• 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’..."

RF667799 said:
I don't think it does.

If you think it is self contradictory though, you can't simultaneously claim it absolutely has the meaning you give it.
Click to expand...
Of course it does.

Or are you goung to ignore durect quotes too?
 
NolanVoyd said:
You are being very selective.

The law says both.

Poorly written at the very least.
Click to expand...
Sorry going by exactly what the bill says is not being selective. It is being factual.

The bill says a protest without a permit on the road and a riot.
It’s written just fine.

But please explain how a car on the sidewalk is exercising due care.
 
Felis Leo said:
Yeah. Even if the person in question were some kind of magical shotgun surgeon, that deck would be ruined.
Click to expand...

The only thing I could think of was laying prone on the deck and waiting for the snake to lift his head high enough to take the shot at close range. But he said no, that wasn't the case.
 
NolanVoyd said:
You are the one ignoring direct quotes and hurling insults.

A sure sign youve failed.
Click to expand...
I am not ignoring any direct quotes. In fact I posted a lot more of the bill than you. You cherry picked a few words to try and cover up your bs.

Still fully want to talk about the Oklahoma bill. Why do you keep running from that. You are the one that brought it up.
 
NolanVoyd said:
Of course it does.

Or are you goung to ignore durect quotes too?
Click to expand...

If it's contradictory as you claim, it has at least two meanings. It can't simultaneously have an absolute singular meaning as well.
 
NolanVoyd said:
Except i alsovquoted from it.

Re read my posts.

Focus on the quotes.

Hence my point.
Click to expand...
You quoted cherry picked words from it. Nothing more.

No need. I quoted a lot more of it then you did. And more importantly I can comprehend what it means. While you seem to be struggling.

You have no point. If a car hits someone on the sidewalk then it was not exercising due caution and there is no immunity. You would know this if you actually read the bill.
 
NolanVoyd said:
Of course you are
Click to expand...
I get you are trying to deflect away your demonstrated ignorance but it is not working.

So about that Oklahoma bill you brought up but now no longer want to talk about. Why do you keep ignoring it.
 
NolanVoyd said:
You need to re read.

Combine your failure on that level with all of your insults and its clear youve lost.
Click to expand...
Coming from the guy who didn’t read past his own headline this is pretty hilarious.
I get you are butt hurt that I demonstrated your ignorance but this is just silly. Just running away would have been less embarrassing for you.

Seeing as I have had to explain this bill to you it’s clear which one of us needs to do some rereading.
 
braindrain said:
Understanding that a riot is not the same thing as a protest is not splitting hairs.
That you can’t understand that is your own problem.
Click to expand...
No, those terrorists who used their cars as weapons today against lawful No Kings protesters heard the message from Republican leaders loud and clear.
 
Absentglare said:
No, those terrorists who used their cars as weapons today against lawful No Kings protesters heard the message from Republican leaders loud and clear.
Click to expand...
That you keep lying about what that message was is not the strong argument you seem to think it is.
 
braindrain said:
That you keep lying about what that message was is not the strong argument you seem to think it is.
Click to expand...
You did not understand.

Republican leaders are promoting the idea of running over left wing protesters with your vehicle. You are lying when you say I’m the only one who hears it that way. It’s not just me, there’s many who agree. Including the multiple right wing terrorists who used their vehicles as deadly weapons against their political opponents.

That’s just a fact.
 
Absentglare said:
You did not understand.

Republican leaders are promoting the idea of running over left wing protesters with your vehicle. You are lying when you say I’m the only one who hears it that way. It’s not just me, there’s many who agree. Including the multiple right wing terrorists who used their vehicles as deadly weapons against their political opponents.

That’s just a fact.
Click to expand...
Yep.

"
This is a real problem. Over a hundred protesters were hit by cars from Indiana to Tallahassee to Minneapolis at Black Lives Matter protests during the summer of 2020. In January 2021, an Iowa man avoided prison after intentionally driving through a group of peaceful racial justice protesters, injuring one. He told police at the time that protesters needed “an attitude adjustment.” Protesters being hit by vehicles has become such a wide-spread issue, a Wikipedia page sprang up to track the incidents.

The rhetorical and symbolic value of driver liability bills can be seen in the response on social media when they are introduced. Users, including members of law enforcement, circulate jokes, memes, and slogans about hitting protesters with vehicles. A Sheriff’s Deputy in Florida posted a meme depicting a semitruck smeared with blood with the caption “DROVE THROUGH ARIZONA/DIDN’T SEE ANY PROTESTERS.” Longtime Seattle detective Mike Brown was formally fired in February 2021 after it came to light that he had made multiple social media posts mocking and endorsing violence against racial justice protesters. Among the posts was a meme depicting a vehicle striking a person with the words “ALL LIVES SPLATTER” that Brown posted on the same day that two protesters were hit, one fatally, on Interstate 5 in Seattle."

www.icnl.org

U.S. Current Trend: Bills Provide Immunity to Drivers Who Hit Protesters

The concerning driver liability bill in Tennessee gives immunity to drivers who injure protestors who take to the streets.
www.icnl.org www.icnl.org
 
These people trying to drive through protests and then using their cars to hit people are going to quickly find out that the places they can do this and get away with it are Republican states like Florida.

😄
 
Absentglare said:
You did not understand.

Republican leaders are promoting the idea of running over left wing protesters with your vehicle. You are lying when you say I’m the only one who hears it that way. It’s not just me, there’s many who agree. Including the multiple right wing terrorists who used their vehicles as deadly weapons against their political opponents.

That’s just a fact.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t matter how many times you repeat that lie. It’s not getting any more true.

I did not say that you are the only one who hears it that way. Why post such a silly lie. Oh that’s right. It’s because that’s what you do.
There are a lot of far left wing people trying to remove the context from his statement and lie about its meaning.

Your understanding of what a fact is has no bearing on reality
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom