[BeaverFever]

stratos stratos:

If you spontaneously go out into a roadway to block it than you are taking the risk upon yourself. If you are hit it's your fault not the drivers. There are cases such as Charletsvile where the Driver purposely drove into a crowd.Yet if i'm driving down the road and a group is blocking the road and I can't stop in time not my fault. The road is for motorized vehicles not pedestrians.

The bold part of your post makes the rest of the post irrelevant. Why are we even talking about hypothetical unsuspecting drivers unable to stop in time?

The right wing Trump supporting neo nazi deliberately drove his car into a crowd of people with the internet to kill or injure. . FULL STOP.

[BeaverFever]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Tricks Tricks:

So... You don't condemn murdering someone for protesting and blocking the road. Just so we are clear.

It is entirely possible to hit someone with your vehicle without killing them.
Of course if the police were actually made to enforce the law, people getting run down while protesting might be less of an issue.

Or just issue a proclamation that ANYONE blocking traffic of any kind without a permit will be arrested, charged and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

It is also entirely possible to shoot someone in the head without killing them. It’s still murder or attempted murder because death is a reasonably forseeable consequence. In fact even if you shoott and miss them entirely it will often be attempted murder

Just for the record you are not legally permitted to intentionally hit people with your car, even if they are illegally blocking the road.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

If I'm not mistaken, blocking traffic in the US without a permit is a federal crime.

You are mistaken. And your post gets progressively worse from there,

Okay, I was wrong. Still illegal though. As far as I'm concerned, if you get injured while engaging in an illegal activity, you are NOT a victim. Other than of your own stupidity of course.

Here's the real issue though. People yap on about their rights to this and that with no understanding whatsoever that with those rights come responsibilities. It is YOUR responsibility to be aware of what you can and cannot do with your right to peaceful protest. Blocking roads and highways is NOT peaceful, it's passive aggressive behaviour and it IS a crime.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Tricks Tricks:

So... You don't condemn murdering someone for protesting and blocking the road. Just so we are clear.

It is entirely possible to hit someone with your vehicle without killing them.
Of course if the police were actually made to enforce the law, people getting run down while protesting might be less of an issue.

Or just issue a proclamation that ANYONE blocking traffic of any kind without a permit will be arrested, charged and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

It is also entirely possible to shoot someone in the head without killing them. It’s still murder or attempted murder because death is a reasonably forseeable consequence. In fact even if you shoott and miss them entirely it will often be attempted murder

Just for the record you are not legally permitted to intentionally hit people with your car, even if they are illegally blocking the road.

Wait for it. Some states are introducing legislation that would protect drivers who hit those illegally blocking roads in protest. And let's face it, if you nudge an idiot with your vehicle and they still don't take the hint, fuck 'em. Not moving out of your way is aggressive behaviour. At that point I have every right to do what I feel is needed to protect myself and any other occupants I have in the car.
I've also seen enough footage of "peaceful" protesters blocking roads and what happens to those who stop, to not give a flying fucking shit about what happens to them.

[herbie]

Listening to radio report of Stanley Park Tea House manager fired after booting someone from restaurant for wearing a MAGA hat....

[Thanos]

herbie herbie:

Listening to radio report of Stanley Park Tea House manager fired after booting someone from restaurant for wearing a MAGA hat....

Good for booting them out, even at the cost of a job. That's real patriotism in action. No service for any traitor, or for any obnoxious American visitor, who'd wear a hat like that in Canada with a trade war against us in progress.

[Zipperfish]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

If I'm not mistaken, blocking traffic in the US without a permit is a federal crime.

You are mistaken. And your post gets progressively worse from there,

Okay, I was wrong. Still illegal though. As far as I'm concerned, if you get injured while engaging in an illegal activity, you are NOT a victim. Other than of your own stupidity of course.

Here's the real issue though. People yap on about their rights to this and that with no understanding whatsoever that with those rights come responsibilities. It is YOUR responsibility to be aware of what you can and cannot do with your right to peaceful protest. Blocking roads and highways is NOT peaceful, it's passive aggressive behaviour and it IS a crime.

Yes, I'm sure most reasonable people would watch that whole thing transpire and agree that the "real issue" is that the aggressor was not the avowed Nazi deliberately plowing his car into a crowd at high speed, the real aggressor here was the woman unlawfully standing in a roadway.

Your hatred has gotten the better of your common sense, I'm afraid.

[BartSimpson]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Politics? The political views of speed bumps are irrelevant.

Note that I feel the same about cops who step in front of people's cars in order to justify murdering them.

It's not about the politics, it's about the physics.

Stepping in front of large moving objects is never a bright idea.

By the way, protesting by blocking a speeding train ain't so bright, either.

Interesting. Referring to the liberal woman run over as a "speed bump." Again, with the dehumanization effort. It's so textbook fascist that I'm actually fascinated by the process.

You spoke in a generality:

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Well the way I see it Bart and Fiddle are expressly supporting murder of people due to their politics. In a way, it's kind of relieving, because at least now it's out in the open, and statements like that convince me that I'm on the right side.

And I responded with a generality.

Now you wish to twist that around as if I was specifically referring to Heather Heyer when I was not.

You owe me an apology.

