This is a discussion on Road Rage within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by archer51 He's lucky he's out. He got out of his car and initiated the incident. If he had stayed in his car ...
Fortune favors the bold.
Freedom doesn't mean safe, it means free.
The thing about "defense" is that it has practically nothing to do with guns. (As passed on by CCW9MM)
Still think personally I would have left it alone and called it in if it was as blatant as said. The danger was gone, again as said. But I surely would have worryed big time for people up the road if these idiots were loaded as in well, whatever that means these days. Still 2 kids in car! Brains!
There is no way I would have exited my car under those conditions. In this day and age, it could have easily ended in someone being shot. With two of his kids in the car, and him being armed and presumably ‘unhappy’ I could just see this going to hell in a hand basket.
“Monsters are real and so are ghosts. They live inside of us, and sometimes they win.”
~ Stephen King
Everyone is so busy attacking the shooter that they haven't discussed the actions of the "victim(s)". Since when is exchanging words (which at this time is all we know happened when the shooter exited his vehicle) reason to exit one's vehicle and attempt to enter another person's? Wouldn't entering someone's vehicle and assaulting them be a felony? They weren't exactly acting in self defense, were they? Everyone, including myself, have said that he shouldn't have gotten out of his vehicle, but neither should they. The man and his kids could (and should) have driven off, but so could (and should) the guys in the truck.
Here's how I see it:
Party 1 (Guys in truck) run Party 2 (Father and kids) off the road. I would guess that would be a crime committed by Party 1.
Party 2 continues driving and exits his vehicle at the red light, where he approaches Party 1's window and exchanges words with them. Incredibly stupid, but a crime?
Next, Party 1 exits their vehicle and starts to enter and assault Party 2. I would guess that's a felony.
While both parties made stupid mistakes, I only see one party committing crimes. Party 2 made stupid mistakes, but I don't think they were criminal.
I'm not trying to defend or attack either party, but just trying to give some food for thought.
Either way, getting out of his car was not a smart thing to do IMO. In my state, he may not have been legally justified in using lethal force as SD given the circumstances as presented...could he have driven off rather than shooting someone? Why did he get out of the car and what did he say? Did his actions and words contribute to the altercation? Once the initial run off the raod incident was over, was the next incident at the stop light a continuance of the first or a new incident? Was their getting out of their vehicle a continuance of the incident he created by getting out of his car?
Too many questions to answer without more details. Unfortunately, the answer may be subjective and open to interpretation by the DA and a jury rather than a clear cut objective answer situation.
Know Guns, Know Safety, Know Peace.
No Guns, No Safety, No Peace.
Guns are like sex and air...its no big deal until YOU can't get any.
Alleged shooter in road rage incident released
Monday, February 8, 2010
By Gordon Wilczynski, Macomb Daily Staff Writer
The father of two young boys who said he fatally shot a 34-year-old Shelby Township man on Saturday because he was afraid for his life and the lives of his children has been released by Clinton Township police pending further investigation.
The man said he was being attacked by three men after they ran him off the road on eastbound Hall Road near Card Road in Clinton Township. The suspect told police said he shot Anton "Tony" Djeljevic during a road rage incident that occurred at 10 p.m. on eastbound Hall Road (M-59) at Groesbeck Highway (M-97), Clinton Township Detective Capt. Richard Maierle said.
Djeljevic was shot in the head and in the torso.
The man allegedly told police, witnesses said, that he was protecting his children, ages 9 and 6, when Djeljevic, his brother and a cousin jumped into his car and attacked him while he was laying on top of one of the boys to protect him.
Witnesses said the suspect, who is from Detroit and works as a planner for DTE Energy, told police he stopped for a traffic signal at the turnaround at Groesbeck and got out of his car. He yelled at the suspects to knock it off, witnesses said.
A witness told police the shooter was attacked by Djeljevic, his brother and a cousin. Police said as the man was lying on top of his eight-year-old son to protect him from the Djeljevics he grabbed a handgun from his glove box and fired twice.
The suspect drove to Interstate 94 after the shooting and called the sheriff's department. Authorities arrested him without incident.
The mother of the children picked them up at the police hedquarters.
"We presented the information to the prosecutor's officer who ordered him released pending more investigation," Maierle said.
The dead man lived in Shelby Township with his wife, Jennifer, and children, Nichole, 15, Anthony 8, and Christina, 7. He was self-employed and worked at home on his computer, relatives said.
Djeljevic was arrested in November, 2001 and was charged in Warren with a cousin for assault with the intent to murder. Djeljevic was released by police when 37th District Judge Walter Jakubowski determined there wasn't enough evidence to have Djeljevic stand trial for assault.
Djeljevic's family said he was kind and loving. He came to the United States when he was 11 years old from Germany. The family is from Montenegro.
He graduated from Fitzgerald High School in Warren.
"He should have stayed in his car," said Djeljevic's cousin Cindy Ljudjuraj.
Alleged road rage shooter freed
Investigators seek more witnesses in traffic incident Saturday in which father of 3 died
Christine Ferretti / The Detroit News
Clinton Township -- Relatives of a Shelby Township father of three who was shot and killed Saturday in an alleged road rage incident expressed dismay Monday after learning the suspected shooter was released pending further investigation.
About a dozen relatives gathered in Clinton Township District Court hoping to watch the suspect's formal arraignment. Police on Monday morning presented the case to Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith, who instructed officers to release the man, Clinton Township Police Capt. Richard Maierle said.
Smith could not be reached for comment.
Police said the suspect, who has not been named, shot and killed Anton "Tony" Djeljevic, 34, after a "traffic altercation" at a light on Hall Road near Groesbeck around 10:15 p.m.
