• 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 plows through protesters during Ferguson rally in south Minneapolis [W:349]

Status
Not open for further replies.
No, it wouldn't, because those people were violating the law by blocking the road.

If someone is raping your wife, you shoot at him and he shoots and kills you, he can't claim self-defense.

So according to you i can run down jaywalkers freely and not get in trouble

Time to put on some push bars on my car. Best keep your kids of the street

Can i run over people who break noise laws as well

The drive ran into people threatening there lives they should have shot the dangerous thug
 
So according to you i can run down jaywalkers freely and not get in trouble

Time to put on some push bars on my car. Best keep your kids of the street

Can i run over people who break noise laws as well

The drive ran into people threatening there lives they should have shot the dangerous thug

Give it a go and let us know how it works out for you. :mrgreen:
 
So according to you i can run down jaywalkers freely and not get in trouble

Time to put on some push bars on my car. Best keep your kids of the street

Can i run over people who break noise laws as well

The drive ran into people threatening there lives they should have shot the dangerous thug

Jaywalkers and rioters blocking the road are two different things.
 
Only after completing the lane change did he make contact with pedestrians.

Yes, contact with pedestrians who were obstructing the road.

If people weren't obstructing the road, there would have been no need for him to go around the car in front of him.
 
Last edited:
Yes, contact with people who were obstructing the road.

If people weren't obstructing the road, there would have been no need for him to go around the car in front of him.
I went around cars in a similar fission 3 times today. It happens all the time. The car could have been stopped for any reason at all...distracted driver, stalled car, came to a near stop and changed their mind about where they were going trying to merge right....those were my 3 reasons for passing today at least...

Why the first vehicle stopped is immaterial to rather or not the second vehicle can pass. If the first stopped at a controled rail-road croissing it's still legal for a car behind it to come up on the right.

The trick is, that second vehicle then needs to stop. This one didn't, and that's where drama ensues.
 
Actually, they often do
Not without getting hit by traffic, it seems.

This is why I don't live in a big city. **** people and their opinions anyway.
 
I went around cars in a similar fission 3 times today. It happens all the time. The car could have been stopped for any reason at all...distracted driver, stalled car, came to a near stop and changed their mind about where they were going trying to merge right....those were my 3 reasons for passing today at least...

I don't know the circumstances of your drive today so I won't comment on it. It's possible that you broke the rules concerning turning and lane changing, or maybe not. I just don't know.

However, it's clear that the lanes were obstructed in this case. If they weren't, the car in front of him would have been proceeding forward and he would have had no reason to illegally pass him on the right.

But I've got to give you cred for non-conformity. Everyone else is agreeing that the streets were being obstructed with many saying the protesters got what they deserve for obstructing the roads. You're the only one arguing that the road was unobstructed.
 
The point was you can't hit people with malice just because they are in the street and in a motorist's way.

How do you know the driver's state of mind?

It just might have been confusion and then fear.
 
People have the right away even if it illegal for them to be on the street. That is what protects people. Cars can't just decide to hit people because they are in the way.
In other words...you believe the silly protesters in the street blocking traffic had nothing to do with it. This makes it clear where you stand.
 
The point was you can't hit people with malice just because they are in the street and in a motorist's way.

My point, is that they were illegally blocking the road, so they can shoot drivers, then claim self defense.
 
My point, is that they were illegally blocking the road, so they can shoot drivers, then claim self defense.

I must have missed the post of shooting drivers. I've no idea of the point you are trying to make.
 
The same way all those other drivers did. It doesn't take a brilliant mind to figure that one out.

When one take into consideration the history such protests, it's perfectly reasonable for a motorist to believe his life is in danger.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom