• 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!

[W:132]Black Lives Matter protester shot driver in Provo, Utah

apdst said:
This wasn't a peaceful protest.
Click to expand...
it was until the driver of a 2 ton assault weapon decided to run over peaceful protesters
 
apdst said:
More protestors going to become roadkill in the future.
Click to expand...

Moderator's Warning:
That's enough. There will be no more promoting, glorifying, or otherwise touting the killing of anyone in this thread. Neither protester or driver or any other group. That goes for everyone in this thread. We're done with this rhetoric.

Failure to abide by this warning may result in moderator action and/or thread bans
 
apdst said:
They blocked the road, then shot him
Click to expand...

which all happened after he ran his car into the protest. Seriously, explain to me how protesters on foot can initiate contact with a moving vehicle. It's a physics question
 
calamity said:
That is a lie.



You straight-up advocated for running over peaceful protesters.
Click to expand...

They blocked the road, attacked his vehicle and shot him. Those three facts can't be disputed.
 
calamity said:
HotAir = Fake News.
Click to expand...

Hot Air - Media Bias/Fact Check

These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy. See all Right Bias sources.

Overall, we rate Hot Air Right Biased based on story selection and editorial positions that usually favor the right. We also them Mostly Factual in reporting, rather than High, due to the use of curated sources that have failed fact checks. However, Hot Air has not failed any fact checks to date.
Click to expand...

They are right-wing, but they actually check out as mostly factual.
 
Elmo said:
Got a source that shows crowds approaching a driver to attack them? Everything I've seen, including the OP, it is clear that these drivers made a conscious choice to try to push the crowd aside with their vehicle. They weren't hunted down while minding their own business. They literally inserted themselves into the situation. As I said before, the driver has all the power. If you stop at a safe distance, pull a u-turn and go around the block, no one is going to try to swarm you. And people on foot wouldn't be able to catch you if they tried. I'm sure the guy in the OP was not the only driver who tried to use that street on that day. SOMEHOW the others managed to escape the dangerous mob without incident. If I'm wrong in my explanation, maybe you can tell me what you think they did differently?


I don't care what you're trying to do. Driving your 2-ton vehicle into a crowd is escalation because it puts dozens of people at risk of injury or death. Protesting is not criminal, and even if it was that does not excuse assaulting them with your vehicle.


I apologize for the accusation. In hindsight it was unnecessarily personal.


Great! I'm glad we agree that drivers will learn to act more responsibly to avoid running over protesters.
Click to expand...

Standing in the road is criminal behavior. Getting drivers to slow down so their accomplices can damage the vehicle and/or harm those inside is criminal behavior. After seeing multiple incidents of this nonsense why would anyone in their right mind slow down for these criminals?

They have absolutely no right whatsoever to block traffic just because they want to. Your entire position is legally flawed.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Standing in the road is criminal behavior.
Click to expand...
You don't have a right to murder criminals with your car, no matter how heinous their crime.

OpportunityCost said:
Getting drivers to slow down so their accomplices can damage the vehicle and/or harm those inside is criminal behavior. After seeing multiple incidents of this nonsense why would anyone in their right mind slow down for these criminals?
Click to expand...
''accomplices''? Talk like that implies these protests are some elaborate trap to lure cars in and ambush them from all sides. Absurd, unless you've got some examples of this happening.

OpportunityCost said:
They have absolutely no right whatsoever to block traffic just because they want to. Your entire position is legally flawed.
Click to expand...

It's a gray area legally, which will ultimately be decided by a jury. This link discusses the legality in the case that the protest has no permit and is blocking public streets.
Fact check: Drivers don’t have the right to “plow through” protesters - Reuters
A driver who deliberately ran over a protester (or any pedestrian) could face homicide charges and would need to prove that they reasonably believed they had no alternative in order to avoid death or serious harm to themselves.
Click to expand...
My point is that proving the bolded is difficult in incidents like this because it is patently obvious that drivers have a whole world of alternatives to plowing into a protest. The protesters are clearly at fault if they ambushed, chased (somehow) or otherwise trapped drivers in a way that prevents them from using alternative routes. In the situation in the OP the driver clearly had alternatives, and consciously chose to disregard them to put everyone around them in danger.

I'm happy to be proven wrong with an example, but I'm not going to hold my breath.
 
Elmo said:
You don't have a right to murder criminals with your car, no matter how heinous their crime.


''accomplices''? Talk like that implies these protests are some elaborate trap to lure cars in and ambush them from all sides. Absurd, unless you've got some examples of this happening.



It's a gray area legally, which will ultimately be decided by a jury. This link discusses the legality in the case that the protest has no permit and is blocking public streets.
Fact check: Drivers don’t have the right to “plow through” protesters - Reuters

My point is that proving the bolded is difficult in incidents like this because it is patently obvious that drivers have a whole world of alternatives to plowing into a protest. The protesters are clearly at fault if they ambushed, chased (somehow) or otherwise trapped drivers in a way that prevents them from using alternative routes. In the situation in the OP the driver clearly had alternatives, and consciously chose to disregard them to put everyone around them in danger.

I'm happy to be proven wrong with an example, but I'm not going to hold my breath.
Click to expand...

If they're threatening your life, it's self defense.
 
apdst said:
If they're threatening your life, it's self defense.
Click to expand...

Which is why it matters who initiates contact, because protesters (criminal or not) ALSO have a right to claim self defense. This has been explained to you several times in this thread. I'm still waiting for an example where the driver didn't make the first threatening move.
 
Elmo said:
Which is why it matters who initiates contact, because protesters (criminal or not) ALSO have a right to claim self defense. This has been explained to you several times in this thread. I'm still waiting for an example where the driver didn't make the first threatening move.
Click to expand...

Blocking the road is initiating contact.
 
apdst said:
Blocking the road is initiating contact.
Click to expand...

Pretend I'm a jury. Convince me. Repeating your opinion over and over is not convincing
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom