16 y.o. runs down bicyclists in TX

[Andy Mink]

Thankfully no one was killed, though two had to be airlifted to the hospital.
Story is here.

 

[tch]

Sh*t!!! I've dealt with these a$$holes before. "Rolling coal" is the term.
Immature guys working immature "pranks" that can turn serious.

I hope they throw him in the clink for awhile where he can learn about taking things seriously.

 

[scott43]

I mean he's 16. So let's not go too far. But yeah, that's pretty dumb.

 

[tch]

You know, when I was 16 I did "dumb" things. But I didn't mow down six bikers and send four of them to the hospital.
There's a difference between dumb and criminal.


PS: I got hit by a pickup truck last November. Three days in the hospital and about three months recovering from internal injuries and bruising and broken ribs. I was LUCKY.
The guy who hit me? SIx "accidents" in ten years, with numerous violations on his record. Legal resolution? Loss of license for 60 days and $150 fine.
Think I'm a bit sensitive about this topic? Yeah.

 

[snwbrdr]

I hope his parents are rich... because I smell a lawsuit...


not to mention insurance premiums are going up on the parent's policy, since the kid is likely under the parent's policy instead of their own

 

[Bad Bob]

If a judge can't throw his butt in jail for a fair period of time at the very least confiscate his vehicle and allow him the pleasure of getting around on a bicycle for an extended period of time.
This guy is a dangerous fool.

 

[slowrider]

I like the bike idea. But mommy & daddy will just chauffeur his lame ass around.

 

[Rudi Riet]

I'm just going to get on the advocacy high horse here:

It's always a driver - a person - who crashes into a person on a bicycle. Unless the car/truck/van is an autonomous object with no human inside, it's always a person striking another person.

And it's always a crash, not an accident. An accident suggests that the interaction was unavoidable. In this case it certainly was avoidable.

OK, dismounting the horse again...

. . .

First off: driving is not a right, but a privilege. So the best thing is to revoke this kid's license to drive until he's 18. In my ideal world he'd have it revoked in perpetuity, but wishes and dreams and all that...

And the bike idea is fantastic. Add to that a transit pass and it would be ideal. A creative judge would issue such a sentence. And sure, his parents or siblings would cart him around but there are ways of enforcing use of the transit pass, at the very least (its use can often be traced if the pass uses RFID technology).

"Smoke rolling" or "coal rolling" is actually an enforceable offense in many states, including Virginia and Maryland.

My guess is that this teenager inherited this reckless behavior from a parent. It's not uncommon for young drivers to model their biases after those of their parents.

 

[scott43]

I can't believe there's an actual offense for that... Like, having to spell it out. However..

 

[Andy Mink]

Unless that truck was modified it probably wouldn't "roll coal" in the first place, at least not much. I have a 2018 Ram diesel. No visible exhaust even starting from a stop pulling a 5th wheel. The coal is an over-fueling issue that is mitigated by proper injection timing run by the computer. Tampering with that by changing the programming or adding larger injectors, at least in a lot of places, is illegal and subject to a hefty fine; I believe it's an EPA thing. I'd be interested in seeing if the authorities take a peek under the hood.

 

[slowrider]

Back when Diesel engines were mechanical, increasing the rail (fuel) pressure/oversized fuel pump button, oversized injectors, bigger turbo,ect. Big power~high dollar, Chicken hauler.

 

[graham418]

I would say "Unbelievable", but I am always (all too often) blown away by peoples behaviour

 

[GB_Ski]

I'm jaded. I'm pretty sure the "he's a good kid" defense will get him off in court.

 

[Jwrags]

Considering it happened in Texas I expect nothing to happen to the kid. Sorry if I offended any Texans here.

 

[newboots]

Sixteen is too young for irresponsible kids to be driving. There are plenty of responsible ones, but the parents should have known that this kid was too self-important, reckless, and impulsive to be allowed to drive.

 

[jt10000]

There are two separate issues here. One is is it appropriate for a person that age to be driving a big truck.

The other is the general "I own the road. I want to threaten and harm (rolling coal) cyclists or other less powerful road users." The second is social/political issue that too many Americans tolerate or even applaud. There's a love of violence in that that must be called out. He may not have want to hit the cyclists, but he sure wanted to scare them. There are 16 year olds who are bad drivers because they don't care about being reckless (and if they hit or kill someone, that's terrible). But this was worse in terms of intent.

 

[François Pugh]

The article isn't clear on how he ended up running over cyclists.
It appears, as near as I can tell, that he got ahead of a (the second one of three) group of cyclists and floored it to be a jerk and cover them with diesel exhaust smoke, but was so intent on watching them in his mirrors he didn't notice the group in front of him until it was too late for him and ran into them. He stayed at the scene after the accident. Is that correct?

If so, I commend the cyclists restraint.

 

[newboots]

Well-put, @jt10000 - and needs to be part of the discussion. This issue of imagining oneself as having this power, and reinforcing the power by wielding it over others, just to exercise that power (and be an a**hole). I think the comment about this being Texas springs from this frame of reference.

 

[dbostedo]

The article isn't clear on how he ended up running over cyclists.
It appears, as near as I can tell, that he got ahead of a (the second one of three) group of cyclists and floored it to be a jerk and cover them with diesel exhaust smoke, but was so intent on watching them in his mirrors he didn't notice the group in front of him until it was too late for him and ran into them. He stayed at the scene after the accident. Is that correct?

If so, I commend the cyclists restraint.

That's the way I read it, but it was a bit confusing without enough description.

 

[newboots]

The article isn't clear on how he ended up running over cyclists.
It appears, as near as I can tell, that he got ahead of a (the second one of three) group of cyclists and floored it to be a jerk and cover them with diesel exhaust smoke, but was so intent on watching them in his mirrors he didn't notice the group in front of him until it was too late for him and ran into them. He stayed at the scene after the accident. Is that correct?

If so, I commend the cyclists restraint.

Not exactly correct. The bicyclist, Chase Ferrell, said:

After the truck blew exhaust on cyclists in Ferrell's lane, the driver attempted to do the same maneuver on cyclists riding ahead of Ferrell, the cyclist said, culminating in the collision.

"The reason he couldn't stop is because he was accelerating to blow more diesel fuel on these cyclists," Ferrell said. "He ended up hitting three people before his brakes even started."

He was in the act of blowing smoke all over the group ahead of Ferrell when he started running over them, and was accelerating (to blow this exhaust) so it took some time to brake. At least that's how I read it.