Road Rage And Reactive Aggression

Road
Rage
and
Reactive
Aggression
 
 By
Jane
F.
Gilgun,
Ph.D.,
LICSW
 
 Michael
Bryant,
former
attorney
general
of
Ontario,
Canada,
killed
Darcy
Allan
 Sheppard,
a
bicycle
courier,
with
his
Saab
convertible
during
a
fit
of
road
rage
on
 September
1,
2009
on
the
streets
of
Ottawa,
in
front
of
multiple
witnesses.
The
incident
 began
when
Bryant’s
car
and
Sheppard’s
bike
collided
in
a
fashionable
district
of
the
 city.
Sheppard
grabbed
the
door
handle
of
Bryant’s
convertible
and
wouldn’t
let
go.
 Bryant
hollered
at
Sheppard
and
sped
down
city
streets
and
sidewalks,
sideswiping
 lampposts
in
an
effort
to
brush
Sheppard
off
his
car.


 Witnesses
said
Sheppard
finally
flew
off
the
convertible
after
hitting
a
postal
 box.
Sheppard
died.

Bryant
was
arrested
and
charged
with
criminal
negligence
 causing
death
and
with
dangerous
driving
causing
death.
After
being
released,
Bryant
 offered
his
deepest
condolences
to
Sheppard’s
family.
His
damaged
car
remained
on
 city
streets.

 Bryant
had
been
the
force
behind
the
toughest
speeding
laws
ever
enacted
in
 Canada.
The
laws
included
confiscation
and
destruction
of
vehicles
and
long­term
 suspension
of
driving
licenses.
Bryant
described
speeding
cars
to
be
as
dangerous
as
 explosives.

Unless
he
can
convince
Canadians
of
his
total
and
complete
repentance,
 this
marks
the
end
of
his
career.
He
is
a
national
and
international
social
outcast.
 
 Michael
Bryant
had
a
meltdown.
He
was
filled
with
rage
and
desire
to
get
 Sheppard
off
his
car
at
any
cost.
He
chose
to
do
whatever
it
took
to
get
rid
of
 Sheppard.
The
consequences
of
his
choice
were
horrific.
He
killed
Sheppard.
He
put
 the
lives
of
pedestrians
and
passengers
and
drivers
of
other
vehicles
in
danger
of
 injury
and
death.
He
destroyed
city
property.

He
damaged
his
own
car.
He
put
his
 own
life
in
danger.
He
disgraced
himself
in
the
eyes
of
the
world.

 What
happened
to
Michael
Bryant?
How
could
he
do
such
things?
 
 Reactive
Aggression
and
Dysregulation
 
 Michael
Bryant
committed
an
egregious
act
of
reactive
aggression.

Reactive
 aggression
is
violence
and
abuse
that
happens
when
perpetrators
are
in
a
state
of
 meltdown.
A
more
technical
word
for
meltdown
is
dysregulation.
When
 dysregulated,
people
experience
powerful
emotions
such
as
powerlessness,
rage,
 indignation,
and
frustration.
They
don’t
think
straight,
although
they
do
not
know
 this.
They
want
to
get
out
of
this
state
of
dysregulation.

 
 Automatic
Activation
of
Belief
Systems
 
 What
persons
in
dysregulated
states
do
is
automatic,
programmed
into
their
 way
of
thinking,
even
programmed
into
their
brains.

Dysregulated
persons
do
not
 think
rationally.

Whatever
they
do,
they’ve
done
before,
whether
actually
or
in
 terms
of
how
they
think
and
what
they
believe.

They
may
act
in
pro‐social
ways,


such
as
talking
to
someone
about
their
emotional
state.

They
may
act
self‐ destructively,
such
as
cutting
themselves,
getting
drunk,
or
over‐eating.

They
may
 act
anti‐socially,
beating
someone
up
or
abusing
them
emotionally,
for
example.

 When
persons
in
dysregulated
states
act
in
violent
ways,
they
already
have
 these
violent
ways
embedded
in
their
brains.

They
have
rehearsed
these
behaviors
 many
times
and
took
pleasure
in
doing
so.
They
have
values
that
tell
them
that
 violence
is
justified
when
someone
does
you
wrong
or
does
something
you
don’t
 like.
They
allow
internalized
pro‐violence
beliefs
to
guide
their
actions.

 
 Competing
Beliefs
and
Scenarios
 
 Persons
in
dysregulated
states
may
also
have
competing
scenarios
and
 behaviors
embedded
in
how
they
think
and
what
they
believe.
Bryant
obviously
did,
 as
evidenced
by
the
speeding
legislation
he
authored.
He
also
may
believe
that
 taking
another
life
is
wrong,
as
evidenced
by
his
statement
of
condolences
to
 Sheppard’s
family.

In
this
homicidal
act,
rage
overwhelmed
these
positive
scenarios
 and
values.
In
other
words,
Beliefs
that
might
inhibit
pro‐violence
beliefs
and
 actions
go
unactivated.


 When
dysregulation
subsides,
individuals
can
think
straight
again.

Their
 competing
beliefs
activate
themselves.
They
may
feel
regret
and
remorse.
Time
will
 tell
whether
Bryant
will
experience
remorse.
 
 Changing
our
Ways
 
 Bryant
had
positive
belief
systems
that
led
him
to
think
that
he
was
entitled
 to
behave
as
he
did.

Most
people
would
not
do
what
he
did
because
their
competing
 beliefs
guide
their
actions
through
less
dangerous
paths.
It
is
not
that
others
do
not
 have
belief
systems
that
are
similar
to
what
Bryant
presumably
has,
but
that
they
 manage
them
better.
 What
can
we
do
to
ensure
that
we
do
not
allow
our
own
anti‐social
scenarios
 and
beliefs
to
guide
our
actions
toward
such
terrible
acts
that
do
such
harm
to
 others
and
to
ourselves?
 The
first
step
I
think
is
to
look
into
our
own
hearts
and
minds
and
 acknowledge
our
own
violent
beliefs
and
values.

We
may
think
we
would
never
act
 them
out.

Bryant
probably
thought
the
same
thing.
 We
have
to
admit
that
we
have
the
potential
for
violence.

We
have
to
grapple
 with
our
own
violence
embedded
in
our
own
hearts
and
brains.

We
must
figure
out
 how
to
ensure
that
our
pro‐social
beliefs
and
values
will
also
help
us
to
manage
our
 anti‐social
values
and
beliefs.
 We
can
talk
to
children
about
violence,
acknowledge
how
common
thoughts
 of
violence
are
and
how
comforting
and
thrilling
they
are.

We
have
to
show
children
 how
rewarding
pro‐social
behaviors
are.


 We
have
a
long
way
to
go
to
understanding
violence.

We
have
a
long
way
to
 go
to
having
the
will
to
do
what
it
takes
to
prevent
violence.
We
must
chose
to
do
so
 and
then
have
the
courage
to
deal
with
the
violence
in
our
own
hearts
and
minds.

 We
may
not
do
it
because
we
enjoy
our
private
experiences
of
violence
too
much.


I
think
Bryant
did.