactly? You seem to be arguing two different discussions and argue with ambiguity.
If someone clings to the hood of my car I'm not supposed to drive away?
If someone holds on to the hood of my car, he better hold on tight.
I do think it's unreasonable to be FORCED to stop because someone is deliberately trying to get you to stop by hanging onto you car. If you do stop, they win. Why would you let them win so easily?
If someone holds on to the hood of my car, he better hold on tight.
I do think it's unreasonable to be FORCED to stop because someone is deliberately trying to get you to stop by hanging onto you car. If you do stop, they win. Why would you let them win so easily?
More to the point, why is winning so important to you that you would be prepared to kill for it? You are the very reason we need our legal protections.
The man was trying to get away from a hostile situation. In this case, "winning" means the whole thing dissipates and they each go their separate ways. The alternative is that he has to keep fighting with her.
Or he could have tried to walk away instead, or call the police, or found some other way of leaving the area.
If she kept trying to keep at him, he could have sued later on for false imprisonment (which she technically did while on the hood of his car), but the answer wasn't to drive, which puts a life in danger and escalates the situation above that which he was in. You can use reasonable force under the circumstances, and it simply is not reasonable to use potentially lethal force to escape a situation where you are at most being irritated and inconvenienced.
I have been down 580 many times, and what he did is truly harrowing. The fact that she survived is amazing enough with the wind speeds and curves that predominate that area.
So, your ok with being held against your will, if harm might come to the perpetrator??
This appears on the cusp of kidnapping.