After the shooting, the suspect drove east on Hall Road, got onto eastbound Interstate 94 and called the Macomb County Sheriff's Office to report "he was involved in a shooting," Maierle said. He then pulled over to the side of the expressway and waited for police.
Djeljevic was transported to Mount Clemens Regional Medical Center, where he was pronounced dead.
Maierle said investigators have interviewed a number of witnesses, but they are seeking more. He declined to discuss any additional details about the case.
Djeljevic was charged in July 2001 with assault with intent to murder and felony firearm. A Warren District Court judge later dismissed the charges, noting there were no witnesses or officers to implicate Djeljevic in the alleged crime.
Family said Djeljevic, who moved to the United States from Germany when he was 11, was a loving husband to his wife Jennifer, 33, and the couple's three children, ages 15, 8 and 7.
"He was a great-hearted person," said his sister, Antoneta Djeljevic, 28, of Shelby Township.
"He would do anything for anybody. Thirty-four years old is too short to live a life. Now there's just such a big missing piece."
Antoneta said the incident occurred when her brother was on his way to a cousin's birthday party. He died in his wife's arms, and when Antoneta got the call that he'd been shot, she first "thought it was a joke."
Family said Djeljevic, who customized cars for a living, had a "heart of gold" and there was "not an ounce of violence in him."
"It should have never happened," said Djeljevic's first cousin, Frank Micakaj, adding his cousin was unarmed. "A gun was drawn ... my cousin never had a chance."
Alleged road rage shooter freed | detnews.com | The Detroit News
Regardless of the legalities here getting out of your car to confront another driver is asking for trouble. Even if this guy walks he still killed somebody and he’s going to have to live W/ that every day for the rest of his life.
lets take it in your direction...he got out of his car and approached the other vehicle...i'll just guess and say he was less than cordial...the other driver feared for his safety, displays a handgun and shoots the father....hmmmmmm...interesting scenario now...
he could have called the police and let them handle it...now hes got a sh!tstorm on his hands and his life is gonna get more complicated than it would have had he thanked his lucky stars he wasnt involved in an accident and let the law handle it...he decided he could talk some sense into 3 guys..foolish move...
i'm not justifying what they did is right...i'm saying what so many others have said...he was out of danger...he shouldnt have taken it to the next level...his actions escalated a situation that was over with...he didnt commit a crime...they did...what he did was foolish and reckless...and poorly thought out...walking into a gang of sports fans and saying there idiots for liking the team they do isnt a crime either....but i wouldnt recommend it....
in the end he was forced to defend himself and his children when he may have never had to if he had just swallowed his pride and told his kids that thats why you have to be a careful driver...
Nobody is justified in taking the life of another for someone asking another to watch out, to be careful around 3ft-tall children, etc. As you suggest, the two chapters in this "book" were: (a) the knock-down incident; and (b) the knife attack and gun defense. The two situations were separate and the first didn't hardly provoke the second, no matter what silliness was playing in the attacker's head, to take a request he watch where he's going as if it were a deadly threat. The defender was thus absolutely justified in stopping the knife attack.
I agree. This 'rager incident is much like this example. Nobody deserves death for asking others to watch out for others, even if that "asking" is in a raised voice. That doesn't hardly constitute escalation or provocation of a deadly response.
The DA in the case of the road ragers saw that, it seems. Most likely, whatever was said at both cars supports this decision to release the person who shot to defend his child.
Either you are a weapon and your gun is a tool or your gun is a weapon and you are the tool.
to clarify my position....the guy who got shot deserved to get shot for attacking the shooter and his children...the other 2 are lucky they didnt get shot also....they broke the law and made a critical error ion judgement...their reaction to his approach was not justified...but it was instigated by his approach...
what could be said though...and probably will in civil court...is that the shooter intentionally escalated the situation knowing that he had a gun and could defend himself if it got out of control...he had an opportunity to let it go (save the macho "this is whats wrong with this country" stuff....the guy ended up in a shooting situation)...but chose to take it to another level...
what the shooter did to escalate the situation does not make what the attackers did right...it just helped provoke it unnecessarily...why ask for trouble if you really dont want it?...the man will be made to look as though he "challenged " 3 other men and his actions could be construed as road rage had they chosen to call the police...he should not have gotten out of his vehicle and approached the other vehicle...
Whether it truly was an instigation, escalation or ratcheting up of tensions and threat depends utterly on what was said, how it was said, what the intentions were. Mere contact does not constitute a crime.
We do NOT know what was said, how it was said, the intention of what was said. He might well be a saint, given the fact that he willingly left his young child in the car while he went to speak with the driver. He might well be the devil in blue jeans. Can't know, without knowing more.
Yes, many people aggressively respond to such contact. Those three men did. But that in and of itself means nothing, in regards to the actions of the parent. The simple fact that the parent went up to speak to the other driver cannot, by itself, be the only relevant fact in concluding there was escalation/instigation.
Certainly, the other three men didn't take the contact well at all. But it's an assumption, at this point, to take such contact as illegal, criminal escalation and instigation. Depends utterly on the totality of the circumstances.
Some simple questions, lest our assumptions get the better of us:
1. If the parent was so livid and desirous of escalating things against three males in the other car, why would he leave his child?
2. If the parent was so livid and desirous of escalating things, why did 18 witnesses corroborate each other and support the idea that it was the three males who escalated things?
3. If the parent was such a deadly threat to everyone, why was released without charges?
Note: Again, I'm not supporting or defending the actions of any of the players in this incident. I'm simply posing questions that might aid in our ability to see through assumptions and biases, to consider what might really be true in this case. I personally don't know, as I wasn't there.