# When should a person have the right to drive thru a crowd of demonstrators? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 3, 2018, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732 "2018-04-03T17:20:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![Uncommon\_Sense](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Uncommon\_Sense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uncommon_Sense)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/221 "2018-04-04T20:14:32Z")
> [@Airbeck](#): > > No I think the idea is: > > Don’t Kill People With Your Car > > Is it really that hard to figure out how to not do that? No, not always. I’ve been pinned in a dangerous situation on a motorcycle before. I took a detour around a construction site and ended up behind a bus on a side street with LOTS of people in the street blocking traffic. It was in a seedy part of town where frequent gang activity and car jackings occur. It also happens to be a shortcut through the city during rush-hour. I got some nasty looks and if any one of them wanted to they could have pushed me off my bike and stole it. Or robbed me. I felt a bit panicked, but nothing happened. My point is, sometimes you end up somewhere by making a bad decision. This bad decision could have ended differently. My intentions were good, I did not realize the route I took would be blocked until I committed to the turn. If I would have been in a car and someone tried to car jack me, you can be assured I would have panicked and ran some people over. This happened in Milwaukee where car jacking have been a\*\* thing\*\* lately. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/222 "2018-04-04T20:24:46Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Or is it you think rolling down your window and talking to them will incite the peaceful protestors to riot? Well, given what we know about him … ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/223 "2018-04-04T20:35:35Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > But at some point, what goes around comes around, and the fact that they are making my life marginally more miserable means that I may have to take steps to make their lives equally miserable. Under the legal doctrine established in Oh Yeah? v. Yeah! ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/224 "2018-04-04T20:55:46Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Fine, if someone starts swinging a baseball bat and approaching you, I maintain that you cannot draw your weapon and shoot them, because you’d just be acting on whatever psychological trauma that a special snowflake might feel by having to step out of the way of a maniac with a baseball bat and refusing to stop. … You are free to “maintain” whatever you like. It doesn’t matter to me. The laws of the state I live in ([and most states, really](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand-your-ground_law#/media/File:Stand-your-ground_law_by_US_jurisdiction.svg)) disagree, and they are what will be applied if someone shoots a bat-wielding protester, not whatever you choose to “maintain”. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/225 "2018-04-04T20:59:35Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > You are free to “maintain” whatever you like. It doesn’t matter to me. The laws of the state I live in ([and most states, really](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand-your-ground_law#/media/File:Stand-your-ground_law_by_US_jurisdiction.svg)) disagree, and they are what will be applied if someone shoots a bat-wielding protester, not whatever you choose to “maintain”. So, by the laws of your state, if someone is threatening you with a car, you may shoot them as well? ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/226 "2018-04-04T21:00:46Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > … Just fucking roll your window down, stick your head out of it, and negotiate for passage. … I’ve seen people try that tactic too, and it seems to rarely work. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/227 "2018-04-04T21:07:59Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > So, by the laws of your state, if someone is threatening you with a car, you may shoot them as well? Yes, generally. Car, bat, brick, any deadly weapon. There are a couple of caveats that you should understand though, because they might apply if you’re thinking that protesters can just take over a street arbitrarily and shoot anyone who tries to nudge their vehicle through. I’ll highlight some potentially-applicable ones below [Utah Code 76-2-402 - Force in defense of person](https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title76/Chapter2/76-2-S402.html) > [@](#): > > (1) > (a) A person is justified in threatening or using force against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that force or a threat of force is necessary to defend the person or a third person against another person’s imminent use of unlawful force. > (b) A person is justified in using force intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily injury **only if the person reasonably believes that force is necessary to prevent death or serious bodily injury** to the person or a third person as a result of another person’s imminent use of unlawful force, or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony. > (2) > (a) A person is not justified in using force under the circumstances specified in Subsection (1) if the person: > (i) **initially provokes the use of force against the person** with the intent to use force as an excuse to inflict bodily harm upon the assailant; > (ii) is attempting to commit, committing, or fleeing after the commission or attempted commission of a felony; or > (iii) **was the aggressor** or was engaged in a combat by agreement, unless the person withdraws from the encounter and effectively communicates to the other person his intent to do so and, notwithstanding, the other person continues or threatens to continue the use of unlawful force. > (b) For purposes of Subsection (2)(a)(iii) the following do not, by themselves, constitute “combat by agreement”: > (i) voluntarily entering into or remaining in an ongoing relationship; or > (ii) entering or remaining in a place where one has a legal right to be. > (3) A person does not have a duty to retreat from the force or threatened force described in Subsection (1) **in a place where that person has lawfully entered or remained** , except as provided in Subsection (2)(a)(iii). > (4) > (a) For purposes of this section, a forcible felony includes aggravated assault, mayhem, aggravated murder, murder, manslaughter, kidnapping, and aggravated