• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

"Four San Francisco protesters hit by car in ‘possible intentional act’..."

EnchantedMuggle said:
There are actually no "rights" as all regarding driving

However, legally, it is the car that must yield to the pedestrian.
Click to expand...
You do realize that there are rules for pedestrians as well, yes? It is illegal to block a roadway. Do it and you can and likely will be arrested
 
Felis Leo said:
If a group of angry protesters walked in front of my car on a busy street or roadway, blocking my movement and preventing me from attending an appointment but otherwise not threatening me or putting me in reasonable fear for my safety, I suppose I would be justified running them over and causing them great bodily injury or death. And if it was a particularly important appointment, I think that would give me the right to back up over their bodies to finish them off. I certainly should not have to remain in place and report this action to the police, because I think that this might be one of the few exceptions to my state's hit-and-run laws (the "aggravated inconvenience" exception).

😁:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Vehicular manslaughter as a reaction to being inconvenienced is a pretty wild flex.
 
Jezcoe said:
Vehicular manslaughter as a reaction to being inconvenienced is a pretty wild flex.
Click to expand...

Well, remember, there are multiple exceptions to the crime of vehicular manslaughter against pedestrians who are blocking traffic but otherwise not threatening the driver. There is the "aggravated inconvenience" exception, of course. Then there are the "Hey, I have places to be!" exception, the "Do you even know who I am?!" exception and the "Do you even know who my dad is?! I'll have your badge!" exception.

I might be forgetting one or two legal exceptions. Perhaps @Fletch will enlighten us.

[/sarc]
 
Felis Leo said:
I am sure DeSantis would have called that an act of self-defense and offered James Alex Fields Jr. a job in his personal security detail.
Click to expand...
Yes, maybe the DeSantis Manifesto chapter in Project 2025.
Ron sure misses the limelight after he was neutered by Susie Wiles as well.
 
bythoughts said:
Vehicular ramming attacks are not a constitutional right. We shouldn't have to say this, but there are a few politicians unclear on the concept.

That said, protesters need to recognize that they have an obligation to teach. That is the point of a protest, after all. And to teach correct behavior, there should be no doubt in a motorist's mind that being surrounded by protesters means that he will hear chants for a few minutes, rather than having his windows smashed before he is dragged out to be beaten. This is the protesters' responsibility, because they are the ones trying to advocate for moral behavior. Protesters need to be sure that their comrades are on the same page about non-violence and about not harassing people with long delays or denied destinations.
Click to expand...
I didn't join in the no kings protest today to teach anything, I was out there voicing my displeasure in our government and trump and crew in particular. What do you think I can teach trump?
 
dcsports said:
Or they can stay off the road and actually protest, rather than obstructing traffic and harassing motorists.
Click to expand...
The protest I attended today, everyone stayed on the sidewalks. I don't know if you seen any video from around the country, if you have, do you think someone had the right to plow down the street in their car hitting as many folks as possible on purpose?
 
bongsaway said:
The protest I attended today, everyone stayed on the sidewalks. I don't know if you seen any video from around the country, if you have, do you think someone had the right to plow down the street in their car hitting as many folks as possible on purpose?
Click to expand...
In NYC if you wanted to get anywhere you used the sidewalks because Fifth Ave had thousands of people marching down it.

It was more like a shuffle because it was moving so slow.
 
Jezcoe said:
In NYC if you wanted to get anywhere you used the sidewalks because Fifth Ave had thousands of people marching down it.

It was more like a shuffle because it was moving so slow.
Click to expand...
I live in a small town in red Florida and my county is one of those red counties so when I saw a couple hundred folks show up on one of our main roads, I loved it. I was watching a live feed from around the country and I saw thousands and thousands of people walking and no violence.

The right will make up lies and just keep repeating them amongst themselves day after day, like people here illegally voting democratic all the time.
 
CLAX1911 said:
And I'm sure he's going to get the fairest of trials.
Click to expand...

It really is scandalous how hard the law tends to come down on people who mow people down purposefully wth their cars, obviously with the potential to harm or even kill some.

What are you thinking? Misdemeanor, maybe? Or just a ticket?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom