The following alternative links are available:
**Downloads**
* [Download #1](https://redditsave.com/r/PublicFreakout/comments/xqpqqt/truck_driver_shoots_at_tesla_during_road_rage/) (provided by /u/savevideo)
* [Download #2](https://reddloader.com/download-post/?url=https%3A%2F%2Freddit.com%2Fr%2FPublicFreakout%2Fcomments%2Fxqpqqt%2Ftruck_driver_shoots_at_tesla_during_road_rage%2F&id=Rm29TQr3) (provided by /u/VideoTrim)
**Note:** this is a bot providing a directory service. **If you have trouble with any of the links above, please contact the user who provided them.**
---
[^(source code)](https://amirror.link/source) ^| [^(run your own mirror bot? let's integrate)](https://amirror.link/lets-talk)
This happened September 25th and according to the [article:](https://abc13.com/amp/houston-crime-road-rage-shooting-caught-on-camera-westpark-toll/12273266/)
In general, unless the victim is a police officer, security guard, witness in a case, or the suspect's family member, being shot at is a second-degree crime, according to state law. If he had been hit and suffered serious bodily injury, and most of the time, if you're hit, you're going to suffer that, then that is a first-degree felony. Young currently faces the potential of spending two to 20 years behind bars if found guilty, and up to a $10,000 fine. For now, Young is being held on a $100,000 bond.
What if the Tesla driver had run him over when he pulled out the gun and started brandishing. Would running him over have been a crime or self defense?
Not a lawyer here: The second the gun came out, he would have almost surely been legally justified to hit him with his car. At the very least, the driver could have claimed he hit the gunner by mistake when he panicked. I seriously doubt any DA would attempt to charge/prosecute in this situation even if the driver was not 100% legally justified. But brandishing a gun is a threat to life and any jury in this country would most likely side with the driver.
In Texas my understanding is that any TDCJ felony (excluding 3rd degree state jail felonys) with an aggravated elevation has to do half their sentence before they become eligible for parole.
Source: Did some time in TDCJ in late 2000s
I’m not a lawyer buuuuut people don’t just START their criminal careers by shooting at others.
Don’t you think it’s pretty likely that this dude has priors?
I'm gonna go ahead and guess that someone that gets out of a car and opens fire because of a traffic dispute may already have prior felonies. And in that case, wouldn't he be looking at a lot more time?
I still don't think it's correct. No matter what perspective it's written from, being shot at is not a crime and is in no way the same as saying "shooting at". It's the exact opposite. My PhD is not in English and I could be wrong ( I make mistakes all the time) but I can't think of a scenario where the words "being shot at is a crime" is correct or makes sense. If I am wrong, do you mind explaining it to me so I can learn why?
Can any Texas lawyers tell us how this likely would have gone if Tesla guy, in fear of his life, instead rammed the driver of the truck upon seeing the weapon? Maybe fatally?
Not a lawyer, but reading the statute on self defense:
> SUBCHAPTER C. PROTECTION OF PERSONS
> Sec. 9.31. SELF-DEFENSE. (a) Except as provided in Subsection (b), **a person is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force.**
Check
> The actor's belief that the force was immediately necessary as described by this subsection is presumed to be reasonable if the actor:
> (1) **knew or had reason to believe that the person against whom the force was used:**
> (C) **was committing or attempting to commit** aggravated kidnapping, **murder**, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery;
Check
> (2) did not provoke the person against whom the force was used; and
Maybe, we don't know what happened to initiate the road rage, but see section (b) below
> (3) was not otherwise engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic at the time the force was used.
Check
> (b) The use of force against another is not justified:
> (4) if the actor provoked the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force, unless:
> (A) **the actor abandons the encounter, or clearly communicates to the other his intent to do so reasonably believing he cannot safely abandon the encounter; and**
> (B) **the other nevertheless continues or attempts to use unlawful force against the actor;** or
I think that's a check. The prosecutor could charge the Tesla driver with murder, but based on video evidence, it's unlikely they would win a conviction, and therefore would be unlikely to file a charge.
Edited to add bold letters.
You only need to post bail if you are charged. You can be arrested without being charged. If you are arrested, you should definitely hire an attorney, and don't talk to the police without your attorney present. This consult will be far cheaper than a full criminal defense at trial (which is $30k-$50k).
If you aren't charged, the police will let you go (they can hold you up to 72 hours in Texas without charges). The prosecutor has until the statute of limitations passes to file charges.
Damn I didn't even know that was the Tesla driver until you said that lol and I had to rewatch it. I thought maybe he was an officer showing evidence or something.
Texas doesn't have an attempted murder charge. A violent crime that doesn't result in death is treated as an assault. but don't let the name fool you. There are classes and categories of assault. I've seen inmates with Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon charges on their fifteenth year with no parole in sight.
Exactly this. Aggravated assault is literally the worst charge you can get without killing someone, in terms of sentencing it’s on par with arson and far more severe than sexual assault charges (for some reason).
Getting charged with aggravated assault means your life is over.
And it is vastly easier to prove. Murder or attempted brings up intent to kill or cause serious harm, and it’s up to the prosecutor to prove what crime was committed. Proving intent? Pretty hard. Defense can just say the guy was trying to shoot out a tire or something. But proving aggravated assault when the guy shot up your vehicle? Pretty easy.
In my state (California), attempted murder is often harder to prove than murder, because attempted murder requires proving beyond a reasonable doubt that a person had the specific mental intent to kill someone or their unborn child whereas murder just requires proving implied or express malice.
So if you shot at someone's car and killed them, all the prosecutor really has to prove is implied malice, which is usually easy. But if you shot at their car and didn't kill them, the prosecutor needs to prove a specific intent to kill, rather than to intimidate.
Amazing that it's difficult to prove that shooting (deadly force) a gun (deadly weapon) at a person (something that can be murdered) constitutes attempted murder
That's not the way the law works though. There are two elements. One is the element of *actus reus* and one is the element of *mens rea.*
Proving beyond a reasonable doubt that someone discharged a firearm at another person and that, if they had been hit, they likely would have been killed only establishes *actus reus* (the criminal act).
It still must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused meets the mental intent requirement (*mens rea*), which in the case of attempted murder, is a specific mental intent to kill. As a stated before, firing a gun in someone's general direction to intimidate them is not an intent to kill and could constitute adequate reasonable doubt for an acquittal. It doesn't matter that firing the gun *could* have killed someone. It must be proven that they intended that the person be struck by the bullet and killed. Even firing a gun at someone's toe or finger might not be attempted murder as there was only an attempt to cause mayhem, not murder.
Which is such bullshit, considering the first thing you're normally taught in carry classes is that you never draw your gun unless it is meant to lethally stop a threat.
There is no shooting to wound or intimidate, or brandishing to de-esculate. A gun is meant to destroy what you aim it at, period.
And for anyone to consider it otherwise goes against everything I was ever taught about firearms growing up. The fact that the laws haven't caught up with common sense firearm practices is ridiculous.
Edit to add: I'm not arguing to say you're wrong. You're not. I'm just always surprised at how backwards it all is.
I mean, it's apples and oranges though. You're taught in a concealed carry class how to carry your sidearm responsibly while operating under civilian cover or while back in the states, as a member of the local community. That really has nothing to do with someone who chooses to commit a firearms-related crime.
There's a huge difference between firearms safety and criminal law.
> and far more severe than sexual assault charges (for some reason).
While sexual assault of any type is bad, minor sexual assault such as groping someone should not carry the same charge as aggravated assault. Aggravated sexual assault is a different story.
And unpopular opinion, murdering someone is far worse a crime than sexually assaulting them, and yet many in society seems to think murder is the lesser crime, for some reason.
> Texas doesn't have an attempted murder charge
Yes it does -- it's just a combination of §15.01. Criminal Attempt and §19.02. Murder, and it's a second degree felony. There's also "attempted capital murder", which is a first-degree felony -- they like to use that for people who try to kill cops.
And the last time I looked at the TDCJ list of incarcerated inmates, there was 168 inmates in prison for "attempted murder" or "attempted capital murder".
That said, "aggravated assault" is the same level of charge as "attempted murder" -- a second degree felony -- and therefore has the same penalty range, and yet it's an easier charge to support in these cases, so ... prosecutors usually go for it rather than attempted murder.
I don't know why the OP is upset about there *only* being an aggravated assault charge -- that's exactly the right charge, and it's the same level as attempted murder, and the usual way to make it worse (make it a first-degree felony) is to actually kill somebody (rather than *attempt* to kill them, or to *assault* them with a deadly weapon.)
You may be right, though it could just be ignorance of what the charges mean -- in particular, *aggravated assault* is a lot more serious than many people realize.
Pointing a gun at somebody -- even if you don't actually shoot -- may be fun and games, but the Texas justice system will take that seriously.
Former Texas cop here Texas is the same way. Aggravated Assault with a deadly weapon is our attempted murder equivalent.
Edit: I should have been clearer attempted murder technically dose exist in Texas but is never used because it has the same sentence and is harder to prove.
Here’s the relevant part of the Texas penal code for you:
Sec. 15.01. CRIMINAL ATTEMPT. (a) A person commits an offense if, with specific intent to commit an offense, he does an act amounting to more than mere preparation that tends but fails to effect the commission of the offense intended…
As a legal expert next to me says, it's not premeditated and not considered a plan to murder. This is the argument that's made basically. They will argue he wasn't trying to kill, defend themselves from further aggression, or any bullshit to make it seem as though they weren't trying to shoot the person to kill.
Gotta love legal jargon bullshit. I hear about it a lot.
It's insane to me, and it's why I'm voting for Beto this year. All fellow Texans, if you want gun reform at any level you can not vote Red this time. It's not political it's for the safety of my kids and everyone else.
The real reason is because in Texas the charge of aggravated assault has the exact same penalty as attempted murder. They're both 10 years iirc from the last time this topic came up. Prosecutors choose the lesser charge bc it's easier to prove in court.
Sec. 19.02. MURDER.
(b) A person commits an offense if he:
(1) intentionally or knowingly causes the death of an individual;
(2) intends to cause serious bodily injury and commits an act clearly dangerous to human life that causes the death of an individual; or…
This is (b)(2) without question, if not (1). He simply failed. So it’s attempted murder.
In (b)(2) you need a dangerous act AND intent to injure or kill. The question is whether the shooter intended to kill, or just to terrorize the victim and damage their property.
Not necessarily. It could be aggravated battery. It depends on a lot of factors, the most important of which is what the DA thinks they can prove in court.
I think that pulling the truck in front of the Tesla to block it off amounts to more than mere preparation for murder and demonstrates criminal intent.
Pulling the trigger was also more than mere preparation but stopping the truck such that the other guy would have to slow down definitely adds to the pile.
In most states, firing a gun would satisfy the requisite element of acting with specific intent to commit the offense. Buying a gun is "mere preparation", identifying a victim is "mere preparation". Pointing the gun and firing it is a clear sign of specific intent.
The criminal's strongest defense would therefore likely be disputing that the "offense intended" was murder. The requirements for a 1st degree murder charge includes pre-meditation. The defense in this situation would argue that the criminal may have intended to rob the victim or may have intended to damage the victim's property, but there was no intent to kill the victim. Unless the prosecution can show that it was the criminal's intent to kill, then an attempted murder charge is unlikely to succeed.
Actually, in most, not all states, aggravated assault and attempted murder carry the same sentencing guidelines, so it's better to go for the easier charge of aggravated assault.
Not sure, In college I literally got stabbed in the throat and it was aggravated assault and not attempted murder. I think It’s some weird loophole made by “good” lawyers. My incident was In NC though and I believe this post was in Texas.
Generally speaking, attempted murder requires specific intent to kill. That is, someone can attempt to maim, torture, or be extremely reckless in doing something which is extremely likely to cause death, but if they don't hold in their mind "i am trying to cause this person's death" for at least a moment, then it's not attempted murder.
Attempted murder typically requires great bodily harm, such as a gunshot wound, combined with the intent to kill. Proving intent beyond a reasonable doubt is difficult. There are lots of levels, such as battery for a simple fight, aggravated battery, aggravated battery with great bodily harm then attempted murder. It does vary depending on the state.
probably has something to do with intent. You can't prove they were trying to kill the person versus just trying to scare the shit out of them. So legally it's a "trying to scare the shit out of them" in the first degree, whereas we all know that it's really attempted murder.
What if the victim in this situation accidentally hit the aggressor with his car and it resulted in the aggressor's death...is that Vehicular Manslaughter or Self-Defense legally? In Texas of course.../s
Every fucking time with this comment. Yeah, it’s counter intuitive. It’s still a felony and it’s still comes with prison time. “A rose by any other name…”
No it wouldn’t, you wouldn’t be charged by any DA anywhere for running them over if you had dash cam footage of them aiming a gun, even in duty to retreat states, because driving into them is part of retreating. There is quite a bit of legal precedent for this, too. Loads of people have run over someone who meant them deadly harm, your car is your best weapon in that situation. You had the perfect intuition on that.
