• 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!

Car vs Protesters - Who was right?

Should the driver be charged?


  • Total voters
    41
It's absolutely what he does.

You didn't get my joke... you say he comes in and immediately says you misrepresent him and I just came in and...?
 
I replied showing you at least 4-5 posts where I laid out my arguments and why I thought what I thought. You did that to me ZERO times. Zero. Not once. You did link me to a post where you told someone else and then bitched at me for not reading it earlier. That's really sad, X Factor.

It's your entire debate style - not take a major stance or argue your own points, but rather attack who you are arguing with and their points. There is never a counter argument. Please, show me one time in the other thread where you told me you thought the driver could be held responsible and should face a grand jury. We argued for a couple ****ing hours, and at no point did you even mention your own thoughts.



It's funny that you're all huffy with me for conceding that this might be the exact type situation where a jury trial is warranted. Most people tend to respect that kind of thing. I replied that way to Sangha because he wasn't freaking out. You were a hysterical wreck (and still are apparently) so I responded to you differently. Nothing about me saying this might be the exact type situation meant for a jury is inconsistent with with saying I can see why the driver responded the way he did.

The only thing I could think of why you're all huffy now is that you intended this thread to cast me in some villains role or get people to agree with you that I want to run people over for some reason and it hasn't worked out for you. Suck it up, Buttercup.
 
Certainly. What blows my mind though, is even if X Factor was right, and it's the scariest world ever where every urban person wants to rape and kill you, there was a ****ing lane wide open on the left that every other driver seemed to have no problem finding!
Did you see all those open sidewalks?

One thing we don't see are cops controling traffic.
 
Certainly. What blows my mind though, is even if X Factor was right, and it's the scariest world ever where every urban person wants to rape and kill you, there was a ****ing lane wide open on the left that every other driver seemed to have no problem finding!

Tell me again how I'm the one who builds strawmen. :roll: Tell me where I said anything like that or admit that you got nothing (it's so pathetically obvious anyway).
 
I those cases I personally would fear for my life. Get in my way and make it worse? Feel what it likes to get run over. They would hear three thumps.. the bumper, the front tire and the rear tire.
 
Most people move when a car is coming... these people jumped in front of him. He was probably shocked, thinking he could roll slowly and they would move. Instead they used that mistake to attack him. Any idiot that was hit deserved it as it was their own fault.

No one jumped in front of him. They were there before he ever got there.
 
Sure they were... the protestors were blocking traffic. Not only were they more wrong they were stupid ****ing morons.

Who goes out in the street and then complains when somebody is hit by a car? Idiots.

People who get hit by a car who knowingly, willingly and purposely rams his car through a crowd of people.
 
No one jumped in front of him. They were there before he ever got there.
That post means you didn't watch the video.

They very clearly spread a blinket on his hood and started climbing onto his car while he was at a very slow crawl well before anyone was knocked down.
 
People who get hit by a car who knowingly, willingly and purposely rams his car through a crowd of people.
This crowd broke The 3Stupid Rule so if they all get ran over and killed...****'em.

Likewise the driver broke The 3Stupid Rule so if he goes to prison for the rest of life......**** him too.
 
This crowd broke The 3Stupid Rule so if they all get ran over and killed...****'em.

Likewise the driver broke The 3Stupid Rule so if he goes to prison for the rest of life......**** him too.

Thank goodness most people have a more reasonable view about what people are allowed to do and not allowed to do (protesting peacefully allowed, running people down with a car for no reason whatsoever not allowed).
 
Thank goodness most people have a more reasonable view about what people are allowed to do and not allowed to do (protesting peacefully allowed, running people down with a car for no reason whatsoever not allowed).
Who's talking about what should & shouldn't be allowed?

I'm talking about reason to take a side. When stupid people get together, someone's getting hurt.

If you don't want to get run over then get out of the street. If you don't want a mob chasing you down then don't drive into a crowd. If you don't want to get shot then don't assult a cop.
 
P
That post means you didn't watch the video.

They very clearly spread a blinket on his hood and started climbing onto his car while he was at a very slow crawl well before anyone was knocked down.

I have actually watch the video repeatedly. I still don't see anybody jumping in front of the car. Especially not the people he hit.
 
Who's talking about what should & shouldn't be allowed?

I'm talking about reason to take a side. When stupid people get together, someone's getting hurt.

If you don't want to get run over then get out of the street. If you don't want a mob chasing you down then don't drive into a crowd. If you don't want to get shot then don't assult a cop.

But just because they were protesting they were not stupid people. It is not like they were a bunch of tea party'rs or communists ;)

If you are occupying a street with dozens upon dozens of people, you are not just getting into the street, you are demonstrating on that street. If your way is blocked by demonstrators, even if they are on the street, then it still does not warrant or make it legal for a driver to drive through them.

One could say that they demonstrators were exercising their first amendment right to peaceably assemble on that intersection to petition grievances against the government.
 
P

I have actually watch the video repeatedly. I still don't see anybody jumping in front of the car. Especially not the people he hit.
In fact they jumped onto the car after spreading a blanket on the hood at the very beginning.
 
But just because they were protesting they were not stupid people.
When did I say they were not stupid people?

