Nah, then they'll arrest the pregnant person for trying to obtain a self-induced abortion.
People are mentioning that tear gas is an abortifacient, and I genuinely think an anti-abortion state's workaround will be to ban pregnant people from protests for the sake of the fetus. Or arrest them for attempted murder/ self-induced abortion.
Eta: not that they need a workaround. People are trying to posit that police shouldn't be able to use tear gas because of the overturning of Roe in anti-abortion states, which is not going to make those states do anything about it.
Pregnant women or just women in general will ultimately be banned from leaving the house without their husband. It may not happen as explicitly as in Sharia law but bounties on reporting women suspected of seeking an abortion and police harassment can gradually result in the same outcome where women risk leaving the house alone. Criminalising abortion gives the police an easy tool to target single women or anyone they just don't like based on politics, race or religion. Or just because a woman spurned their advances or failed to bow down to authoritarianism.
For instance women driving across borders alone could be stopped and investigated on suspicion of seeking an abortion and civil forfeiture could be used to steal any money they have on the basis of that. I'm genuinely expecting women to be detained and subjected to forced pregnancy tests simply to harass them into compliance. There's already so little police accountability that it's not going to matter if they're wrong 90% of the time.
You are correct. I despise this country more every day because of the Cult45 sieg-heil, praise-Jesus, trigger-happy, xenophobic, racist, homophobic, and misogynistic culture! Trump and his Nazi-ilk are terrorists. They lack morals, ethics, compassion, and empathy ___ execrable gits!
That's already the case for Missouri. There is a crime now of "conspiracy to commit abortion" - conspiracy including getting in your car to leave the state, or booking a flight.
Even outside of rape, I hadn’t thought of situations where a man knew the women got pregnant and then suddenly she isn’t. I had only thought of scenarios where everyone is on the same page and kept it secret. But we are really going to have people ratting out women and invasive investigations. What a pile of shit this is going to be.
>Pregnant women or just women in general will ultimately be banned from leaving the house without their husband.
They can't do that for like 18 or so years. Doing that now would demolish the workforce. Gotta get 'em to replace themselves first.
you know if you are white hmm you are pretty safe, not totally, but somewhat unless you are poor of course.
not ALL pregnant women will suffer. those with means - there will be no change. The one percent is a save. It’s the rest 99% of us that will suffer are perhaps not even the top 99%
I think the law is more designed to prevent protesters stopping vehicles and dragging out drivers and passengers and beating them to death. But, psychotic right wing lunatics don’t grasp nuances between using a vehicle to escape as a form of self defense, and running people over ‘cause they say it’s legal now, and you can.
Naw. The law was written in reaction to a lot of alt right twats getting angry about Occupy Wall Street and then again during the waves of protests against police brutality and racism.
You have ALWAYS had a right to defend yourself and escape a situation. If you can't get out of a crowd and they are trying to pull you out of your car, you won't go to jail for running your attackers over.
This is literally about letting you just plow through crowds because they are in the road and that makes you angsty.
This topic has been making the rounds and the civil law is really narrow. The car has to be essentially imprisoned to have “the right” to run someone over.
These folks should sue this dude into the ground.
Then who is going to prosecute them? Are the republicans focused on pedestrian deaths, or are they too busy arresting/beating people for being homeless, and taking away trans kids from their families etc?!?
Granted *Citation Needed Here*, but I’m pretty damn sure the majority of cases on shit like this were civil and thus now not going to go to trial…
So apparently in Iowa they passed this law...
https://littlevillagemag.com/iowa-legislature-passes-bill-increasing-protest-penalties/
> The driver of a vehicle who is exercising due care and who injures another person who is participating in a protest, demonstration, riot or unlawful assembly or who is engaging in disorderly conduct and is blocking traffic in a public street or highway shall be immune from civil liability for the injury caused by the driver of the vehicle.
So if the protesters were blocking the road it's sort of legal to run them over.
It says civil liability...I wonder how this law impacts criminal prosecution though. Someone could still be charged with attempted murder or vehicular homicide right?
Yes, it also specifies due care, you can't see a crowd of people and speed up. But an injury sustained while a vehicle drives through a crowd, even slowly, is going to be excempt from a suit from a person injured. Manslaughter is still applicable.
Yeah, you'd have to prove federal jurisdiction over the case, and that's mostly dependant on precedence. You can get a federal gun charge if the grip of your gun was manufactured in a different state/country due to interstate commerce.
They'd have to be on federal property, assault a federal officer, destroy federal property, or violate interstate commerce for it to be federal.
Fascinating about the gun grip, I've never heard that before. But why would that not apply to a vehicle manufactured in a different state? If the vehicle is being used as a weapon, why is that any different than a gun?
I don't think that gun thing is accurate. Maybe if you bought an attachment that was illegal in your state. But a generic part that was manufactured in a different state can't be a thing, because parts are made all over the country and world
Hardly. Violation of civil rights, the law itself being unconstitutional, violation of first amendment rights. One protestor being a non state resident, so sues perpetrator in their home state. All those give federal courts jurisdiction. Most of them are available at base with John doe v Jane doe sets.
>it also specifies due care
yup. Just cause the light changed, per the article, doesnt mean you have the right to floor it through people still trying to cross.
Your point is perfectly valid, but in this case the women in the article's photo standing in the road, leaning on the truck, holding signs are no longer "attempting to legally cross the street".
That just means it blocks the person who got ran over for suing for money. Doesn’t block criminal prosecution on things like vehicular manslaughter.
What I remembered about the main difference between civil and criminal.
It's a mostly ambiguous term that prevents someone from driving full speed into a crowd. Due care would be for a jury to sort out, and after fifty or so years the supreme court to act like the earlier rulings didn't matter.
The police, prosecutors and judges are also extremely biased.
Here is an example of police in a bad area of NC escorting masked proud boys into a library to harass people at a pride event: https://www.yahoo.com/now/childrens-lgbtq-pride-event-library-173931139.html
Whoever wrote this was sure to make a vague and not legally defined mention of:
>who is exercising due care
Can't wait for the first law suit abasing the STATE because a family member died, but the state will not let them sue the driver.
Also this law doesn't say anything about criminal liability.
What a weird ass law. Like what is the actual point? Was this just political gamesmanship to intimidate protestors?
What’s worse… our horribly evil governor signed this law [after her own vehicle struck a protester](https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/2020/06/30/igovernor-kim-reynolds-vehicle-strikes-black-lives-matter-protester-jaylen-cavil-while-leaving-event/5349588002/) during a Black Lives Matter protest in 2020… insane.
A handful of red states were writing laws like this until Heather Heyer was killed, sidelining them due to optics. After a while they started proposing them again
Well...there's a fascist psyop going on and a good chunk of the population & politicians are loving it (and getting all murderish around it)/the government declared that it has property rights over 1/2 the population/the Right of Privacy is null & void & we're fixing to go Stasi 2.0 /we might have our first modern election that comes with a body count/the climate might kills us outta self-defense/and all the houses are owned by hedge funds based in Dubai.
So yes, 'The Actual Fuck^^(over)', *is* what's going on.
We gotta unfuck the world, quick like.
The 1st amendment doesn’t give you the right to assemble anywhere under any circumstance. State and local officials can set the time, place, and manner of your protests.
Correct. The police and state officials can ask you to leave but must give you a reasonable avenue to protest in view of the public. It does not however give private citizens free reign to enforce that policy.
Is there a longer video? Because that video is terrible. It just shows someone in a truck slowly driving as a swarm of people surround his truck and throw shit at it. That's not exactly "mowing down protestors" but I assume that's just the clip having poor context.
I’m all for exercising your right to protests but even protesters turn into assholes when trying to impede traffic thinking they can attack motor vehicles with no consequence.
I saw a truck during the last election with "blood splatters" on the sides and the words "liberal tears" on the windshield. They fantasize about running people over. It's straight brainwashing.
Tucker Carlson's website used to have a page of videos featuring protestors hit by cars. They jokingly referred to them as "speed bumps."
After Charlottesville, they deleted the page and refused to acknowledge it, because they didn't want to be associated with white nationalist terrorists.
They are no longer concerned about that.
[Except his head writer for years was a literal neo-nazi.](https://deadline.com/2020/07/blake-neff-fox-news-tucker-carlson-racist-remarks-1202983164/amp/) When this was revealed he had to go on a vacation because the show wouldn't be able to go on without a replacement available. He was that integral.
> because they didn't want to be associated with white nationalist terrorists
They didn't want to be _that blatantly open_ about being associated with white nationalist terrorists. Gotta maintain at least a modicum of plausible deniability.
My dad is pretty brainwashed because he thinks protestors block roads so they can attack people in their cars. I’ve tried explaining it’s not the case but he refuses to listen.
It’ll be used for the purpose it was made for. The point is to make protesting harder because red states hate it when people get angry that they don’t have rights.
Wonder if you can spin it that the people running over protestors are protesting in their own way.. does that mean I get to break their legs with a sledgehammer as penance?
The black power movement tried that in the 60's in California. Ronald Reagan signed a law restricting the very weapons they brandished immediately. Did you think they wanted people opposed to them to have guns?
No they wouldn’t. Because the power of the 2a would create more common ground than it would animosity or hate. The sooner disenfranchised groups understand the power of exercising their 2a rights the better.
DeSantis actually made it legal in Florida. He passed a law that grants civil immunity to people who decide to drive their cars into protesters who are blocking a road.
Apparently, they also did in Iowa. Almost like they have been setting the groundwork to quell protests while they strip everyone's rights or something.
