nyc suv runs over bikers

[GreenNinja]

Originally Posted by NevadaWolf

So, watching that video, with the baseball bat (?) and the gun, each impact was in a slightly different place and did result in damage to the window. What would have happened if either of those was used repeatedly in the exact same spot? Would it eventually break through?

Yes. Even with a bullet proof glass, if you shoot in the same exact place eventually it will break. The issue with that is that only protects you if someone shot at the glass. If someone aims at your legs then you are screwed.

[lgk]

Originally Posted by NevadaWolf

So, watching that video, with the baseball bat (?) and the gun, each impact was in a slightly different place and did result in damage to the window. What would have happened if either of those was used repeatedly in the exact same spot? Would it eventually break through?

Yes you would break through eventually.
If you keep moving the probability is less.

[LNasty]

Originally Posted by GreenNinja

Yes. Even with a bullet proof glass, if you shoot in the same exact place eventually it will break. The issue with that is that only protects you if someone shot at the glass. If someone aims at your legs then you are screwed.

The doors have kevlar and metal plating

[lgk]

Originally Posted by GreenNinja

Yes. Even with a bullet proof glass, if you shoot in the same exact place eventually it will break. The issue with that is that only protects you if someone shot at the glass. If someone aims at your legs then you are screwed.

They can install steel plates to protect your lower body.

[jackliu239]

After all the steel plates and bullet proof glass installed, that Land Rover is going to be a heavy mother, forget about MPG.

[LNasty]

Originally Posted by jackliu239

After all the steel plates and bullet proof glass installed, that Land Rover is going to be a heavy mother, forget about MPG.

you should watch a show on how its all done, pretty impressive and extensive. They have to put in heavier leaf springs, heavy duty shocks, stabalizer arms. Some mods to engine are sometimes neccessary.

Link to original page on YouTube.

[choneofakind]

Impressive demonstration from the car armoring guys. I'd like to hope that I'll never ever need those modifications made to my car, but 'tis still interesting to see how it's done.

[Aggrotech]

if u guiz need armored cars, go to mexico. theyre pros at armoring ur cars due to all of the cartel BS going on. Believe VICE has a documentary on it on their YT channel.

[lgk]

Originally Posted by jackliu239

After all the steel plates and bullet proof glass installed, that Land Rover is going to be a heavy mother, forget about MPG.

one you're important enough to need an armored car, MPG is a minor/insignificant detail...

[Tigerpaw]

Originally Posted by lgk

one you're important enough to need an armored car, MPG is a minor/insignificant detail...

I see your point...economically.

Do you want to refuel every 3000 yards though?

[anacron]

Lessons learned from mario kart man... banana peels and spike balls.

No need to beat the guy up.

[lgk]

Originally Posted by Tigerpaw

I see your point...economically.

Do you want to refuel every 3000 yards though?

I haven't experienced one that went through a tank in 3000yds. 2-5mi per gallon is not out of the question.

If there was one i would expect an equally competent protection detail.

[az3200]

I love how the SUV plows through the parked bikes and people, and these idiot riders race to catch up to him and start surrounding him again. Like he wouldn't do it again. I wish he took that whole group out.

[az3200]

Originally Posted by oblivion007

The main issues I have with the actions depicted in this video are as follows.

• Bikers ****ing with the SUV - This is just stupid...
• The brake check - Even more stupid
  [*]Bikers acting out in a seemingly non-resonable manner. -Why was there no good guy biker that helped diffuse the situation? If I was in the ride I'd like to think I'd try and stop others from hurtin the driver because a stupid person purposefully braked checked him.
• The driver running over multiple bikers - although self defense being a valid reason to injure assailants association does not imply intent! The run over bikers may have been completely innocent.
  
  Maybe its because I'm still very young but I like to think that things would have gone smoothly if I stepped out of the vehicle and tried to discuss things with the most seemingly reasonable person there.

Undercover NYPD Cop Watched SUV Driver Get Beaten
http://http://gma.yahoo.com/undercover-nypd-cop-watched-suv-222926277.html

[DaBlue1]

The rider who was run over, Edwin "Jay" Mieses, was portrayed Friday as an "innocent victim" who was trying to calm tempers and disperse the crowd after the fender bender.

"His sole intention was to defuse the situation," said his family's new high-profile lawyer, Gloria Allred.

At a Manhattan news conference, Allred said Mieses, 32, had his back to the Range Rover and was trying to get fellow bikers to walk away when he was struck "at top speed."

