# 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:** 17
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2018, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/321 "2018-04-05T19:18:16Z")
> [@ZPG\_Zealot](#): > > One of “Operation Rescue”, a anti-abortion terrorist group, frequent tactics was laying done in front of cars or otherwise blocking roadways to prevent people from entering abortion clinics (or sometimes merely Planned Parenthood clinics in general). I often encountered these fetus worshiping lunatics and often did want to run over them with my car. But you know what, I didn’t because I respect the law and value my freedom more than I was angered by their behavior. They shouldn’t block traffic. I’d support legislation that protects drivers who _unintentionally_ hit them. ---
**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, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/322 "2018-04-05T19:20:05Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > They shouldn’t block traffic. I’d support legislation that protects drivers who _unintentionally_ hit them. Would prosecutors have to prove the intentions of the driver? ---
**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 5, 2018, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/323 "2018-04-05T19:23:59Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I’ve read conflicting reports about how much evading and ignoring happened. I believe I mentioned that in an earlier post. He drove by a cop that was trying to get him to stop. That’s simply factual. > [@](#): > > No, not aggressive or provoking, but also definitely not in a place they had lawfully entered or remained. Well, you originally said that the crowd was aggressive and provoking to this innocent driver. Are you now acknowledging that that is not the case, and that they were not aggressive or provoking until the driver drove into them? > [@](#): > > I’m glad you like it. The point was to contrast with the violent Portland protest, not make an allusion to “the majority of protests”. I know many are non-violent. The Tea Party protests were examples of that. As this thread is about protests and when you can drive your car into them, and you are saying that you can do so when you are in fear for your life, and you only have a reasonable fear for your life if the protest is violent, it is an important distinction, and it is also important to point outta the vast majority of demonstrations, on both left and right, are peaceful assemblies, and so would not have anything to make you fear. > [@](#): > > I suspect that incidents of mugging jaywalkers in the middle of the street are rare enough that our laws weren’t written to accommodate them. Sort of like if two separate burglars entered the same home and encountered each other. It’s an edge case that I don’t think this law was written in consideration of. Not so much more of an edge case than the exceedingly rare times that you find yourself caught up in a violent protest or riot and have to shove your way through the crowd. IANAL, but I doubt that jaywalking is what legislators had in mind for removing your duty to retreat. > [@](#): > > I suppose that’s one argument your lawyer could make if you chose to pursue that course of action. It would certainly be an uncomfortable level of legal jeopardy for me personally (mostly because of the “legally entered or remained” clause). I suspect here that if a car was slowly nudging it’s way through a crowd of protesters in the street like the video from the OP, and you decided to shoot the driver, you’d end up getting prosecuted and likely convicted. There are specific facts that could alter that assessment. And if you see a person trapped in front of the car, knocked down and about to be crushed, would you protect them from the driver’s assault, or worry about the uncomfortable level of legal jeopardy you personally may encounter? > [@](#): > > “legally entered or remained” Okay, so if you have entered the street as a jaywalker, and someone tells you to get out of the street or else, and starts advancing towards you while swinging a baseball bat, you have no right to defend yourself? > [@](#): > > The law doesn’t say anything like “therefore you can run them down”. You apparently don’t understand what you’re talking about. Two points to consider there. First point, the law does say that you will face no legal or civil penalties for harming them with your car, which “runn[ing] them down” is short for. Second point, if you see at the end of my line, I put a [/jk], which means that I was speaking facetiously. But your attempt at insulting dismissal is noted and dismissed. ---
**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 5, 2018, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/324 "2018-04-05T19:27:36Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > They shouldn’t block traffic. I’d support legislation that protects drivers who _unintentionally_ hit them. The law as it stands generally protects people who unintentionally do bad things insofar as they were not negligent. What’s wrong with that? Why the big need to protect negligent people? ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2018, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/325 "2018-04-05T19:29:49Z")
nc ---