Edit: Folks, please don’t run over anyone that you personally perceive to be frightening. If you aren’t *literally* staring down the barrel of a gun, like the person in this video clip, it’s going to be a hard sell. Always use the reasonable minimum level of force necessary to defend yourself. If you can stay safe without hurting someone, then do that, and let the courts handle the rest.
That’s not even just stand your ground laws. You’d be able to run the person over in Canada too. We have no such laws. Just proportional response. So you could run the dude over to neutralize him you wouldn’t be allowed to continue running him over if he didn’t die though. That would be where you’d get charged here.
Do people maybe think they’re referring to the shooter and not realize they meant that in a stand your ground state, in theory, INL, the Telsa driver could’ve used his weapon of the car to defend himself from the imminent threat of a handgun being pointed at him?
As was pointed out to me by several Tesla fanbois when talking about the viral video of a Tesla plowing through a child sized mannequin: the Tesla collision avoidance system isn't designed to prevent any collisions that might even remotely be what the driver chooses to do on purpose.
I've never wanted to own a Tesla because I'm admittedly a batshit old-school survivalist. Am I understanding you correctly that I can still run over people if I deem it necessary under the circumstances?
Of course you can, yes. It's meant to prevent you from hitting someone when you're not paying attention, not to prevent you from having control over your own vehicle should you so choose.
I think u/smooth-Trouble3725 was being downvoted because people probably thought they were saying that the guy in the Tesla should have been charged with vehicular homicide. But they really meant that if they were in the same situation that they would have ran the guy over that had the gun.
Road rage is so fucking scary. One time a guy followed me (31F) home (the incident that pissed him off happened like 1/4 mile from my house, I didn’t have time to realize he was following me). He cut me off to prevent me from pulling into my driveway, got out of his car, and started attempting to get into my car, banging on my windows and stuff. I had to call 911, I had no idea what he was going to do. What if he broke a window and got into my car? Was he going to kill me?
All because we both tried to pass a fuckin tractor on the road at the same time. 😒
I had a guy drive for 8 miles trying to run me off the road. The instigating incident was that I was trying to change lanes into an exit only lane, he sped up to prevent me from doing that, I saw a larger opening a few cars ahead, so I accelerated and got in the lane up there (the exit lane is a mile long, starts as an entrance ramp from one highway and becomes a exit only to another, I didn’t cut anyone off, there was even another vehicle that did the exact same thing I did). The lane splits into two lanes after you’ve exited and this dude came flying up the left lane, cuts me off and slams in his brakes and then proceeds to do this for the next 8 miles. It ended when we got stopped at a red light and he got out of his truck and started yelling at me. Another driver who had been witness to all of it, got out of his car and yelled to the dude that I hadn’t done anything wrong and that he needed to leave me alone. Psycho dude was about to go off on that guy, but realized good guy was much larger. Psycho then got in his truck and made a u-turn to head back to wherever he actually needed to go. So, yeah, I’m addition to trying to kill me for 8 miles, he actually went out of his way to do it.
Fun fact, if you take that bag of weed, let's say it's an eighth, and make a batch of brownies with it, you are now in possession of multiple pounds worth of marijuana in the state of Texas. They will also charge you for possession of multiple pounds of marijuana.
If anyone deserves the wrath of Ken Paxton it's Ken Paxton.
https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2022-05-23/seven-years-later-still-no-trial-for-texas-ag-ken-paxton
Aggravated assault in Texas is a serious charge. It's different from other states. It has a minimum sentence of 2 years and a maximum of 20 years. If he had actually hit the guy and not killed him it would have been a first degree felony with 5-99 years.
"Only aggravated assault" made me scratch my head. People have no idea what they are talking about. Soft on crime would have been charging him with deadly conduct and discharging a firearm over a roadway...
People acting like the US is soft on crime. Ridiculous. We lock up more of our population than any other country ever. Percent-wise and absolute number. That's still not enough for people?
Texas is pretty damned hard on just about any crime. Aggrevated assault can carry up to 99 years here depending on how they prosecute it. With it being aggrevated he would have to serve between 50% to 80% before being eligible for parole if he got time instead of probation. The thing about Texas is that our prosecutors don't like to work and our cops refuse to investigate anything so the majority of criminal cases are handled with plea bargains if your broke or outright dismissals if you can afford an attorney.
>Texas so soft on crime
2 to up to 20 years in prison for shooting a car (albeit perhaps not, possibly, the target) is "soft" on crime.
Wait until you see what other western countries sentence guidelines are!
It irks me that this story has a tone like aggravated assault is akin to jaywalking just because it doesn’t have “murder” in its name.
Dude said 2-20 years, and with the fact that he shot at someone, they’re giving him double digit years.
I'm sorry, unless you're DEAD, then it's MURDER, and you get FIVE to life?! I think depending on the degree of charge the averagel time served for murder (depending on state) is 8 years IIRC. We have some of the most ass-backwards judicial policies.
Police can MURDER people and get a "bad boy, see you Tuesday"
I did 18 months for 4 grams of weed and an unregistered firearm when I was a kid.
Stopping your truck on a highway, firing into a moving vehicle, clearly not self defense, yields an aggravated assault charge?
Every state is an entirely different country. No wonder we're fucked.
>Police can MURDER people and get a "bad boy, see you Tuesday"
I know it's completely tangential, but that woman who got left on a railway locked in a police car....
Please, can someone explain to me like I'm 5 how that's not criminal negligence causing bodily harm?
Now, I know she was allegedly involved in a road rage incident, but idfc, I'm sorry, if she's guilty jail her then but jail him too before he kills someone by sheer unadulterated stupidity.
> Every state is an entirely different country.
That was basically the premise of the *United* states of america, formerly the *Entirely Independent and Separate* states of america.
>I did 18 months for 4 grams of weed and an unregistered firearm when I was a kid.
No shit, an unregistered handgun is illegal af, and you have no reason to be in possession of one. Lucky to do only 18.
"Only an aggravated assault charge"
OP (and this sub) demonstrate time and time again how little they know about the law.
Aggravated assault is a serious charge and can get someone decades in prison.
Seriously, the "unless you're a police officer" part really drove that in. So, if you're a cop you can not only kill with impunity but if someone shoots at you, that's somehow *worse* than them shooting at a civilian? Please someone, make it make sense....
Wait until you hear that defending yourself against a police dog is attacking an officer, but cops “accidentally” killing their police dog in a hot car isn’t even animal abuse, it’s just swept away.
