It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Tennessee Passes Controversial Law Allowing Drivers to Injure Protesters Without Civil Liability

page: 2
34
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:29 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Then arrest them for public endangerment. Intentionally running them over should be completely unacceptable. Once again, people here are showing their true repulsive colors.



+2 more 
posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:31 PM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

I don't think the point of this law is to advocate people getting run over, but instead send a message to the protestors to stay off the road.



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: daryllyn

Just dont leave out the part where these people are making it a point to restrict the freedom of others (freedom of movement/travel), and they haven't even been letting ambulances off the hook (not even when right up amongst them). An ambulance way in the back has no hope, therefore the cars in front being able to push on and keep the situation from getting too thick to control is the ultimate cause here.


In the first sentence of my post I said that people shouldn't be blocking roadways. So how am I "leaving that part out"?



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:32 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

DEATH RACE 2017 ! ...........



edit on 13-2-2017 by Zanti Misfit because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:33 PM
link   
They better protest of the sidewalks now.


+12 more 
posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:35 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

Most humans have a base instinct geared towards self-preservation so if laws exist which suggests standing on a road has consequences then those laws are not for me - they are for the bottomfeeders of society because:

1. I won't stand on a road to express my feelings.
2. I won't hit someone who is stupid enough to stand on a road and express their feelings.
3. If I stop to avoid the protesters and they attack my car as a consequences, then I'll floor it as part of my action=reaction self-preservation instinct.



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:36 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

Good. We need this. Maybe those idiots won't block the streets now.


+1 more 
posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:36 PM
link   
a reply to: daryllyn


If I'm driving down the road, and a group of masked individuals with "stick" signs are in the way, especially at night, I will not be stopping to say hi. In my mind, they are thugs who might beat me up.



Sorry, this should be a case where once you turn on a sharp bladed fan; you don't put your hands inside it else you lose it.




originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: seasonal

Most humans have a base instinct geared towards self-preservation so if laws exist which suggests standing on a road has consequences then those laws are not for me - they are for the bottomfeeders of society because:

1. I won't stand on a road to express my feelings.
2. I won't hit someone who is stupid enough to stand on a road and express their feelings.
3. If I stop to avoid the protesters and they attack my car as a consequences, then I'll floor it as part of my action=reaction self-preservation instinct.


Exactly!

edit on th2017000000Mondayth000000Mon, 13 Feb 2017 20:38:31 -0600fAmerica/ChicagoMon, 13 Feb 2017 20:38:31 -0600 by SoulSurfer because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:36 PM
link   
Why is it illegal in most places to stand in the middle of a road or even walk across highways while not protesting?

Because it's dangerous. One could get hit. It's not because the driver is intentionally out for blood. It's just the way it is.

I would never intentionally run someone over. But if they were in the middle of the highway and I couldn't stop in time this law makes it so I could still get it trouble for it but the protesters can't sue me over it.

They were already breaking the law.
edit on 13-2-2017 by Noncents because: Fixed Penalty



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:37 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

It's easy to define lawful and unlawful protests. People shouldn't be in the streets no-brainer. But it does happen. Removing what little deterrent or restraint some people may have in regard of injuring protesters just seems to invite tragedy. The kind of stuff that can lead to even more tragedy, violence, confrontation etc.

Recipe for disaster.

imo



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:38 PM
link   
a reply to: knowledgehunter0986

Wrong. If that were the case, they would just increase the penalty for protesting in the road. There's no need for such a roundabout & heavy handed "solution".



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:38 PM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant


With most protestors I imagine the car would slow down and make contact with the protestor who is wearing skinny jeans holding a Starbucks and when the sh!t gets real, the protester will wuss out. And get the F off the road.



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:40 PM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

What you call repulsive is going to stop riots.

This is a warning shot that the weak wristed leadership is gone. We are a country of laws and order. If you can't abide by it we will run you over.



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:41 PM
link   
"exercise due care"

In other words..try to stop

The rest is hyperbole

Me, I'm not that nice, if I have a medical emergency when someone's life is in jeopardy, and someone is blocking their treatment with political problems, I'm not only running them over, I will probably grind them up with the e-brake for good measure.






posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:41 PM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

When in a matter of an hour 500 people all spontaneously show up in one strategic spot, armed with fireworks / weapons, how many police stations anywhere are ready to deal with that spontaneously short of using deadly force?

When the reason the traffic stops is because people are afraid to get hit & run charges for pushing past the belligerent psychos, then its a win win strategy that ensures hours of an ordeal once set in motion.

It's not like to push past idiots you have to slam into them doing 70 miles per hour (and total your vehicle).


The point is as the idiots try to wiggle their way out there nobody should even give them the opportunity to jam. They'll move; they wont even go out there if they know for sure nobody is going to stop (opposed to knowing that inherently almost everybody WILL as it is currently).
edit on 13-2-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:42 PM
link   
a reply to: knowledgehunter0986

Agreed, you will only have one injury and suddenly the idiot protestors will grab their cell phones and burn down some convenience store or lute a walmart.



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:43 PM
link   
a reply to: daryllyn

Because you are more concerned for the criminals than the people who are victims.



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:45 PM
link   
a reply to: SoulSurfer

No they are thugs who will beat you brain dead or kill you, just vote "wrong" and you are in their sites.



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:52 PM
link   
This is so dumb. If someone runs over a protester then they did it with the intent to hurt or kill them. I hope this doesn't encourage some psycho to run through a crowded street.



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:52 PM
link   
a reply to: ausername

It seems you are looking at this as a thing that is going to happen and people don't realize the danger.
If someone does not understand that stopping traffic is very dangerous, then maybe a couple of them getting broken bones will drive the point home.

Protecting criminals is not the answer.



new topics

top topics



 
34
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join