Charlottesville Driver May have Been Panicked into Losing Control of His Car

[Call Sign Chaos]

His car was blocked from the front and a man was beating his car blocking his path from behind before he struck anyone, its all on tape so save your lies.

Thats a flat out lie. There was no one behind him.

It's all on video you lying ****** the man is hitting his car with a club from behind so ******* kill yourself.

He was going too fast to avoid hitting the crowd in front of him.

Show me your degree in physics or STFU.

 

[Montrovant]

He also had the legal responsibility to avoid hitting pedestrians, no matter if they were legally in the road or not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They were not pedestrians they were a violent mob intentionally blocking a public and open thoroughfare chanting "whose streets? Our streets!" And he didn't strike anyone until they started attacking his car from behind and blocking his escape from the front.

Do you really believe that?

I have it on ******* video bud.

Um, the "blocking his escape" did not happen after his car was struck by a flag.

The car was going fast enough when it was struck by the flag there is almost no chance he could have stopped before hitting the crowd. If he was already going to be hitting the crowd, trying to say it was only because of his fear for his life after his car was struck by a flag doesn't hold water.

Chanting in the street does not make a "violent mob." Nor does it grant anyone license to hit those people with their car.

His car was blocked from the front and a man was beating his car blocking his path from behind before he struck anyone, its all on tape so save your lies.

I didn't lie about anything. You said he didn't hit anyone "until they started attacking his car from behind and blocking his escape from the front." That would mean he didn't hit anyone until they started attacking his car from behind and until they started blocking his escape from the front. In other words, according to your statement, they weren't blocking his escape from the front at first. The road was blocked well before the car got down there.

I also don't think characterizing the guy with the flag as "blocking his path from behind" to be entirely accurate. Perhaps that guy blocked a bit of his path from behind, but the car could certainly have gotten past that one person far more easily than any attempt to move forward through the road which was full of pedestrians, not to mention multiple vehicles.

But hey! Feel free to point to what I said that was a lie, maybe you are talking about something else.

 

[Montrovant]

Is that the "high rate of speed" that was referring to the speed at the time of the crash?

Unfortunately, the statement did not specify just what time frame that high rate of speed encompasses. However, the videos don't seem to show any dramatic increase in speed between the time the car is hit by the flagpole and the time it hits the crowd.

Anyway, I said before I'm not a mind-reader. No, I don't know what was going through his head anymore than I know what was going through the head of the driver. I'm simply making observations based on the facts that are visible in the evidence, such as the way it was actually used and the general demeanor of the crowd: they were up to no good from the beginning.

Of course you are not a mind reader. However, you said this:

It's obviously an attempt to bring a weapon to the "protest."

That speaks to the intent of the guy before the protests even happened; it's saying that the flagpole was intended to be a weapon all along. I don't know what you observed that would speak to the man's intent before the protests.

Regardless, what does any of this have to do with my use of the word "polearm?" Regardless of the reason he brought it there, he still used it as a weapon. If someone bashed the driver's head open with an iron pipe, would the iron pipe be a weapon? Would it matter when the attacker decided to use the pipe as a weapon, whether 1 second ago or 1 day ago?

Yes, an iron pipe can be used as a weapon. If someone used it as such, I wouldn't decide to call it a quarterstaff.

 

[Montrovant]

What happened in Charlottesville.

James Fields might well walk.

If he does, they might just get their race war after all.

Facts mean nothing to the left. They want blood. WHITE blood.

What facts do you think mean nothing to "the left" in this instance?

 

[Montrovant]

Why do these communists hide their faces?

They're not communists, asshole.

Yeah, I'm afraid they are. Also, they are anarchists.

Are all Antifa members communist anarchists?

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Are all Antifa members communist anarchists?

Yes.
Twitter

 

[JimBowie1958]

Why do these communists hide their faces?

They're not communists, asshole.

Yeah, I'm afraid they are. Also, they are anarchists.

Are all Antifa members communist anarchists?

Yes, communist or Anarchists

 

[Call Sign Chaos]

Um, the "blocking his escape" did not happen after his car was struck by a flag.

There illegal presence in the middle of the street was blocking his escape you stupid ****.

The car was going fast enough when it was struck by the flag there is almost no chance he could have stopped before hitting the crowd.

Show me your physics degree or Stfu.

If he was already going to be hitting the crowd, trying to say it was only because of his fear for his life after his car was struck by a flag doesn't hold water.

It wasn't a flag it was a club with a flag on it which is a well documented tactic of Antifa so save your minimization propaganda you laughable ****.

Chanting in the street does not make a "violent mob." Nor does it grant anyone license to hit those people with their car.

Violating the right to freedom of movement is an act of violence.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Um, the "blocking his escape" did not happen after his car was struck by a flag.

There illegal presence in the middle of the street was blocking his escape you stupid ****.

The car was going fast enough when it was struck by the flag there is almost no chance he could have stopped before hitting the crowd.

Show me your physics degree or Stfu.

If he was already going to be hitting the crowd, trying to say it was only because of his fear for his life after his car was struck by a flag doesn't hold water.