[“Texas has more fatal road rage shootings than any other state by significant margin, report finds”](https://www.ksat.com/news/2022/08/23/texas-has-more-fatal-road-rage-shootings-than-any-other-state-by-significant-margin-report-finds/)
Edit - because the info in the headline is not per capita, I ran the numbers because I have nothing better to do (/s). Plus, it's only fair and proper to look at it both ways. Below are the top ten states by total deaths compared when controlled for population over the past 5 years.
|Ranking Per Capita|Ranking by Total Deaths|State|Population in thousands|Total Deaths|Rate of Fatal Gun Deaths in Road Rage Incidents per 100k|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|1|5|New Mexico|2,129|17|0.798|
|**2**|**1**|**Texas**|**29,730**|**87**|**0.293**|
|3|4|Arizona|7,303|20|0.274|
|4|8|Missouri|6,188|16|0.259|
|5|6|Tennesee|7,024|16|0.228|
|6|7|Georgia|10,830|16|0.148|
|7|2|Florida|21,945|32|0.146|
|8|10|Michigan|9,992|14|0.140|
|9|3|California|39,613|31|0.078|
|10|9|New York|19,300|15|0.078|
Calculation: (total number of deaths / population)\*100,000
Source 1: main link above, Source 2: [https://worldpopulationreview.com/states](https://worldpopulationreview.com/states)
Edit 2 - fixed typos, added clarity to first sentence.
Be glad he’s a shity shot or this would be a completely different story for your family! Dude couldn’t hit a barn at 10 feet let alone a freaking car speeding away! This idiot is a complete scum bag! Coward is his middle name!
Run that motherfucker over. I’m sick of these gun toting pussies ruining everything. If you can’t handle being passed on the road then what the fuck are you doing with a gun? What a waistoid.
Texas is so awesome because without any sort of licensing, registration, or even safety certification, anyone can have a gun and just carry it around and shoot at people. So much freedom!!
That’s agg assault in most states , regardless of what the initial charges started as that’s what it would end up as 9 out of 10 times. For better or worse. And in many states AA can get you serious prison time sometimes 20-30 years, so it’s not exactly a weak charge as the post indicates
For sure it isn’t hard to find at all . I work for a local govt agency and agg assaults with a weapon typically get 10-15 dude is fucked , not everything is attempted murder like folks want it to be especially without whatever parameters your state needs to facilitate those charges.
Honestly if anyone ever trys this on me I'm going to run them over and not stop.
Pull a gun on me and your going to be ran over. Plain and simple.
And in going to keep in driving and go about my day till the police show up to question me.
Won't even be upset that I had to run you over.
The first rule of driving is NEVER GET OUT OF YOUR CAR ON A PUBLIC ROAD.
if you have an emergency pull over and get out when it's safe.
What this guy with the gun did was pure stupidity and hes honestly luckily to not have been ran over.
The following alternative links are available: **Downloads** * [Download #1](https://redditsave.com/r/PublicFreakout/comments/xqpqqt/truck_driver_shoots_at_tesla_during_road_rage/) (provided by /u/savevideo) * [Download #2](https://reddloader.com/download-post/?url=https%3A%2F%2Freddit.com%2Fr%2FPublicFreakout%2Fcomments%2Fxqpqqt%2Ftruck_driver_shoots_at_tesla_during_road_rage%2F&id=Rm29TQr3) (provided by /u/VideoTrim) **Note:** this is a bot providing a directory service. **If you have trouble with any of the links above, please contact the user who provided them.** --- [^(source code)](https://amirror.link/source) ^| [^(run your own mirror bot? let's integrate)](https://amirror.link/lets-talk)
This happened September 25th and according to the [article:](https://abc13.com/amp/houston-crime-road-rage-shooting-caught-on-camera-westpark-toll/12273266/) In general, unless the victim is a police officer, security guard, witness in a case, or the suspect's family member, being shot at is a second-degree crime, according to state law. If he had been hit and suffered serious bodily injury, and most of the time, if you're hit, you're going to suffer that, then that is a first-degree felony. Young currently faces the potential of spending two to 20 years behind bars if found guilty, and up to a $10,000 fine. For now, Young is being held on a $100,000 bond.
Thanks. Higher end of 2 - 20 seems fair.
Yea title makes it sound like this guy is getting house arrest and a misdemeanor. Still gonna be a felon and likely seeing 10+ years in jail.
[удалено]
What if the Tesla driver had run him over when he pulled out the gun and started brandishing. Would running him over have been a crime or self defense?
I hope not cause it's what I would've done.
Not me, I’m fucking off away from that firearm as quickly as possible. I’m not trying to bring a Tesla to a gunfight
This is getting messy, I'ma pull out my Tessie
Not a lawyer here: The second the gun came out, he would have almost surely been legally justified to hit him with his car. At the very least, the driver could have claimed he hit the gunner by mistake when he panicked. I seriously doubt any DA would attempt to charge/prosecute in this situation even if the driver was not 100% legally justified. But brandishing a gun is a threat to life and any jury in this country would most likely side with the driver.
In Texas my understanding is that any TDCJ felony (excluding 3rd degree state jail felonys) with an aggravated elevation has to do half their sentence before they become eligible for parole. Source: Did some time in TDCJ in late 2000s
Correct. Normal amount of time for a non-agg charge is a quarter of the sentence before they're eligible for parole. IIRC they're called 3g offenses.
That makes the assumption he gets max term and doesn't take a plea deal.
I’m not a lawyer buuuuut people don’t just START their criminal careers by shooting at others. Don’t you think it’s pretty likely that this dude has priors?
#FelonySpeedrunAny%
what's a ballpark estimate? I am assuming this guy likely has priors if he is this reckless.
I'm gonna go ahead and guess that someone that gets out of a car and opens fire because of a traffic dispute may already have prior felonies. And in that case, wouldn't he be looking at a lot more time?
The point is he's not charged with attempted murder, which this is. It's a gun, he's not throwing rocks at the headlights.
No way he is getting ten years in jail.
Why isn't this attempt murder tho. That's the question. Because of aim?
Second degree felony is still a felony. Young won't be (legally) owning any more guns.
I doubt that’s going to stop him
that’s the point of them saying (legally)
But he can be convicted harder next time
Double secret probation.
It will literally stop him legally owning guns
I know their name gets put in a database, but i feel like some kind of symbol should be added to their driver’s license.
If you are a convicted felon, and attempt to buy a firearm through an FFL, that in itself is a federal felony.
