When have the conservatives ever protested by shutting down freeways? Or doing anything else illegal? You didn’t hear about the Tea Party doing that.
What part of this is about the fucking Tea Party? Are they the gold standard of protesting or something?
Because they can and did shut down freeways any number of times.
Your inability to remember the faults of your own party aside.
Calling the Tea-shirts “conservatives” is ridiculous. They were/are some other thing. Actual conservatives are not so easily led down the garden path.
I notice you don’t offer any evidence to support any of this.
What do I think? I think you’re letting ideology color how you judge the behavior of people demonstrating in public. Ten thousand people demonstrate and a hundred people in the crowd commit some crimes. If you support the cause, it was a peaceful demonstration. If you oppose the cause, it was a riot.
Their what, now?
Don’t infringe on his 11th Amendment right to make up things that sound official.
“I’m not driving I’m traveling!”
Is this really the case? Given the fact (as other posters have said) that the person you hit is very likely to be nothing to do with the person who is threatening you with bodily crime.
Are there jurisdictions where, if I drive through a crowd of school kids to prevent a reasonable threat to my life, I will get off Scott free?
This pretty much is the last word that needs to be spoken. There should be absolutely no right to drive a vehicle into protesters. There is absolutely zero reason to give drivers any expectation that they will never be hindered by people expressing their political views.
Protesting is one of the most fundamental rights in our society. It is part of what makes us American, what makes us good, to the extent that we can claim to be good at all. It’s part of what our country’s values are based on.
So given what you say here, I would say fuck no to any right at all to run over a protester with a car.
Anything else I would have to say on this topic belongs in the Pit.
That clearly holds for the protesters in the video in OP. While they are clearly idiots who are doing eff-all for the cause they ares supposedly supporting, if any of those cars ran them over the driver should, and would, be charged with assault/murder.
But there are clearly cases when a driver could claim to be reasonably threatened with bodily harm. E.g. this one:
I would still say they still shouldn’t have the right to drive off through a crowd of people who were NOT the guy whaling on them with a U-lock.
I am fairly sure the law agrees with me on this, pretty much everywhere (in the US at least). But I’d like to hear a lawyer’s opinion.
… nor be deprived of life, [COLOR=“Black”]liberty, or property, without due process of law; …[/COLOR]
Because, protesters are the government (toward which the fifth is uncorked). Or something. It is illegal for you to tell me to shut up, because my 1st Amendment right of free speech protects me from you, because you are, like, the government.
You realize it is literally impossible for BLM marchers to violate your constitutional rights don’t you?
No true Scotsman amiright? :rolleyes:
Generally you’re not justified in using deadly force if the encounter was started by your own law-breaking.
That was not the situation presented however.
In this scenario, the protesters are not violating any law.
They do every time the blockade a freeway. The Kent v. Dulles case established that travel is a right that you cannot be deprived of without 5th amendment due process protections. Therefore they’re infringing on the right of myself and every other innocent person in the city trying to travel that particular freeway.
How many of those are freeways where innocent victims would have a hard time picking another route?
How many were legal parades?
In how many was a proper permit obtained? I guarantee that Black Lives Matter didn’t’ get a proper permit for protesting in a freeway like you can get for protesting on a city street.
Kent v. Dulles only says you have a right to travel. It does not guarantee you access to a particular freeway.
Is it your contention then that you can be deprived of your 5th amendment right to travel as long as the state gives someone a permit allowing them to do so?