On a less serious tone. Who else is supposed to pay for the damages he caused to the hood? His friend holding the camera? If he caused the damages why shouldn't he pay?

 

I know this is serious and everything but.......
I thought that was -randomly funny-

 

Alright, I took a look at the video a second time. First time around I thought he jumped on the hood and was facing the driver. Second time I look I noticed he kind of just sat backwards on the hood. So, maybe I wouldn't delibrately run him ober, but I probably would have done the same thing the RX driver did where he hit the gas (Probably because he was scared) then hit the brakes to get him off the car. I still say that in the heat of the moment I just can't exepct the driver to make a determination of he was really a thread or not. You just have to react as it could be life or death. It is real easy to judge when we are just watching a video a couple of times to really see what is going on. Obviously intent plays a large roll in self defence as well. If you are truely affraid you are justified to use reasonable force to get out of the situation. Yes, reasonable doesn't mean to kill him, but it certainly is reasonable to use your vehicle to get out of the situation. Now, I wouldn't then go around saying I purposely ran him over and I wasn't affraid for my safety as that would throw the whole self defence theory out the window.

 

Actually I thought it was funny as well, It turned a little serious because it could have been. Diablo does bring up a good point so I thought it was worth discussing since any of us could be in that situation at any moment. Lot's of what I have said is my reaction and what I would have liked to see happen to these types of idiots. The question is would would we really do in that situation, what would be the right thing to do, and what would be the consequences. I think it is a worthy discussion (Just as long as it stays civil) because I certainly don't want to go to jail, but I also don't want to make the wrong decision and put my family in harms way.

 

fact is, when a guy jumped on the hood of my car like that, i cannot, and will not, care about his intention. i have to act defensively and do what it takes to neutral the guy asap and get him off my car, period.

i wouldn't go as far as running him over, that's overboard imho. but do what showed in the video to throw him off my car? yes, any day, drunk or not, armed or not.

the driver of the rx didn't see the video, he had no idea what the guy was like when he jumped on the hood

 

Say it was you who was driving and someone jumped on the hood of your IS and your wife and child was in the car also. I'm sure you would do what is necessary to protect them and not even think twice about if the person was armed or unarmed, drunk or sober, lost, playing around etc...

 

OK so I asked my friend who is a lawyer. There are four separate issues: did either the driver or the kid (the perpetrator) commit either a crime or a civil offense.

Did the kid commit a crime? NO
He did not violate any criminal statute. He did not harm anyone, steal any property, etc. He did not commit a crime

Did the kid commit a civil offense? POSSIBLY
If he damaged the car, which I think is unlikely, then that is a civil offense and he would probably be found liable and have to pay the owner for the damages. He may also have trespassed on the driver's property (his car). However, this would vary state by state. It's quite possible that the kid did nothing worse than a simple traffic violation such as impeding traffic or interfering with a driver. Probably a small fine at most.

Did the driver commit a crime? PROBABLY
If a jury would find that the driver acted with the intent to injure the kid, or that his actions clearly would injure the kid, then he committed assault. If the driver used lethal force (trying to kill/run over the kid) then the situation is even worse, because in most states you are not allowed to use lethal force to defend your property (only to defend your life). The driver would have to argue that he was defending his life, not his property, by acting the way he did. A jury might or might not buy it.

Did the driver commit a civil offense? PROBABLY NOT
Normally in such a situation the driver would owe civil penalties, however in this case, the kid has what's called "contributary negligence" which means that he basically contributed to the problem himself, so he can't get any civil reward for damages. However, he could argue that his original offense, trespass, was much less severe than the driver's reaction, intention to harm or kill. In that case the kid might actually be able to get a civil reward as well.

So, that's the legal situation. Basically the driver could be in a LOT more trouble than the kid, and would definitely need a good lawyer. Now I know y'all will say it doesn't matter and you would still defend yourself and your family etc, and that is fine. I just want you to know what the legal consequences are for a situation like this. Hopefully nothing like that will ever happen to any of us!

 

 

LMAO HAHAHAHAAHAH

that guy got ****ed up LMAO AHHAAHAH

exactly what he deserved.

 

So basically it seems the laws really do protect the criminal or lawbreakers. If our laws really do find that drunk did nothing wrong and the driver in teh drong this country has flip flopped and it is no wonder why there are so much crime in the US today.

There definately is damage to teh hood. There is no way you can sit on a hood and not dent it. If you apply too much pressue using a Porter Cable buffer you can dent the hood much less having a 175lb guy sit on it. Public Drunkeness may not be criminal, but it is still against the law. I guess the Justice System has specific categories, but if you break the law IMHO you are a thug and a criminal. I see no difference between the guy just spray painting the wall vs the guy that commits assult. They all deserve jail time. I don't do it so I expect our laws to punish those that do severely.

I guess the only way out of this was to just sit there and hope the guy leaces. Then you would not have put yourself in any liable position. The problem is you would end up having to pay at least your $500 deductable for a brand new hood (Body shops rearly pound out hoods) because the chances that you chatch the guy and get money from him is practically zereo.

The other way is sit still and do nothing, but then have the guy pull a gun and carjack you. Probably end up with kidnapping charges as well because all the carjackings we reported about with children in the back seat ended up being taken. Most ended happily, but it is still unacceptable. Basiscally this just sucks that the lawbraeakers have more rights that those that obey the laws and are just trying to protect their own flesh and blood.

This brings me to the question about why the police tell you to run the offender over if he is trying to carjack you have the chance? If that is considered assult why do they tell you to do this? The question is what were the intensions of a group of drunk guys hanging around at an intersection jumping on cars? Is it just drunken fun or were they setting up a car to jack? Can anyone know the intentions of these indibiduals and would anyone stick around to find out? Back in the 50s maybe, but today, noway. People get killed for looking at someone the wrong way.

 

I don't think the advice "run over someone if you think they might carjack you" is very good. If you know for sure they are going to carjack you then ya, do it. If they've got a gun pointed at you and you run them over, you are fine. But what if you are mistaken and the person is just coming up to the car to try to sell you something, and you end up hitting them by accident? In this country you are innocent until proven guilty, and I think that is how it should be. Do you remember the story of a guy in Florida a couple years ago who shot and killed someone trick-or-treating at his house at Halloween? The guy who was shot I think was an immigrant from Asia and didn't understand the homeowner yelling at him to get off his property. Eventually the guy just went and got his gun and shot him. To avoid situations like this, it's better to err on the side of caution.

Also, you've never sat on the hood of a car before? I have - it doesn't do any damage.

Anyway, this video was just meant to be some stupid prank, and it's gotten us all worked up, so I think that's all I'll say about it. Safe driving everyone.

 

It's a clean get away, everyone looking for a Lexus RX and it's a Toyota 4Runner, surprising how no one picked that out

 

My god, if he did that to my S500, I'd get it up to 60 mph then slam the breaks. I'd probaby be able to do that in less than 15 seconds. And he wouldn't know what hit him, except an Benz.

No offense to other RX drivers, but I know my RX330 couldn't match what my S500 could do.

 

What a schmuck. He should get a beat down for sure..

 

This will also be my last post. I'm at least glad the discussion stayed civil Anyway, there was another carjacking today. This is rare even for my state (Hawaii) but you just don't know when it will happen. If the guy is just walking up to your car that is one thing. If the guy makes and agressive move and jumps on the hood of your car that is an entirely differet story. I just can't believe one is expected to wait until someone pulls a gun on you to confirm it is a carjacing before you are allowed to react. The second he jumped on the hood that IMHO was an agressive act. There is no other reason why anyone would jump on the hood of a car unless it was to invoke fear into the driver or some other malicious act. There was nothign innocent about that move.

Personally, I've never sat on the hood of my car. The hood on my car is over $2000 and aluminum. I would be crazy to sit on it. I've seen detailers warp a hood just from applying too much pressure with the buffer. I've also seen models at car shows warp a hood laying on the hood while posing for a photo shoot.

Anyway, you are right. Everyone should just drive carefully and hope none of us are ever put in a situation like this or more serious.