• 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.
sangha said:
Plowing does not require much speed. The word is defined by its' effect, not its' speed.

In fact, most plowing is done at a fairly slow speed.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...



It all depends on who's doing the plowing, and ground conditions.

I've seen some mighty slow plowing, and some mighty fast plowing. :roll:
 
sangha said:
Plowing does not require much speed. The word is defined by its' effect, not its' speed.

In fact, most plowing is done at a fairly slow speed.
Click to expand...

Snow plows are pretty fast. And since that involves a road vehicle the comparison makes more sense than a farming implement.
 
rabbitcaebannog said:
People intentional step into the street and block cars a lot, especially after concerts, sporting events in my neck of the woods. That does not give a motorist the green light to run them down.
Click to expand...
Right. But this was not that. And no one was run down. Had the goofy protesters wanted to do so they could have stepped out of the way. Why didn't they?
 
Misterveritis said:
Right. But this was not that. And no one was run down. Had the goofy protesters wanted to do so they could have stepped out of the way. Why didn't they?
Click to expand...

No, it wan't that and that exactly a big deal is being made out of it. No one would probably question the negligence of a motorist if he ran down a bunch of people in the road after a football game.
 
rocket88 said:
So now You have a right to kill people for inconveniencing you? Since you are a fan of the Constitution, perhaps you can tell us where that is codified?

When did the RW decide that self-restraint was a bad thing?
Click to expand...

Did I say that is in the Constitution? No, so there is your answer.
 
sangha said:
Yes, plowing can be fast but my point is it doesn't have to be fast in order to be plowing
Click to expand...

True but the guy was actually nudging his way through at first. He didnt start plowing until that guy jumped on his hood and started trying to cave in the guys windshield.

He was moving pretty slowly at first the protesters did not want him to pass so they stormed the car, the video clearly shows them attacking his car. The driver started moving faster when the guy was trying to break the tail lights with his flag poll. None the less though there was no reason that the driver needed to go through the crowd when he could have seeked a different route.
 
Phys251 said:
Stop dodging my questions. The evidence against Rice is clear. I am asking you, for the third time: Which FACTS that I documented in post #333 are wrong? What FACTS are in error?
Click to expand...
I watched your second video 3 times to confirm: The observer can't determine where exactly the left-turn lane goes. Yes we can see that there's a left-turn lane there, but we can't see where it goes. An observer can't determine that it simply bypasses the jaywalkers.

....because there's a crowed of people blocking the view.

You're demanding that a subjective point of view is an objective fact. That's your error. It is perfectly possible that the driver didn't know that was a bypass because, again, the cowed of people are blocking view of where the lane goes.

That doesn't mean I support running protesters over, that only means you're wrong on this singular point.
 
Last edited:
Misterveritis said:
Right. But this was not that. And no one was run down. Had the goofy protesters wanted to do so they could have stepped out of the way. Why didn't they?
Click to expand...
Because they're black and allowing traffic to flow on roads made for traffic is racist.
 
rabbitcaebannog said:
No, because they were protestors. Funny how you had to make this incident into racism though.
Click to expand...
Right, because my last post was the very first thing anyone ever said regarding race since the shooting.
 
Jerry said:
Right, because my last post was the very first thing anyone ever said regarding race since the shooting.
Click to expand...

That has nothing to do with the post you responded to, so now you are just being dishonest.
 
Anthony60 said:
Did I say that is in the Constitution? No, so there is your answer.
Click to expand...

So even if it isn't, perhaps you can explain how you have the right to kill people that inconvenience you?
 
Misterveritis said:
Right. But this was not that. And no one was run down. Had the goofy protesters wanted to do so they could have stepped out of the way. Why didn't they?
Click to expand...

They could have. However in Minnesota, as in many other states, pedestrians have the right of way.
 
Jerry said:
I watched your second video 3 times to confirm: The observer can't determine where exactly the left-turn lane goes. Yes we can see that there's a left-turn lane there, but we can't see where it goes. An observer can't determine that it simply bypasses the jaywalkers.

....because there's a crowed of people blocking the view.

You're demanding that a subjective point of view is an objective fact. That's your error. It is perfectly possible that the driver didn't know that was a bypass because, again, the cowed of people are blocking view of where the lane goes.

That doesn't mean I support running protesters over, that only means you're wrong on this singular point.
Click to expand...

I clearly refuted this idea multiple times. There is no way in hell that a reasonable person could possibly conclude that there was no viable exit route; other cars were slowly moving through that route. All that Rice had to do was wait a couple minutes, assess the situation, and use that escape route. Or better yet, be an alert driver, notice the blockade ahead, and turn off of Lake Street onto Snelling Avenue, which is less than 500 feet from Minnehaha and (Don't take my word for it; go to Google maps to verify this for yourself.)

rocket88 said:
So even if it isn't, perhaps you can explain how you have the right to kill people that inconvenience you?
Click to expand...

Two words: White entitlement.
 
Napoleon said:
Video footage of the incident in the link. Cant say I blame the driver for fleeing the mob.
Click to expand...

So attempted vehicular homicide is OK with you, no wonder murdering unarmed black teens for tickling your face is OK with you.

Don't pay attention to the arsonists setting fire to the city, that's OK, as long as they aren't burning down police property let it burn.
 
rocket88 said:
I'd consider using your vehicle as a weapon unacceptable in either situation.

I wonder, what if someone in the protest was armed? Would you consider it "fearing for their life?"
Click to expand...

I'd consider that unacceptable as well...

I am not sure... it would depend, I guess.
 
sangha said:
There is no record of any of the protesters who were hit by the driver having any criminal record, AFAIK.
Click to expand...

They are ALL breaking the law... I seriously doubt that none of them have a record.
 
IDNeon said:
So attempted vehicular homicide is OK with you, no wonder murdering unarmed black teens for tickling your face is OK with you.

Don't pay attention to the arsonists setting fire to the city, that's OK, as long as they aren't burning down police property let it burn.
Click to expand...

!!! Drama Queen Alert !!!

This whole thing is one HUGE logical FAIL.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom