Motorist liability introduced in response to pipeline protests

a reply to: UKTruth

I am of the opinion that this is more about trying to legitimise a situation where protestors attempting to prevent police from reinforcing their lines at Standing Rock, might be run down by whatever transports are being used by the authorities in any case.

But way to support the status quo UKTruth. The people in charge love it when the citizens make their lives easier by accepting the ridiculousness of the circumstances they are placed in by the state. That applies both in the US, and over here in the UK, and idiots like the mob who are running the place these days, are precisely what we get for accepting the hegemony rather than taking it apart in protest.

Good.

This could have been very useful the past few years.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

a reply to: Diisenchanted

My daughter lives in Charlotte. When the massive protest were going on I told her NEVER to stop her car. Drive around them if possible if not hit them. I saw the videos of what was happening to white people they were able to get to. I would rather her be alive and unharmed then dead or in the hospital.
It is a matter of self defense. When your personal safety is at risk you have the right to use any means possible. Safety first, at least you will be alive. Don't stand in the middle of the road and you don't have to worry about the repercussions.

a reply to: Diisenchanted

I noticed they used the word pedestrian in the link.
Depending on the circumstances contributory negligence is apportioned to pedestrians if they were not taking due care

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: UKTruth

I am of the opinion that this is more about trying to legitimise a situation where protestors attempting to prevent police from reinforcing their lines at Standing Rock, might be run down by whatever transports are being used by the authorities in any case.

But way to support the status quo UKTruth. The people in charge love it when the citizens make their lives easier by accepting the ridiculousness of the circumstances they are placed in by the state. That applies both in the US, and over here in the UK, and idiots like the mob who are running the place these days, are precisely what we get for accepting the hegemony rather than taking it apart in protest.

I am all for legitimate protests that have a clear message and are peaceful.
I am not sure why you think protesters should have the right to mess with other people's rights. That is not attacking the status quo, it's attacking other people. There is a difference.

Most protests these days seem to have no clear message at all, just a bunch of anarchists on the street arguing against a range of things together and disrupting other people's lives.

a reply to: UKTruth

Just because a protest has many facets does not mean it is not legitimate, and just because a protest is disruptive or obstructive does not mean it is violent as opposed to peaceful.

originally posted by: IkNOwSTuff
Im reminded of that idiot who got hit on a freeway screaming something about Trump after he won the election

Theyre in the wrong and as someone else pointed out its not safe to stop

Run em over and the ones who arent hit should be charged with obstruction or something

EDIT: I know the 2 above options are Trump related but I would support this law regardless of the protest, if it was people protesting Hillary Id be just as much for running them over

Wow, you literally want to live in The Purge. I kinda want it to happen just so someone can see the look in your eyes when they add something you do to The Purge OK'ed list and you get taken out.

a reply to: Rookseven

Would you stop for an angry mob in the middle of the road? I know i wouldn't. I'm pretty sure the law would already support my decision to protect myself from a group of people trying to stop traffic. Castle laws already allow you to use deadly force to stop carjackings.

a reply to: Woodcarver

And you are the one in a 2 ton weapon. You hit somebody you go to jail. Don't like our laws? Move to South Africa where you can use flamethrowers or poison because this will NEVER make it past the Supreme's.

a reply to: Woodcarver

What the heck do you people do when there is a bad wreck on a road that has the road shut down? Do you run over the EMS guys and the cops that are on the scene just so you can keep going down that road, or do you find an alternative route?

I know what I would do, but I'm not too sure about you guys.

I'm selfish, I like it, don't inconvenience me because your butt hurt about something.

I always wondered why they didn't stop police chases with a gun ship like an Apache helicopter.

a reply to: kaylaluv
How many people are pulled out of their cars and attacked at wrecks? NONE. That has nothing to do with this topic. Nice deflection. SMH

originally posted by: Zimnydran
There's a reason your parents told you not to play in the street..... they just figured after you made it past 12yo you got the message..... little did they realize they needed to keep telling you once you became an adult.
"But mom I wasnt playing in the street..I was protesting"

I hate to say it...I enjoy watching them get hit by cars. Every video I have seen so far put a smile on my face and made me giggle at their expense.
I hope to see even more during the inauguration and I encourage them to continue providing me with more videos so that I can laugh at them getting caused great bodily injury.

This is ugly. I've been for Trump, but I'm nothing like you. If I start to see most Trump advocates are like this, I'm disassociating from Trump.

I don't want one person hurt. That's why I elected the man, because I thought he might be able to help improve the economy for us all - not just for me.

ETA, the law simply needs to make room for accidents. Not everyone needs to be punished when a situation is already punishing enough. That's my view here.

One more addition - the burden of proof should be in the investigators and on both parties. Everyone is innocent until proven... No sense in deeming one party automatically innocent and the other not. That is evil in the world of perception.

originally posted by: Martin75
a reply to: kaylaluv
How many people are pulled out of their cars and attacked at wrecks? NONE. That has nothing to do with this topic. Nice deflection. SMH

If you totally avoid the area, you won't have a problem.

originally posted by: Woodcarver
a reply to: Rookseven

... I'm pretty sure the law would already support my decision to protect myself from a group of people trying to stop traffic. Castle laws already allow you to use deadly force to stop carjackings.

Being stopped due to the road being blocked and a car jacking are not necessarily the same.

Well, I recommend all the truck lovers up in North Dakota install a bull bar or brush guard to their trucks to protect them from wild protestors crossing the street.

With my wife and two young children in the car I would absolutely not stop. I would go as slow as possible and attempt to not injure anyone ... but taking care of my family comes first.

originally posted by: eXia7
Well, I recommend all the truck lovers up in North Dakota install a bull bar or brush guard to their trucks to protect them from wild protestors crossing the street.

Snow plowing blade is much more efficient, and no damage to your vehicle.

when ISIS does it its an outrage right... or does it make a difference 'who is doing the running innocent people over with the motor vehicle'.

if its behind a 'bill' its ok . maybe thats why we've never been slapped with war crimes charges against the world for the never ending turmoil in other nations and the amount of bombs dropped on foreign soil.

When I first moved here and was renting my landlord said if you hit someone come home then call the police they will think nothing of it because it's not safe to stop and do the right thing. Hardly a month goes by someone is not whacked walking down the street in the dark in dark cloths late at night.

Normal around here anyway but I don't have to go through part of town anymore.