Boys Attack Cyclist Who Fights Back (Page 2)

 Cannot imagine the emotional toll of taking another human life, but intended victim seemed to have no choice.  Given the apparent  pattern of violent behavior by these thugs (according to DA),  this poor elderly man's skillful act of self-defense probably saved a number of potential future victims.  Luckily the victim lived in a jurisdiction that allowed for concealed carry permits, was able to get one, AND was carrying his pistol at the time he was assaulted.

We live in Hinesville, I do all my running on Post, when I ride on post I leave all weapons at home, not only is it not allowed on post, I don't feel a need for it there.

I have to say that the cyclist probably was in danger of losing his life.

Sorry that someone had to die to prove the point that attacking "defenseless" people is not a good life plan.

That's a very long answer. To be clear, I'm suggesting that those from the margins of our society where these youth are likely to be from (huge assumption, I know) often feel forced. I'm not saying they don't have other options ... clearly they do. I'm saying their behavior is a symptom of a very complicated set of circumstances that are going to be present in our society for some time to come. I don't think guns are the band-aids to those symptoms.

In addition to being a pacifist, I'm also a socialist who has different thoughts on correcting the situations that result in the disenfranchised feeling so helpless that muggings and theft are a legitimate answer. That doesn't often go over too well within internet discussion forums.

Please understand that this is NOT me rationalizing the actions of the youth of this story. There is a fine line between explanations and excuses. I'm trying hard not to provide the latter. 

You've summarized my position very well. Well stated.

Assume a city where everyone carries, and everyone knows it. You might think that solves crime, but it still happens. Except, since everyone is armed, instead of a purse snatcher pushing an old lady down and taking her purse, he now has to stab her in the back with a butcher knife and slit her throat so he doesn't risk getting shot. A car jacker walks up and shoots the driver point blank with no warning rather than trying to drag the driver out of the car and risk getting shot. It's all an escalation for stupid objects (for the most part). I don't want a carjacker to shoot me - I want him to take my car and I'll let the cops and insurance deal with it. But if he thinks I'm carrying, now my chanced of being killed are going up.

So back to this case.. Say this boy has thug friends who want to rob someone a few months from now, maybe they're scared and don't do it. But maybe the next time they simply go on the assumption that their target is armed, and instead of punching him off his bike they use a sawed-off shotgun and slay him.

On a case by case, it's hard not to be happy that the biker was ok and the scumbag got what he deserved, but the precedent it sets is the reason USA has so much more violent crime.

I grew up in one of the most violent metro areas in the Midwest, and now work in health profession at a major urban hospital.  I have personally witnessed WAY too many people die as victims of violence. I need NO lecture on the value of a human life or the inequality of human "circumstances".  Every human being still has free will and makes choices- sometimes good or sometimes very bad.  Young people often could use help making good choices.  I get that.  I've seen plenty of very, very good people come from some truly hellish backgrounds.  But mitigating circumstances or not, the very bad choice made by these 3 young thugs to attack was their own.  

With all due respect I'm totally with Fred on this one.  As an elderly man being punched & stomped by 3 young thugs I really do not see the victim had any choice. This is real life, not a social abstraction.

Pragmatically- Ask yourself what was the old guy to do?  Wait for the next kick to cause a serious or fatal brain injury (which takes relatively little force in an elderly victim) ????

And if you believe the guy had no right to carry, how is an elderly man being seriously beaten (or easily killed in this scenario) a better outcome than 3 street thugs committing a successful assault (possibly murder) & continuing to roam the streets for their (DA's words) "pattern" of violence on others? 

I understand that the right to self-defense is not a duty to exercise that right.  But reality is that any course of action, including pure pacifism, has consequences.

So many things one could say - but I'll keep it to a minimum, because it's pointless since most people have deeply entrenched feelings on a subject like this.

Either way the title is what sticks out for me, and the key word boys.  In the end, a kid died - did he deserve it, not for me to say, but he's dead and from my point of view that is incredibly sad. 

Okay. I'll jump in the fire.

I think that's more a societal question.  There are some deep seeded issues in American society that are not as prevelant in some other countries.  Daniel pointed out above that violent crime has risen steadily in the UK in the past number of years, and again I think there are some parallels.  A lot of disenfranchised, under(un)educated youth/adults, with no belief that opportunities exist for them.

Morally, people should know right from wrong and act accordingly - but culture and society have a funny way of getting in the way of morals.  I recognize and respect that the right to bear arms is engrained in the US psyche, but at the same time I wonder what the country would be like without 200+ million weapons floating around.

But, I don't think guns are the root of the problem, and certainly don't view them as the solution as others would suggest - more guns to scare the bad guys just seems to add to the problem in my mind, even if immediately effective.  Rather, people have to re-evaluate society and what the priorities and expectations should be for all citizens. 

Fred D - 2012-01-30 5:52 PM Nice, I drew you in Neil

Yes you did....I typically avoid these types of threads.

The whole story is sad. Lots of emails flying around from the local bike clubs regarding what's been happening on the Schuylkill River Trail.

The young man who lost his life and the older man who has to live with the knowledge that he took a life. To say they were kids implies they were young and innocent, which is hardly the case. In fact the one who was killed had just been fitted with an ankle bracelet and was awaiting a hearing. Both he and the other two youths had a history of criminal offenses. 

The guy was knocked off his bike, which he would have surrendered, and offered his wallet, but that was not enough. These punks thought it would be fun to beat him up, too. The older man, who had a concealed weapon permit, fired to defend himself from further attack. This could not be a clearer case of self defense.

Actions have consequences. Now several families will have to live with those consequences.

I wonder if the man had any police or military backgrond.  To get knocked of your bike with a punch to the face and attacked must be a crazy adrenaline filled confused state.  That he was able to draw his gun, fire, and hit two of the kids is pretty amazing.