Uh, that’s exactly my point.
I know. That’s why you have to claim it was self-defense. Or that it was “unintentional”.
Not with the new law (see post #116).
Now you just need to shut up and let the prosecution try to prove you intended to run the people over.
Lots of protesters are going to be reaching for lots of waistbands here.
In urban areas (around here), where most protests are likely to take place, it is very often not legal to discharge a firearm. Not to mention, shooting at a moving car is a very bad idea all around.
Yes, it does, in the context of the scenario we are talking about. But the bill is even more stupid than that. Let’s take two scenarios:
-
Little old lady is in her car in her driveway. She doesn’t look when she is backing up, and runs into and kills a little kid playing in the street.
-
Same little old lady is in her driveway. She doesn’t look where she is going, and runs into and kills a person demonstrating for nationwide concealed carry laws while in the street during an unpermitted protest.
In scenario one, said lady is subject to criminal and civil penalties. In scenario two, she faces no penalties, even though her degree of negligence is identical.
That is fucking stupid.
Then I think you do not understand our current laws on self-defense. I wouldn’t call it “legal carte blanc to run over whoever they want”, but it’s certainly well-established that they can respond with force to stop a threatened attack.
Allow me to introduce you to the case of Alexian Lien. In 2013, Lien was driving his Range Rover in NYC when he got into an altercation with some motorcyclists, members of an informal group / rally known as Hollywood Stuntz, which did not have a permit for their rally.
Here is a video of most of the confrontation.
A motorcyclist brake checks the Range Rover. The Range Rover appears to hit the motorcycle. Other motorcycle riders surround the vehicle. At some point, Mr. Lien feels threatened (justifiably so, I believe, as we will see momentarily).
He FLOORS IT, driving over several motorcyclists (about 50 seconds into the video). It’s really the closest real-world example I can think of to a driver exercising “legal carte blanc to run over whoever they want (even if the people being run over are not ones doing the threatening)”.
Other motorcycle riders pursued Mr. Lien during his ill-fated escape attempt (during which he runs into additional motorcyclists), trapped him when he got stuck in traffic, and beat him. What was the legal result of all of this?
AFAICT, Mr. Lien was not even charged with any crime, let alone convicted of any wrong-doing, despite running his Range Rover over several motorcyclists. 11 of the motorcyclists were convicted of various crimes for their participation in the assault on Mr. Lien (including a NYC cop who was sentenced to 2 years in prison).
A penny for your thoughts?
Here is an article about one of the critically-injured motorcyclists, titled “Biker doesn’t blame SUV driver who left him paralyzed”
ETA: additional links -
HD, that bike story is so far off topic, you should be ashamed. There is no comparison.
Are you kidding me? OFF TOPIC?!? Off topic to “I was specifically talking about a case where the cars occupants did have a reasonable reason to fear for their safety. I cannot believe they would have legal carte blanc to run over whoever they want (even if the people being run over are not ones doing the threatening)” (which was the post I was responding to)? It’s EXACTLY “a case where the cars occupants did have a reasonable reason to fear for their safety” and ran over people blocking their escape. I don’t see how it could possibly have been more ON topic.
Oh yeah I rememeber hearing about this when it happened (and how unusual it was they actually charged the cop)
Though not pressing charges does not mean they couldn’t have pressed charges (esp given the undercover cop angle you could imagine they might be inclined not to). I wonder how different it would be if rather than being one of the motorcyclists (who were probably co-conspiritors in the DA’s opinion) it was a innocent bystander
If the DA would view Edwin Mieses (the now-paralyzed motorcyclist who said “he only knew three people in the loosely organized crew cruising around the city” and “was returning to his bike with his back to the SUV when Lien ran him over”) as a “co-conspirator”, I have every reason to believe they would view whatever Antifa / OWS / BLM protester(s) that might get run over as co-conspirator(s) as well, and likewise choose to not press charges against the driver.
ETA: but let’s get back to your earlier post. You originally said “I cannot believe they would have legal carte blanc to run over whoever they want (even if the people being run over are not ones doing the threatening)”. Now that I’ve presented you with a real-world example where that’s pretty much exactly what happened, can you believe it?
Its definitely close, but the fact it’s simply the DA choosing not to prosecute (esp given the complications with the undercover cop) doesn’t convince me.
I would want to see a verdict from a court case before I would concur that US law gives you the right to run over bystanders if you feel threatened.
So no need for a new law right? The system is working as you would like it to it seems.
In the extreme case of Mr. Lien, yes, the legal system had the outcome I prefer. In the UCSD nighttime freeway collision, the driver still ended up getting sued, which I find a fairly ridiculous outcome which probably would have been prevented by a law like S.B. 1096, so I would not mind seeing states adopt such a law.
Once again, I have to ask why you support a bill that provides for zero civil liability for someone who kills a protester on a road, no matter how negligent the driver may be.
I don’t think roads are appropriate places for unpermitted protests. My hope would be that this bill either encourages protesters to stay out of traffic when protesting, or at least protects motorists when protesters are injured due to their own gross negligence.
If you had some suggested modifications to the bill that still accomplished those purposes while perhaps allowing for driver liability in cases of great negligence, there’s a good chance I’d be supportive of those modifications.
How about if people took over a road but also held up a sign saying they would leave in 15 minutes - and then actually dd it? Ok, I could go along with being respectful of that.
No I’m saying their needs to be a clarification of the laws about IF, and, or when a person could drive thru people illegally blocking a road or highway.
I’d certainly be patient enough to wait for that (assuming no life-threatening emergencies). I don’t really mind if they take over roads along their pre-planned and permitted march route for the whole freaking day so long as they adhere to whatever reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions put in place by the permitting authority. Just don’t do stupid shit like wander onto the freeway at night because you’re bitter your girl lost and then sue the driver that hits your (generic you) dumb ass.