Road rage death by strangling

[Double Naught Spy]

In this, I don't see either as malign or bad, but I see many poor choices. Calling one or the other "evil" or a "bad guy" is just wrong.

No, I am pretty sure that the acts described quality Welton accurately at the time of the event.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evil
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/evil

Poor choices? He didn't just make poor choices. A poor choice of actions on Welton's part might be to yell and scream at Darling, cuss, making Darling's little girl cry because of the tiraid, be uncooperative with Darling in resolving the fender bender, etc. He apparently did all those things, but in doing those, he threatened Darling with serious bodily harm and then attempted to execute his threats fully, taking advantage of his superior size to try to exact some satisfaction out of Darling for having the audacity to let Welton crash into him.

The notion of "poor choices' was ancient history by the time Welton has beat Darling to the ground and was continuing to press his violent attack.

Maybe you think is it the good people of planet Earth that violently assault others without justification? Maybe you think Welton was trying to help Darling in some way as a good guy by beating him as he did?

Based on the current information available, at the time of the incident, Welton was doing evil and he was the bad guy. This isn't confirmed by just Darling, his wife, and his child, but by several other witnesses. There is no moral or legal justification for Welton's violent attack on Darling.

 

[Onward Allusion]

^^^
Getting road rage and starting a fist fight does not equate evil. It equates stupidity. Getting road rage and taking a gun out to kill the other guy is evil. Huge difference.

Going back to the story, I can almost guarantee that something else transpired prior to the incident, whether 30 seconds before, a minute before, or a mile up the road.

I have personally experienced on many occasions where some people will absolutely refuse to let anyone into their lane even though traffic is moving at a snail's pace. I'm guessing a game of chicken was played and they bumped. People just don't get into a minor fender bender and start fighting without something happening immediately prior.

 

[shooter_john]

I'd don't see any problems with the survivor's actions at all. By all accounts, the aggressor started the trouble, escalated the trouble, and didn't give in until he didn't any air. I hate it for his family, but he was the sole reason for his own demise unless something very significant is missing from the stories that I read. I don't think for a minute that the other guy was trying to kill him, but what else was he to do since the aggressor was still trying to fight?

I've gotten ticked off at people on the road PLENTY of times... But I have NEVER yelled at, flipped off, threatened, or ASSAULTED any of them, epsecially their innocent passengers or family members. Eventually I learned that getting mad at drivers only ruins MY day, so I don't let it bother with it any more, and I am much happier as I commute around day to day. If you threaten my wife or my kids, "Katy bar the door" is all I have to say.

 

[BlackFeather]

I don't think for a minute that the other guy was trying to kill him, but what else was he to do since the aggressor was still trying to fight?

If someone was choking you, would you be able to stop your panic? I'm sure he stopped fighting, but when the panic set in he started again. Hard to tell the difference, isn't it?

No, I am pretty sure that the acts described quality Welton accurately at the time of the event.

I can get philosophical with this, but I won't. A man in anger isn't inherently evil, he didn't leave the house with the intention to be an evil man that day. He got angry, lost his control, and acted like a kid throwing a tantrum. If you have never been angry and wanted to hit someone, you're lying. I understand control, and I'm sure he did too, but everyone slips. He didn't deserve to die for it. Maybe get kicked on down the road and learn a lesson, but certainly not death.

 

[Young.Gun.612]

You say you're sure he stopped fighting and then started to panic? How do you KNOW that to be the case? I've seen people continue to make threats from a disadvantaged position. I wouldn't be surprised if the aggressor continued to make threats of violence the entire time. If he caused the accident, then escalated the violence, it doesn't sound out of character that he kept it up even in the headlock.

He may not qualify as "evil". But definitely dangerous. The kind of dangerous that society is better off without.

 

[dyl]

Let's ask ourselves this:

When is a fist fight not "just" a fist fight anymore?
- because beatings stop after the opponent falls unconscious, right?
- because surely he/she would stop choking you after you stop moving, right?
- because if it started with fists, it'll stay with fists right?