"Watch that huge vehicle, SUV, blast off, and watch it as it is lifted several feet off the ground as it rolls over Edwin Mieses," she said of the video of the incident, which has gotten millions of hits on YouTube.



Talk about over exaggeration and embelishment. Obviously this lawyer did not watch the video carefully. In the video, Mieses (purple shirt, green bike) is in the far right hand (passenger side)and clearly one of the first ones off the bike and can be seen walking back and approaching the SUV. About 16 seconds later you see the SUV trying to escape. Pictures after the accident place Mieses on his back, feet pointed and laying in the far left hand lane (driver's side). Mieses's bike never got run over, but two other bikes did.
I'm willing to bet Mieses is the one who started slashing tires or hit the passenger side window or mirror.

I also wonder where the witnesses and reports are to back up this lawyer's claim. As innocent as he is made out to be, surely someone can back up the claim. Right?

[akima]

Originally Posted by az3200

Undercover NYPD Cop Watched SUV Driver Get Beaten
http://http://gma.yahoo.com/undercover-nypd-cop-watched-suv-222926277.html

Good find. Hopefully the officers will tell the truth about what happened. Fill in the blanks left by incomplete camera footage.

[ForceofWill]

Originally Posted by DaBlue1

The rider who was run over, Edwin "Jay" Mieses, was portrayed Friday as an "innocent victim" who was trying to calm tempers and disperse the crowd after the fender bender.

"His sole intention was to defuse the situation," said his family's new high-profile lawyer, Gloria Allred.

At a Manhattan news conference, Allred said Mieses, 32, had his back to the Range Rover and was trying to get fellow bikers to walk away when he was struck "at top speed."

"Watch that huge vehicle, SUV, blast off, and watch it as it is lifted several feet off the ground as it rolls over Edwin Mieses," she said of the video of the incident, which has gotten millions of hits on YouTube.



Talk about over exaggeration and embelishment. Obviously this lawyer did not watch the video carefully. In the video, Mieses (purple shirt, green bike) is in the far right hand (passenger side)and clearly one of the first ones off the bike and can be seen walking back and approaching the SUV. About 16 seconds later you see the SUV trying to escape. Pictures after the accident place Mieses on his back, feet pointed and laying in the far left hand lane (driver's side). Mieses's bike never got run over, but two other bikes did.
I'm willing to bet Mieses is the one who started slashing tires or hit the passenger side window or mirror.

I also wonder where the witnesses and reports are to back up this lawyer's claim. As innocent as he is made out to be, surely someone can back up the claim. Right?

16 tickets, no license EVER and banned from driving in his home of record.

BUT MA BABY AIN'T DONE NUFFIN!!!! HE AN ANGEL!!

[DaBlue1]

Originally Posted by ForceofWill

16 tickets, no license EVER and banned from driving in his home of record.

BUT MA BABY AIN'T DONE NUFFIN!!!! HE AN ANGEL!!

But wait! There's more!

"The Lawrence motor*cyclist struck and paralyzed as a desperate SUV driver tried to escape the rage of other bikers in New York on Sunday has a six-page criminal record that began at age 12 with a negligent driving charge and includes jail time for drugs, guns, resisting arrest and other convictions, according to court records.

Edwin Mieses, 32, never got a driver’s license in the Bay State, the Registry of Motor Vehicles said, but he was frequently nabbed behind the wheel, and even sentenced to jail for driving without a license, court records show. Mieses has a pending case out of Lawrence District Court for driving suspended, subsequent offense, said Carrie Kimball Monihan, spokeswoman for the Essex County District Attorney’s Office. Mieses also has 15 guilty findings for criminal offenses including distribution of cocaine, possession of a firearm without a permit, knowingly receiving stolen property, resisting arrest and several motor vehicle violations, court records show.

Mieses was sentenced to jail in 2004 for distribution of cocaine, in 2001 for operating without a license, in 2000 for possession of a firearm, and in 1999 for possession of marijuana, receiving stolen property, destruction of property and attaching plates, according to court records."

http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion...riminal_record


"...Mieses is the loving father of two children with Dayana Mejia, who he has been with for 15 years. Mieses and Mejia were together in 2002, according to a Lawrence Police Department report that charges him with possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, failure to stop for police, driving to endanger and resisting arrest. In August 2002 a prostitute was busted and told cops she could get Mieses to deliver crack cocaine to them, police said. When Mieses showed up, cops moved in and he fled, ditching the car and running, but was arrested, police said.

Mejia told cops the car was hers and Mieses was her boyfriend, police said. She allowed cops to search their home where police said they found more drugs. The drug charges were later dismissed, but he was sentenced to one year in jail for the driving violations. Allred did not respond to repeated messages regarding Mieses’ criminal record.