**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 5, 2018, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/326 "2018-04-05T19:44:30Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > This is hilarious actually. Did you even read your own cite? > > I think you just proved the point of that cite’s author. > > TL;DR (which is apparently _really_ needed in **eschereal** ’s case) = WRONG!!! While he should have checked the source better, he only repeated what the author claimed. So, yes, falling for the author’s lies is not great, but that is not “proving the point of the author”, it is just incorrectly believing that the author is not a liar. In order to prove his point, he would have had to be doing original reporting on the incident, and come up with something like what the author fabricated. So esceheral, you have been successfully trolled by your own cite. Oops. Fortunately, you have done nothing like proving his point. But, I would recommend reading to the end of the articles, as it is entirely possible that you are being trolled by a right wing liar. Now, as far as violent tea partiers, here’s a few links with a bit better vetting. [https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2009/1118/violence-at-tea-party-rally-bare-knuckle-politics-in-the-streets](https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2009/1118/violence-at-tea-party-rally-bare-knuckle-politics-in-the-streets) > [@](#): > > When two Tea Party activists entered their protest zone, a fight erupted as Tea Party and ANSWER protesters kicked and punched one another and spilled into the middle of a busy intersection. Is it okay to run these guys over, they are in the street? [Here’s some violent tea partiers.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6mCTU4NpRQ) Best not be a part of the media, exercising _your_ first amendment rights in a way they don’t want you to. [They are not just violent at protests](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/tea-party-getting-violent-10-house-dems-report-threats-vandalism/), but are violent towards legislators and their families as well. ---
**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, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/327 "2018-04-05T19:58:35Z")
“Union thugs”. A zombie political chimera rises from the graveyard of Eisenhower-era editorial cartoons. Always swarthy, unshaven, vaguely ethnic, an inch or so of cheap cigar sticking out of their cheek. Union thugs Wobblie, but they don’t fall down. “Granpa, tell us again about the Union Thug and the Three Little Job Creators!” ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2018, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/328 "2018-04-05T20:05:27Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > … the author’s lies … just incorrectly believing that the author is not a liar. … a right wing liar. … What about that was a lie? He gave an example story and then said, “That’s how I believe the main stream media and lefty websites would have reported the left wing violence …”. That’s not a “lie”, that’s an opinion. Or are you one of those Dopers with an odd definition of “liar”? ---
**Author:** ![Urbanredneck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ea5d25/32.png) [@Urbanredneck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Urbanredneck)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2018, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/329 "2018-04-05T20:10:14Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > They shouldn’t block traffic. I’d support legislation that protects drivers who _unintentionally_ hit them. I think it also should depend on when and where. For example, dont walk out onto a busy highway where thousands of vehicles (cars, semis) go by at 60 mph every hour and where there is literally, NO PLACE to go around. Drivers might be patient for maybe 5-10 minutes before you will start seeing some come thru and no damn law will stop them. But I can see maybe a downtown area where cars can easily go around. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2018, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/330 "2018-04-05T20:17:51Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > … Well, you originally said that the crowd was aggressive and provoking to this innocent driver. Are you now acknowledging that that is not the case, and that they were not aggressive or provoking until the driver drove into them? … Where did I say this? I don’t believe I’ve ever claimed that the driver in the UCSD incident was ever “provoked” by the crowd or that they were “aggressive” towards him. I DID say that about the crowd in the Portland protester, where the crowd attacked the vehicle. I think you probably misunderstood that I was talking about two separate incidents, but it’s also possible I didn’t make that distinction clear in my posts. > [@k9bfriender](#): > > As this thread is about protests and when you can drive your car into them, and you are saying that you can do so when you are in fear for your life, and you only have a reasonable fear for your life if the protest is violent, it is an important distinction, and it is also important to point outta the vast majority of demonstrations, on both left and right, are peaceful assemblies, and so would not have anything to make you fear. Yes, I agree. The cases where a driver has a reasonable fear for his safety from protesters are quite rare. > [@k9bfriender](#): > > And if you see a person trapped in front of the car, knocked down and about to be crushed, would you protect them from the driver’s assault, or worry about the uncomfortable level of legal jeopardy you personally may encounter? If by “protect them” you mean would I shoot the driver? No, probably not, unless the person was a close friend or family member, or I was exceedingly confident that I understood the entirety of the incident. It’s probably worth mentioning here also that shooting the driver is not a good way to stop a vehicle. In many cases, it won’t do it quickly enough to avoid whoever is in front of the vehicle getting crushed. You and the potential-crushee would probably be better served by working to get them out of the path of the vehicle in most cases. > [@k9bfriender](#): > > Okay, so if you have entered the street as a jaywalker, and someone tells you to get out of the street or else, and starts advancing towards you while swinging a baseball bat, you have no right to defend yourself? In Utah, you’d probably be fine if you shot the