Road Rage Shooting in Moorsville

I hear ya. But pointing a gun at something you intend to destroy doesnt mean ya HAVE to destroy it, ya know? That guy is pretty effed in the A now and its bad for all of us if he was legally carrying that gun and it was lawfully purchased.
If I'm at the point where I'm drawing on someone I've already decided I'm pulling the trigger. Pulling a gun on someone & threatening them with it will get you kilt.
 
If I'm at the point where I'm drawing on someone I've already decided I'm pulling the trigger. Pulling a gun on someone & threatening them with it will get you kilt.

well, youre also above the law. I feel like if a reporter tried to use your personal life to write some liberal junk piece to advance their cause, that reporter would disappear lol. and no on would question it.
 
well, youre also above the law. I feel like if a reporter tried to use your personal life to write some liberal junk piece to advance their cause, that reporter would disappear lol. and no on would question it.
I'm not above the law. But the decision to draw your weapon will be the most serious decision you'll ever make. And you should have already decided that you have no other choice.
 
When I was a LEO, they taught us, "Draw it whenever you feel like it. That's called Officers Presence! "

Now, as a civilian, they say, "Don't pull it unless you absolutely need to pull the trigger! Or else we'll call it BRANDISHING! and we'll arrest you for that! "
Ummm...

You’re a civilian in both of your posted situations. :p
 
The fact that there aren't daily road rage shootings in the sheetshow that is Moorseville is a strong statement about the discipline of the average gun owner in the USA.
That’s true even if you considered nothing but exit 36, less than a mile on each side of 77. :eek:
 
Not from an off brand dictionary,
civilian
noun
Save Word
To save this word, you'll need to log in.

Log In

ci·vil·ian | \ sə-ˈvil-yən also -ˈvi-yən \
Definition of civilian
(Entry 1 of 2)

1: a specialist in Roman or modern civil law
2a: one not on active duty in the armed services or not on a police or firefighting force
b

Of course you saw that and went on to find a more palatable version.
 
That’s true even if you considered nothing but exit 36, less than a mile on each side of 77. :eek:

Before we moved to Statesville I lived off of hwy 3. It took 20 minutes to get to I-77 any way you would go and then 10 minutes to Statesville going to work. It was all around horrid and the city of Mooresville is horribly run. They repaved hwy 3 and less than a month later the city cut it up replacing water lines and made it 1000 time worse than before. The city blamed the state and the state blamed the city but IMO the city was responsible. Hell I think they are going on almost two years that McClelland ave has been closed to through traffic. Just a total mess.
 
Plus not sure the pictures have been posted yet so here is the suspect if you might know him.

5e569eaf0ca86.image.jpg

5e569eaf20b1c.image.jpg
 
That’s no Nissan. Looks a lot like a Kia Optima based on lights, but the size of a Rio
From updated article, "Initially, officers said the suspect was driving a Nissan Sentra-style car, but after receiving video of the vehicle, they determined he was driving a silver 2008 or newer model Kia Forte."
 
From updated article, "Initially, officers said the suspect was driving a Nissan Sentra-style car, but after receiving video of the vehicle, they determined he was driving a silver 2008 or newer model Kia Forte."
Ahhh didn’t read the article. Was just googling pics and came to the same conclusion, forte.
 
Does anyone else think there is more to the story than simple road rage? Even IF its simple road rage both parties seem to hold some responsibility for the entire ordeal. There seem to be some great legal defenses in this situation.
 
Does anyone else think there is more to the story than simple road rage? Even IF its simple road rage both parties seem to hold some responsibility for the entire ordeal. There seem to be some great legal defenses in this situation.
I was thinking about this a little and can’t come up with a great defense/argument in favor of the victim. The shooter could say he realized things had escalated and wanted to end it, therefore he pulled off the road for the victim to pass, victim pulled in behind him essentially blocking him into a corner, then victim approached his vehicle (add colorful description of demeanor and language used to describe threat level), so he fired in self defense and believes he is covered under SYG.

It seems like the thing working against the shooter is the claim that he started the incident after being upset that he was passed for driving too slowly. Not sure how SYG will hold up if you’re labeled the instigator.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SPM
:D
Not from an off brand dictionary,
civilian
noun
Save Word
To save this word, you'll need to log in.

Log In

ci·vil·ian | \ sə-ˈvil-yən also -ˈvi-yən \
Definition of civilian
(Entry 1 of 2)

1: a specialist in Roman or modern civil law
2a: one not on active duty in the armed services or not on a police or firefighting force
b

Of course you saw that and went on to find a more palatable version.

I think he was just making a friendly dig at The Coastie—like, you weren’t military or LEO.

this may be unfamiliar because most people don’t even bother taking jabs at coast guard :D

this your probably more familiar with “Crayon eating meathead marines...girly boy pampered Air Force, gluttonously supplied Army...”
 
Hopefully in the near future video recorders will be standard equipment in all highway vehicles. That and an application that directs one to the nearest law enforcement agency for this near epidemic cause of harm and death. Or better yet a button to push that force drives you and the rager to the agency for a sit down conversation with the authorities, doubt that will ever happen but it would be great to see those who wish to control the highways having to explain themselves in court.
 
Last edited:
Only things worse than a Nissan driver is a Kia driver. :eek:

(Just kidding! I'd drive a Kia Stinger GT in a heartbeat!)

hey, maybe one of these days your KIA will make it more than 6ft into the shooting bay without disappearing into the earth.

maybe you just like the exercise? Or is dragging your steel silhouette 150ft some kind of wounded comrade exfil drill?:)
 
Last edited:
I was thinking about this a little and can’t come up with a great defense/argument in favor of the victim. The shooter could say he realized things had escalated and wanted to end it, therefore he pulled off the road for the victim to pass, victim pulled in behind him essentially blocking him into a corner, then victim approached his vehicle (add colorful description of demeanor and language used to describe threat level), so he fired in self defense and believes he is covered under SYG.

It seems like the thing working against the shooter is the claim that he started the incident after being upset that he was passed for driving too slowly. Not sure how SYG will hold up if you’re labeled the instigator.

Yeah I'm not sure either
 
Ahhh didn’t read the article. Was just googling pics and came to the same conclusion, forte.
The article originally said Nissan, I looked again today and they'd updated it, it also only had one of the two pictures you posted. Thanks for the pic update or I wouldn't have looked again.
 
I was thinking about this a little and can’t come up with a great defense/argument in favor of the victim. The shooter could say he realized things had escalated and wanted to end it, therefore he pulled off the road for the victim to pass, victim pulled in behind him essentially blocking him into a corner, then victim approached his vehicle (add colorful description of demeanor and language used to describe threat level), so he fired in self defense and believes he is covered under SYG.
It seems like the thing working against the shooter is the claim that he started the incident after being upset that he was passed for driving too slowly. Not sure how SYG will hold up if you’re labeled the instigator.
Knowing the victim makes this story odd. He's not a big guy/physically imposing, has the patience to drive a very expensive custom built 18 wheeler and trailer, and I've never seen him other than a easy going demeanor.
As the story now stands, I'd expect the shooter to get burned if caught because he shot, fled and hid.
 
Honestly old boy who stopped and popped could have probably stayed put and claimed SYG. Not that it would be a clear cut case but hey......he was being followed et al.
No--it fails the "you didn't start the incident" test. Throwing a cup of stuff at a vehicle would easily be viewed as such.
 
I seldom get on the road that I don't consider shooting some dumb bastard. I usually try to get them to follow me to the house. My best skinning knives & bonesaw are there.
Careful, man. This would be labeled "Exhibit A, your honor."
 
Hopefully in the near future video recorders will be standard equipment in all highway vehicles. That and an application that directs one to the nearest law enforcement agency for this near epidemic cause of harm and death. Or better yet a button to push that force drives you and the rager to the agency for a sit down conversation with the authorities, doubt that will ever happen but it would be great to see those who wish to control the highways having to explain themselves in court.

 
Hopefully in the near future video recorders will be standard equipment in all highway vehicles. That and an application that directs one to the nearest law enforcement agency for this near epidemic cause of harm and death. Or better yet a button to push that force drives you and the rager to the agency for a sit down conversation with the authorities, doubt that will ever happen but it would be great to see those who wish to control the highways having to explain themselves in court.
Yeahhhhh, I’ll pass on that button nonsense. I enjoy my liberty and free will.
 
No--it fails the "you didn't start the incident" test. Throwing a cup of stuff at a vehicle would easily be viewed as such.
Pretty sure theres more to it. If someone disengages as the aggressor you cant chase them down and engage them at least on public property. The chaser / victim should have contacted law enforcement
 
If I'm at the point where I'm drawing on someone I've already decided I'm pulling the trigger. Pulling a gun on someone & threatening them with it will get you kilt.
I'm not above the law. But the decision to draw your weapon will be the most serious decision you'll ever make. And you should have already decided that you have no other choice.
Yep even the likes of Clint Smith lean to your philosophy . He says of Rule 3...Finger off the trigger til sights are on the target...does not apply. Ole Clint says ….If I have to pull my pistol, the next decision to be made is by You! Stop or get shot! That requires finger On the trigger.
 
Last edited:
A few weeks ago I got into a slight altercation after dropping off my kids at school. Guy in the parking lot nearly rear ended me, then proceeded to assume it was my fault. Swung around me and proceeded to hurl obscenities at me until we got out of the parking lot. I kept thinking "This is sure going to be awkward at PTA night...". I was behind him on the road and I saw him reaching across into the passenger area and then he started motioning me to pull into a nearby parking lot...I did not oblige. I was pretty angry at this point and my blood was up...but I knew that pulling in was the worst possible decision I could have made up till that point. I didn't know if he had grabbed a weapon, and I am not one to get into a fist fight...too old, too many kids, too much responsibility to get hurt/killed because someone is acting the fool. I also knew that I was angry, not making clear decisions, and the last thing I needed to do was get into a fight while armed and have to shoot some dude over a parking lot mishap. So, I drove on to work, cooled off, and now when I drop the kids off I keep a keen eye out for some crazy dude that still has a chip on his shoulder.

So, in short, I can kinda empathise with the guy...he was probably angry, irritated, and doubly so because his wife and kids were in him. But his decision to pull in, as seen, was the worst possible thing he could have done. I am not defending the dude that shot him...but as mentioned above "Officer, this guy cut me off, and then followed me and then got out of his car and came at me aggressively...I was in fear of my life." Would it stand up in court? Perhaps not...but it would have stood up far better than "I shot the dude and ran because I knew I had done messed up..."
 
Or better yet a button to push that force drives you and the rager to the agency for a sit down conversation with the authorities, doubt that will ever happen but it would be great to see those who wish to control the highways having to explain themselves in court.
LoL. I like it.
 
I don't get road rage..
I do. What would you do if some jackoff put himself two inches behind you when you were walking down the street and when you asked him to stop he throws a drink in your face? How is this different?
 
I do. What would you do if some jackoff put himself two inches behind you when you were walking down the street and when you asked him to stop he throws a drink in your face? How is this different?
That's not as bad as a 4,000lb rolling battering ram on your tail.
 
Sort of like 'red flag laws'. right? Someone you don't know, at any time, can force the authorities to interfere.
Not really, no one I know has ever went 'road rage' on a Highway Patrolman nor on anyone else while a officer is present. There are those that just care less about anybody and only when the authorities are present do they present themselves as civil, freedom for all is only valid when it is shared with responsibility.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom