Sooo, by the sounds of it, we have an insane person who took offence at this guy stopping suddenly, which caused him to have to slam on his breaks.

And that's it, that's enough to make you flip out to that degree? Some people are seriously deranged, seriously need some help.

But bravo Today Tonight for taking what is an interesting and fairly scary story, and going batshit crazy on the fear mongering at the end by trying to say that road rage is mentally out of control by showing clips of road rage from all over the world implying these are all recent Australian road rage incidents, and we should all fear for our lives.

Bravo Today tonight, you just keep on with your journalistic integrity.

Dicks.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

Just tried to submit this - of course it's already here. I think the heat of Brisbane fries the brain. *promote

Promoting this video back to the front page; last published Tuesday, December 18th, 2012 11:41am PST - promote requested by dag.

Sorry madman-My first reaction to your ramming my car and getting out would be to squish your dumb ass between bumpers and sort out the details later...Used his car as a weapon, attacked me with harmful intent, got it all on film, jury trial.

Australia, no where else do they breed a finer quality of nutter. Not even Scotland.

That's what I was thinking. If that guy left his car that would be it. He chased me for miles, I would end it or at least make it clear that I was going to end his life. Hopefully he would be scared.

He was driving a pimped out pick-up... Biiiiiiiiig surpriiiiiiiiiise!

So, natives of Oz (and you, @dag) please explain to me how, given the video evidence, could the local authorities not be able to track this fellow down? What, they don't keep track of which license plate belongs to which car down there? Look into it, it's a good system.

And I didn't see him wearing any bonnet either!

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

I think he's turned himself in. He might have gone walkabout to evade capture.

I hope the cock sucker suffered some serious injuries when he rolled off the dude's bonnet. What an arsehole.

I'd have just calmly leveled my CCW and let him decide to continue or not.

Dont think a crazed guy like that would be scared.

Also, just from the bits and pieces, that might be the worst emergency call person I've ever heard.

Who punches through a windshield with their bare hands? That's got to hurt!

"You left your groceries on your roof! I SAID. YOU LEFT. YOUR GROCERIES. ON YOUR ROOF."

Yeah, but this is Australia mate.

Should have just flat out run the cunt over when he got out of his car.

@bobknight33 How do you think this would have turned out if everyone was "legally" armed?

I wonder if drugs played a role in his rage...

That's what I was thinking. "Aaaaaaw someone's trying to run you off the road and kill you?"

Australia, where you can't find out where a truck is or who drive it even if you have the make, model, and license plate.

nice police work there lou

Anybody has the latest news on this? I'd like to know what happens to the nut job, and what reason he'll give.

Just today - http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/newshome/15677149/road-rage-attacker-hands-himself-in/

Reasons why he wasn't arrested straight away: "Officers say the black ute isn't registered to the 21-year-old accused, but a family-run business."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iXrI04QXQs

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

Not to cross-post on other issues - but can I say that I'm really glad that guns are not readily accessible here in OZ to people like this.

You could say - "but at least the guy would have been able to defend himself" - but great, lead flying through the air in both directions from freaked out people with jittery nerves - and dead bodies at the end of it. Even if the guy did deserve to be shot - that's a Judge Dredd world I don't want to live in.

There would not have been any incident at the school.

Right @dag. But which of these two individuals do you think would be most likely to be packing heat? And even if both were who is most likely to use it?

(I'm not arguing with you, just raising more points)

Hi Troll. I hope someone shoots you. Bye.

Back on topic...

The guy assaults a TV camera while claiming that the video is fake... as he turns himself into a police station.

Steroids or amphetamine, you decide. Another mass shooter in the making maybe.

The competition between Today Tonight and A Current Affair to plumb new depths of retarded reporting was always my favourite bit of the Chasers. Damn I miss that show.

The Hamster Wheel is close. I think they've passed their prime, but it has amusing moments still

If it were America, he'd have one too and would have just shot you from his truck and driven on.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

I'd say it's a 50/50 proposition on both of them. The victim is an ex-cop

Apparently, Australians have learned nothing from The Road Warrior.

Crime has been on the ups in Australia ever since they banned most private firearms in 1996.

Lol, as usual you're wrong. You've taken a piece of right wing propaganda and accepted it as fact. Never mind the fact that armed robberies involving firearms have steadily declined, or that gun suicides have declined. Ignore the fact that in the 18 years prior to the Port Arthur massacre there were 13 mass shootings and in the decade since 1996 there was one.

In fact, the Australian Federal Attorney even told the NRA to please stop mis-interpreting the facts.

They didn't actually ban most private firearms, only a few specific types. I'm not even really sure the banned types were terribly common in the first place. There was a buy back, which took around 500,000 firearms out of circulation... leading to a net decrease of approximately 0 since roughly that number have been sold since the buyback, but it has led to a change in the type of weapons.

You can't necessarily draw conclusions from Australia anyway, since it was never the case that people here typically went around armed except when hunting, going to gun clubs, or committing armed offenses.

How is this guy not arrested yet? The police have everything they need (the frickin' license plate!) to find him right here in the video.

Arrested
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9egu3ds5KZQ&feature=share&list=UUFnWjYqIG1V1RV6lRmmulsw

Ok, I read more comments. He turned himself in. Scary dude.

As to this evolving into a gun discussion, as far as I'm concerned, no one was hurt or killed in this incident, so it's a good thing guns weren't involved. It's easy to rationalize using deadly force after the fact (and no witnesses; Trayvon Martin), but the point at which a person crosses that line, when threatened, and actually chooses to kill another human appears to run a gamut from "I'm being really inconvenienced/disrespected right now" to "I'm going to die right now". I don't think George Zimmerman was about to die, or even get his ass kicked. I would rather kick someone's ass, if necessary, than they kick mine, but I'd rather take an ass-kicking than sentence someone to death. That's probably not going to be a popular opinion.