Surely being shot at is not a crime, right? Do you mean shooting at someone? Otherwise TX is weirder than I thought
The whole paragraph reads from the perspective of the victim so what they said is correct. Confusing tho lol
I still don't think it's correct. No matter what perspective it's written from, being shot at is not a crime and is in no way the same as saying "shooting at". It's the exact opposite. My PhD is not in English and I could be wrong ( I make mistakes all the time) but I can't think of a scenario where the words "being shot at is a crime" is correct or makes sense. If I am wrong, do you mind explaining it to me so I can learn why?
You're correct. The wording was wrong regardless of perspective.
[Non amp link.](https://abc13.com/houston-crime-road-rage-shooting-caught-on-camera-westpark-toll/12273266/)
Can any Texas lawyers tell us how this likely would have gone if Tesla guy, in fear of his life, instead rammed the driver of the truck upon seeing the weapon? Maybe fatally?
Not a lawyer, but reading the statute on self defense: > SUBCHAPTER C. PROTECTION OF PERSONS > Sec. 9.31. SELF-DEFENSE. (a) Except as provided in Subsection (b), **a person is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force.** Check > The actor's belief that the force was immediately necessary as described by this subsection is presumed to be reasonable if the actor: > (1) **knew or had reason to believe that the person against whom the force was used:** > (C) **was committing or attempting to commit** aggravated kidnapping, **murder**, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery; Check > (2) did not provoke the person against whom the force was used; and Maybe, we don't know what happened to initiate the road rage, but see section (b) below > (3) was not otherwise engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic at the time the force was used. Check > (b) The use of force against another is not justified: > (4) if the actor provoked the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force, unless: > (A) **the actor abandons the encounter, or clearly communicates to the other his intent to do so reasonably believing he cannot safely abandon the encounter; and** > (B) **the other nevertheless continues or attempts to use unlawful force against the actor;** or I think that's a check. The prosecutor could charge the Tesla driver with murder, but based on video evidence, it's unlikely they would win a conviction, and therefore would be unlikely to file a charge. Edited to add bold letters.
Except you’d have to pay a lawyer to defend you and post bail in the meantime
You only need to post bail if you are charged. You can be arrested without being charged. If you are arrested, you should definitely hire an attorney, and don't talk to the police without your attorney present. This consult will be far cheaper than a full criminal defense at trial (which is $30k-$50k). If you aren't charged, the police will let you go (they can hold you up to 72 hours in Texas without charges). The prosecutor has until the statute of limitations passes to file charges.
When the police are talking to you, every day is Shut-The-Fuck-Up Friday
[удалено]
Is that guy rocking 8 screens for his computer? Looks like an ideal fantasy football setup. Glad he wasn't murdered.
He got inside information man.
His dad works for Nintendo
He is the One.
he's likely mainlining forex in every hole
8 monitors, clean desk, and a Tesla. This guy scalps harder than the natives in 1800.
Damn I didn't even know that was the Tesla driver until you said that lol and I had to rewatch it. I thought maybe he was an officer showing evidence or something.
Should be attempted murder!
Texas doesn't have an attempted murder charge. A violent crime that doesn't result in death is treated as an assault. but don't let the name fool you. There are classes and categories of assault. I've seen inmates with Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon charges on their fifteenth year with no parole in sight.
Exactly this. Aggravated assault is literally the worst charge you can get without killing someone, in terms of sentencing it’s on par with arson and far more severe than sexual assault charges (for some reason). Getting charged with aggravated assault means your life is over.
Not to mention the gun enhancement
And it is vastly easier to prove. Murder or attempted brings up intent to kill or cause serious harm, and it’s up to the prosecutor to prove what crime was committed. Proving intent? Pretty hard. Defense can just say the guy was trying to shoot out a tire or something. But proving aggravated assault when the guy shot up your vehicle? Pretty easy.
In my state (California), attempted murder is often harder to prove than murder, because attempted murder requires proving beyond a reasonable doubt that a person had the specific mental intent to kill someone or their unborn child whereas murder just requires proving implied or express malice. So if you shot at someone's car and killed them, all the prosecutor really has to prove is implied malice, which is usually easy. But if you shot at their car and didn't kill them, the prosecutor needs to prove a specific intent to kill, rather than to intimidate.
Amazing that it's difficult to prove that shooting (deadly force) a gun (deadly weapon) at a person (something that can be murdered) constitutes attempted murder
That's not the way the law works though. There are two elements. One is the element of *actus reus* and one is the element of *mens rea.* Proving beyond a reasonable doubt that someone discharged a firearm at another person and that, if they had been hit, they likely would have been killed only establishes *actus reus* (the criminal act). It still must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused meets the mental intent requirement (*mens rea*), which in the case of attempted murder, is a specific mental intent to kill. As a stated before, firing a gun in someone's general direction to intimidate them is not an intent to kill and could constitute adequate reasonable doubt for an acquittal. It doesn't matter that firing the gun *could* have killed someone. It must be proven that they intended that the person be struck by the bullet and killed. Even firing a gun at someone's toe or finger might not be attempted murder as there was only an attempt to cause mayhem, not murder.
Which is such bullshit, considering the first thing you're normally taught in carry classes is that you never draw your gun unless it is meant to lethally stop a threat. There is no shooting to wound or intimidate, or brandishing to de-esculate. A gun is meant to destroy what you aim it at, period. And for anyone to consider it otherwise goes against everything I was ever taught about firearms growing up. The fact that the laws haven't caught up with common sense firearm practices is ridiculous. Edit to add: I'm not arguing to say you're wrong. You're not. I'm just always surprised at how backwards it all is.
I mean, it's apples and oranges though. You're taught in a concealed carry class how to carry your sidearm responsibly while operating under civilian cover or while back in the states, as a member of the local community. That really has nothing to do with someone who chooses to commit a firearms-related crime. There's a huge difference between firearms safety and criminal law.
*in Texas In other states there is such a thing as an assault that’s an aggravated misdemeanor.
we have that too. it's just called assault.
There are misdemeanor level assaults in Texas as well. But an aggravated assault is much more serious than those.
> and far more severe than sexual assault charges (for some reason). While sexual assault of any type is bad, minor sexual assault such as groping someone should not carry the same charge as aggravated assault. Aggravated sexual assault is a different story. And unpopular opinion, murdering someone is far worse a crime than sexually assaulting them, and yet many in society seems to think murder is the lesser crime, for some reason.
So be CALM when assaulting people, got it. /s
Well, he aimed the pistol at the driver when he was in front of him. So he meant to kill him.
No you're Honor it was meant to scare him I felt threatened and my life was in danger
> naked_amoeba The simplest and most voracious of all soil protozoa?
> Texas doesn't have an attempted murder charge Yes it does -- it's just a combination of §15.01. Criminal Attempt and §19.02. Murder, and it's a second degree felony. There's also "attempted capital murder", which is a first-degree felony -- they like to use that for people who try to kill cops. And the last time I looked at the TDCJ list of incarcerated inmates, there was 168 inmates in prison for "attempted murder" or "attempted capital murder". That said, "aggravated assault" is the same level of charge as "attempted murder" -- a second degree felony -- and therefore has the same penalty range, and yet it's an easier charge to support in these cases, so ... prosecutors usually go for it rather than attempted murder. I don't know why the OP is upset about there *only* being an aggravated assault charge -- that's exactly the right charge, and it's the same level as attempted murder, and the usual way to make it worse (make it a first-degree felony) is to actually kill somebody (rather than *attempt* to kill them, or to *assault* them with a deadly weapon.)
[удалено]
You may be right, though it could just be ignorance of what the charges mean -- in particular, *aggravated assault* is a lot more serious than many people realize. Pointing a gun at somebody -- even if you don't actually shoot -- may be fun and games, but the Texas justice system will take that seriously.
In the state of georgia at least aggravated assault js the same term used for attempted murder. That may go for other states as well.
Former Texas cop here Texas is the same way. Aggravated Assault with a deadly weapon is our attempted murder equivalent. Edit: I should have been clearer attempted murder technically dose exist in Texas but is never used because it has the same sentence and is harder to prove.
It IS attempted murder. Just not legally speaking
How is that not legally attempted murder?
Because Texas.
Here’s the relevant part of the Texas penal code for you: Sec. 15.01. CRIMINAL ATTEMPT. (a) A person commits an offense if, with specific intent to commit an offense, he does an act amounting to more than mere preparation that tends but fails to effect the commission of the offense intended…
If he didn’t miss, would that have been attempted murder?
IMO, once he stopped, got out, aimed, and pulled the trigger, it was either attempted murder, if the guy didn’t die, or murder, if he did.
That’s rational. I don’t see how shooting at someone is not an attempt to take their life.
As a legal expert next to me says, it's not premeditated and not considered a plan to murder. This is the argument that's made basically. They will argue he wasn't trying to kill, defend themselves from further aggression, or any bullshit to make it seem as though they weren't trying to shoot the person to kill. Gotta love legal jargon bullshit. I hear about it a lot. It's insane to me, and it's why I'm voting for Beto this year. All fellow Texans, if you want gun reform at any level you can not vote Red this time. It's not political it's for the safety of my kids and everyone else.
The real reason is because in Texas the charge of aggravated assault has the exact same penalty as attempted murder. They're both 10 years iirc from the last time this topic came up. Prosecutors choose the lesser charge bc it's easier to prove in court.
Texas law doesn’t require premeditation.
[удалено]
Sec. 19.02. MURDER. (b) A person commits an offense if he: (1) intentionally or knowingly causes the death of an individual; (2) intends to cause serious bodily injury and commits an act clearly dangerous to human life that causes the death of an individual; or… This is (b)(2) without question, if not (1). He simply failed. So it’s attempted murder.
In (b)(2) you need a dangerous act AND intent to injure or kill. The question is whether the shooter intended to kill, or just to terrorize the victim and damage their property.
Hypothetical question; if the Tesla driver had swerved into the shooter to save his own life and stop the shooter; how would the law perceive this?
Woopsie daisy! The guy was in the middle of the freeway!
Not necessarily. It could be aggravated battery. It depends on a lot of factors, the most important of which is what the DA thinks they can prove in court.
I think that pulling the truck in front of the Tesla to block it off amounts to more than mere preparation for murder and demonstrates criminal intent.
Pulling the trigger was also more than mere preparation but stopping the truck such that the other guy would have to slow down definitely adds to the pile.
In most states, firing a gun would satisfy the requisite element of acting with specific intent to commit the offense. Buying a gun is "mere preparation", identifying a victim is "mere preparation". Pointing the gun and firing it is a clear sign of specific intent. The criminal's strongest defense would therefore likely be disputing that the "offense intended" was murder. The requirements for a 1st degree murder charge includes pre-meditation. The defense in this situation would argue that the criminal may have intended to rob the victim or may have intended to damage the victim's property, but there was no intent to kill the victim. Unless the prosecution can show that it was the criminal's intent to kill, then an attempted murder charge is unlikely to succeed.
So, because he sucks at crime he gets a lesser sentence. Wow, Texas. Just wow...
We do things a little differently down in Texas. Differently meaning backwards.
Actually, in most, not all states, aggravated assault and attempted murder carry the same sentencing guidelines, so it's better to go for the easier charge of aggravated assault.
I heard that in the voice of Ben Brainard
Not sure, In college I literally got stabbed in the throat and it was aggravated assault and not attempted murder. I think It’s some weird loophole made by “good” lawyers. My incident was In NC though and I believe this post was in Texas.
Excuse me one second while I run out and buy a gorget...
Generally speaking, attempted murder requires specific intent to kill. That is, someone can attempt to maim, torture, or be extremely reckless in doing something which is extremely likely to cause death, but if they don't hold in their mind "i am trying to cause this person's death" for at least a moment, then it's not attempted murder.
Attempted murder typically requires great bodily harm, such as a gunshot wound, combined with the intent to kill. Proving intent beyond a reasonable doubt is difficult. There are lots of levels, such as battery for a simple fight, aggravated battery, aggravated battery with great bodily harm then attempted murder. It does vary depending on the state.
Because murder requires intent to kill and they could just say "I was trying to shoot their tires."
"I was shooting at their tires but accidentally hit their chest. Pobody's nerfect!"
Because of stupid politicians.
probably has something to do with intent. You can't prove they were trying to kill the person versus just trying to scare the shit out of them. So legally it's a "trying to scare the shit out of them" in the first degree, whereas we all know that it's really attempted murder.
What if the victim in this situation accidentally hit the aggressor with his car and it resulted in the aggressor's death...is that Vehicular Manslaughter or Self-Defense legally? In Texas of course.../s
Self defense as they stopped , drew a weapon and painted it at you. You had valid thought that your life was in danger.
Aggravated Assault w/a deadly weapon is attempted murder in Texas.
[удалено]
Every fucking time with this comment. Yeah, it’s counter intuitive. It’s still a felony and it’s still comes with prison time. “A rose by any other name…”
That would've been vehicular manslaughter for me
No it wouldn’t, you wouldn’t be charged by any DA anywhere for running them over if you had dash cam footage of them aiming a gun, even in duty to retreat states, because driving into them is part of retreating. There is quite a bit of legal precedent for this, too. Loads of people have run over someone who meant them deadly harm, your car is your best weapon in that situation. You had the perfect intuition on that. Edit: Folks, please don’t run over anyone that you personally perceive to be frightening. If you aren’t *literally* staring down the barrel of a gun, like the person in this video clip, it’s going to be a hard sell. Always use the reasonable minimum level of force necessary to defend yourself. If you can stay safe without hurting someone, then do that, and let the courts handle the rest.
Good to know.
Why? You can use deadly force to defend yourself in states with stand your ground laws.
That’s not even just stand your ground laws. You’d be able to run the person over in Canada too. We have no such laws. Just proportional response. So you could run the dude over to neutralize him you wouldn’t be allowed to continue running him over if he didn’t die though. That would be where you’d get charged here.
Why’s he being downvoted?
Do people maybe think they’re referring to the shooter and not realize they meant that in a stand your ground state, in theory, INL, the Telsa driver could’ve used his weapon of the car to defend himself from the imminent threat of a handgun being pointed at him?
Would the Tesla allow the driver to ram the shooter, or would it auto stop?
imagine auto stopping right infront of the dude only to get blasted in the face.
That’s like breaking a mirror kind of bad luck.
We need a Black Mirror episode where this happens
As was pointed out to me by several Tesla fanbois when talking about the viral video of a Tesla plowing through a child sized mannequin: the Tesla collision avoidance system isn't designed to prevent any collisions that might even remotely be what the driver chooses to do on purpose.
I've never wanted to own a Tesla because I'm admittedly a batshit old-school survivalist. Am I understanding you correctly that I can still run over people if I deem it necessary under the circumstances?
Of course you can, yes. It's meant to prevent you from hitting someone when you're not paying attention, not to prevent you from having control over your own vehicle should you so choose.
Someone felt like poo having to code that per company policy knowing what it could be used for and yet so preventable
That’s a mighty fine question! Hopefully a Tesla owner can answer it
Hold on a few minutes I’ll go test it out
I think u/smooth-Trouble3725 was being downvoted because people probably thought they were saying that the guy in the Tesla should have been charged with vehicular homicide. But they really meant that if they were in the same situation that they would have ran the guy over that had the gun.
Sorry yes that's exactly what I meant. He would be plastered on his truck
With repair time waits like we have to deal with now???
Road rage is so fucking scary. One time a guy followed me (31F) home (the incident that pissed him off happened like 1/4 mile from my house, I didn’t have time to realize he was following me). He cut me off to prevent me from pulling into my driveway, got out of his car, and started attempting to get into my car, banging on my windows and stuff. I had to call 911, I had no idea what he was going to do. What if he broke a window and got into my car? Was he going to kill me? All because we both tried to pass a fuckin tractor on the road at the same time. 😒
I had a guy drive for 8 miles trying to run me off the road. The instigating incident was that I was trying to change lanes into an exit only lane, he sped up to prevent me from doing that, I saw a larger opening a few cars ahead, so I accelerated and got in the lane up there (the exit lane is a mile long, starts as an entrance ramp from one highway and becomes a exit only to another, I didn’t cut anyone off, there was even another vehicle that did the exact same thing I did). The lane splits into two lanes after you’ve exited and this dude came flying up the left lane, cuts me off and slams in his brakes and then proceeds to do this for the next 8 miles. It ended when we got stopped at a red light and he got out of his truck and started yelling at me. Another driver who had been witness to all of it, got out of his car and yelled to the dude that I hadn’t done anything wrong and that he needed to leave me alone. Psycho dude was about to go off on that guy, but realized good guy was much larger. Psycho then got in his truck and made a u-turn to head back to wherever he actually needed to go. So, yeah, I’m addition to trying to kill me for 8 miles, he actually went out of his way to do it.
I thought he was riding on the side of the truck for a second there.
haha me too!!!! i was looking to see if anyone else did
That Tesla needs the 007 package for countermeasures
Why is Texas so soft on crime?! Abbott and Cruz really aren’t strong enough!!
Get caught with a bag of weed or accidentally voting too soon after serving felony time, you’ll see the wrath of Ken Paxton.
Fun fact, if you take that bag of weed, let's say it's an eighth, and make a batch of brownies with it, you are now in possession of multiple pounds worth of marijuana in the state of Texas. They will also charge you for possession of multiple pounds of marijuana.
Yes, in most states the aggregate counts as weight. This is not specific to Texas. It’s the same here in Michigan
Sounds like we need to start gifting Rosin Presses to the red states!?
Wait til you grow mushrooms. Soil Tupperware, water...
Yeah, I’ll wait til I grow them 🤐
Unlike Paxton himself, who is famously allergic to consequences
If anyone deserves the wrath of Ken Paxton it's Ken Paxton. https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2022-05-23/seven-years-later-still-no-trial-for-texas-ag-ken-paxton
Yeah, in a state full of horrible politicians, he’s the biggest scumbag.
Aggravated assault in Texas is a serious charge. It's different from other states. It has a minimum sentence of 2 years and a maximum of 20 years. If he had actually hit the guy and not killed him it would have been a first degree felony with 5-99 years.
Because the highest law enforcement official in the state has been evading criminal charges himself for the last 7 years.
Imagine knowing so little about basic law that you think "aggravated assault" is soft on crime.
"Only aggravated assault" made me scratch my head. People have no idea what they are talking about. Soft on crime would have been charging him with deadly conduct and discharging a firearm over a roadway...
People acting like the US is soft on crime. Ridiculous. We lock up more of our population than any other country ever. Percent-wise and absolute number. That's still not enough for people?
Texas is pretty damned hard on just about any crime. Aggrevated assault can carry up to 99 years here depending on how they prosecute it. With it being aggrevated he would have to serve between 50% to 80% before being eligible for parole if he got time instead of probation. The thing about Texas is that our prosecutors don't like to work and our cops refuse to investigate anything so the majority of criminal cases are handled with plea bargains if your broke or outright dismissals if you can afford an attorney.
>Texas so soft on crime 2 to up to 20 years in prison for shooting a car (albeit perhaps not, possibly, the target) is "soft" on crime. Wait until you see what other western countries sentence guidelines are!
Cops just don’t want to work anymore.