They were very stupid, by blocking traffic and tempting the inevitable road-rager and for being on the wrong side of the issue to begin with. Very stupid.

If you are occupying a street with dozens upon dozens of people, you are not just getting into the street, you are demonstrating on that street. If your way is blocked by demonstrators, even if they are on the street, then it still does not warrant or make it legal for a driver to drive through them.

Speaking against the protesters is not speaking for the driver. I don't defend the driver's actions in the least. The driver deserves to be arrested for some kind of vehicular assault.

The notion that there has to be a good guy in this is a false dichotomy. There is no good guy here. All parties involved are wrong. The driver for trying to push through the crowd is wrong. The protesters for blocking traffic are wrong. The police Watch Commander for not maintaining order is wrong. The media for using emotive language and sensationalizing a minor nearly dying is wrong. OP for making a poll based on a false comparison is wrong.

One could say that they demonstrators were exercising their first amendment right to peaceably assemble on that intersection to petition grievances against the government.
Show me their permit from the city to hold that event in that location and I'll agree.
 
Last edited:
In fact they jumped onto the car after spreading a blanket on the hood at the very beginning.

The people who were on the hood or not the people that got hit.
 
The people who were on the hood or not the people that got hit.
Right, but you said "no one jumped in front of him", and that's not true. There were people who got onto and in front of his car.
 
Right, but you said "no one jumped in front of him", and that's not true. There were people who got onto and in front of his car.

I will have to watch the video again on a bigger screen. I did not see anybody jump in front of him watching the video on my phone. Jumping on the Hood of the car is not the same as jumping in front of the car
 
It's funny that you're all huffy with me for conceding that this might be the exact type situation where a jury trial is warranted. Most people tend to respect that kind of thing. I replied that way to Sangha because he wasn't freaking out. You were a hysterical wreck (and still are apparently) so I responded to you differently. Nothing about me saying this might be the exact type situation meant for a jury is inconsistent with with saying I can see why the driver responded the way he did.

The only thing I could think of why you're all huffy now is that you intended this thread to cast me in some villains role or get people to agree with you that I want to run people over for some reason and it hasn't worked out for you. Suck it up, Buttercup.

Classic example of X Factor misrepresentation. What am I a hysterical wreck about? Please, cite specific examples of my views that are hysterical. Good luck - it will be tough because you just ****ing made it up. LOL.

Well, there was one thing I got "huffy" about (okay soccer mom with the word huffy): you, jerry, and a few others arguing that dictionary definitions were not valid. That made me laugh. I got a bit fired up over how bad that argument was.

But again, please show where I have been hysterical over these events.
 
Tell me again how I'm the one who builds strawmen. :roll: Tell me where I said anything like that or admit that you got nothing (it's so pathetically obvious anyway).

X Factor - your entire premise is that this guy was somehow being attacked because there was a group of non-violent, peaceful protesters in front of him. The video evidence shows no one going towards his car until he drives into them. If he was scared, there was a lane wide ****ing open on the left that 3434 other cars found.

I showed you an example of a group of people who had intent to attack a person in a car. You get to be paranoid in that situation, X Factor. When a group of bikers surround your car and attempt to slow you down. You don't get to be ****ing scared when there is a group of people in front of you. That's not scary. If you are scared of that, then don't go into ****ing cities.

That's insanity. Stay in West Viriginia.
 
Just watched the video..it is shocking..the guy/girl tried to drive through the thickest of the protesters..not stopping..even with people on his bonnet..

Even though they are in the middle of the road..they are not ''jaywalking'' they were protesting and the police should have cordoned the road off and offered an alternative route..Or if it had been me I would have just reversed and gone somewhere else..

That person in red was so, so lucky..there could have been children there.

People like this have no business driving a car.
 
Just watched the video..it is shocking..the guy/girl tried to drive through the thickest of the protesters..not stopping..even with people on his bonnet..

Even though they are in the middle of the road..they are not ''jaywalking'' they were protesting and the police should have cordoned the road off and offered an alternative route..Or if it had been me I would have just reversed and gone somewhere else..

That person in red was so, so lucky..there could have been children there.

People like this have no business driving a car.

It was a child - the person who ended up underneath the car was underage. X Factor said he was worried she'd rape him though.
 
It is my argument that the entire Ferguson issue has become almost entirely divided down party lines. In fact, so divided, that even the simple driving of a car into a group of people is divisive. Some people think it was within the drivers right and some don't. I'm posting this poll to get an idea of what your lean is (liberal vs conservative) and where you stand on whether the driver should be charged or not.

If you have not seen or looked into this yet, here are videos shot of the incident:



*Edit:

The last option should say liberal - could a mod edit that for me?


l cant see any tie between this case and leans.nobody has the right to do it
 
Moderator's Warning:
Whysoserious and X-Factor (along with the "me toos" like ThePlayDrive and Jerry) this is not the basement. Keep your critiques, criticisms, and conversations about your thoughts on other posters out of upstairs threads. Whether or not you like the style or who you'd rather debate is not the topic of this thread. Additionally baiting nicknames and throw away comments are not welcome. Anything not directly related to discussing the topic by either of you will result in action going forward
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom