WOW!! Did anyone catch the news tonight?

[Machx2]

How so? Isn't it known that if you hit someone from behind you better have a damn good reason as to why for you not to be at fault? I don't see how not seeing a crowd of 150 bikes would necessarily change that rule.

Let me ask you this. Is deadly force authorized if you are held against your will,l while a crime is being committed. Yes it changes it completely.

[347Mike]

Let me ask you this. Is deadly force authorized if you are held against your will,l while a crime is being committed. Yes it changes it completely.

Jesus.. I was siding with you guys but it seems like both parties are dumb.

You are in a traffic jam, block, stop whatever you want to call it, not in a basement tied to the ceiling.....

And you are a cop?

[Machx2]

If someone was on their way to the emergency room stuck in this, and died, it then becomes murder. You guys are over looking the seriousness of this.

[Skidmark]

Are you really that stupid. It is called UNLAWFUL RESTRAINT! You are going to compare wrecks to people unlawfully restraining thousands of people? Did you watch the video. The front row of cars CAN see the people stunting. Driving through those idiots and killing them isn't the answer. But pushing through them slowly would be a decent solution. I personally would have gotten out and grabbed the first one I saw off their bike and handcuffed them. And so on. I have 5 sets in my car plus zip ties. I am sure after the first they would have ran though.

§ 20.02. UNLAWFUL RESTRAINT. (a) A person commits an
offense if he intentionally or knowingly restrains another person.
(b) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this
section that:
(1) the person restrained was a child younger than 14
years of age;
(2) the actor was a relative of the child; and
(3) the actor's sole intent was to assume lawful
control of the child.
(c) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor,
except that the offense is:
(1) a state jail felony if the person restrained was a
child younger than 17 years of age; or
(2) a felony of the third degree if:
(A) the actor recklessly exposes the victim to a
substantial risk of serious bodily injury;
(B) the actor restrains an individual the actor
knows is a public servant while the public servant is lawfully
discharging an official duty or in retaliation or on account of an
exercise of official power or performance of an official duty as a
public servant; or
(C) the actor while in custody restrains any
other person.
(d) It is no offense to detain or move another under this
section when it is for the purpose of effecting a lawful arrest or
detaining an individual lawfully arrested.
(e) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this
section that:
(1) the person restrained was a child who is 14 years
of age or older and younger than 17 years of age;
(2) the actor does not restrain the child by force,
intimidation, or deception; and
(3) the actor is not more than three years older than
the child.

Where does it say in there that an exception would be a wreck blocking traffic?

[347Mike]

If someone was on their way to the emergency room stuck in this, and died, it then becomes murder. You guys are over looking the seriousness of this.

Yeah, I get that and agree with that, but you are encouraging individual citizens to run over a crowd os motorcycles. Does that make any sense at all?

The answer isn't to steam roll these mother fuckers down. The answer is preventing this before it gets to 150 bikes deep.

[Machx2]

Jesus.. I was siding with you guys but it seems like both parties are dumb.

You are in a traffic jam, block, stop whatever you want to call it, not in a basement tied to the ceiling.....

And you are a cop?

§ 20.02. UNLAWFUL RESTRAINT. (a) A person commits an
offense if he intentionally or knowingly restrains another person.
(b) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this
section that:
(1) the person restrained was a child younger than 14
years of age;
(2) the actor was a relative of the child; and
(3) the actor's sole intent was to assume lawful
control of the child.
(c) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor,
except that the offense is:
(1) a state jail felony if the person restrained was a
child younger than 17 years of age; or
(2) a felony of the third degree if:
(A) the actor recklessly exposes the victim to a
substantial risk of serious bodily injury;
(B) the actor restrains an individual the actor
knows is a public servant while the public servant is lawfully
discharging an official duty or in retaliation or on account of an
exercise of official power or performance of an official duty as a
public servant; or
(C) the actor while in custody restrains any
other person.
(d) It is no offense to detain or move another under this
section when it is for the purpose of effecting a lawful arrest or
detaining an individual lawfully arrested.
(e) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this
section that:
(1) the person restrained was a child who is 14 years
of age or older and younger than 17 years of age;
(2) the actor does not restrain the child by force,
intimidation, or deception; and
(3) the actor is not more than three years older than
the child.



Does it state tied up in the basement? They blocked off the shoulders and the main roads. They are not free to go.

[CexMashean]

Where does it say in there that an exception would be a wreck blocking traffic?

I saw stunting, therefore, they are risking bodily harm to to drivers being blocked who may experience an out of control bike flying through their windsheild.

[347Mike]

Alright Hassel Hoff, why don't you just rent a bulldozer and take care of them next time if it is so legal.

I don't say this often but you are a fucking idiot...

[Machx2]

Yeah, I get that and agree with that, but you are encouraging individual citizens to run over a crowd os motorcycles. Does that make any sense at all?

The answer isn't to steam roll these mother fuckers down. The answer is preventing this before it gets to 150 bikes deep.

No i'm not. I stated running them over and killing them is not the solution.

[Treybiz]

I think these are stupid and so is ROC.

I don't even like to ride crowds because of all the water-heads.

And blocking a hwy or creating a dangerous situation on public highways is dumb.

That being said:

When traffic clears and no one is close you can bet your ass whatever I am on is the dangling the front wheel down the highway.

And to all the people that say; "I woulda run em over". Fuck you in the neck. You are just as fucking stupid as the people blocking the road.

[Skidmark]

I saw stunting, therefore, they are risking bodily harm to to drivers being blocked who may experience an out of control bike flying through their windsheild.

That is possible.

I'm mainly curious of the legalities of this that would actually stick in court.

I stayed away from this group and went to cruise some country roads. I figured there would be trouble and I figured trouble would find them, i'm just not sure what the arresting charges would be.

[347Mike]

No i'm not. I stated running them over and killing them is not the solution.

You keep referring to people being restrained unlawfully. There weren't any Ambalamps in this particular story so I am only going to assume y ou are referring to individual citizens. If you want to talk hypotheticals there are forums for that.

[Steve]

[CexMashean]

i'm just not sure what the arresting charges would be.

A multi-tude.
Does it become worse knowing the crimes were planned out?

[Skidmark]

...

Yea, the guy riding on one wheel apparently drank 4 or so 24oz beers before they left. He got back on his bike and left.

The guy who got hit was apparently one on wheel towards the beginning of the ride, but was on channel 4 last night, crying, acting innocent, and saying he wished the guy who hit him would at least call him to apologize.