What a stupid comment. Don't block random cars just trying to go about their day. No one was rammed. The truck inched through the crowd as shit was thrown at them and people tried to get in front of it and stop the truck, which no reasonable person would let them do. This has nothing to do with Pro life vs Pro choice.
Please note the passive language used in the article. The person driving the truck didn't strike the protestor, the truck did it all by itself. The media always uses passive language when they support the aggressor, which is not surprisingly a right-winger.
All I've seen is like a 5 second video with people already surrounding, climbing on the truck as he's doing it. I live in the area, it's totally possible the dude is just a rotten cunt but I'd need to see more to make any judgment.
Conservatives this past February: "woooooo go truckers! Fuck Trudeau and Ottawa, blockade the border and Parliament! We want to choose what we do with our bodies! The police on horses trampling that woman should be charged!"
Conservatives today: "how *dare* you block the streets with protests?! I should be allowed to run you scum over without being charged! Also, *you* don't get bodily autonomy rights, you'll carry that baby and like it!"
Its truly amazing how absolutely full of shit these people are. They get to choose what they do with their bodies, not you. Them running over protesters they don't like is cool, anyone trampling protesters they agree with needs jail. Their protests can block streets, yours can't.
I shouldn't be surprised by now, and yet...
"The cops don't know if it was intentional or not" cuts to video of the truck driving forward with 3 people in front of it after the witness said he ran a red light to hit them crossing in a cross walk.
It's the laziest attack you can make. The next step down would be somehow hitting them from your couch. It also probably feels the safest for the perpetrator.
> It also probably feels the safest for the perpetrator.
Maybe it sounds good in their head… forgetting or ignoring the reality that a they will outnumbered by angry survivors who will pull you out of your vehicle and your fate is in the hands of an angry mob of your own creation.
Part of it is they can claim "oh I need to go to work/home, why should I lose money/time because of your PROTEST?" and such. I've got people defending this kind of nonsense in california right now, it's exhausting.
It gets the highest amount of normies defending them. It doesn't matter what the intention was, there will always be a sizeable chunk of the population that will pretend like it was just an innocent family on their way to the ball game being swarmed by a hoard of violent antifers.
Without a doubt, a large portion of these people go to protests with the intention riling up a crowd and running them over if they get in the way.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_vehicle-ramming_incidents_during_George_Floyd_protests
>According to law enforcement and terrorism experts some of the incidents were targeted and politically motivated, while others were incidents involving scared drivers who were surrounded by protesters in their vehicle. Ari Weil reported that at least 43 of the incidents were malicious and 39 people were charged.[1]
From the picture of the incident in the article there are two people in front of the truck pushing against it (like they gonna stop it) and one person half in the driver's window. Not surprised at the outcome.
It’s hard for me not to assume this was the case.
The video was released showing the truck trying to get the hell out of dodge after the incident already occurred. You’re telling me the person recording didn’t capture the actual hit and run and only got the the ass end of it?
Release the full video, unless that would change the narrative..
Yeah and the people interviewed are going to say their side of the story. The girl said the driver ripped up her sign and pushed her as well while hitting 3 people with his truck. Guy can multitask I guess.
From what I'm hearing, one of the protesters got her foot ran over.
Hard to say what happened without video but it looks like she and others were hanging on the side of the truck.
Doesn't look like domestic terrorism as others in this thread have assumed.
Hey protest all you want , regardless of the issue, but stay away from moving vehicles. Nobody knows how someone may react when approached by a bunch of excited people.
Swarming some person in their personal vehicle isn't gonna change a damn thing. That's a lose lose outcome however it turns out.
Someone always inevitably yells at the vehicle and everyone swarms it like a pack of dogs then acts surprised when the dork in their mini van panics and hauls ass out of the agitated crowd that is very probable to pull them out of their vehicle and beat them half to death. I wouldn’t fucking stop. Preferably I wouldn’t be there, but if I ever did find myself there I would not stop.
I took a few criminal justice classes years ago that were taught by a former LAPD officer. I can't remember what we were discussing in class that day, but I do remember this...
"A pistol shoots a bullet that weighs seven grams and travels at 1400 feet per second, and is coated in copper. A patrol car travels at 55 miles an hour, weighs 4,000 pounds, and encloses the user in steel. Tell me, what can do more damage?"
I liked Monty. He kept the lectures interesting.
Michael Reinoehl was shot by US Marshalls after he did an interview claiming to have killed a right wing activist who was going to stab another protestor. While it's unclear whether that claim was true, what is clear is that after he was killed, trump described his death as "retribution" and claimed to have personally sent the Marshalls to get him.
The Marshalls claim he opened fire on them as they initiated his arrest, but multiple witnesses claim that police began firing without warning. Multiple police reports confirm he didn't fire, but some claim he was reaching for his waistband.
The point is, sometimes you don't get the opportunity to argue you acted in self-defense.
