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

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
I can't agree to disagree. This isn't a matter of opinions, the law is very clear.

This prevents the protesters from taking civil action against the driver. Any potential criminal liability would still be on the driver. So they can still be prosecuted for breaking the law, just not sued by the protesters.

Civil Liability.

Relax, it's not as bad as you seem to think it is.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Ok, who said anything about intentionally running people over, not I.

If you think this is a free and clear mad max situation where anything goes, you need to read the story.

It clearly is about getting the dumb asses off the road, be logical for a moment.

If the protesters look like this as they mob my car i am going to run them down if i have to to get away.
pbs.twimg.com...
theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com...
www.thecollegefix.com...

In the state of calif you can use lethal force to protect your or another persons life.
This means if you believe your in danger enough to use a firearm to protect yourself a car can also be used.
www.shouselaw.com...

I have a dash cam in my car for many reasons and this is just one of them.

originally posted by: daryllyn

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: daryllyn
While I can agree that people should absolutely not be blocking roadways, I also think hitting them, is much much worse.

Personal responsibility be damned, you are still responsible for your actions and reactions. Other people's irresponsibility isn't a free license to throw your own personal responsibility, of you know, not hitting people with your car, out the window.

But some have traded their lives. So be safe out there and when confronted I hope you don't eat those words.

If they're surrounding your car and being threatening, that's their own fault and deserve whatever they get. I'm so tired of you extremist leftists constantly justifying and rationalizing your violent actions. People are tired of it and they're going to start fighting back.

Nope, sorry. Not going to trade my morality in, over political beliefs.

Justify it all you like, it's still not okay.

What's really bothering me about this, is the way that some seem almost eager and excited at the prospect of protesters being hit by cars, as if their justification makes it totally okay.

And, I am far from a "violent, extremist, leftist".

WE aren't calling you an extremist. I do think there is some yanking of your chain by some but you should realize they are really not about JOY.

It is about personal RIGHT to be safe from bring ripped out of your car during one of these mob events and stomped like that old man in Memphis was a few weeks back. People have died and the left has lied to borrow from Jesse Jackson.

originally posted by: daryllyn

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: daryllyn

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: daryllyn
While I can agree that people should absolutely not be blocking roadways, I also think hitting them, is much much worse.

Personal responsibility be damned, you are still responsible for your actions and reactions. Other people's irresponsibility isn't a free license to throw your own personal responsibility, of you know, not hitting people with your car, out the window.

If they're surrounding your car and being threatening, that's their own fault and deserve whatever they get. I'm so tired of you extremist leftists constantly justifying and rationalizing your violent actions. People are tired of it and they're going to start fighting back.

Nope, sorry. Not going to trade my morality in, over political beliefs.

Justify it all you like, it's still not okay.

What's really bothering me about this, is the way that some seem almost eager and excited at the prospect of protesters being hit by cars, as if their justification makes it totally okay.

And, I am far from a "violent, extremist, leftist".

Im glad people can defend themselves from the violent alt-left. If you're justifying or excusing their violence in place of blaming those just trying to go about their day, then you are.

Where did I say I support the protests? Or the actions of the protesters?

Oh, right.... I didn't.

Not out right, but implication and perceptions are projected by your statements. Innocent people should be able to pass through or not sister?

a reply to: daryllyn

I disagree. it boils down to this. If a bunch of violent protesters are going to pull me from my car and beat me for whatever reason... they're going to feel my tyres.

Do you even remember the riots from decades ago?

The people dont want protest, they want riots.



Im running those people out of my way....

originally posted by: daryllyn

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: daryllyn

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: daryllyn
While I can agree that people should absolutely not be blocking roadways, I also think hitting them, is much much worse.

Personal responsibility be damned, you are still responsible for your actions and reactions. Other people's irresponsibility isn't a free license to throw your own personal responsibility, of you know, not hitting people with your car, out the window.

If they're surrounding your car and being threatening, that's their own fault and deserve whatever they get. I'm so tired of you extremist leftists constantly justifying and rationalizing your violent actions. People are tired of it and they're going to start fighting back.

Nope, sorry. Not going to trade my morality in, over political beliefs.

Justify it all you like, it's still not okay.

What's really bothering me about this, is the way that some seem almost eager and excited at the prospect of protesters being hit by cars, as if their justification makes it totally okay.

And, I am far from a "violent, extremist, leftist".

Im glad people can defend themselves from the violent alt-left. If you're justifying or excusing their violence in place of blaming those just trying to go about their day, then you are.

Where did I say I support the protests? Or the actions of the protesters?

Oh, right.... I didn't.

Problem is, who is protesting? and who is recklessly instigating a violent revolt.

If you block ambulances, and other drivers from travelling, and you see them beat people... That is not protesting.

No one is saying run over passive protesters making a statement. but should a mob prevent you from lawful travel, violently.. well, the safety of the average citizen comes first in my humble opinion.

and the anti-Trump protests are nothing short of riots.

a reply to: savemebarry

If the tolerant left was on the highway protesting, I would low down to a slightly faster speed than walking and drive through them. This is not going to "run them over". Once the SH gets real, they will go back to Starbucks and college.

a reply to: savemebarry

Concur.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: SlapMonkey

Yes, I read it. If someone purposely runs another person over then they are not immune to civil liability... but who is to say it was intentional or not? If it goes one way or the other you're going to have witnesses denying that way.

