And people like that are criminals and should be arrested. But you’re not entitled to kill them yourself on the spot.
We’ve covered this already. S.B. 1096 does not authorize anyone to “kill them on the spot”. It only applies to unintentional collisions.
The law handles this with a “reasonable person” test. If, under the same circumstances, a “reasonable person” would have feared for their life, then self-defense is typically justified (with various caveats depending on which state you’re in)
Could you explain how running over protesters that are in your way would ever be considered “unintentional”? Or maybe explain what an “unintentional collision” would be in the context of driving through a protest?
If you’re on the freeway, at night, maybe you look down to change the radio station for a second, and then BAM, you collided with a UCSD co-ed. I’d call that unintentional.
[quote=“HurricaneDitka, post:245, topic:811732”]
Ok, I get YOU fell that way. But what about others?
Just how long should say 10,000 drivers wait? Minutes? Hours?
Or better yet, how long will all those 10,000 drivers wait?
Thing is I can almost promise you at some point one of those 10,000 people ARE going to drive thru, possibly hurting or even killing someone regardless of the law.
So frankly, a law like this is needed to get it out of peoples heads to NOT walk out on a busy highway and stop traffic for as long as you damn well please with the full power of the law behind you keeping someone from driving thru you.
And that’s different from “If you’re on a street, during the day, maybe you look down to change the radio station for a second, and then BAM, you collided with an elementary school student who was playing stickball in the street” how?
And more importantly, how about, “If you’re on a freeway, during the day, maybe you’re about to catch a really big Pokemon Go character, so you’re concentrating really hard on your iPhone, using both hands and concentrating really hard, nd then BAM, you collided with a protester and killed them.”
That’s unintentional, but extreme negligence. And that driver would walk away completely free of any liability under the bill we’re talking about.
Vigilante justice is frowned upon in civilized societies, no matter how inconvenient the alternative is.
Good thing this law has nothing to do with vigilante justice, then.
Regards,
Shodan
I was commenting on the law UR wants.
Oh, so now YOU are changing your position. You’ve said basically that you don’t think Tea Partiers or other conservatives ever block traffic – now you are projecting that opinion onto me. But I accept your explaination that to the extent that conservatives act like liberals in your eyes, you will criticize those conservatives.
Would you care to look over Shodan’s posts in which he believes he has the right to slowly drive his car into people who are interfering with his path?
Would you care to look over your posts in which you believe you have the right to slowly drive your car into people who are interfering with your path?
I’ve already answered this. The elementary school stickball player’s motive wasn’t to deliberately blocking traffic.
Are they accidentally playing stickball in the street? What if the elementary school student sees you, and decides to stand in front of your car just to fuck with you? Can you “unintentionally” hit him then?
Exactly. Which is why it’s important to remember that after you run over somebody deliberately, you have to say it was unintentional.
No, that’s not what I said. I said I am unaware of them deliberately blocking traffic, but if someone has a cite to support Chronos’ claim, my view could be changed. AFAIK, no one has provided such a cite.
Cite for a post where I ever said I believe I “have the right to slowly drive your car into people who are interfering with your path” or retract this bullshit. You can’t just make up imaginary claims I never made and falsely attribute them to me.
So what? The driver gets a vote in the event as well. For pretty much any other traffic situation, in virtually all states that I know of, the negligence of each party must be weighed to balance how much each contributed to the accident. But noooooo, not when stinky liberal scofflaws get run over; they automatically are 100% at fault in an accident. Fuck 'em.
Hey, maybe you should write to this Florida legislator and suggest making the killed or injured parties pay for the damage to the car that ran them over, too.
Did you actually read the post I made that you just quoted? I await your retraction.
nm