Police told NBC Boston that Richard Kamrowski, 65, jumped onto the hood of a white Infiniti SUV that belonged to Mark Fitzgerald, 37, after a verbal altercation over a minor traffic accident on Interstate 90 about 20 miles west of Boston.Both men were arrested.
Fitzgerald apparently had enough of the two men’s confrontation at some point after their collision and attempted to drive away, but Kamrowski then jumped onto his hood and held on while Fitzgerald drove for “a very significant distance,” police said....
The driver was eventually stopped by others on the roadway, one going so far as to point a gun at the SUV to convince him to stop the car....
ADDED: Pointing a gun at the driver was an interesting idea about how to rescue the hood-clinger. If you were the guy on the hood, would you rather take your chances with the driver as he was or the driver as he would be shot in the head?
Posts
61 comments:
Two fine specimens of Masshole, as observed in their natural environment.
He's no T. J. Hooker!
Really kicks "road rage" up a notch.
he keeps speeding up, and then hitting his brakes
How is that not trying to throw him off (at highway speeds)
How is that not attempted murder?
It's Premeditated (he speeds up b4 slowing down, AND he does it repeatedly)
Probably he was smirking! We need to leave both of them alone - they are just trying to lead quiet, unassuming lives!
I would assume that the person with the gun wasn’t going to shoot. So the question is, would I rather wait and see what the driver decides to do or risk him doing something even crazier because he might think he’s about to get shot.
Jumping onto the hood was a very bad idea, but good job hanging on.
Extreme carpooling..
Trump and Pelosi.
He was trying to one-up the dog in the Budweiser Bob Dylan Superbowl ad.
Not to mention the chance the shooter might hit the guy on the hood.
NBC Boston was unable to get a statement from Fitzgerald about the incident, as he ran away from their camera and jumped into another car, slamming the door behind him.
NBC Boston chose not to jump on the hood.
Here's the thing with guns (i have a lot of experience btw):
- when they work for the given situation they work because nothing else would do. I.E. situation resolved successfully, you'll never know what would have worked otherwise.
- when they are not the ideal choice for resolution, it's usually a catastrophe, even if the gun didn't go off.
The point is - without knowing additional detail - flourishing the gun worked. You'll never know what the less ideal outcome could've been. When it works, people usually don't care and don't pay much attention. When it didn't work is when you hear all about it.
My policy both when I was in and in civilian life, the gun is pulled with the understanding theres a 97% chance it's going to be fired. A guy's life was clesrly in danger. Both incident drivers really should thank their lucky stars.
Extended video from earlier on will show the older man's MAGA hat blowing off in the wind.
The Mythbusters addressed the "car cling" in an episode. You can find details here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MythBusters_(2009_season)#Car_Cling
From what I see in the video, the driver kept speeding up and slowing down, which was something the Mythbusters did test and they could hang onto the hood in that scenario. Now if the driver had made some moderate turns at speed the guy most likely would have been tossed off in short order. I get the impression that the driver wanted the guy off his hood, but he was not willing to risk killing him. Both of them are very lucky.
The surprising thing is that someone in MA had a gun :) Although one girl from my high school who dated the son of a mobster said that he kept a gun in the glove compartment.
Pointing a gun at the driver was an interesting idea about how to rescue the hood-clinger.
At this point, pointing the gun at the driver was more about protecting the rest of us from these two idiots more than rescuing idiot number one from idiot number two.
bitter clingers
Brandishing the weapon simply makes it clear to the driver that if he does something to harm the man on the hood; then lethal force on the driver may be used. The threat apparently was sufficient. The driver may not care about the man on the hood, but he seemed to care more about his own life.
Does that count as exercise?
YoungHegelian said...
Two fine specimens of Masshole, as observed in their natural environment.
1/26/19, 12:41 PM
Un acceptable behavior by some does not reflect the entire state.
Source: I live in California.
Here's the body camera video of a recent police shooting in Seattle.
The video looks like an unintended shooting. The victim appears to be surrendering. I'm sure the officer was well trained, and qualified, but somehow his booger hook hit the boom switch.
Brandishing a weapon from a moving vehicle? They need to arrest that guy too!!
Well first off the whole argument got out of hand. Should have called the cops, politely, and waited.
But, unfortunately they both acted like asses.
Both did wrong and both got arrested... all over a fender bender.
Stupid is as stupid does.
Have you seen the Tarantino movie 'Death Proof' with Kurt Russell?
It has a great trapped-on-the-hood-of-a-speeding-car sequence. If you like action, Tarantino dialogue, muscle cars and hot girls, you'll like this movie.
I'm pretty sure you can watch it online.
Here's a preview:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1028528/videoplayer/vi840277017?ref_=vi_prev_btn
Both are idiots.
Neither should have a drivers license!
"The point is - without knowing additional detail - flourishing the gun worked."
Brandishing.
I don't think it is what stopped the driver. And if the driver was thinking clearly, he should predict that the man with the gun won't shoot, assuming he's thinking clearly, because it would only increase the danger to the person he wants to save.
When the man saw the gun, I'd bet he was aware, viscerally so, of the danger to himself and not just the man on the hood.
Both should have been arrested.
And the gun owner too, because of his recklessness.
What about garnishing your gun?
You could brandish it with a flourish then finish with a sprig of parsley in barrel.
Here's the body camera video of a recent police shooting in Seattle.
Is "Stop or I'll shoot!" off the table now?
I stumbled across a video of a series road rage incidents assembled in one you tube video. More for amusement than anything else. It was actually quite educational. What to do and what not to do.
What to do? Get away. Just get away!
What not to do? Engage the opposition. There is a jail cell or emergency room waiting for you.
Patriot fans.
Althouse believes people will think and act logically. I've had guns pointed @ me and I've been shot at. Logic was light years away from those instances.
I think the real story here is the guy on the hood was 65. Us OTs just aren’t gonna take it.
> Unacceptable behavior by some does not reflect the entire state.
There are plenty of rough neighborhoods in MA, so it is helpful to be reminded that it isn't all lefty loons teaching at Harvard.
Birkel, violence in the defense of others is an accepted defense
Darwin was foiled this time.
The news stories didn't give key information that matters: Did the driver try to get away without exchanging insurance information with the 65 YO? If so, I would say the hood clinger was in the right. But if they had exchanged information and the old guy wouldn't let the Infinity driver leave, he was in the wrong--jumping on the hood was akin to kidnapping.
These details matter.
Full disclosure: I live about 30 miles from the Mass Pike.
Pointing a gun at the driver was an interesting idea about how to rescue the hood-clinger. If you were the guy on the hood, would you rather take your chances with the driver as he was or the driver as he would be shot in the head?
Uh, he could have shot at the tires, first.
Think, Althouse. Think.
65-year old jumps onto the hood? 65? Over a small collision? He had the other guy's plate number so the guy could be picked up once the thing was reported to police. Man, was that stupid on his part, and criminal on the part of the other.
Ann,
When someone points a gun at you, thinking clearly means you need a change of behavior RIGHT NOW.
It was legal to pull the gun, as it is anytime you are reasonably in fear that you or someone else is in danger of death or serious bodily injury, which was clearly the case here. He probably saved the guy's life, but hey let's arrest him too, becuase guns - bad. Most successful defensive use of firearms do not result in anyone being shot, but lets arrest them all. We wouldn't want the good guy getting away unscathed just for saving a life.
I bet the good guy with the gun had an evil smirk on his face.
Does this get a Mitt Romney tag?
I'm curious about what the charges will be. The driver didn't really assault the older guy. The older guy jumped on his car, so could you charge assault with a deadly weapon when the guy intentionally jumped on the weapon. If you were chopping down a tree and a guy jumped in front of the axe, is that assault by you? I'm sure the driver will claim that he feared for his life becuase the guy seemed deranged. I mean, he has to, right?
We’ve seen cases where drivers aren’t charged so long as the person trying to detain the vehicle had a reasonable opportunity to get away safely. The motorycle punks incident in Manhattan a few years ago and a couple of picket line crosers what had union hood ornaments come to mind.
Charges for the people trying to detain the other driver probably coming however.
God Bless America.
Massachusetts is a funny gun state. Basically the chief of police in each community has sole discretion on who gets weapons permits. Some places the cops help you with the paperwork and offer to show you the best hunting sites. Places like Newton, MA the police chief says nobody Newton needs a gun because that’s what the police are for.
Game theory has its Prisoner's Dilemma and Althouse poses the Road Rager's Dilemma.
Their English is Surprisingly Good for Illegals in a Sanctuary State and All.
I am assuming that the gun got traded from NH, based on someone else's valid EBT bona fides, as that's how shit works in the suburbs.
mitt romney's dog said "Roof!" when asked what part of the car he wanted to ride on
Rejahm: MA is a funny state in that they require training in firearms before getting a license. Generally speaking, the only gun-waving idiots you see around are either gang-bangers or out of state idiots (NH being in the range of the story).
"Pointing a gun at the driver was an interesting idea about how to rescue the hood-clinger. If you were the guy on the hood, would you rather take your chances with the driver as he was or the driver as he would be shot in the head?" That seems like a weird question. The guy on the hood wants the third option: the driver stopping the car and giving up.
Massachusetts senior saved in near-fatal road rage incident by "gun waving idiot".
I hate when armed men do that crazy saving lives thing.
@MikeR, and, indeed, that third option is precisely what happened.
The way this should play out:
(1) The driver needs to be charged with a quadrillion or so charges, including leaving the scene of an accident, attempted vehicular homicide, and driving with an illegal hood ornament.
(2) The guy on the hood needs to donate his brain to science, since he isn’t using it himself.
(3) The guy with the gun needs to get a warning about brandishing. I’d leave it with a warning because he did, after all, succeed in stopping the incident. That changes, of course, if he doesn’t have a concealed carry permit.
It's not illegal brandishing due to the clearly imminent and serious threat. Your local ambitious prosecutor may feel different, but if I'm the judge, it's dismissed outright.
Fullmoon said "Unacceptable behavior by some does not reflect the entire state."
I'm with the commenters that blame Mitt Romney for his youthful canine example. And to think they (the Massholes) elected him governor.
"would you rather take your chances with the driver as he was or the driver as he would be shot in the head?" I don't think that's the way things were likely to happen. The message from the guy with the gun was "If you kill the guy on your hood, I'm killing you". The driver decided maybe he'd better stop. It's a myth that the "good guy with a gun" never wins.
And if the driver was thinking clearly, he should predict that the man with the gun won't shoot, assuming he's thinking clearly, because it would only increase the danger to the person he wants to save."
Wow.
When someone points a gun at you, it is like a computer priority interrupt.
Basically all brain functions allow the interrupt to have priority, and all other functions are put into a stop state.
Well most functions. It seems the brain has no control over the colon or the bladder during a priority interrupt.
During the priority interrupt the body submits to the threat and stops doing what it was doing.
Post a Comment