Just had to punch a bloke in B&Q

=Mac= · 9 Apr 2006 at 21:43

Surely, if the OP was expected to be reasonable to the chap on the crossing the chap on the crossing should be reasonable to the OP, therefore not scratching his car.

And those of you on the "its only metal" though, imagine you accidentally annoyed me about something so I broke your PC / other expensive electric thing would you be reasonable to me?

Mac

Captain Kirk · 9 Apr 2006 at 21:44

Wow! 10 pages for a punch up in B&Q! I think I would have done the same as well though, keying someone car is not on!

Vertigo · 9 Apr 2006 at 21:45

VeNT said:
neither is smacking someone in the face.

Congratulations on completely missing my point.

I never said that violence was constructive, merely that expecting someone whose blood is boiling because their car has just been vandalised to be rational or constructive isn't reasonable.

VeNT · 9 Apr 2006 at 21:45

Captain Kirk said:
Wow! 10 pages for a punch up in B&Q! I think I would have done the same as well though, keying someone car is not on!

only 4 pages here

SidewinderINC · 9 Apr 2006 at 21:45

Captain Kirk said:
Wow! 10 pages for a punch up in B&Q! I think I would have done the same as well though, keying someone car is not on!

10 pages? are you a woman... ive only got 4

beaten by a matter of seconds

Chris [BEANS] · 9 Apr 2006 at 21:46

AAAAAAAAAGH!!!!

This is so frustrating!!! May have to go and have a lie down

The fact is, unless the OP was using reasonable force to defend his property he was in the wrong.
Morallity does not come into it, if a policeman saw the situation as it has been described the OP WOULD have been arrested.

Arguing about the rights and wrongs of this situation is pointless, the OP WAS LEGALLY WRONG.

Now if we were debating 'Should you be able to deck someone who scratches your car' then i'd understand.

VeNT · 9 Apr 2006 at 21:46

Vertigo1 said:
Congratulations on completely missing my point.

I never said that violence was constructive, merely that expecting someone whose blood is boiling because their car has just been vandalised to be rational or constructive isn't reasonable.

the laws not ment to be rational, its there to protect.

VeNT · 9 Apr 2006 at 21:47

Chris [BEANS] said:
AAAAAAAAAGH!!!!

This is so frustrating!!! May have to go and have a lie down

The fact is, unless the OP was using reasonable force to defend his property he was in the wrong.
Morallity does not come into it, if a policeman saw the situation as it has been described the OP WOULD have been arrested.

Arguing about the rights and wrongs of this situation is pointless, the OP WAS LEGALLY WRONG.

Now if we were debating 'Should you be able to deck someone who scratches your car' then i'd understand.

my point exactly!

Gilly · 9 Apr 2006 at 21:48

Chris [BEANS] said:
.

:shrug:

The other guy was in the wrong too, I don't think anyone is debating whether in the eyes of the law putting the guy on his back was allowed, are they?

Chris [BEANS] · 9 Apr 2006 at 21:52

Gilly said:
:shrug:

The other guy was in the wrong too, I don't think anyone is debating whether in the eyes of the law putting the guy on his back was allowed, are they?

Suppose that's my interpretation of this thread.

But then again, if we're debating 'were my actions right or wrong?' I'd still have to argue that they were wrong because the law says so.

iSam · 9 Apr 2006 at 21:52

Fair play! Give him a smack!

I found this pic of him!

Vertigo · 9 Apr 2006 at 21:55

Pinkeyes said:
Incorrect. Pedestrians have right of way AT ALL TIMES - and because you are in a big metal thing that could kill them you ARE responsible if they step out in front of you.

From the Highway Code:

18: At all crossings. When using any type of crossing you should

always check that the traffic has stopped before you start to cross or push a pram onto a crossing

19: Zebra crossings. Give traffic plenty of time to see you and to stop before you start to cross.

According to that and if the comments made by the OP are accurate, the pedestrian was in the wrong.

Jonny ///M · 9 Apr 2006 at 21:55

This thread is funny,reminds me of the time i seen the guy get closelined while trying to run otu BnQ with a christmas tree.

