# 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:** 13
**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, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/241 "2018-04-04T22:09:14Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > … 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. The claim is not that one can run over “anyone in the vicinity”. It’s that one can take necessary steps to extricate oneself from a life-threatening situation. If the threat’s companions are too slow to get out of your way, that may be unfortunate, but will likely not result in a criminal conviction, at least given the one real-world scenario that either one of us has put forward for review. If you are aware of some other situation in which a fearful driver ran over a bystander to escape a threat, please provide some information about it and we can examine how it might alter our understanding of the legal landscape. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/242 "2018-04-04T22:12:48Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > What if he deliberately lays down in front of you? Then that person should be arrested and charged with a crime. But killing them is going too far. ---
**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, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/243 "2018-04-04T22:14:31Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > If the threat’s companions are too slow to get out of your way, that may be unfortunate, **but will likely not result in a criminal conviction** That’s a pretty remarkable legal claim (given the fact, as you are driving off, “companion” can mean the party of school children obscured just behind the guy whaling on your windshield). Unless you can come up with an actual legal opinion to back it up I will stick to my original opinion: Running over a random bystander because you feel threatened in your car **should** and probably **would** result in criminal conviction, no matter how valid the original threat was ---
**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, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/244 "2018-04-04T22:16:30Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > The claim is not that one can run over “anyone in the vicinity”. It’s that one can take necessary steps to extricate oneself from a life-threatening situation. If the threat’s companions are too slow to get out of your way, that may be unfortunate, but will likely not result in a criminal conviction, at least given the one real-world scenario that either one of us has put forward for review. If you are aware of some other situation in which a fearful driver ran over a bystander to escape a threat, please provide some information about it and we can examine how it might alter our understanding of the legal landscape. Jesus Christ, for someone who has criticized others for misrepresenting the proposed bill, will you clearly state for the record that nothing in this post has anything to do with the proposed bill, because the proposed bill does not require the driver to be threatened in any way? You’re just projecting this concept of self defense on all these various scenarios, when the bill is actually not about anyone being threatened at all. ---
**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, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/245 "2018-04-04T22:19:53Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > 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. Where did I say that about “someone swinging a bat”? IIRC, my “snowflake” comment was about protesters in the street (where they have not “lawfully entered”) being nudged aside by a slow-moving vehicle. > [@Ravenman](#): > > 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. I am not at all convinced that they were “well visible” to the driver. It was night, most of the crowd was still on the side of the road. The part that I think was “being treated poorly” is that he has to face a civil suit and all the expense, stress, and time-consuming aggravation that entails because the protesters “were stupidly in the freeway”. I’d prefer he didn’t have to undergo all that for a sequence of events that I see as largely / entirely the fault of the protesters themselves. ---
**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, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/246 "2018-04-04T22:24:32Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > … I will stick to my original opinion: > > Running over a random bystander because you feel threatened in your car **should** and probably **would** result in criminal conviction, no matter how valid the original threat was Except that it did NOT result in a criminal conviction in the one case we are aware of that fits those parameters. (Mieses was a random bystander run over by Lien, who justifiably felt threatened, and Lien was not convicted). Your opinion is at odds with reality (but you are, of course, more than welcome to continue holding it). ---
**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, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/247 "2018-04-04T22:34:24Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Jesus Christ, for someone who has criticized others for misrepresenting the proposed bill, will you clearly state for the record that nothing in this post has anything to do with the proposed bill, because the proposed bill does not require the driver to be threatened in any way? > > You’re just projecting this concept of self defense on all these various scenarios, when the bill is actually not about anyone being threatened at all. I have not claimed that SB 1096 has anything to do with self defense. It quite evidently does not. There are (at least) two separate strands of this thread, and I’m participating in both. One of them, with **griffin1977** (and encompassing the post of mine that you quoted), discusses whether one is justified in running people over when facing a threat of great bodily harm. We’ve been discussing Lien and the Hollywood Stuntz rally. It got started when andros asked “When is it acceptable to commit assault with a deadly weapon?” in post #7 and I responded in post #9. Another strand of this thread, running in parallel to that discussion, is my conversation with you and a few others about whether SB 1096 is good public policy. I think it is. You do not. Neither one of us thinks it has anything to do with self-defense in the face of a genuine threat to one’s safety. ---
**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, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/248 "2018-04-04T22:36:30Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Except that it did NOT result in a criminal conviction in the one case we are aware of that fits those parameters. (Mieses was a random bystander run over by Lien, who justifiably felt threatened, and Lien was not convicted). Your opinion is at odds with reality (but you are, of course, more than welcome to continue holding it). You are saying he was a random bystander, hanging out in the roadway, and not one of the bikers? ---
**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, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/249 "2018-04-04T22:39:24Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > The claim is not that one can run over “anyone in the vicinity”. It’s that one can take necessary steps to extricate oneself from a life-threatening situation. If the threat’s companions are too slow to get out of your way, that may be unfortunate, but will likely not result in a criminal conviction, at least given the one real-world scenario that either one of us has put forward for review. If you are aware of some other situation in which a fearful driver ran over a bystander to escape a threat, please provide some information about it and we can examine how it might alter our understanding of the legal landscape. [Driver Found Guilty In Comic-Con 2014 Accident Trial](http://deadline.com/2015/12/zombiewalk-driver-guilty-verdict-matthew-pocci-2014-comic-con-accident-1201607237/) > [@](#): > > The