It wasn't a flag it was a club with a flag on it which is a well documented tactic of Antifa so save your minimization propaganda you laughable ****.

Chanting in the street does not make a "violent mob." Nor does it grant anyone license to hit those people with their car.

Violating the right to freedom of movement is an act of violence.

Dude, you have not asked me, but I really think you are beating a dead horse here and being so vociferous about it that you are kind of looking less than wise for it.

You have good reasons for what you think is true, and I was agreeing with you until recently, and you should be able to respect the disagreement of others, right?

No one is going to hell over this issue, are we?

So please, lets back this off a few notches and rembmer we are discussing the issue with our fellow working class countrymen.

 

[Montrovant]

Um, the "blocking his escape" did not happen after his car was struck by a flag.

There illegal presence in the middle of the street was blocking his escape you stupid ****.

The car was going fast enough when it was struck by the flag there is almost no chance he could have stopped before hitting the crowd.

Show me your physics degree or Stfu.

If he was already going to be hitting the crowd, trying to say it was only because of his fear for his life after his car was struck by a flag doesn't hold water.

It wasn't a flag it was a club with a flag on it which is a well documented tactic of Antifa so save your minimization propaganda you laughable ****.

Chanting in the street does not make a "violent mob." Nor does it grant anyone license to hit those people with their car.

Violating the right to freedom of movement is an act of violence.

I understand that the crowd was blocking his escape, assuming escape was his intent. However, that blocking did not start after or at the same time as the car was struck by the flagpole. They were blocking his escape from the moment his car is first recorded; the crowd was filling the road when he got there. If you pay some attention to what I actually said, I said that the blocking did not happen AFTER his car was struck by a flag. His escape was always blocked.

I'm sorry, do you have a physics degree? Are you going to explain the formulae you used and the measurements you took to show that the car could have stopped before hitting the crowd at the moment it was struck by a flagpole? I am obviously giving my opinion on the events based on the speed the car appeared to be moving at and the distance between the car and the crowd as seen in still photos from when the flagpole hits the car. Besides, I see no reason to be quiet on your command.

It was a club.....so was it a stout stick, heavier on one end? And even if it were, as I originally thought, a baseball bat, that doesn't matter in the context of the point I was making. A club, a bat, a foam pool float, whatever the guy used to hit the car, my point was that at the time the car is struck, it is already going to be hitting the crowd IMO.

Calling people standing in a road an "act of violence" is ridiculous. If a road crew puts up barricades, preventing traffic from moving, is that an "act of violence?" If someone's car breaks down in the road, are they committing an "act of violence" until they are able to push it to the breakdown lane? Your statement actually makes you sound remarkably like some Antifa members I've read statements from, who consider racist or hateful speech to be an "act of violence," and therefore they feel justified in responding with physical violence.

Would you like to simply address my points, or will you once again toss out insults intended to disparage my intelligence while you misunderstand my post?

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Sign Chaos, post: 17974779

It's all on video you lying ****** the man is hitting his car with a club from behind so ******* kill yourself.

You flat out liar. First you said a man was beating his car and blocking his path from behind. Now you say the man was hitting his car with a club.

No man blocked his car from behind because he never stopped moving. The car was hit once by someone on the sidewalk as it sped by. Your version is a lie and there is a reason for it to be a lie.

One hit is not beating and blocking. You are a liar.

 

[bgrouse]

Is that the "high rate of speed" that was referring to the speed at the time of the crash?

Unfortunately, the statement did not specify just what time frame that high rate of speed encompasses. However, the videos don't seem to show any dramatic increase in speed between the time the car is hit by the flagpole and the time it hits the crowd.

I thought it said something to the effect of "when the crash happened."

The video from behind, far away, is a bad way to judge speed.

Anyway, I said before I'm not a mind-reader. No, I don't know what was going through his head anymore than I know what was going through the head of the driver. I'm simply making observations based on the facts that are visible in the evidence, such as the way it was actually used and the general demeanor of the crowd: they were up to no good from the beginning.

Of course you are not a mind reader. However, you said this:

It's obviously an attempt to bring a weapon to the "protest."

That speaks to the intent of the guy before the protests even happened; it's saying that the flagpole was intended to be a weapon all along. I don't know what you observed that would speak to the man's intent before the protests.

Like the fact that he used it as a weapon and the violent, irrational reaction of the crowd right after the crash. Shows they had violence on their minds, so it would make sense for them to bring a polearm more than it would to bring a flag.

Regardless, what does any of this have to do with my use of the word "polearm?" Regardless of the reason he brought it there, he still used it as a weapon. If someone bashed the driver's head open with an iron pipe, would the iron pipe be a weapon? Would it matter when the attacker decided to use the pipe as a weapon, whether 1 second ago or 1 day ago?

Yes, an iron pipe can be used as a weapon. If someone used it as such, I wouldn't decide to call it a quarterstaff.

It looked like he adapted it to be used as a polearm, as opposed to a slingshot or crossbow.

 

[bgrouse]

"When the crash happened." Is that the same "report?"

Yes when the crash happened. What do you think it was? The night before?

The 16 seconds before.

Why don't you tell us how you calculated his speed? You counted 8 seconds, but the shouting you described happens at the 16 second mark. So was his speed actually 15 mph instead of 30 mph?

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Call Sign Chaos, post: 1797486

Violating the right to freedom of movement is an act of violence.

Who violated the Nazi killer's right to freedom of movement? He killed and maimed nineteen of the people he targeted and got away. That apparently was the movement he intended to have.

Why else was he speeding down 4th Street heading for a group of counter protestors at a high rate of speed according to the cops.

The only one's to restrict his movement are the cops. Without bond. For good reason. He killed a young woman who opposed racist fascism in America.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

bgrouse, post: 17975102

"When the crash happened." Is that the same "report?"

Yes when the crash happened. What do you think it was? The night before?

The 16 seconds before.

Why don't you tell us how you calculated his speed? You counted 8 seconds, but the shouting you described happens at the 16 second mark. So was his speed actually 15 mph instead of 30 mph?

No the car came by the camera in reverse at 22 seconds on the video. Deduct two seconds stopped at zero mph at the crash point. Deduct two more seconds for acceleration in reverse to top speed and that is 18 seconds round trip.

9 seconds in and nine seconds out.

But you said reverse was more difficult so 8 seconds in and 10 seconds out is probably more like it.

The 8 seconds to the impact sounds quite accurate. That's 30mph in and 20mph out roughly.

Your Nazi did not stop before he hit all those people. He didn't because he didn't have time. If he was going 15 mph it is even more impossible.

 

[bgrouse]

bgrouse, post: 17975102

"When the crash happened." Is that the same "report?"

Yes when the crash happened. What do you think it was? The night before?

The 16 seconds before.

Why don't you tell us how you calculated his speed? You counted 8 seconds, but the shouting you described happens at the 16 second mark. So was his speed actually 15 mph instead of 30 mph?

No the car came by the camera in reverse at 22 seconds on the video.

That's when he was backing out. You were talking about when he initially approached the crowd before the crash, the time between passing the cameraman and the time of "go go go" (when he started backing out).

Deduct two seconds stopped at zero mph at the crash point. Deduct two more seconds for acceleration in reverse to top speed and that is 18 seconds round trip.

Surely you realize that he may have been traveling faster while reversing out of there as that's when he feared for his life followed the crash, right?

9 seconds in and nine seconds out.

But you said reverse was more difficult so 8 seconds in and 10 seconds out is probably more like it.

Difficulty affects the top speed, not the minimum speed. I suspect the top speed of that car going forward is more than 100 mph. Even if the top speed going backwards is 50 mph, it's still possible to go 15 mph forward and 45 mph backwards. That would average out to your claimed 30 mph. What matters is when.

The 8 seconds to the impact sounds quite accurate. That's 30mph in and 20mph out roughly.

Your Nazi did not stop before he hit all those people. He didn't because he didn't have time. If he was going 15 mph it is even more impossible.

It's 16 seconds between when he passes the camera and when you hear "go go go." Those are your markers, stupid!

 

[Billo_Really]

Antifa is a violent terrorist organization just like black lives matter...or should I say black lives splatter. Hey look ma, I'm road kill! And I can't stop laughing.

You're too laughable to take seriously.

Neither group has anything to do with terrorism. That's what you want people to believe because you're embarrassed normal college kid folk don't buy in to your phony tough guy talk and won't back down when you get in their faces. You call them terrorists because they don't fear you and you don't know how to handle that.

ANTIFA is against fascism and white supremacy. That is a noble cause to be in to. BLM is a group that is fighting for equality. Unite the Right is a group that is fighting for white supremacy. The FBI considers the WS "domestic extremists". They do not consider ANTIFA and BLM that.

So you're a big mouth who's full of shit. As usual.

 

[Billo_Really]

Yeah, I'm afraid they are. Also, they are anarchists.

What is your proof they are communists?

 

[Sun Devil 92]

I know this will not evenb penetrate into the minds of our SJWs who just wanna have ANY reason at all to hate some random white guy, but it seems that the driver was hit with a bat and that might have panicked him.

It might be that the driver in Charlottesville was panicked into losing control of his car, and did not intentionally run his car into the crowd.
VIDEO: Protesters Attacked Charlottesville Driver's Car With Baseball Bat

Yes. every time I feel a bump on the left rear of my car, I end up running over people and killing as many as I can.

Completely missed the point.

it's a shame you morons can't think outside of your tiny little Saul Alinsky manufactured boxes.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

The Holicaust was just because one morning Hitler was startled when a Jew asked him for directions

So you think that nervously and unintentionally stepping on the gas too hard is equal to a protracted genocidal strategy?

I've unintentionally stepped on the gas pedal too hard before, myself. I let off before I ran over a bunch of people and killed at least one, but that's just me.

I've been in an accident once. Just a fender bender. Therefore, anyone whose "accident" involves a fatality is actually a murderer.

If it is an accident. But this was no accident. The murdering bastard purposely drove into that crowd.

There you have it !

The left has spoken.

No need for a trial. Just dial up big rocks in the head and find out what you need to know.

He knows everything.

After all....he's a left winger.