bat-wielder, but I’d be a bit less confident of your legal footing than if you were standing on the sidewalk. ---
**Author:** ![Urbanredneck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ea5d25/32.png) [@Urbanredneck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Urbanredneck)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2018, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/331 "2018-04-05T20:20:36Z")
Ok, how about this? Lets say the law says I as a driver cannot drive thru protesters. How about a law AGAINST blocking traffic with stiff penalties so the drivers know the protesters will NOT get off scot free? Along with this put up signs on highway entrance ramps warning persons NOT to try and stop traffic and reminding them of the heavy penalties they will see? You see, my idea is to eliminate the problem. Get the idea out of these idiots heads that standing in the street blocking traffic is nothing but a big joke with no consequences and if you do, your ass will get arrested and you will spend time in jail and pay a heavy fine. Double the penalties for blocking a major highway. ---
**Author:** ![Urbanredneck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ea5d25/32.png) [@Urbanredneck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Urbanredneck)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2018, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/332 "2018-04-05T20:22:50Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > They shouldn’t block traffic. I’d support legislation that protects drivers who _unintentionally_ hit them. Do you support legislation making it a crime with stiff penalties to block roads? ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2018, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/333 "2018-04-05T20:23:25Z")
> [@Urbanredneck](#): > > Do you support legislation making it a crime with stiff penalties to block roads? Yeah, generally I’d be supportive of laws along those lines. ---
**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 5, 2018, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/334 "2018-04-05T20:28:32Z")
> [@Urbanredneck](#): > > How about a law AGAINST blocking traffic with stiff penalties so the drivers know the protesters will NOT get off scot free? > > Along with this put up signs on highway entrance ramps warning persons NOT to try and stop traffic and reminding them of the heavy penalties they will see? While everyone may have different views on what “heavy penalties” may be, sure. I have zero problem with it. But something tells me that you may be thinking more like “10 years in prison!” and I’m thinking more like “$5,000 fine!” ---
**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 5, 2018, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/335 "2018-04-05T20:36:15Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > What about that was a lie? He gave an example story and then said, “That’s how I believe the main stream media and lefty websites would have reported the left wing violence …”. That’s not a “lie”, that’s an opinion. Or are you one of those Dopers with an odd definition of “liar”? It is not an odd definition. A liar is someone who says things that are not true. He made up an entire story, complete with commentary by liberal pundits. Then after “the fold” he fesses up. While I do agree that it was poor research on **e** ’s part, you made the claim that it proved the author’s point. I disagree, I just see that he fell for the author’s lies. > [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Where did I say this? I don’t believe I’ve ever claimed that the driver in the UCSD incident was ever “provoked” by the crowd or that they were “aggressive” towards him. I DID say that about the crowd in the Portland protester, where the crowd attacked the vehicle. I think you probably misunderstood that I was talking about two separate incidents, but it’s also possible I didn’t make that distinction clear in my posts. You are probably right, I don’t know that I want to try to scroll and track down the post, so I’ll agree for now that I misunderstood and that I thought you were talking about one when you were talking about the other. > [@](#): > > Yes, I agree. The cases where a driver has a reasonable fear for his safety from protesters are quite rare. Yet we need a law to deal with these extreme edge cases? Personally, on edge cases, I prefer to just do what seems most reasonable at the time, and hope to justify myself in front of my peers. If I found myself in trouble and in fear of my or my family’s life, I wouldn’t be looking up the law to see what my options are, I’d be doing what I feel needs doing. It’s like the torture thing. People claim that we need to have torture legal for a “ticking time bomb scenario”, and I disagree entirely. In the extremely unlikely case that torture will save lives, then I will be considering the questions of whether I could live with myself after torturing someone, and whether I could get the information, not as to what the legal status is. I’d leave that to a jury of my peers as well. If we made torture legal under certain circumstances, then that would open it up to abuse as people manage to engineer those circumstances that get them off on a technicality. I feel the same way about these sorts of laws. They are unnecessary, as the courts can already reduce or dismiss your case due to extenuating circumstances, so having a law that can be engineered for abuse is counter productive. > [@](#): > > If by “protect them” you mean would I shoot the driver? No, probably not, unless the person was a close friend or family member, or I was exceedingly confident that I understood the entirety of the incident. It’s probably worth mentioning here also that shooting the driver is not a good way to stop a vehicle. In many cases, it won’t do it quickly enough to avoid whoever is in front of the vehicle getting