deaf motorist and SDCC volunteer struck a 64-year-old woman on July 26, 2014, as he drove his car through an overflowing crowd watching that year’s annual ZombieWalk. Pocci testified in the weeklong trial that he felt “very nervous” on his way out the San Diego Convention Center that day while costumed revelers and pedestrians filled the streets. Pocci’s girlfriend, her mother and 9-year-old son also were in the car; the two other adults are also hearing impaired. > > After stopping his car for a while at the Gaslamp Quarter intersection of Island Avenue and Second Avenue, Pocci claimed he was waved through by those on the street. He only stepped on the gas after feeling threatened when two men in costume leapt on the front of his car. As video that Deadline posted that week showed, one of the men started smashing Pocci’s front windshield. > > During the trial, Deputy DA Anthony Campagna told jurors that an impatient Pocci was hitting the horn on his car “loudly, aggressively” before driving into the parade crowd after a pedicab pulled in front of him. Witness claim that they were yelling at Pocci to stop and putting their hands up to indicate that as well. His car drove over the female victim’s arm, breaking it. Pocci stopped a couple blocks later and waited for the SDPD to arrive. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/250 "2018-04-04T22:39:57Z")
> [@andros](#): > > 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. > . Kinda like voter fraud, huh? ---
**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, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/251 "2018-04-04T22:39:59Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > You are saying he was a random bystander, hanging out in the roadway, and not one of the bikers? He was not one of the ones threatening Lien. See post #152. ---
**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, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/252 "2018-04-04T22:45:22Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Where did I say that about “someone swinging a bat”? IIRC, my “snowflake” comment was about protesters in the street (where they have not “lawfully entered”) being nudged aside by a slow-moving vehicle. Your response to this issue affirms my view that your opinion on this matter is inseparable from your disdain for liberal protesters in general. > [@](#): > > I am not at all convinced that they were “well visible” to the driver. It was night, most of the crowd was still on the side of the road. The part that I think was “being treated poorly” is that he has to face a civil suit and all the expense, stress, and time-consuming aggravation that entails because the protesters “were stupidly in the freeway”. I’d prefer he didn’t have to undergo all that for a sequence of events that I see as largely / entirely the fault of the protesters themselves. You saw the video, right? How long was the crowd in the freeway before the woman was struck? Do you consider a driver who reportedly evaded a police effort to slow down traffic to be exercising due care? And again, I’m pretty sure you don’t care to have the obvious negligence of this driver to be questioned by a judge or jury on the merits of the facts, probably because you’re rather happy to see protesters in general punished for not being the type of people you prefer. ---
**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, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/253 "2018-04-04T23:54:15Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > Kinda like voter fraud, huh? Very similar indeed. . ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2018, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/254 "2018-04-05T04:10:06Z")
Just wait till the MS-13 caravan clears the border and joins up with Antifas! ---
**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 5, 2018, 4:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/255 "2018-04-05T04:20:38Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Just wait till the MS-13 caravan clears the border … Well, that is why USNG are being sent to watch the border, to stop those guys (who already have a major presence in LA). ---
**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 5, 2018, 6:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/256 "2018-04-05T06:47:58Z")
> [@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) > > > [@](#): > > > > (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. The highlighting above is mine. Seems to me if a person tries to push their car through a crowd they will be provoked so the person driving the car has no legal protection for being in fear for their life. You cannot walk into a bar filled with African Americans and yell “nigger” and then shoot them when they get pissed because you are in “fear for your life” and expect to not go to jail for it. ---
**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 5, 2018, 7:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/257 "2018-04-05T07:27:00Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > The highlighting above is mine. > > Seems to me if a person tries to push their car through a crowd they will be provoked so the person driving the car has no legal protection for being in fear for their life. > > You cannot walk into a bar filled with African Americans and yell “nigger” and then shoot them when they get pissed because you are in “fear for your life” and expect to not go to jail for it. Missed the edit… “They” above being the crowd…not the driver. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2018, 9:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/258 "2018-04-05T09:03:20Z")
It doesn’t matter what the protesters are doing or what side they are protesting. You don’t push through them with your car. If they are breaking the law, you call the police–you don’t get to enforce the law by driving on through, and hoping they’ll get out of the way. If you do, and someone gets hurt, that’s your fault. And, even if no one does get hurt, there’s a chance they will, so it makes sense to legally discourage such tactics. The only exception I can come up with is some sort of genuine emergency where either you are yourself in danger, or you need to hurry along to save someone else. But, otherwise, I don’t get to assault someone just so I can get somewhere on time. Now maybe an illegal U-turn, I could justify. U-turn and take another route. Point out the protesters when you get wherever you were going, if they are upset at you for being late. But vehicular assault? No. The idea that my entitlement to drive on a street is as important as their entitlement against assault is ridiculous. Yes, **Shodan** , even if they are wearing MAGA hats. I may wish they didn’t exist, but that doesn’t entitle me to harm them. ---
**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2018, 11:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/259 "2018-04-05T11:17:21Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Then that person should be arrested and charged with a crime. > > But killing them is going too far. And if others are attacking you and you’re in fear for your life you just have to take it because God forbid you should hurt their accomplice who is lying down to stop you escaping? You may be prepared to nobly give up your life in such circumstances. Most people sensibly wouldn’t. They would drive off and let the courts sort it out later. ---
**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 5, 2018, 11:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/260 "2018-04-05T11:20:05Z")
> [@aldiboronti](#): > > And if others are attacking you and you’re in fear for your life you just have to take it because God forbid you should hurt their accomplice who is lying down to stop you escaping? You may be prepared to nobly give up your life in such circumstances. Most people sensibly wouldn’t. They would drive off and let the courts sort it out later. And as I demonstrated with my cite, you will be found guilty. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732.md?page=14)