So what you're implying, then, is that the onus to avoid injury for the individual illegally standing in a roadway blocking traffic is on the driver? Nope, that logic doesn't pass muster. Laws are already on the books in, I must assume, EVERY municipality and county and state in the nation that says that it is illegal to stand in the middle of a roadway and block/impede traffic. I fully understand that laws exist against vehicular manslaughter or reckless driving, too, but that isn't what we're talking about, here.

If I tell people in the road to get out of the way and that I'm about to pull through (slowly, of course), and they remain and get injured (say, for example, their foot finds the underside of my tire), I should not be held responsible for their stupidity. Remember, "peaceful protest" is a great thing, but when you start breaking laws while protesting, the "peaceful" part is over and it is no longer lawful.

If someone is doing their due diligence of driving safely then they will either avoid the area or find another way around. It sucks but sometimes assholes are assholes and they block the roadway, that's no reason to sink to their level by trying to drive through them and risk running someone over though, in my opinion.

And as someone else has already mentioned, what if there is no other way? What if a driver isn't glued to the news and has no idea that the roads are blocked? What about the ambulance that needs through to get someone to the hospital and are stuck between side roads and is surrounded by cars and can't find another way?

Yes, sometimes assholes are assholes, and they should be treated accordingly. Again, this law in no way gives anyone the right to "[run] someone over," and to say that is hyperbole and a mischaracterization of the bill.

I think this law is dangerous because it may give some 'closet extremists' an excuse to run someone over at a protest and then claim it was an accident and get away with it. That was my meaning, sorry for not being more clear.

And I think that allowing people to block roadways (which, BTW, equates to extremist actions, IMO) without repercussion or threat of cause-and-effect, this cancer of blocking roadways in protest will continue and increase. If someone is in the street and they get hit by a "closet extremist," as you say, then I hate to sound heartless, but that's a Darwin Award nominee if I've ever heard of one.

It really takes a special kind of stupid to stand in front of cars and assume that you could not get injured in the process. I back this legislation 100%, but if someone gets seriously hurt or killed by someone hitting them, then that doesn't seem as if it would be protected by the law, so it becomes a strawman argument.

I wouldn't suggest using such a slippery-slope logical fallacy in this discussion, though--it doesn't prove anything, and it reduces the efficacy of your argument.

Of course, guys like me generally have a firearm in their vehicle. I would give a few verbal warnings, then let it be known that I have a firearm (and I don't mean verbally), then would proceed through the blockade with caution. In such a situation, I would have absolutely valid concern for my safety, and would be fully within the law in doing so. Quite honestly, these idiots blocking roadways are lucky that they have not been injured more than they have been thus far.

a reply to: ausername

Who are blocking roads and highways why?

Yes they should. I don't support the protests, but I also don't support hitting them with cars.

I can disagree with what they are doing AND still not want harm to come to them, at the same time.

Not sure what people aren't understanding about that.

a reply to: daryllyn

And do you think anyone would want to hurt the protestors, in a real life situation?

This is like when police shoot to center mass, it isn't to kill it is to stop the criminal. If the criminal dies, try not to be a criminal.


The majority of responses that are not in favor of the bill seem to be based on emotions with little if any logic.

a reply to: daryllyn

Just who is WANTING harm to come to them if they are exercising “due care.”

This driver has the right idea:

insider.foxnews.com...

a reply to: buckwhizzle

Gotta love the girl punching the driver through the window... sigh

a reply to: seasonal

Its about time. I support this law. Every Time a white Cop shoots a unarmed Black kid people go ape s-hit block highways that have absolutely nothing to do wit the incident holding people up from getting to there destination in a timely manner. Or god forbid if someone had a real emergency run there ass over.

a reply to: Tempter

then either nobody told the insurance company the driver was drunk or the insurance company is foolish for paying.

about 30 years ago me and buddy were out hitting the bars and on the way home he jumped a curb and hit a tree. His insurance company wouldn`t pay because they said I knew he had been drinking but I got in the car anyway,so in their eyes I had assumed all the risk of what could happen and what did happen.

a reply to: Tardacus

did you have a lawyer, there are lots em now on tv that go after the big bucks and make them pay.

originally posted by: ausername
Gawd I hope some psycho doesn't take this as encouragement to go out and plow into a crowd of protesters.

I kinda hope they do!

If two cars are driving down the road and there is an accident between the two. The one breaking the law is usually to blame and ticketed. If a person is driving down the road and a person runs out into the street (which they shouldn't), it is usually the pedestrian's fault. If I'm in fear for my life, I'm allowed to use my car just as I may use my gun to protect myself.

So when protesters break the law, remove my right to use the roads I pay to use, delay me and take my time from me, cause me undue harm, stress, etc...YES! I think it is right that they be blamed for accidents caused by their illegal acts. No...I'm not in favor of purposely injuring someone with a car, but if they are in front of me...if they are blocking me...I may decide they want to car-jack me, drag me out and beat me (as they have others) and I will use my vehicle to stop them, injure them and protect myself and my family.

And at least in Tennessee...I know the law abiding citizens support my right to self-protection.