kidnapping, rape, forcible sodomy, rape of a child, object rape, object rape of a child, sexual abuse of a child, aggravated sexual abuse of a child, and aggravated sexual assault as defined in Title 76, Chapter 5, Offenses Against the Person, and arson, robbery, and burglary as defined in Title 76, Chapter 6, Offenses Against Property. > (b) Any other felony offense which involves the use of force or violence against a person so as to create a substantial danger of death or serious bodily injury also constitutes a forcible felony. > (c) Burglary of a vehicle, defined in Section 76-6-204, does not constitute a forcible felony except when the vehicle is occupied at the time unlawful entry is made or attempted. > (5) In determining imminence or reasonableness under Subsection (1), the trier of fact may consider, but is not limited to, any of the following factors: > (a) **the nature of the danger** ; > (b) **the immediacy of the danger** ; > (c) **the probability that the unlawful force would result in death or serious bodily injury** ; > (d) **the other’s prior violent acts or violent propensities** ; and > (e) any patterns of abuse or violence in the parties’ relationship. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/228 "2018-04-04T21:11:52Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > That’s how it started out: > At that point, the rally participants escalated, by striking the vehicle, which is common in these situations with protester too This was a gang of people assaulting someone with dangerous weapons, it had nothing to do with anyone protesting anyone, or blocking anyone’s path. No amount of inconvenience inflicted on your daily commute time justifies killing someone. Morally or legally. Having your life threatened in an immediate way (e.g. by a gang of people attacking your car with a dangerous weapon) entitles you to take reasonable action in self defense. Whether that happens in a protest or an back alley make no difference. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/229 "2018-04-04T21:25:19Z")
@ **griffin1977** ;20885368] I think we’re largely in agreement. [Here is another video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-C3WgYhZfc), this one happened at an anti-Trump protest in Portland. So far as I know, the driver didn’t actually run anyone over to make his escape, but I’m curious if you agree that he would have been justified in doing so, around say 1:10-1:20 in the video. If he had punched the accelerator at that point and squished some protesters to escape, and you end up on the jury at his trial, do you vote guilty or not (based off the information you have from the video)? ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/230 "2018-04-04T21:25:20Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Yes, generally. Car, bat, brick, any deadly weapon. There are a couple of caveats that you should understand though, because they might apply if you’re thinking that protesters can just take over a street arbitrarily and shoot anyone who tries to nudge their vehicle through. I’ll highlight some potentially-applicable ones below > > [Utah Code 76-2-402 - Force in defense of person](https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title76/Chapter2/76-2-S402.html) I don’t see anything in that that does not justify a protester shooting and killing a motorist who is pushing their way through the crowd. The car is posing a danger to them and to others. They are not the aggressor or provoking use of force. Also, I note that in your response to **Ravenman** , you called the bat wielder a protestor. That is not the scenario here. In this scenario, you are the protestor, and the bat wielder is the person trying to get you to move out of the way. ---
**Author:** ![Uncommon\_Sense](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Uncommon\_Sense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uncommon_Sense)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/231 "2018-04-04T21:26:30Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > If you are on the freeway and there’s a traffic jam, do you think you have the right to just start pushing cars out of your way with your own car? If the car behind me had a bazooka aimed at me? Or if the cars around me were all illegally protesting? We need more info… ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/232 "2018-04-04T21:29:33Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > …I’m curious if you agree that he would have been justified in doing so, around say 1:10-1:20 in the video. If he had punched the accelerator at that point and squished some protesters to escape, and you end up on the jury at his trial, do you vote guilty or not (based off the information you have from the video)? Is he squishing protestors threatening him or just protestors in general? ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/233 "2018-04-04T21:34:59Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > I don’t see anything in that that does not justify a protester shooting and killing a motorist who is pushing their way through the crowd. The car is posing a danger to them and to others. They are not the aggressor or provoking use of force. It depends on the protest. Watch the Portland video I just posted. _Those protesters_ were certainly the aggressors and provoking use of force (IMHO). But even in the case of a peaceful protest, something like the video from the OP. Would you say that those guys blocking traffic in the street were “in a place where that person has lawfully entered or remained”? I would certainly not. > [@k9bfriender](#): > > Also, I note that in your response to **Ravenman** , you called the bat wielder a protestor. That is not the scenario here. In this scenario, you are the protestor, and the bat wielder is the person trying to get you to move out of the way. If someone is in a place that they have lawfully entered (and not otherwise subject to the various exceptions to the law), and someone else wants to dislodge them by swinging a bat and approaching them, they can shoot them, and the shooting will be a justified action by the laws of my state (and many other states). ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/234 "2018-04-04T21:36:22Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Is he squishing protestors threatening him or just protestors in general? Let’s go with protesters in general (at least at first), in the same way that Lien ran over a motorcyclist in general, not necessarily one of the ones causing the threat. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/235 "2018-04-04T21:41:23Z")
I work in downtown Portland. A while back, a co-worker and I were looking down on Broadway at a nascent protest. He commented something along the lines of “Boy, I feel sorry for the people parked down there when the protesters start breaking things.” I was startled almost silent, then managed “Dude. It’s the Women’s March. They aren’t anarchists.” His automatic assumption was that any protest–particularly by “liberals”–will always involve violence and vandalism. IME, this knee-jerk thinking is not rare, particularly among the conservative, older, and white. If it’s a march, a rally, a protest, it’s just going to turn violent. Because that’s what plays on television and other media. The hundreds of peaceful protests are irrelevant; hell, they probably don’t even _exist_ in some peoples’ minds. (Just as a small number of assholes turns any protest into a riot in some peoples’ minds.) I think I bring this up only to suggest that this entire issue, the entire thread, is based on situations that are vanishingly rare…but are nevertheless seen by many as a very real, regular occurrence. . ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/236 "2018-04-04T21:43:07Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Let’s go with protesters in general, in the same way the Lien ran over a motorcyclist in general, not necessarily one of the ones causing the threat. Which he would probably have prosecuted for but for the fact one of the attackers turned out to be a undercover cop, so the DA decided it was not good for his career to bring the case to trial (at the same time as he was prosecuting the cop in question) There are two basic facts here: - Being inconvenienced by a protester or anyone else does not give you the right to run them over - Being threatened or attacked by a protester or anyone else gives you the right to respond reasonably in self-defense, not the right run over anyone in the vicinity Unless you can find an actual legal cite that says otherwise. I will maintain my position that if you deliberately run someone over, who is not presenting an immediate threat to your life, you are morally and legal guilty of assault or murder. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/237 "2018-04-04T21:46:41Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > It depends on the protest. Watch the Portland video I just posted. _Those protesters_ were certainly the aggressors and provoking use of force (IMHO). This much is not evident. If he was attempting to drive his vehicle into the gathering of people, then, no, I would say they were not the aggressors. > [@](#): > > But even in the case of a peaceful protest, something like the video from the OP. Would you say that those guys blocking traffic in the street were “in a place where that person has lawfully entered or remained”? I would certainly not. In the case of Portland, I would be very cautious about making pronouncements about what is “lawful entry”, but in any case, if there is someone or something in your way, your are very probably not entitled to run it/them down. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/238 "2018-04-04T21:48:16Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > Which he would probably have prosecuted for but for the fact one of the attackers turned out to be a undercover cop, so the DA decided it was not good for his career to bring the case to trial (at the same time as he was prosecuting the cop in question) Do you have any evidence to support this claim? Did the DA make a public statement to that effect? Have there been other similar cases, without the UC wrinkle in which the fearful motorist _was_ prosecuted? What makes you think “he would probably have” if not for the UC? The DA charged (and won convictions against) 10 other motorcyclists that were NOT undercover cops. As far as I can tell, if it had only been the 10 non-UC motorcyclists vs Lien, the DA still would have charged the 10 and not Lien. > [@griffin1977](#): > > … Unless you can find an actual legal cite that says otherwise. I will maintain my position that if you deliberately run someone over who is not presenting an immediate threat to your life you are morally and legal guilty of assault or murder. I’ve already found a cite. You’re not legally guilty of assault in NYC. We’ve got a real-life example of that, and no assault charge, let alone a conviction. What have you got? “I will maintain my position” (in the face of all facts to the contrary)? Anything more than that? ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/239 "2018-04-04T21:53:31Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I’ve already found a cite. You’re not legally guilty of assault in NYC. We’ve got a real-life example of that, and no assault charge, let alone a conviction. What have you got? “I will maintain” (in the face of all facts to the contrary)? Anything more than that? That is the absence of a cite. There is no “state of NYC vs Lein”. That could be for a whole host of reasons. The fact they were pursuing a criminal prosecution against that cop is a pretty good one IMO, but we’ll never know. Someone getting away with running some people over is not a cite. In order to prove the (pretty unbelievable IMO) claim that US laws says being threatened in your car gives you the right to run over anyone in the vicinity you’ll need to show a court case where that opinion was successfully presented in court. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/240 "2018-04-04T22:07:37Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > You are free to “maintain” whatever you like. It doesn’t matter to me. The laws of the state I live in ([and most states, really](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand-your-ground_law#/media/File:Stand-your-ground_law_by_US_jurisdiction.svg)) disagree, and they are what will be applied if someone shoots a bat-wielding protester, not whatever you choose to “maintain”. Look, you are the one who literally said that someone swinging a bat and advancing on a person is merely hurting the feelings of a snowflake. I essentially asked if you would see it differently if you were the “snowflake” in question, and it is now clear that the answer to my question is a resounding YES. Let me get back to the UCSD events. You said the driver was being treated poorly. I watched the video in which he basically went full speed toward a group of people who were stupidly in the freeway, but almost certainly well visible, and only hit the brakes after he entered the crowd. I must ask again how you think someone who appears to be under absolutely no threat is justified in going full speed into people, and what happened to him that you see as unfair. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732.md?page=13)