Just had to punch a bloke in B&Q

[NiCkNaMe]

lol @ all the law abiding replies from people saying the OP went OTT.

Hell, you people are why societies going down the drain and all the scum keep getting away with things Good going, I hope you feel all warm tonight knowing your a goody two shoes

 

[Slam62]

I sort of agree with the above (the post about the baby on the crossing), generally, the bloke keying your car was definitely wrong but you should never ever hit anyone unless it is the only way to stop you or someone else being hurt.

Now i used to think i had a bit of a temper, i tend to shout a lot but thats it. After reading about you lot on here and the stuff you get into, i'm beginning to think i'm calm, i cant decide whether to be depressed at the state of the world or be pleased because i'm not as nutty as i thought i was, so thanks for the therapy, i think.

Also i'm never going to buy decking now.

 

[chopchop]

having only read the first page, I guess we've moved on, but anyway

so you don't give the pedestrian his LEGAL right of way,
he's ****** off at this and keys your car, yes this IS a bad move, but you should have taken his reg number of HIS car and phoned the police.
you then ASSAULT him infront of the store (with people watching) and think that YOU are still in the right?

ok
a) you arse, if your going to deck someone you wait till theres no-one looking
b) you where in the wrong IN THE FIRST INCIDENT. everything after this could be classed as "Agrovated".
and
c) I hate people like you. THE LAW STATES THAT YOU SHOULD STOP AT ZEBRA CROSSINGS, you should ALSO always drive AS IF YOU HAVE TO STOP EVEN IF THERE IS NO-ONE THERE YET.

I was out in town with my brother and his new baby boy a few days back and as we where crossing at a zebra crossing in town some PLANK like you drove across infront of us AS WE WHERE CROSSING.
people like you should never have been alowed to have a bleeding driving licence, you disgust me.

also, your thread tital says "HAD TO" you didn't HAVE to, you just lack the self control most of the rest of us have in place to stop us doing these things, maybe you should grow up.

ROFL

maybe you should read more than just one page before going off on one. he mspainted what happened. the pedestrian did not have right of way over the car.

 

[Dublove]

having only read the first page, I guess we've moved on, but anyway

so you don't give the pedestrian his LEGAL right of way,
he's ****** off at this and keys your car, yes this IS a bad move, but you should have taken his reg number of HIS car and phoned the police.
you then ASSAULT him infront of the store (with people watching) and think that YOU are still in the right?

ok
a) you arse, if your going to deck someone you wait till theres no-one looking
b) you where in the wrong IN THE FIRST INCIDENT. everything after this could be classed as "Agrovated".
and
c) I hate people like you. THE LAW STATES THAT YOU SHOULD STOP AT ZEBRA CROSSINGS, you should ALSO always drive AS IF YOU HAVE TO STOP EVEN IF THERE IS NO-ONE THERE YET.

I was out in town with my brother and his new baby boy a few days back and as we where crossing at a zebra crossing in town some PLANK like you drove across infront of us AS WE WHERE CROSSING.
people like you should never have been alowed to have a bleeding driving licence, you disgust me.

also, your thread tital says "HAD TO" you didn't HAVE to, you just lack the self control most of the rest of us have in place to stop us doing these things, maybe you should grow up.

a) No choice
b) You should look at my diagram on page 4 then tell me if I was in the wrong
c) I was going 5mph so I would be ready to stop. There was no one else waiting to cross. Again see my diagram.


Edit: Just remembered that I actualy forgot something & I need to go back

 

[Chris [BEANS]]

Ever heard of provocation, diminished responsibility, etc etc? Theres a reason these things exist, so you know, you can defend yourself and what not?

Right, a lot of people giving different versions of the law on here.

The fact is that BOTH parties would be arrested, all this 'provocation' and 'diminished responsibilty' business has nothing to do with anything.

The situation would be considered by a jury and the ONLY things they would consider are did each person commit their respective crimes (ABH and Criminal Damage) and did they have reasonable excuse or lawful authority.

Ok, first off, i won't comment on the initial driving part as i can't work out the exact circumstances.

Then comes the criminal damage, can't think of ANY reason this bloke can give for commiting the crime, i'm sure he would be charged.

Then comes the assault, from the description on how it happened i imagine it'll be ABH (Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm).
Common law (traditions and precident, not acts of parliment) says that you may use 'REASONABLE FORCE' to defend your property. So for this to be your defence in court you would have to prove that you thought the criminal damage was going to continue AND that the force you used was reasonable to stop the criminal dammage continuing and not excessive.
If the CPS decide that it was not reasonable OP will be charged, if it's touch and go chances are OP would not be charged.