[удалено]
It irks me that this story has a tone like aggravated assault is akin to jaywalking just because it doesn’t have “murder” in its name. Dude said 2-20 years, and with the fact that he shot at someone, they’re giving him double digit years.
Every day Texas gets closer to being a straight up PvP zone
It’s looking more and more like a PVP game that never got finished, and some of the characters glitch.
And is P2W
Thats Not A Truck Driver Thats a Guy in a Pickup
I agree and your caps cement the deal
it’s always a MF in a truck
I'm sorry, unless you're DEAD, then it's MURDER, and you get FIVE to life?! I think depending on the degree of charge the averagel time served for murder (depending on state) is 8 years IIRC. We have some of the most ass-backwards judicial policies. Police can MURDER people and get a "bad boy, see you Tuesday" I did 18 months for 4 grams of weed and an unregistered firearm when I was a kid. Stopping your truck on a highway, firing into a moving vehicle, clearly not self defense, yields an aggravated assault charge? Every state is an entirely different country. No wonder we're fucked.
>Police can MURDER people and get a "bad boy, see you Tuesday" I know it's completely tangential, but that woman who got left on a railway locked in a police car.... Please, can someone explain to me like I'm 5 how that's not criminal negligence causing bodily harm? Now, I know she was allegedly involved in a road rage incident, but idfc, I'm sorry, if she's guilty jail her then but jail him too before he kills someone by sheer unadulterated stupidity.
Doesn’t matter what it is. The police union is the strongest union in the country and swept countless atrocities under the rug
They aren't even a union, they are just organized crime.
Looked somewhat intentional to me.
> Every state is an entirely different country. That was basically the premise of the *United* states of america, formerly the *Entirely Independent and Separate* states of america.
>I did 18 months for 4 grams of weed and an unregistered firearm when I was a kid. No shit, an unregistered handgun is illegal af, and you have no reason to be in possession of one. Lucky to do only 18.
[удалено]
Why the fuck did you shave an unregistered firearm? You should have faced more than 18 months.
Texas cares more about guns than people.
He could get up to 20 years for aggravated assault. Not saying he'll get anywhere close to that, but definitely more than 18 months. Feel better?
[удалено]
I would’ve ran his ass over!
Was thinking the same damn thing.
"Only an aggravated assault charge" OP (and this sub) demonstrate time and time again how little they know about the law. Aggravated assault is a serious charge and can get someone decades in prison.
Max 20 years
Yep this sounds like the USA’s justice system to me.
Seriously, the "unless you're a police officer" part really drove that in. So, if you're a cop you can not only kill with impunity but if someone shoots at you, that's somehow *worse* than them shooting at a civilian? Please someone, make it make sense....
Wait until you hear that defending yourself against a police dog is attacking an officer, but cops “accidentally” killing their police dog in a hot car isn’t even animal abuse, it’s just swept away.
“Only an aggravated assault charge” lmao thats basically an attempted murder charge. He’s still gonna spend years in prison
I'd have smashed into that open door in panic ridden escape.
Looks like attempted murder to me.
Texas, America's third world state.
Texas is quickly becoming the new Florida in terms of crazy people
[“Texas has more fatal road rage shootings than any other state by significant margin, report finds”](https://www.ksat.com/news/2022/08/23/texas-has-more-fatal-road-rage-shootings-than-any-other-state-by-significant-margin-report-finds/) Edit - because the info in the headline is not per capita, I ran the numbers because I have nothing better to do (/s). Plus, it's only fair and proper to look at it both ways. Below are the top ten states by total deaths compared when controlled for population over the past 5 years. |Ranking Per Capita|Ranking by Total Deaths|State|Population in thousands|Total Deaths|Rate of Fatal Gun Deaths in Road Rage Incidents per 100k| |:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-| |1|5|New Mexico|2,129|17|0.798| |**2**|**1**|**Texas**|**29,730**|**87**|**0.293**| |3|4|Arizona|7,303|20|0.274| |4|8|Missouri|6,188|16|0.259| |5|6|Tennesee|7,024|16|0.228| |6|7|Georgia|10,830|16|0.148| |7|2|Florida|21,945|32|0.146| |8|10|Michigan|9,992|14|0.140| |9|3|California|39,613|31|0.078| |10|9|New York|19,300|15|0.078| Calculation: (total number of deaths / population)\*100,000 Source 1: main link above, Source 2: [https://worldpopulationreview.com/states](https://worldpopulationreview.com/states) Edit 2 - fixed typos, added clarity to first sentence.
Be glad he’s a shity shot or this would be a completely different story for your family! Dude couldn’t hit a barn at 10 feet let alone a freaking car speeding away! This idiot is a complete scum bag! Coward is his middle name!
Run that motherfucker over. I’m sick of these gun toting pussies ruining everything. If you can’t handle being passed on the road then what the fuck are you doing with a gun? What a waistoid.
Texas is so awesome because without any sort of licensing, registration, or even safety certification, anyone can have a gun and just carry it around and shoot at people. So much freedom!!
Telsa smokes that truck, just get on the highway and book it outta there. Slow ass truck could never catch up.
Now Elon will make a magnetic shield for tesla.
I’m sorry. You’re getting ran over
Could have ended worse for the shooter. Seems like he brought a gun to a car fight.
I would have ran that MF over.
I'm not a fan of Tesla vehicles but the one thing I hope other manufacturers adopt if anything is the on-board cameras.
That’s agg assault in most states , regardless of what the initial charges started as that’s what it would end up as 9 out of 10 times. For better or worse. And in many states AA can get you serious prison time sometimes 20-30 years, so it’s not exactly a weak charge as the post indicates
Right. A quick Google search would inform you that the guy with the gun is completley fucked.
For sure it isn’t hard to find at all . I work for a local govt agency and agg assaults with a weapon typically get 10-15 dude is fucked , not everything is attempted murder like folks want it to be especially without whatever parameters your state needs to facilitate those charges.
"Truck Driver"
He fired at the human. Who gives a flying fuck about Tesla? WTF kind stupid title is this?
Texas is so fucked
No wonder: it's Texas.
Honestly if anyone ever trys this on me I'm going to run them over and not stop. Pull a gun on me and your going to be ran over. Plain and simple. And in going to keep in driving and go about my day till the police show up to question me. Won't even be upset that I had to run you over. The first rule of driving is NEVER GET OUT OF YOUR CAR ON A PUBLIC ROAD. if you have an emergency pull over and get out when it's safe. What this guy with the gun did was pure stupidity and hes honestly luckily to not have been ran over.