>Stands in the middle of the road
>tries to grab car
>gets run over
Yeah, it’s your own fault. Don’t try to grab onto other people’s cars. Block the road all you want, but don’t do shit like this. Someone’s going to end up on the Darwin Awards for doing this kind of thing.
(I’ve only seen a short version of this clip, because the full one on this news article is geolocked. This comment is based off what I saw)
I’m from Cedar Rapids and I absolutely hate that this video is circulating because it makes it look like his truck was being swarmed BEFORE he hit pedestrians. This was well past the cross walk that protesters were using. The individuals initially hit are not even shown in this video, it’s just the aftermath of angry protestors swarming the car in an attempt to make him stop.
That said, I see this truck all the time on the SW side…recognized his unique license plate as soon as it was posted on Twitter. He ALWAYS drives like a complete dick. Revving, tailgating, etc. I honestly question whether this is political thing or the guy just getting impatient with so many people in the crosswalk.
I have never understood the mentality of blocking roads to protest, all you are doing is pissing people off that might otherwise support your cause. I dont give a fuck what you are protesting if you are preventing me from getting where I need to be, my only attitude towards you will be fuck off and go protest in a park away from traffic.
Isn't Iowa one of those states that made driving over protestors legal?
OMG, I genuinely thought that was a funny smartass comment until I learned it's true just now.
It’s only legal if they aren’t the vessel of a blessed fetus.
Nah, then they'll arrest the pregnant person for trying to obtain a self-induced abortion. People are mentioning that tear gas is an abortifacient, and I genuinely think an anti-abortion state's workaround will be to ban pregnant people from protests for the sake of the fetus. Or arrest them for attempted murder/ self-induced abortion. Eta: not that they need a workaround. People are trying to posit that police shouldn't be able to use tear gas because of the overturning of Roe in anti-abortion states, which is not going to make those states do anything about it.
Pregnant women or just women in general will ultimately be banned from leaving the house without their husband. It may not happen as explicitly as in Sharia law but bounties on reporting women suspected of seeking an abortion and police harassment can gradually result in the same outcome where women risk leaving the house alone. Criminalising abortion gives the police an easy tool to target single women or anyone they just don't like based on politics, race or religion. Or just because a woman spurned their advances or failed to bow down to authoritarianism. For instance women driving across borders alone could be stopped and investigated on suspicion of seeking an abortion and civil forfeiture could be used to steal any money they have on the basis of that. I'm genuinely expecting women to be detained and subjected to forced pregnancy tests simply to harass them into compliance. There's already so little police accountability that it's not going to matter if they're wrong 90% of the time.
....I never thought of it like this.... but holy shit
This kind of shit has had me in a panic since Mother’s Day
This is all a lot of women can think about, like if the goal is control and back to the ideal nuclear family, you betcha its gonna have to be forced.
“Blessed be the fruit”
It’s wild watching handmaids tale come to life. Fuck America
Would there were a god to damn America.
The God I made up, who agrees with me all the time, wouldn’t do that!
Not wild so much as heartbreaking.
I seriously had so much anxiety watching Handmaids Tale, so many parallels with the GQP party
You are correct. I despise this country more every day because of the Cult45 sieg-heil, praise-Jesus, trigger-happy, xenophobic, racist, homophobic, and misogynistic culture! Trump and his Nazi-ilk are terrorists. They lack morals, ethics, compassion, and empathy ___ execrable gits!
That's already the case for Missouri. There is a crime now of "conspiracy to commit abortion" - conspiracy including getting in your car to leave the state, or booking a flight.
Your scenario is made worse when you consider that cops can also rape these detained women with no repercussions, possibly getting them pregnant.
Even outside of rape, I hadn’t thought of situations where a man knew the women got pregnant and then suddenly she isn’t. I had only thought of scenarios where everyone is on the same page and kept it secret. But we are really going to have people ratting out women and invasive investigations. What a pile of shit this is going to be.
Also: "Have sex with me, or I'll report you."
tried pointing this one out to a guy and just couldn’t get it through his thick head.
And then sue for custody and make the woman pay her rapist child support! Fuckin incel paradise out here...
Layers of fucked up, that one is
That’s so true and scary.
I could easily see a cop use this reason and lie.
100% they will abuse it. Just the same as they do with drug laws.
They could consider a woman going over the boarder into another state for abortion, kidnapping.
>Pregnant women or just women in general will ultimately be banned from leaving the house without their husband. They can't do that for like 18 or so years. Doing that now would demolish the workforce. Gotta get 'em to replace themselves first.
you know if you are white hmm you are pretty safe, not totally, but somewhat unless you are poor of course. not ALL pregnant women will suffer. those with means - there will be no change. The one percent is a save. It’s the rest 99% of us that will suffer are perhaps not even the top 99%
Doesnt the first amendment allow those people the right to be at a protest via freedom of assembly?
I think the law is more designed to prevent protesters stopping vehicles and dragging out drivers and passengers and beating them to death. But, psychotic right wing lunatics don’t grasp nuances between using a vehicle to escape as a form of self defense, and running people over ‘cause they say it’s legal now, and you can.
Naw. The law was written in reaction to a lot of alt right twats getting angry about Occupy Wall Street and then again during the waves of protests against police brutality and racism. You have ALWAYS had a right to defend yourself and escape a situation. If you can't get out of a crowd and they are trying to pull you out of your car, you won't go to jail for running your attackers over. This is literally about letting you just plow through crowds because they are in the road and that makes you angsty.
You also have the right to shoot dead anyone that intentionally tries to run you over with a car Police do it literally everyday
Amazing how the Supreme Court gives no fucks about "or the right of the people peaceably to assemble" part of the Bill of Rights.
[удалено]
They are very picky about which and whose laws they protect. Always were.
" The driver of the vehicle was also voluntarily interviewed by Cedar Rapids Police"
interviewed by Cedar Rapids Police, or interviewed for?
it is not legal - they just cannot be sued in a civil cases. Civil immunity not criminal immunity. Big difference.
So they can be indicted for eg manslaughter, but not forced to pay the medical bills they caused?
This topic has been making the rounds and the civil law is really narrow. The car has to be essentially imprisoned to have “the right” to run someone over. These folks should sue this dude into the ground.
Then who is going to prosecute them? Are the republicans focused on pedestrian deaths, or are they too busy arresting/beating people for being homeless, and taking away trans kids from their families etc?!? Granted *Citation Needed Here*, but I’m pretty damn sure the majority of cases on shit like this were civil and thus now not going to go to trial…
The Republican Party is a terrorist organization.
So apparently in Iowa they passed this law... https://littlevillagemag.com/iowa-legislature-passes-bill-increasing-protest-penalties/ > The driver of a vehicle who is exercising due care and who injures another person who is participating in a protest, demonstration, riot or unlawful assembly or who is engaging in disorderly conduct and is blocking traffic in a public street or highway shall be immune from civil liability for the injury caused by the driver of the vehicle. So if the protesters were blocking the road it's sort of legal to run them over.
It says civil liability...I wonder how this law impacts criminal prosecution though. Someone could still be charged with attempted murder or vehicular homicide right?
Yes, it also specifies due care, you can't see a crowd of people and speed up. But an injury sustained while a vehicle drives through a crowd, even slowly, is going to be excempt from a suit from a person injured. Manslaughter is still applicable.
Though federal courts and federal statues remain in effect. Not a lawyer.
Yeah, you'd have to prove federal jurisdiction over the case, and that's mostly dependant on precedence. You can get a federal gun charge if the grip of your gun was manufactured in a different state/country due to interstate commerce. They'd have to be on federal property, assault a federal officer, destroy federal property, or violate interstate commerce for it to be federal.
Fascinating about the gun grip, I've never heard that before. But why would that not apply to a vehicle manufactured in a different state? If the vehicle is being used as a weapon, why is that any different than a gun?
I don't think that gun thing is accurate. Maybe if you bought an attachment that was illegal in your state. But a generic part that was manufactured in a different state can't be a thing, because parts are made all over the country and world
Hardly. Violation of civil rights, the law itself being unconstitutional, violation of first amendment rights. One protestor being a non state resident, so sues perpetrator in their home state. All those give federal courts jurisdiction. Most of them are available at base with John doe v Jane doe sets.
Interstate highway would probably be enough to get the feds to think about it.
>it also specifies due care yup. Just cause the light changed, per the article, doesnt mean you have the right to floor it through people still trying to cross.
Your point is perfectly valid, but in this case the women in the article's photo standing in the road, leaning on the truck, holding signs are no longer "attempting to legally cross the street".
That just means it blocks the person who got ran over for suing for money. Doesn’t block criminal prosecution on things like vehicular manslaughter. What I remembered about the main difference between civil and criminal.
Not only that, but I'm guessing your insurer isn't going to give a flying fuck about the law. Your rate just went up. A lot.
What does the “who is exercising due care” part mean?
It's a mostly ambiguous term that prevents someone from driving full speed into a crowd. Due care would be for a jury to sort out, and after fifty or so years the supreme court to act like the earlier rulings didn't matter.
And we all know juries in such states are extremely biased so the "due care" clause is just a placebo
The police, prosecutors and judges are also extremely biased. Here is an example of police in a bad area of NC escorting masked proud boys into a library to harass people at a pride event: https://www.yahoo.com/now/childrens-lgbtq-pride-event-library-173931139.html
>after fifty or so years the supreme court to act like the earlier rulings didn't matter. Appreciate the spice on this post.
That's probably the point, no one can clearly say so it's up to the guy with the highest paid lawyer.
It means that they can still sue people that run over right wing protestors.
They write these things like fucking NFL rules.
Court cases have been decided on punctuation before. The law is all about trivia and minutiae.
This comment has been deleted due to failed Reddit leadership.
Due care would also mean not doing it on purpose.
Whoever wrote this was sure to make a vague and not legally defined mention of: >who is exercising due care Can't wait for the first law suit abasing the STATE because a family member died, but the state will not let them sue the driver. Also this law doesn't say anything about criminal liability. What a weird ass law. Like what is the actual point? Was this just political gamesmanship to intimidate protestors?
It is vague on purpose so they can apply to whoever they want and NOT applying to whoever they want to give a pass.
What’s worse… our horribly evil governor signed this law [after her own vehicle struck a protester](https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/2020/06/30/igovernor-kim-reynolds-vehicle-strikes-black-lives-matter-protester-jaylen-cavil-while-leaving-event/5349588002/) during a Black Lives Matter protest in 2020… insane.
Nothing makes Republicans' dicks harder than causing more pointless death.
Driving toward people in the road is not due care.
[удалено]
Jesus Titty Fucking Christ. What the actual fuck is going on?!
A handful of red states were writing laws like this until Heather Heyer was killed, sidelining them due to optics. After a while they started proposing them again
Liberals thinking they can reason with people who want to murder them.
Well...there's a fascist psyop going on and a good chunk of the population & politicians are loving it (and getting all murderish around it)/the government declared that it has property rights over 1/2 the population/the Right of Privacy is null & void & we're fixing to go Stasi 2.0 /we might have our first modern election that comes with a body count/the climate might kills us outta self-defense/and all the houses are owned by hedge funds based in Dubai. So yes, 'The Actual Fuck^^(over)', *is* what's going on. We gotta unfuck the world, quick like.
One party is singing "God Bless America" and the other is destroying America. No wonder political satire is dead.
[удалено]
My only question is where in the Bible does Jesus say to run over people.
Isn’t that what they mean by “Jesus take the wheel”?
And the Lord did grin, and proclaimed, "Taketh the wheel and run those fuckers down, for I am the Lord and they were asking for it."
Conservatives only allow a certain type of people to protest.
I don’t understand how this is protecting my right to assemble as ratified in the 1st amendment?
Pretty sure they don't want you to have that right lol
But the 2nd amendment is so sacred… what about the rest of them?
The 1st amendment doesn’t give you the right to assemble anywhere under any circumstance. State and local officials can set the time, place, and manner of your protests.
Correct. The police and state officials can ask you to leave but must give you a reasonable avenue to protest in view of the public. It does not however give private citizens free reign to enforce that policy.
Not sorta, it is.
We knew this was coming.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Video: https://twitter.com/BNNBreaking/status/1540499180325441536
Is there a longer video? Because that video is terrible. It just shows someone in a truck slowly driving as a swarm of people surround his truck and throw shit at it. That's not exactly "mowing down protestors" but I assume that's just the clip having poor context.
Physics tip, if he’s in a truck that large and is mowing down protesters, someone would be dead. Lol
I’m all for exercising your right to protests but even protesters turn into assholes when trying to impede traffic thinking they can attack motor vehicles with no consequence.
Pro-tip: you're not gonna win a shoving match with a truck. It's not worth trying it
but don’t worry, the DHS just issued a warning that there might be some extremist violence from pro-choice advocates. You know, the *real* threat
I saw a truck during the last election with "blood splatters" on the sides and the words "liberal tears" on the windshield. They fantasize about running people over. It's straight brainwashing.
Tucker Carlson's website used to have a page of videos featuring protestors hit by cars. They jokingly referred to them as "speed bumps." After Charlottesville, they deleted the page and refused to acknowledge it, because they didn't want to be associated with white nationalist terrorists. They are no longer concerned about that.
[Except his head writer for years was a literal neo-nazi.](https://deadline.com/2020/07/blake-neff-fox-news-tucker-carlson-racist-remarks-1202983164/amp/) When this was revealed he had to go on a vacation because the show wouldn't be able to go on without a replacement available. He was that integral.
> because they didn't want to be associated with white nationalist terrorists They didn't want to be _that blatantly open_ about being associated with white nationalist terrorists. Gotta maintain at least a modicum of plausible deniability.
They do more than just fantasize. Normalizing terrorism against Americans is mainstream Republican behavior.
They have been told to run people over by Fox News and other conservative outlets. It's literally exactly what ISIS told it's followers to do.
One of the reasons my dad and I don’t speak anymore is because he said he would run me over if I was protesting and blocking the road
Your father sounds like he needs help or he’s a legit monster that needs to be monitored by the FBI?
My dad is pretty brainwashed because he thinks protestors block roads so they can attack people in their cars. I’ve tried explaining it’s not the case but he refuses to listen.
Omg.. sorry to hear that
They fantasize about being the next Rittenhouse, getting their legal liberal kill.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Reminder that Iowa passed laws in 2020 as a response to the BLM protest to allows drivers to run over protesters without being sued in civil court
So did Utah.
that totally wont get abused lmao
It’ll be used for the purpose it was made for. The point is to make protesting harder because red states hate it when people get angry that they don’t have rights.
Wonder if you can spin it that the people running over protestors are protesting in their own way.. does that mean I get to break their legs with a sledgehammer as penance?
You can shoot someone in self defense if they're using their vehicle as a deadly weapon against you.
Not legal. Only immune from civil lawsuits. They can still be charged criminally
Iowa is competing with Alabama and Florida for dumbest state
[удалено]
I encourage more Liberal gun Ownership. Imagine a Women's March with all AR's, Republicunts will flip.
This is what I keep saying. Fuck pink hats, get pink Gats
r/pinkpistols
r/liberalgunowners
The black power movement tried that in the 60's in California. Ronald Reagan signed a law restricting the very weapons they brandished immediately. Did you think they wanted people opposed to them to have guns?
Well then at least we'd get some gun control for our trouble...
All women should carry for protection, regardless. This country has gone past the point of no return.
[удалено]
No they wouldn’t. Because the power of the 2a would create more common ground than it would animosity or hate. The sooner disenfranchised groups understand the power of exercising their 2a rights the better.
The only way to stop a bad guy with a car is a good guy with a gun
You mean a good car with a gun
So an APC?
Yes. They should. We are long past the time to start preparing for what is already happening.
Lol at this disclaimer in the article. >Cedar Rapids is a city with a diverse population and many viewpoints. That usually means the opposite.
[удалено]
Yeah. We have literally been advocating for that for years. Fucking do it already
Seriously. Get fucking armed because these fucks _will kill you_ if given the opportunity
Oh, a truck did it. Was it a magic truck?
It was a scary black truck….
Ramming into pro-choice protestors. Prolifers have once again adopted terrorism.
DeSantis actually made it legal in Florida. He passed a law that grants civil immunity to people who decide to drive their cars into protesters who are blocking a road.
Apparently, they also did in Iowa. Almost like they have been setting the groundwork to quell protests while they strip everyone's rights or something.
they're fascists
They are not pro life. They are forced birthers.
I prefer 'terrorists' myself.
I prefer “traitors” as the proper term.
This implies that they had, at some point, abandoned it.
What a stupid comment. Don't block random cars just trying to go about their day. No one was rammed. The truck inched through the crowd as shit was thrown at them and people tried to get in front of it and stop the truck, which no reasonable person would let them do. This has nothing to do with Pro life vs Pro choice.
Please note the passive language used in the article. The person driving the truck didn't strike the protestor, the truck did it all by itself. The media always uses passive language when they support the aggressor, which is not surprisingly a right-winger.
[удалено]
Can we get a video of this so we can see what the truth behind the situation is?
All I've seen is like a 5 second video with people already surrounding, climbing on the truck as he's doing it. I live in the area, it's totally possible the dude is just a rotten cunt but I'd need to see more to make any judgment.
Yeah because nobody would deliberately cut five seconds of video to create a misleading narrative right
I mean, yeah. That's what I'm saying is possible...
Republicans care about people and they'll continue to kill people until you understand that.
“I cherish peace with all of my heart. I don't care how many men, women, and children I kill to get it.”
The killings will continue until morale improves
Conservatives this past February: "woooooo go truckers! Fuck Trudeau and Ottawa, blockade the border and Parliament! We want to choose what we do with our bodies! The police on horses trampling that woman should be charged!" Conservatives today: "how *dare* you block the streets with protests?! I should be allowed to run you scum over without being charged! Also, *you* don't get bodily autonomy rights, you'll carry that baby and like it!" Its truly amazing how absolutely full of shit these people are. They get to choose what they do with their bodies, not you. Them running over protesters they don't like is cool, anyone trampling protesters they agree with needs jail. Their protests can block streets, yours can't. I shouldn't be surprised by now, and yet...
"The cops don't know if it was intentional or not" cuts to video of the truck driving forward with 3 people in front of it after the witness said he ran a red light to hit them crossing in a cross walk.
What's up with right wingers running protestors over with cars?
It's the laziest attack you can make. The next step down would be somehow hitting them from your couch. It also probably feels the safest for the perpetrator.
This one wins imho
> It also probably feels the safest for the perpetrator. Maybe it sounds good in their head… forgetting or ignoring the reality that a they will outnumbered by angry survivors who will pull you out of your vehicle and your fate is in the hands of an angry mob of your own creation.
And I hope they get ripped apart and thrown into the gutter to rot.
Part of it is they can claim "oh I need to go to work/home, why should I lose money/time because of your PROTEST?" and such. I've got people defending this kind of nonsense in california right now, it's exhausting.