When it comes to "fist fights" and "beatings" I'm convinced there is an assumption made by many. To their credit that's because most posters here are headed towards being more responsible, not less. I may be an extremist here but I feel too many things could go "wrong" in a fist fight to dismiss them as low risk/non-fatal as they are often stated as being on forums.

It may be similar to how we have to remember our ideal "gun battle" will probably not happen the nice and neat way we'd like. No one imagines gouged eyes or crushed tracheas (especially not after we've fallen unconscious - that's barbaric!). We expect to always wake up after we've lost consciousness.

But something tells me that if the story is true that the attacker did not have a clear idea of boundaries or he did but willfully charged across them. He already ditched the norms. Would he stop punching if he'd managed to "teach the guy a lesson? How long was the lesson going to be?" If he'd successfully knocked the defender unconscious with his very first blow would his anger be so quickly satiated? How else could he vent his anger? (wife and kids?)

We can't know if a "street fight" is fatal- neither before nor during the fight. Only in retrospect - which also encourages the thought of "see? no one died". And even afterwards there's the risk of death hours later from head trauma, then infections of skin/bone/dental work. And as for evil (see previous posts) it depends on what you believe to determine the definition. Do you live by "as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else I can do whatever?" Biblical perspective says we've all done evil and would hold starting a fist fight or firefight due to road rage both sins. Quite possibly a "how dare you" attitude too.

I'll throw in a perspective on this evil person discussion too (sorry mods, don't know if off topic): I don't think people are inherently evil. We commit evil thoughts and actions though. It's like a chemical addiction. Sometimes we want to quit, sometimes we are happily (sadly) addicted, the more you partake the higher the frequency (I'm thinking anger and tantrums here), you can choose to share it with others or intervene, and you can bet it affects all parts of our life.

 

[shooter_john]

If someone was choking you, would you be able to stop your panic? I'm sure he stopped fighting, but when the panic set in he started again. Hard to tell the difference, isn't it?

The survivor had tried to do nothing but de-escalate/ end the situation... Why should I assume that suddenly he decided that "hey you know what, I'm going to go ahead and kill this guy."

I'm all ears as to how your "sure" he stopped fighting, other than going unconscious. I can think of a couple of nearly universal ways to "say uncle" or tap out... Granted this wasn't a fair fight, but I still believe that the survivor intentions were much more innocent than the aggressor's.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Look at the size of the aggressor in the above link and the size of the hero in this one. How is that for a disparity of force?

Wow, if you had told me that 28yr old was the guy who choked out the 42yr old, I'd never have believed it. That is a big disparity in size. I'm guessing the 28yr old has some background in empty hand skills (high school wrestling?) to be able to pull that off.

 

[Furminator]

If the information that's coming out about this incident is true, then the guy who died got what he was asking for. The fact of the matter is that there are men out there who use their size advantage to intimidate people smaller than them. They get used to it, they get off on it. They're arrogant, but sometimes the stars are in the right alignment and they get their just reward.

This reminds me of something that happened about 10 years ago when I was living in Seattle. There was a college athlete, probably intoxicated, who was walking down a city street kicking people as hard as he could in the rear. Just random people that he did not even know. He ripped open a car door (I don't know why) and the fellow sitting in the car, not knowing what the hell was going on, used his legally carried handgun and shot the kid, who eventually died. The shooting was ruled justified.

 

[brickeyee]

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

 

[ScottRiqui]

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

Just wanted to let you know I'm stealing that!

 

[TexasJustice7]

Furminator: If the information that's coming out about this incident is true, then the guy who died got what he was asking for. The fact of the matter is that there are men out there who use their size advantage to intimidate people smaller than them. They get used to it, they get off on it. They're arrogant, but sometimes the stars are in the right alignment and they get their just reward.

This reminds me of something that happened about 10 years ago when I was living in Seattle. There was a college athlete, probably intoxicated, who was walking down a city street kicking people as hard as he could in the rear. Just random people that he did not even know. He ripped open a car door (I don't know why) and the fellow sitting in the car, not knowing what the hell was going on, used his legally carried handgun and shot the kid, who eventually died. The shooting was ruled justified.

I am pretty good size, but I am old. A blow to my stomach might kill me because of some documented medical problems I have. So in an encounter I will use deadly force before I will allow someone to attack me with their fists.
It helps that I live in Texas where we do not have to be assaulted first. And if we are assaulted first, nobody can guarantee that they won't take my guns from be and use them on me. I would try to walk away from a confrontation regardless, but if someone thinks they going to get a free bite, there are no free bites.

 

[TailGator]

Getting road rage and starting a fist fight does not equate evil. It equates stupidity. Getting road rage and taking a gun out to kill the other guy is evil. Huge difference.

We don't need to look past this story to prove that fist fights can be fatal. I don't see it as a "huge difference" that one is willing to beat someone to death and the other supposedly more evil person is willing to shoot someone to death. Resorting to violence without justification seems inherently evil to my simple mind.

 

[farmerboy]

agways be armed when you can, avoid any and all conflicts when possible even when its a guy 5'0" and 195#s. a little guy with a gun and you with nothing can still make a bad day for you. and dont think you can call 911 and the cops will be there in 30 seconds and fix all your problems! More like 45 minutes here and take care of whats already happened. Most of all use your head and be calm but defend yourself, family, friends and others. Call 911 asap but do anything and everything you need to do to take care of the situation.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

I can get philosophical with this, but I won't. A man in anger isn't inherently evil, he didn't leave the house with the intention to be an evil man that day. He got angry, lost his control, and acted like a kid throwing a tantrum. If you have never been angry and wanted to hit someone, you're lying. I understand control, and I'm sure he did too, but everyone slips. He didn't deserve to die for it.

He didn't deserve to die for it? Well gosh, he should have thought of that before trying to harm somebody much smaller than he was, huh? The ironic thing was he undoubtedly thought Darling an easy target. Darling didn't deserve to be attacked by the person who crashed into him from behind, did he?

What Welton did or did not deserve out of life changed markedly when he violent attacked Darling, beating him to the ground, and continuing to press on the assault. He could have stopped at any time from before making the first threat, throwing the first punch, but he didn't.

A sampling of the internet, lots of people engaged in criminal acts and threatening or using force and/or lethal force to attempt to cause serious bodily harm or death all have believers that say that the deceased didn't deserve to die. Committing criminal acts involving such violence and the threat of violence and lethal force is a very high risk endeavor. Those engaging in those activities may not 'deserve' to die for them as you suggest, but voluntarily give up what they deserve when they commit their violent acts.

Getting road rage and starting a fist fight does not equate evil. It equates stupidity. Getting road rage and taking a gun out to kill the other guy is evil. Huge difference.

Yep, the difference is huge. The difference is that if you are the one attempting to do serious bodily harm to another person illegaly and get caught or killed in the event, you or your loved ones explain it away as having attempted to do something stupid. When you are the intended viction, the person apparently trying to alter your anatomy or cease your life is evil or is doing evil.

Resorting to violence without justification seems inherently evil to my simple mind.

It certainly isn't the act of goodness, is it? Welton was not performing the role of a good samaritan trying to help out Darling and his family after he crashed into to them, was he? So yeah, violence without justification certainly does seem evil, especially if you are the one the violence is directed towards.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

It seems that headlocks are all the rage of late, though I am not sure they are necessarily the right tool for all situations...
http://www.myfoxboston.com/dpp/news/national/good-samaritan-puts-bank-robber-in-a-headlock-20100910

Here, the robber also died and no charges were filed...
http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/loca...r-Death-Gian-Davis-Prosecutors-138978054.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ed-robber-headlock-men-half-age-stood-by.html

Check out the guy in the wheelchair doing a headlock takedown and then other samaritans uses it as well...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71VCOWw-Zvg

 

[Stevie-Ray]

Seems to me a bully was shown the door. Yes, it's too bad the door was to the hereafter, but he made that choice, not the other guy. I might have done the same thing just trying to get the guy to quit. I seriously doubt he meant to kill him. Not so sure, OTOH, the decedent wasn't going for at least great bodily harm.