Jump to content


Police Reform


Recommended Posts


6 hours ago, RedDenver said:

Where is the proof these 18 vehicular crimes were committed by white nationalists or extremists?   Just some guys word??  The link goes a generic UofChicago page.  Did he post all the instances somewhere so we can see his justification. 
 

I believe we can also come up with more than 18 instances of protesters blocking traffic and causing harm to vehicles and driver/passengers. 

  • Plus1 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
6 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

Where is the proof these 18 vehicular crimes were committed by white nationalists or extremists?   Just some guys word??  The link goes a generic UofChicago page.  Did he post all the instances somewhere so we can see his justification. 

"Just some guy." Yeah, it's not like he's a terrorism researcher working at a center for security and threats...

Quote

Ari Weil, a terrorism researcher at the University of Chicago's Chicago Project on Security and Threats. Weil has tracked vehicle-ramming attacks, or VRAs, since protests began.

https://www.uchicago.edu/research/center/the_chicago_project_on_security_and_threats/

 

Quote

I believe we can also come up with more than 18 instances of protesters blocking traffic and causing harm to vehicles and driver/passengers. 

You probably do believe that. Show us the evidence.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
6 hours ago, RedDenver said:

"Just some guy." Yeah, it's not like he's a terrorism researcher working at a center for security and threats...

https://www.uchicago.edu/research/center/the_chicago_project_on_security_and_threats/

 

You probably do believe that. Show us the evidence.

Your link doesn’t seem to go to his study?  Just goes to a generic U of Chicago page that tells about his program. 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
7 hours ago, RedDenver said:

You probably do believe that. Show us the evidence.

 

That's really not relevant in this discussion, though. Blocking traffic is a nuisance. The response we're talking about - ramming your vehicle into the crowd blocking traffic - is a felony. 

 

I presume it would be easy for someone to do some basic research and find 20+ instances of protests blocking traffic. Somewhere between five and ten instances happened in Omaha and Lincoln alone last year. Nationwide? I'd put it closer to 100, if not more. 

 

Blocking traffic doesn't mean you turn to murder, as happened in Charlotte when one of trump's "good people" killed that girl. Blocking traffic means you, the driver, find an alternate route. It's a nuisance, and a pretty minor one.

 

That the right feels they need to counter that nuisance with murder is the issue. And that governors like DeSantis feel it's OK to provide cover for those murderers through law is also a major issue. 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

34 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

That's really not relevant in this discussion, though. Blocking traffic is a nuisance. The response we're talking about - ramming your vehicle into the crowd blocking traffic - is a felony. 

 

I presume it would be easy for someone to do some basic research and find 20+ instances of protests blocking traffic. Somewhere between five and ten instances happened in Omaha and Lincoln alone last year. Nationwide? I'd put it closer to 100, if not more. 

 

Blocking traffic doesn't mean you turn to murder, as happened in Charlotte when one of trump's "good people" killed that girl. Blocking traffic means you, the driver, find an alternate route. It's a nuisance, and a pretty minor one.

 

That the right feels they need to counter that nuisance with murder is the issue. And that governors like DeSantis feel it's OK to provide cover for those murderers through law is also a major issue. 

Ya that’s not what we are talking about.  We are talking about instances where a mob of protestors is surrounding a car, banging on said car and many times trying to break windows or enter car.  Being able to drive away at that point is what we are talking about. 

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Archy1221 said:

Ya that’s not what we are talking about.  We are talking about instances where a mob of protestors is surrounding a car, banging on said car and many times trying to break windows or enter car.  Being able to drive away at that point is what we are talking about. 

This is the only part of the article that addresses what the conversation is about (that I can find).

 

I don't see in here where it talks about a mob attacking a car and trying to break out it's windows.  Any reasonable person would realize that in that case, a driver should be able to defend themselves and attempt to drive off.

 

However, this lone statement leaves a lot that is not acceptable.  If I'm driving down a highway and someone is walking along that highway and I hit them, I'm liable for that accident.  It's my fault I didn't see them and have my car under control in a manner that I could avoid them.

 

So, if I am driving a long and a group is protesting in the street and I hit them (intentionally or unintentionally), I should be liable for the accident and any punishment that comes from it.  That doesn't matter if I'm a liberal or a conservative or if I agree or disagree with their protest.

 

In both of these scenarios, I could be abiding by all traffic laws that would pertain to the last sentence.  

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
5 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

This is the only part of the article that addresses what the conversation is about (that I can find).

 

  •  

I don't see in here where it talks about a mob attacking a car and trying to break out it's windows.  Any reasonable person would realize that in that case, a driver should be able to defend themselves and attempt to drive off.

 

However, this lone statement leaves a lot that is not acceptable.  If I'm driving down a highway and someone is waling along that highway and I hit them, I'm liable for that accident.  It's my fault I didn't see them and have my car under control in a manner that I could avoid them.

 

So, if I am driving a long and a group is protesting in the street and I hit them (intentionally or unintentionally), I should be liable for the accident and any punishment that comes from it.  That doesn't matter if I'm a liberal or a conservative or if I agree or disagree with their protest.

 

In both of these scenarios, I could be abiding by all traffic laws that would pertain to the last sentence.  

 

The bill doesn't say anything about "surrounding a car," or whatever the moving goalpost line is. 

 

This bill, and others like it, are direct responses to the BLM protests of 2020. They are designed to have a chilling effect on protests. 

 

It's not an accident these laws are coming from Republican-led legislatures. And it's not an accident the people who support it have a certain political ideology.

 

  • Plus1 2
  • Haha 3
Link to comment

The driver must be exercising "due care" at the time and not engaging in "reckless or willful misconduct."

 

"engaging in disorderly conduct or participating in a protest without a permit."

 

Sounds like the answer is not blocking through streets without a permit...and/or...not getting all road raged out that you might be late for koffee klatch if you took the wrong route

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

It's just too easy to discern the intent behind these laws. Right-wingers have fantasized about ramming cars into protesting crowds for years. Last year there were huge crowds protesting the murder of an unarmed man. The right-wingers responded by driving their cars into the crowds (in at least one instance, cops did it). 

 

And now here are laws providing a layer of protection for people who ram their cars into protesters. 

 

Run Them Down

Driving into crowds of protesters was a right-wing fantasy long before the violence in Charlottesville.

 
 
 

The Right to Crash Cars Into People

How Republicans across the country came to endorse a terrorist tactic against protesters

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Notably, what NOT ONE of these legislatures are doing, is making it easier to exercise one's right to protest. 
  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
13 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

One's right to protest does not supersede someone else's right to travel on a public roadway

The Constitution disagrees.

 

But regardless, running someone over because they're blocking a road is what a sociopath does. In the few cases where a driver is surrounded and fears for their life, then we can have a debate on reasonable courses of action and what should and shouldn't be allowed. Running people over when no lives are threatened is murder.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...