“Edwin is not a member of any gang,” Allred told reporters. “He loves to ride motor bikes and he came to New York City to participate in a ride, nothing more.”
http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion...nnocent_victim

[moonwalker]

IMHO all that talk about what kind of person the guy is shouldn't really matter, the only thing that should be of consequence is what the guy did in that particular situation. If the evidence shows that he's guilty it shouldn't matter that he's "father of two", if the evidence shows that he's not guilty it shouldn't matter that he "has a six-page criminal record that began at age 12".

[DRivero]

Hello, my long-lost friends!

Popped in `cause I was interested in what you guys had to say about this issue, and offer my two cents, as follows:

Maybe this is a "mother lion" thing, but if I am in my car with my child, and you are threatening the safety of said child, whether it's you with your bunch of idiot buddies or you all by yourself, I will kill you if necessary. I will do whatever it takes to remove my offspring from harm's way, including using my SUV as a weapon, and I will flatten as many of you as it takes to get away. Never, ever, EVER f$*% with my kids.

[allanoue]

Originally Posted by moonwalker

IMHO all that talk about what kind of person the guy is shouldn't really matter, the only thing that should be of consequence is what the guy did in that particular situation. If the evidence shows that he's guilty it shouldn't matter that he's "father of two", if the evidence shows that he's not guilty it shouldn't matter that he "has a six-page criminal record that began at age 12".

Passed record helps to show likely intent of why he was in front of that SUV.

[moonwalker]

Originally Posted by allanoue

Passed record helps to show likely intent of why he was in front of that SUV.

Likely intent is not the same thing as the actual intent, and until the malicious intent is proven it should be assumed that his intent was indeed to diffuse the situation even if that might not be the case. Yet even if his good will is demonstrated for as long as his actual actions caused the incident to escalate his intent still doesn't matter.

Again, intent doesn't matter, actions do.

I'm not on bikers' side in this case, but I just hate people adding oil to emotional flame and inciting peanut gallery to a specific subjective judgement.

[allanoue]

Originally Posted by moonwalker

Likely intent is not the same thing as the actual intent, and until the malicious intent is proven it should be assumed that his intent was indeed to diffuse the situation even if that might not be the case. Yet even if his good will is demonstrated for as long as his actual actions caused the incident to escalate his intent still doesn't matter.

Again, intent doesn't matter, actions do.

I'm not on bikers' side in this case, but I just hate people adding oil to emotional flame and inciting peanut gallery to a specific subjective judgement.

Is action was to help trap the RR

[moonwalker]

Originally Posted by allanoue

Is action was to help trap the RR

Then that's what he should be judged for, not his past record.

[allanoue]

Originally Posted by moonwalker

Then that's what he should be judged for, not his past record.

But it will matter a lot when the shyster lawyer he hired tries to sue the RR driver in civil court. I will not be too disappointed if he does not get jail time that he deserves. He is no longer the danger to society he was last week. He was a danger is clear by the fact that he was there on a motorcycle, considering his record and his company.

[moonwalker]

Originally Posted by allanoue

But it will matter a lot when the shyster lawyer he hired tries to sue the RR driver in civil court

Regardless of your intentions you touch the car - you violate it's owners property, you give it's owner and driver the reason for self-defense actions, driving over you in this case. Again, no intent needed, just evidence of actions.

[Felipe the Ant]

Everyone talks about the the decisions of the driver of the SUV, but no talk about how he wouldn't have any decisions to make if he wasn't put into this situation to begin with. The group of bikes could have just ridden normally, not trying to close the highway and nobody would have had to make any abnormal decisions


What if they were trying to block off one of those old ladies who confuses the gas and brake pedals and she floors it? Now grandma's a monster

[Somchai]

Originally Posted by DRivero

Maybe this is a "mother lion" thing...

Debbi, good said but at least that's the "father lion" thing also

[tfkrocks]

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/vi...o-nyc.cnn.html

Testimony that the bikers were going to hurt the wife too. I'd say the driver's fears were justified.

http://nypost.com/2013/10/05/biker-b...d-head-stomps/

More details on the beating of the driver.

[Motofool]

Originally Posted by tfkrocks

Testimony that the bikers were going to hurt the wife too. I'd say the driver's fears were justified.

More details on the beating of the driver.

Anyone in that rolling herd without a respectable criminal record ???