There are public order offences there too, Affray i recon but again without having all the circumstances i wouldn't like to say.

This is all what would happen in these circumstances, we may all have our own ideas on morraly whether OP was in the right or wrong but the decision as to whether legaly the OP was right will ONLY come from a court.

 

[Daff_Duck]

Regardles of who did what to whom as we are only getting one persons side of the story. bottom line if somone keyed his car then well done for punching him I am sick of this nanny state and people not being able to do protect there property espcially when someone blantantly crosses the line.

As for Civil arrest crap and making him pay for god sake it would take ages for that to be processed if you were even succesful,l nah a good bit of on the spot vengance would do me every time, maybe people would not be so hasty to act then.

 

[Chris [BEANS]]

Regardles of who did what to whom as we are only getting one persons side of the story. bottom line if somone keyed his car then well done for punching him I am sick of this nanny state and people not being able to do protect there property espcially when someone blantantly crosses the line.

As for Civil arrest crap and making him pay for god sake it would take ages for that to be processed if you were even succesful,l nah a good bit of on the spot vengance would do me every time, maybe people would not be so hasty to act then.

It would take a long time, and yes, chances are you would not be satisfied with the result. thing is, now the OP has the chance of arrest, criminal record etc. Is it worth it?? Morally you may agree with him, fair enough, but do you think getting a criminal record is worth twatting the bloke?

Another thing about criminal records is that EVERYTHING is now permanently on PNC. So if you are arrested and not even charged it will show on PNC in 99 years that you were arrested for ABH. Doy want that on your record? What if you apply for a job where they request a PNC check? Sure it'll say NFA (No Further Action) after the arrest but who knows what that means?? To someone who's never looked a a PNC report before all they'll see is an arrest for assault and that will have an affect on their oppinion of the OP.

 

[Pinkeyes]

Yes, pedestrians have right of way even if they wander in front of you and last time I checked you have to see if anyone is LIKELY to cross as you approach a crossing and you SHOULD stop and let them pass according to the highway code. If they step out, you MUST stop.
Also, I really dont think that two pedestrians just JUMPED out onto the crossing... that would require a 3-6 ft leap to come from no-where straight in front of a car...

A near identical thing happened to me in a car park, quite recently infact. I was turning a corner and going towards the exit and this guy and his wife and 2 kids just blindly start walking across the road (there's no padestrian crossing here). I thought theyd realise and wait till i'd gone when i got closer to them, but they just carred on.
I didnt beep my horn but i stopped abruptly close to them and they jumped and the guy started mouthing off at me, nice language too...I just looked at him and shook my head and drove off.
Carparks seem especially bad for this sort of thing, padestrians who just refuse to look where theyre going.

CBS is right - Pedestrians have right of way at all times. No buts... no conditions. Its fair enough if you ask me. Cars tend to hurt more.

Six6Six - same goes. Probably why he was upset. Walking across a car park with young children is bad enough - you should give way....always.

Ok, let's look at it this way:
'I continued to eat the doughnut until it was all gone.'
'I eat two mouthfuls of doughnut but the dog came and eat the rest of it. It was then all gone. '

As for this - I would have punched the dog in the face till it went to the floor for eating my doughnut.

 

[singist]

Given my past posts about jumping out in front of people going the wrong way in a one way street ......



You are driving ~ a ton of lethal metal, protected by air bags,seat belts etc ...... versus pedestrians with absolutely NO PROTECTION ....


You should brake, indicate that you are unhappy but stay still until the ****s have moved; is it really so difficult that you have to do what you did?

I hope you get what's coming to you ..... what goes around, comes around.

I really don't understand the mentality of people who think that a piece of metal is more important than human wellfare!

 

[Duke]

This situation would have been a lot funnier if you had horn blasters

 

[VeNT]

ROFL

maybe you should read more than just one page before going off on one. he mspainted what happened. the pedestrian did not have right of way over the car.

iirc, pedestrians ALWAYS have right of way.

anyway, even IF the other guy is an arse, if you go around smacking every arse in county your gonna be VERY busy.

 

[Liverpool-Lad]

You are driving ~ a ton of lethal metal, protected by air bags,seat belts etc ...... versus pedestrians with absolutely NO PROTECTION ....

Doesnt that tell you then that the padestrian in this case shouldve taken more care than almost be run over?