As far as gun control possibly keeping the badguy in this video from having a gun... then "yay" for gun control. That's exactly its purpose, and not so you can't defend against the gov'ment when they come to break down your door.

Hell, I hope some sort of car control is used in this situation and this guy isn't allowed to drive for a long time (after he gets out of jail). He had a car, he used it as a weapon. If he had a gun... ?

EDIT: Admittedly, some seeming contradictions to a prior rant, but I'm sure I wasn't the only one jolted into a somewhat clearer reality by what happened at Sandy Hook.

I never understand the argument "if x person had a gun, it would have stopped the whole thing before it started."

In this example, the lunatic had a car and the victim had a car - so they have approximately equal "weaponry". The lunatic clearly used his weapon with utter disregard for anyone's safety and without warning. I'd like to know why people think that raising the weaponry stakes would change anything. Let's rewind the whole situation and without any hindsight give both of them a gun. Now the victim would be dead because he had no idea of the danger he was in until it happened, and if a gun was involved then that would have happened and been over very fast.

I have been accosted in my car about 4 times now (i travel to uni, it's an occupational hazard) after having to brake hard from someone's poor driving (for example). In that situation i am the one who is entitled to be aggrieved, if i had a gun then of course i wouldn't use it - because i am not going to shoot someone for driving like that and rightly so because i'd go to jail.

So the mad person is always going to shoot first, and he's always going to have the initiative of knowing what's going on and what he needs to do.

Why is escalation EVER a solution? We don't say it about nuclear warheads? Surely if everyone had a nuclear warhead we'd all be a lot safer. It might seem ridiculous to say that but why do people think it's good to upgrade the madman's potential weapon from a car to a gun!?

Although maybe a good idea at the time, there is something called necessary force and unnecessary force in self defense (If my english is correct here). It means that i could use a gun to defend myself against someone who attacks me with a knife, it's totally legal to shoot the other guy in self defense (even if shoot him in the head). But if the guy already lays on the ground and I shoot him again, in the leg just to go sure, it would be unnecessary.
So driving head on into the guy, while he tries to jump on your windshield, smashing him down (killing him in the process), would be alright with the law, you're the hero of the day! But going into reverse and make sure the threat is over (even if you only run over his legs)... chances at court wouldn't be so good, just saying.

And speaking of the gun control thing, I totally agree with @Fletch and @dannym3141 (the nuclear warhead scenario is allways the one i try to bring up talking with gun loving people)

I had a friend who would have a steel pipe lying under his driver seat in case of such incidents (On a side note, sometimes he was the one raging, but mostly to himself). The thing I (for)told him was, that someday if he walks out of his car with the steel pipe to "calm down" (read intimidate) the raging guy of the other car, that guy may draw a knife. Which was exactly what happened to him one day. Luckily nobody of them snapped and did something stupid. They just screamed at each other for a little while until they realised that they didn't wanted to die that day.

My point being, in Germany we have a very strict gun law and I think thats a good thing. Look at the situation I just described, someone might say that they could have killed themselves as easily, as if they had guns, and at least with a gun you could make sure that you could defend yourself. But there is a general mistake in that logic. It takes far more "effort" and willingness to attack someone head on with a knife or a steel pipe. And the whole attacking process can be stopped at any given time (in the unusual event that the guys come to their senses). But on the other side, every freaking kid in the world would be able to kill anyone with a gun. It doesn't take much skill, practice or time, just a slight movement of the finger and pointing the end into the right direction.

I was 'victim' to road rage in my early 20's. Me and a bunch of my mates passed a truck on this road pretty much in the middle of nowhere, when we came to a light the truck rammed us, pushing us nearly into another car that was out late. The next few minutes were spent at high speed as he attempted to push us off the road, ram into us and it ended with our driver driving at high speeds in reverse with this huge truck barreling towards us. Driver was good, quickly turned into a wide driveway. The truck driver likely would have hopped out to continue the violence if six of us didn't jump out of the car, ready to beat the shit out of the guy. He sped away, we went to the cops, my buddies car was near totaled. They never did catch the guy.

Friend of mine since then keeps an unloaded handgun on him (Legally) just in case. He's had to flash it a few times to crazy drivers or punks out looking for a fight.

Funny thing is, I live in the country. But it still happens surprisingly often to people.

@Xaielao i think @Quadrophonic's comment would be good advice for your friend. In no way intending to downplay that horrible situation you were in, i'd have been terrified. I'm just of the opinion that it's safer for "none" of us to carry than for "all" of us to carry.

There's another argument i find quite compelling though - the people who live in nice houses, own guns and keep them safely locked up put up fantastic arguments for why guns are safe and all the positive reasons for safely owning a gun. The problem is as we all know (from road rage, from nasty neighbours, bullying etc.) that the world is full of utter idiots at the best of times, and do you really want all of those people having the same "right" to own a gun as you, who keeps it responsibly and maturely?

Responsibility and maturity once in possession of a gun is OPTIONAL. I'm very glad that a lot of enthusiasts are responsible and mature with firearms, but for every one of those, there can be 100 others who keep it unhidden, or hidden poorly, which then opens up the potential for disaster even further (getting it stolen, kids finding it, whatever).

Or is it simply a case of - but if i have one, i'm ok........as long as i can see the danger, and see it soon enough to react, and not make a mistake when i react because i'm very aware everyone is armed.......etc.

He should have had an assault rifle, then this would have never happened..