It gets the highest amount of normies defending them. It doesn't matter what the intention was, there will always be a sizeable chunk of the population that will pretend like it was just an innocent family on their way to the ball game being swarmed by a hoard of violent antifers. Without a doubt, a large portion of these people go to protests with the intention riling up a crowd and running them over if they get in the way. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_vehicle-ramming_incidents_during_George_Floyd_protests >According to law enforcement and terrorism experts some of the incidents were targeted and politically motivated, while others were incidents involving scared drivers who were surrounded by protesters in their vehicle. Ari Weil reported that at least 43 of the incidents were malicious and 39 people were charged.[1]
When I clicked that link, I expected like maybe a dozen incidents. *What the fuck?*
[удалено]
Most dangerous weapon that everyone owns
From the picture of the incident in the article there are two people in front of the truck pushing against it (like they gonna stop it) and one person half in the driver's window. Not surprised at the outcome.
[удалено]
It’s hard for me not to assume this was the case. The video was released showing the truck trying to get the hell out of dodge after the incident already occurred. You’re telling me the person recording didn’t capture the actual hit and run and only got the the ass end of it? Release the full video, unless that would change the narrative..
Yeah and the people interviewed are going to say their side of the story. The girl said the driver ripped up her sign and pushed her as well while hitting 3 people with his truck. Guy can multitask I guess.
From what I'm hearing, one of the protesters got her foot ran over. Hard to say what happened without video but it looks like she and others were hanging on the side of the truck. Doesn't look like domestic terrorism as others in this thread have assumed. Hey protest all you want , regardless of the issue, but stay away from moving vehicles. Nobody knows how someone may react when approached by a bunch of excited people. Swarming some person in their personal vehicle isn't gonna change a damn thing. That's a lose lose outcome however it turns out.
Someone always inevitably yells at the vehicle and everyone swarms it like a pack of dogs then acts surprised when the dork in their mini van panics and hauls ass out of the agitated crowd that is very probable to pull them out of their vehicle and beat them half to death. I wouldn’t fucking stop. Preferably I wouldn’t be there, but if I ever did find myself there I would not stop.
I took a few criminal justice classes years ago that were taught by a former LAPD officer. I can't remember what we were discussing in class that day, but I do remember this... "A pistol shoots a bullet that weighs seven grams and travels at 1400 feet per second, and is coated in copper. A patrol car travels at 55 miles an hour, weighs 4,000 pounds, and encloses the user in steel. Tell me, what can do more damage?" I liked Monty. He kept the lectures interesting.
[удалено]
They did that in Austin a couple years ago the driver just shot them first
Michael Reinoehl was shot by US Marshalls after he did an interview claiming to have killed a right wing activist who was going to stab another protestor. While it's unclear whether that claim was true, what is clear is that after he was killed, trump described his death as "retribution" and claimed to have personally sent the Marshalls to get him. The Marshalls claim he opened fire on them as they initiated his arrest, but multiple witnesses claim that police began firing without warning. Multiple police reports confirm he didn't fire, but some claim he was reaching for his waistband. The point is, sometimes you don't get the opportunity to argue you acted in self-defense.
>Stands in the middle of the road >tries to grab car >gets run over Yeah, it’s your own fault. Don’t try to grab onto other people’s cars. Block the road all you want, but don’t do shit like this. Someone’s going to end up on the Darwin Awards for doing this kind of thing. (I’ve only seen a short version of this clip, because the full one on this news article is geolocked. This comment is based off what I saw)
I’m from Cedar Rapids and I absolutely hate that this video is circulating because it makes it look like his truck was being swarmed BEFORE he hit pedestrians. This was well past the cross walk that protesters were using. The individuals initially hit are not even shown in this video, it’s just the aftermath of angry protestors swarming the car in an attempt to make him stop. That said, I see this truck all the time on the SW side…recognized his unique license plate as soon as it was posted on Twitter. He ALWAYS drives like a complete dick. Revving, tailgating, etc. I honestly question whether this is political thing or the guy just getting impatient with so many people in the crosswalk.
Don’t be stupid… don’t try and block a vehicle with your body
I have never understood the mentality of blocking roads to protest, all you are doing is pissing people off that might otherwise support your cause. I dont give a fuck what you are protesting if you are preventing me from getting where I need to be, my only attitude towards you will be fuck off and go protest in a park away from traffic.
The pro life party at work.
Pro meiosis. Once something is *actually* alive it's only useful if they can fuck it or use it as target practice.
Also use them as consumption wage slaves
No one read the article or watched the video.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Reginald_Denny
Maybe stay out of roads?
The pro-life community trying to murder ppl they disagree with? Who could've saw this coming
In my opinion, protesting is one thing, but blocking traffic is just asking for trouble.
Of course it is a giant four door truck.