[Trubin]

I've met up a guy last Sunday same day as the incident. He showed me a video of the chase from a different perspective. Way before I saw any other video, or herd anything on the news. Looked like street justice to me. He told me that "the Range Rover hit a kid as he entered the highway" and they were trying to make him stop. I assume that the "break-check" incident was already trying to pull the SUV over. If you look closely at the live-leak video at 0:20 you see that the range rover is already missing the drivers side mirror. More then likely that the range rover was involved in a confrontation previous to the break-check. If people think that running over bikers is justified then the beating got to be justified as well. If the bikers didn't pull him out of the car and beat him, then the driver probably would have been facing charges.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by Trubin

If people think that running over bikers is justified then the beating got to be justified as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

[jackliu239]

Originally Posted by Trubin

I've met up a guy last Sunday same day as the incident. He showed me a video of the chase from a different perspective. Way before I saw any other video, or herd anything on the news. Looked like street justice to me. He told me that "the Range Rover hit a kid as he entered the highway" and they were trying to make him stop. I assume that the "break-check" incident was already trying to pull the SUV over. If you look closely at the live-leak video at 0:20 you see that the range rover is already missing the drivers side mirror. More then likely that the range rover was involved in a confrontation previous to the break-check. If people think that running over bikers is justified then the beating got to be justified as well. If the bikers didn't pull him out of the car and beat him, then the driver probably would have been facing charges.

I went back at 0:20 and I see driver side's mirror present.

[Sinister]

Originally Posted by moonwalker

Again, intent doesn't matter, actions do.

Lol, Intent is one of the most important factors.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/intent

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intenti...riminal_law%29

http://thelawdictionary.org/criminal-intent/


I could easily go on...

[Motofool]

Originally Posted by Trubin

I've met up a guy last Sunday same day as the incident. He showed me a video of the chase from a different perspective. Way before I saw any other video, or herd anything on the news. Looked like street justice to me...........

I wonder how such a helpful video has not already been used to help these victims of street injustice and bad luck (in that moment and during previous years of unfair charges and prosecutions for diverse wrongly called crimes and traffic violations) ???

I believe that you have to be smarter than what you are messing with.
If you want to be a street justicer, you will need to be a smart one.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/justicer

Has anyone wondered why no member of http://www.ninjette.org was involved in that unfortunate situation?

Because we are more street-smart than street-justicers.
As it has happened many times to many of us and as we know of 20% of those cagers have mental problems, when you become the traffic victim of any cager, you don't:

1) Move your bike into the path of that offender.

2) You don't try to stop that car.

3) You do call the police or try to gather some witnesses or try to film the offense.

4) If the car stops at a traffic light, you don't reach for the door of that car or try damaging the mirrors, tires or any part of others' property.

5) You don't place your bike and your persona in the path of an offender with some reason to flee the scene of the offense.

6) You don't follow, chase and harass a speeding offender if you can get and report the information of the vehicle, violating more laws and principles in the process.

7) You don't physically assault the offender, especially when you over-number and over-power that offender (that is as abusive and coward in USA as in China).

8) You don't leave the scene of your abuse and cowardice.

9) If you choose doing all the dont's, you don't record and publish your consistent lack of decency and intelligence, expecting people (while purposely instigated by the media and powerful interests) to understand that you have been a victim of the society and the circumstances: you have created a perfect storm.

"Respect for the rights of others means peace." - Benito Juarez

For whoever is interested on taking a side in this case, just use the above quote as a different point of view and respond the following question:
What side disrespected the rights of the other part first and more times?

[GreenNinja]

Originally Posted by Alex

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

hahaha! Good one Alex! I find it funny that you used a fallacy definition instead of saying "just because he hit you doesn't give you the right to retaliate." A professor used to say "an eye for an eye makes the world go blind."

[az3200]

Originally Posted by Motofool

you don't:

1) Move your bike into the path of that offender.

2) You don't try to stop that car.

5) You don't place your bike and your persona in the path of an offender with some reason to flee the scene of the offense.



[/B]

I think this right here sums up the inelegance level of the individuals on the bikes involved in this. Especially after the SUV runs someone over, and jumps up 5 feet in the air after bulldozing two motorcycles.


Edit: I love that I spelled Intelligence wrong. :P

[moonwalker]

Originally Posted by Sinister

Lol, Intent is one of the most important factors.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/intent

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intenti...riminal_law%29

http://thelawdictionary.org/criminal-intent/


I could easily go on...

...then please do go on.

[moonwalker]

Originally Posted by Motofool

"Respect for the rights of others means peace." - Benito Juarez

Words to live by.

[allanoue]

Originally Posted by moonwalker

...then please do go on.

last time you asked that the thread was closed a couple of posts later