Now i agree with the OP as i cant see him doing anything wrong,he beeped the horn.....the ignorant idiot took this as "you wont tell me what to do" and keyed the Op's car......if somebody beeps at me i dont get off my bike and smash their windows in with a spanner do i?

The guy was in the wrong and could have just gave a wave or thumbs up to say sorry or whatever but no,he cant do that hes superior to anybody else.

My mate uses this pedestrians have right of way nonsense and flies across T junctions,coming from one pavement to the other. Cars hit the brakes sometimes and im like apologising for him. I would prefer not to get into a fight with a car but if i go out on a road infront of a car i will make some jesture(gesture???) to show i was in the wrong.

Im on the Op's side as the guy could have been angry but thats no right to key the car,im sure my dad would have done the same.

Edit: Pics not exactly funny^^^ reminds me of when my dad was jumped by two guys with a golfclub at 3am!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now thats an example of the law being an ass and rough justice having to be put into effect. :mad:

With zebra crossings ,this really gets on my ****. Im stood there while ignorant bints on the mobile drive on and dont stop :eek:

they are promply giving the one finger salute or any other appropriate hand gesture and i make sure they see it! when somebody does stop(its usually a guy thats nice enough) i will give a thumbs up or a wave while flooring it on my bike.

Cody · 9 Apr 2006 at 21:57

When I see this post title I can't get Johhny Cash's "Folsom Prison Blues" out of my head

"I shot a man in Reno, just to watch him die,"

Just had to punch a bloke in B&Q, cause he keyed my car

Gilly · 9 Apr 2006 at 21:58

Chris [BEANS] said:
Suppose that's my interpretation of this thread.

Thats certainly not what I'm debating, and I don't see anyone else doing so either. Maybe Singist is trying to argue the other side of that debate, but with him trying to avoid actually saying anything its difficult to make out exactly what he is saying.

Chris [BEANS] said:
But then again, if we're debating 'were my actions right or wrong?' I'd still have to argue that they were wrong because the law says so.

I'd argue they were right in the situation, but agree that in the eyes of the law they were wrong. The guy deserved a smack whether it is against the law or not, but I agree completely that in the eyes of the law it is wrong. You wouldn't be able to argue it any other way.

SidewinderINC · 9 Apr 2006 at 21:58

Jonny ///M said:
when somebody does stop(its usually a guy thats nice enough) i will give a thumbs up or a wave

every time!

ive learnt to appreciate somebody stopping!

Efaws · 9 Apr 2006 at 21:59

Mohinder said:
I had a fight in B&Q once. One of the staff came up to me and asked if I wanted decking, so I got the first punch in and legged it.

Yeah I've had one of them :mad:

I gave him a right pasting then finally nailed him where it hurts

Jonny ///M · 9 Apr 2006 at 22:01

SidewinderINC said:
every time!

ive learnt to appreciate somebody stopping!

9 out of 10 times they dont stop with me so you do have to show your appreciation to a nice person so they realise that the world actually has some decent people.

If you show respect to them you should get it back! If your an **** to them then quite rightly so they should be an **** back.

Too many people are like I HAVE THE RIGHT(to buy my council house)!!!! Who cares,you dont have to exercise your right!

Captain Kirk · 9 Apr 2006 at 22:02

SidewinderINC said:
10 pages? are you a woman... ive only got 4

beaten by a matter of seconds

Not a woman (not the last time I looked anyway. but yeah, at the top of the page, says page 10 out of 10. go figure (unless its something to do with settings)

Vertigo · 9 Apr 2006 at 22:02

Gilly said:
:shrug:

The other guy was in the wrong too, I don't think anyone is debating whether in the eyes of the law putting the guy on his back was allowed, are they?

I don't think anyone can dispute that the OP had no legal right to assault the pedestrian and he could well find himself being charged with assault.

Despite this, I still maintain that his actions were completely understandable, given the circumstances.

Talking of legalities, I'm still waiting for those who claim pedestrians ALWAYS have right of way to back up their claims with some references. Until this happens I'll go with the Highway Code's view of things, which clearly states the pedestrian was in the wrong.