 

[VeNT]

Doesnt that tell you then that the padestrian in this case shouldve taken more care than almost be run over?

no
if you have a gun is it up to me not to get shot?

 

[Vertigo]

I have been in an even more extreme situation actually. I had my rear windscreen smashed with a baseball bat for showing someone the finger outta my window for cutting me up. I phoned the police, he was arrested. I got my car covered under HIS car insurance. Plus I got £1,300 compensation for distress from the courts.

Ok fair enough, but then you're hardly likely to physically confront someone wielding a baseball bat, are you?

My point is that, whilst it's all very well reasoning it out logically afterward and telling the OP what he should and shouldn't have done, in the heat of the moment I think a great many people on here would have reacted in the exact same way, whether they'll admit it or not. I know I would have.

Criticising him for being an "ANGRY" person isn't very constructive. Different people are angered by different things and for someone whose pride and joy is their car, having it physically damaged by a passing moron for no good reason is more than enough to cause rationality to go out of the window. I'm sure there are things that you hold dear which, if they were to be broken or damaged by someone, would cause you to react in a non-rational and possibly violent manner.

Oh, and FYI, diminished responsiblity is a defence for murder ONLY!

Maybe it does as a specific defence but I've no doubt that the provocation involved here and the fact that the OP obviously wasn't thinking completely rationally at the time of the attack would have a bearing on any court verdict, which is what I was trying to say.

 

[VeNT]

Criticising him for being an "ANGRY" person isn't very constructive.

neither is smacking someone in the face.

I have/had anger management issues, have done since a child, but I've learned NOT to take them out on people.

 

[singist]

Doesnt that tell you then that the padestrian in this case shouldve taken more care than almost be run over?

Think about what you just said.....

 

[Mr Joshua]

no
if you have a gun is it up to me not to get shot?

It's up to you not to walk onto the firing range .

 

[Skiddley]

Sick it in reverse and run him over?

 

[Gilly]

b) you where in the wrong IN THE FIRST INCIDENT. everything after this could be classed as "Agrovated".

No he wasn't, and how could it be classed as aggravated?

c) I hate people like you. THE LAW STATES THAT YOU SHOULD STOP AT ZEBRA CROSSINGS, you should ALSO always drive AS IF YOU HAVE TO STOP EVEN IF THERE IS NO-ONE THERE YET.

WHERE DOES THE LAW SAY THIS?

I call BS

maybe you should grow up.

Maybe you should read what happened, get your facts right and then you grow up too?

However, if this went down exactly as the OP stated then I'm on his side. You can't just walk out without looking, even on a zebra crossing. The idea is that you stop, see if there's a car coming, if there is you make sure he's seen you and is stopping, then you cross.....maybe with a little nod or a wave if you're feeling generous. It's not rocket science. If you walk out in front of a moving car without looking then you deserve a blast of the horn. If you then chase after the car and damage it then you deserve a punch in cake-hole as well. As long as you didn't go to town and seriously hurt the guy I think that's acceptable. Of course this will turn into a "keyboard warrior" versus "moral crusader" issue, but really, some things in life can be sorted out on the spot....and this is one of them

Excellent. Spot on

so we've got criminal damage against... assault! you make me laugh, all high and mighty on things like drugs (for example) but then potentially doing somebody some serious damage over a KEYED CAR and you say it's ok. pathetic.

B@Th*nG

I don't see a big difference between criminal damage and assault tbh. Not when the OP was provoked but the goon crossing the road without looking wasn't.

Think about what you just said.....

He asked a fair question. Its also in context and nullifies your point rather well.

 

[Cueball]

You should brake

indicate that you are unhappy

He did.

I hope you get what's coming to you ..... what goes around, comes around.

What would that be? If someone keyed my car for no reason, I'd be pretty ****** too.

I really don't understand the mentality of people who think that a piece of metal is more important than human wellfare!

I really don't understand the mentality of the idiot pedestrian in keying the his car. Read his posts again and look at his diagram. When he made the decision to cross the zebra crossing there was no one currently ON the crossing, nor was there anybody waiting to cross the crossing.

OP is virtually over the crossing when idiot pedestrian moved out onto road without looking. The pedestrian should have waited until the car had passed completely over the zebra crossing before just charging out into traffic.

Had the pedestrian had paid attention, this would never have happened.

I would say the blame would be more 60/40 to the pedestrian. Nevertheless that is no justification to commit criminal damage on the OP's vehicle.

Or, by implication, are you suggesting that it is completely OK to commit random acts of criminal damage?