crushed. You and the potential-crushee would probably be better served by working to get them out of the path of the vehicle in most cases. If you or the potential crushee cannot get out of the way of the vehicle, as you are in a big crowd that is being compressed by the vehicle, then trying to get out of the way is just allowing yourself to get killed. Sure, shooting the driver may not stop the car, but it will make it easier to reach in and put the car in park. Would you attempt to stop the driver in any way? I don’t carry a gun, especially not to a protest, but I could certainly see breaking the window, and knocking out the driver to take control of the vehicle that he is currently using to injure people. > [@](#): > > In Utah, you’d probably be fine if you shot the bat-wielder, but I’d be a bit less confident of your legal footing than if you were standing on the sidewalk. I still don’t see the difference between someone approaching you with a bat and with a 2 ton vehicle. ---
**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, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/336 "2018-04-05T21:10:22Z")
> [@Urbanredneck](#): > > How about a law AGAINST blocking traffic with stiff penalties so the drivers know the protesters will NOT get off scot free? It is already illegal to impede traffic. The police don’t seem to enforce it against protestors. Not sure how strong you want the penalties to be but it is pointless if the police won’t enforce it anyway. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2018, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/337 "2018-04-05T22:49:18Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > It is not an odd definition. A liar is someone who says things that are not true. He made up an entire story, complete with commentary by liberal pundits. Then after “the fold” he fesses up. **eschereal** said something that wasn’t true in post #319, but I certainly wouldn’t call him/her a liar. S/He was just mistaken. I think you would benefit greatly from a more refined definition of “liar” (personally I think it’s one of the best things I’ve learned from the SDMB), but carry on as you please. > [@k9bfriender](#): > > … Would you attempt to stop the driver in any way? I don’t carry a gun, especially not to a protest, but I could certainly see breaking the window, and knocking out the driver to take control of the vehicle that he is currently using to injure people. I have a hard time envisioning me being anywhere near one of these protests that block traffic. I detest them and would not participate. If I happened to be nearby, and saw a vehicle-protester confrontation, I would be unlikely to insert myself in the middle of it. If, by some crazy confluence of circumstances, I was the one about to be crushed, and truly couldn’t move out of the path of the vehicle, I would certainly try to take action to stop the driver, although I think the probability of success is quite low. > [@k9bfriender](#): > > I still don’t see the difference between someone approaching you with a bat and with a 2 ton vehicle. Both a bat and a 2 ton vehicle can be deadly weapons. If the vehicle is moving at 1 MPH and honking and the driver is yelling at people to get out of the way, and the people have room to move aside, as happened in the video in the OP, I think one would be hard-pressed to successfully make the case there that the vehicle was being used as a deadly weapon and that one was justified in harming the driver. If, for example, someone in Charlottesville had turned around at the last second and seen the Dodge coming towards them, I think they would have been justified in shooting at the driver. Can you see the differences between those two encounters and why one is _not_ likely to be justified in the one case and likely to be justified in the other? ---
**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, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/338 "2018-04-05T23:14:22Z")
Ok, I screwed up with that link. I should read the whole text. Sorry. ---
**Author:** ![Haldurson](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/51bf81/32.png) [@Haldurson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Haldurson)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2018, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/339 "2018-04-05T23:25:40Z")
> [@Urbanredneck](#): > > This issue has come up as some republican lawmakers have started legislation designed not to protect drivers who hit demonstrators - [LINK](https://www.citylab.com/equity/2017/08/the-states-trying-to-pass-laws-protecting-drivers-who-hit-protesters/536844/). > > What do you all think? Normally, pedestrians have the right of way, and you should (nearly) always yield to them, even if they are demonstrating. That said… If the pedestrians are armed and acting aggressively towards you, or trying to break in with tools or rocks or other implements of destruction, then you need to vacate the area. BUT EVEN THEN, unless the only way away from them is through them, you need to do so safely. You have a deadly weapon – your car. You have to act accordingly. You may have to receive some dents, or other damage to your vehicle, but arson should not be repaid with murder. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2018, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732/340 "2018-04-06T01:51:36Z")
If I found myself suddenly confronted with a number of tiki-torch bearing Illinois Nazis…well, I’m a civilized man, I have every confidence that I would not succumb to rage and give them a Volkswagen enema. I would pull over, turn it off, lock it, and throw away the keys. I don’t doubt my self-control, but why take the chance? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732.md?page=16) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-should-a-person-have-the-right-to-drive-thru-a-crowd-of-demonstrators/811732.md?page=18)