[BeaverFever]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

It is also entirely possible to shoot someone in the head without killing them. It’s still murder or attempted murder because death is a reasonably forseeable consequence. In fact even if you shoott and miss them entirely it will often be attempted murder

Just for the record you are not legally permitted to intentionally hit people with your car, even if they are illegally blocking the road.

Wait for it. Some states are introducing legislation that would protect drivers who hit those illegally blocking roads in protest. And let's face it, if you nudge an idiot with your vehicle and they still don't take the hint, fuck 'em. Not moving out of your way is aggressive behaviour. At that point I have every right to do what I feel is needed to protect myself and any other occupants I have in the car.
I've also seen enough footage of "peaceful" protesters blocking roads and what happens to those who stop, to not give a flying fucking shit about what happens to them.

I don’t think the judge is going to buy that ridiculous argument anymore than your cellmates will. For starters, nobody is forcing you to drive in their direction when you can clearly see they’re blocking the road.

I repeat: you are not legally permitted to intentionally hit people with your car, even if they are illegally blocking the road. You can’t deliberately run down jaywalkers either. That is not going to change anywhere or anytime. Anybody who doesn’t understand why doesn’t understand how democracy and the rule of law and is just a thug waiting for permission to put on a brown shirt in service of the next demagogue.

[BartSimpson]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

For starters, nobody is forcing you to drive in their direction when you can clearly see they’re blocking the road.

If you are on a limited access expressway then you are indeed forced to drive in one specific direction even if you can clearly see someone is blocking the road.

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

I repeat: you are not legally permitted to intentionally hit people with your car, even if they are illegally blocking the road. You can’t deliberately run down jaywalkers either. That is not going to change anywhere or anytime. Anybody who doesn’t understand why doesn’t understand how democracy and the rule of law and is just a thug waiting for permission to put on a brown shirt in service of the next demagogue.

Intent has a lot to do with this. I think it may be Arizona that passed a law that removes liability from drivers on limited access and high speed expressways when protesters illegally block those roads.

Even though we don't have a law covering the issue I do know in California that protesters have gotten violent with drivers they were blocking and then when the drivers fled and hit the protesters no charges were brought.

We had a few such cases this last year in Sacramento when black protesters were blocking streets over the (IMHO wrongful) shooting of Stephon Clark. They were fine blocking the streets but then they started attacking drivers in their cars and when the drivers fled then the police and the DA refused to charge the drivers with hit & run.

And that also speaks to the intent of the protesters.

If they intend to have a peaceful protest then

But if they intend on violence then I don't give a shit what happens next.

[herbie]

$1:

I think it may be Arizona that passed a law that removes liability from drivers on limited access and high speed expressways when protesters illegally block those roads.

First state to pass asshole driver laws?

[BartSimpson]

herbie herbie:

$1:

I think it may be Arizona that passed a law that removes liability from drivers on limited access and high speed expressways when protesters illegally block those roads.

First state to pass asshole driver laws?

Yes, except in Arizona they call it "Constitutional Carry".

[BeaverFever]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

For starters, nobody is forcing you to drive in their direction when you can clearly see they’re blocking the road.

If you are on a limited access expressway then you are indeed forced to drive in one specific direction even if you can clearly see someone is blocking the road.

I repeat: you are not legally permitted to intentionally hit people with your car. You can always choose to use these obscure little things called brakes and just not drive into them. Just pull over as you would for any other obstacle obstructing the roadway up ahead. .

$1:

quote="BeaverFever"]
I repeat: you are not legally permitted to intentionally hit people with your car, even if they are illegally blocking the road. You can’t deliberately run down jaywalkers either. That is not going to change anywhere or anytime. Anybody who doesn’t understand why doesn’t understand how democracy and the rule of law and is just a thug waiting for permission to put on a brown shirt in service of the next demagogue.

Intent has a lot to do with this. I think it may be Arizona that passed a law that removes liability from drivers on limited access and high speed expressways when protesters illegally block those roads. [/quote]


Even though we don't have a law covering the issue I do know in California that protesters have gotten violent with drivers they were blocking and then when the drivers fled and hit the protesters no charges were brought.

We had a few such cases this last year in Sacramento when black protesters were blocking streets over the (IMHO wrongful) shooting of Stephon Clark. They were fine blocking the streets but then they started attacking drivers in their cars and when the drivers fled then the police and the DA refused to charge the drivers with hit & run.

And that also speaks to the intent of the protesters.

If they intend to have a peaceful protest then

But if they intend on violence then I don't give a shit what happens next.[/quote]


I’m not aware of any AZ law but II repeat: you are not legally permitted to intentionally hit people with your car, even if they are illegally blocking the road. People jumping in front of speeding highway traffic or motorists being attacked by a mob in their cars are clearly different situations altogether and clearly not what’s being discussed here.

[desertdude]

Man this place is going down the shitter real fast, 12 pages of first crying that someone wasn't served and the rest defending someone who ran into a crowd of people on purpose killing a person with all sorts of verbal and mental gymnastics.

And yet no thread on 5 people shot in another mass shooting at the Capital Gazette because white non muslim fella. Bet that thread would be twice as long as this if it were a brown muzzie fella but my favourite US President already tweeted thoughts and prayers so it must be alright.

[N_Fiddledog]

desertdude desertdude:

Man this place is going down the shitter real fast, 12 pages of first crying that someone wasn't served and the rest defending someone who ran into a crowd of people on purpose killing a person with all sorts of verbal and mental gymnastics.