Will Conservative Patriots Back Down From Their Running Over Protestors Bills?

Biff_Poindexter

Diamond Member
Jun 6, 2018
26,844
14,761
1,415
USA


"Republican lawmakers in six states have pushed this year for legal protections for motorists who hit protesters blocking traffic - they’re facing an intense backlash now that violent images of a car ramming into a crowd protesting a white supremacist rally have been seen around the world. The driver immunity proposals have been labeled “hit and kill” bills that undermine free assembly and embolden extremists by suggesting they have a free pass to drive through protesters; by the American Civil Liberties Union.

A North Carolina state senator said Monday there are no plans to advance the measure in that chamber. In Tennessee, a committee rejected the bill. In Florida, Sen. George Gainer said the intent of his now-failed bill was to protect only those motorists who unintentionally strike protesters blocking traffic. He denounced “the reprehensible actions of the evil person in Virginia.”


The evil person the Florida Senator was referring to was the guy who ran over protestors in Charlottesville -- as if this guy didn't have a right to run them over...he feared for this safety....Some of these republican legislatures are starting to show weakness and not pushing hard enough to pass these bills...they are showing a reluctance to stand up for the call that "All Lives Splatter" .
 
Of course, the AP News, which is a member of the DEMOCRAT PROPAGANDA WING, misconstrues the true intent of the bill.

If your life is in DANGER, if you're vehicle is being attacked by a mob, then you should have the right to DRIVE TO SAFETY, and if that means hitting a protestor or two by doing do, then that's the protestor's problem. It's illegal to block a road without a permit, and it's also illegal to attack people and their property, i.e., their vehicle.

But once again the DEMOCRAT PROPAGANDA WING lies about these laws making them sound as though it gives anyone FREE LICENSE to just MOW DOWN PEOPLE ON THE STREET AT WILL, and that's just plain LYING.
 
Some of these republican legislatures are starting to show weakness and not pushing hard enough to pass these bills...they are showing a reluctance to stand up for the call that "All Lives Splatter" .
Your silliness aside, if protesters want to be safe from being hit by vehicles, DON'T SURROUND THE VEHICLES. See how simple the solution to public safety can be? Oh... and seriously consider not standing in the interstate, assuming high-speed traffic gives a damn about your snowflake issue of the day.
 


"Republican lawmakers in six states have pushed this year for legal protections for motorists who hit protesters blocking traffic - they’re facing an intense backlash now that violent images of a car ramming into a crowd protesting a white supremacist rally have been seen around the world. The driver immunity proposals have been labeled “hit and kill” bills that undermine free assembly and embolden extremists by suggesting they have a free pass to drive through protesters; by the American Civil Liberties Union.

A North Carolina state senator said Monday there are no plans to advance the measure in that chamber. In Tennessee, a committee rejected the bill. In Florida, Sen. George Gainer said the intent of his now-failed bill was to protect only those motorists who unintentionally strike protesters blocking traffic. He denounced “the reprehensible actions of the evil person in Virginia.”


The evil person the Florida Senator was referring to was the guy who ran over protestors in Charlottesville -- as if this guy didn't have a right to run them over...he feared for this safety....Some of these republican legislatures are starting to show weakness and not pushing hard enough to pass these bills...they are showing a reluctance to stand up for the call that "All Lives Splatter" .
It depends on the circumstances

If surrounded by crazy Black Lies Matter rioters a white persons life is in danger

Should he allow himself to be pulled from the car and beaten like Reginald Denny?
 
Of course, the AP News, which is a member of the DEMOCRAT PROPAGANDA WING, misconstrues the true intent of the bill.

If your life is in DANGER, if you're vehicle is being attacked by a mob, then you should have the right to DRIVE TO SAFETY, and if that means hitting a protestor or two by doing do, then that's the protestor's problem. It's illegal to block a road without a permit, and it's also illegal to attack people and their property, i.e., their vehicle.

But once again the DEMOCRAT PROPAGANDA WING lies about these laws making them sound as though it gives anyone FREE LICENSE to just MOW DOWN PEOPLE ON THE STREET AT WILL, and that's just plain LYING.
so, is there a need for a new law for the situation that you describe?
 

"Republican lawmakers in six states have pushed this year for legal protections for motorists who hit protesters blocking traffic - they’re facing an intense backlash now that violent images of a car ramming into a crowd protesting a white supremacist rally have been seen around the world. The driver immunity proposals have been labeled “hit and kill” bills that undermine free assembly and embolden extremists by suggesting they have a free pass to drive through protesters; by the American Civil Liberties Union.

A North Carolina state senator said Monday there are no plans to advance the measure in that chamber. In Tennessee, a committee rejected the bill. In Florida, Sen. George Gainer said the intent of his now-failed bill was to protect only those motorists who unintentionally strike protesters blocking traffic. He denounced “the reprehensible actions of the evil person in Virginia.”


The evil person the Florida Senator was referring to was the guy who ran over protestors in Charlottesville -- as if this guy didn't have a right to run them over...he feared for this safety....Some of these republican legislatures are starting to show weakness and not pushing hard enough to pass these bills...they are showing a reluctance to stand up for the call that "All Lives Splatter" .

Well he wouldn't have been convicted if he had this alleged right to run people over because he was scared.
 
If anyone thinks I'd sit still and watch a mob beat on, kick, smash windows, etc, my $65,000 truck while threatening to pull me out and beat me or kill me, you have to be freakin' insane. I'm going to hit the gas, and if I plow over someone that was standing on my hood, I couldn't give a fuck less. I hope they die. Anyone that acts that way isn't suitable to live in a peaceful society. They are violent, out of control trash with zero respect for other people, their property or the law.
 
Last edited:
Of course, the AP News, which is a member of the DEMOCRAT PROPAGANDA WING, misconstrues the true intent of the bill.

If your life is in DANGER, if you're vehicle is being attacked by a mob, then you should have the right to DRIVE TO SAFETY, and if that means hitting a protestor or two by doing do, then that's the protestor's problem. It's illegal to block a road without a permit, and it's also illegal to attack people and their property, i.e., their vehicle.

But once again the DEMOCRAT PROPAGANDA WING lies about these laws making them sound as though it gives anyone FREE LICENSE to just MOW DOWN PEOPLE ON THE STREET AT WILL, and that's just plain LYING.
so, is there a need for a new law for the situation that you describe?
What do you think?
 

"Republican lawmakers in six states have pushed this year for legal protections for motorists who hit protesters blocking traffic - they’re facing an intense backlash now that violent images of a car ramming into a crowd protesting a white supremacist rally have been seen around the world. The driver immunity proposals have been labeled “hit and kill” bills that undermine free assembly and embolden extremists by suggesting they have a free pass to drive through protesters; by the American Civil Liberties Union.

A North Carolina state senator said Monday there are no plans to advance the measure in that chamber. In Tennessee, a committee rejected the bill. In Florida, Sen. George Gainer said the intent of his now-failed bill was to protect only those motorists who unintentionally strike protesters blocking traffic. He denounced “the reprehensible actions of the evil person in Virginia.”


The evil person the Florida Senator was referring to was the guy who ran over protestors in Charlottesville -- as if this guy didn't have a right to run them over...he feared for this safety....Some of these republican legislatures are starting to show weakness and not pushing hard enough to pass these bills...they are showing a reluctance to stand up for the call that "All Lives Splatter" .


Get off the fucking road.
 
Of course, the AP News, which is a member of the DEMOCRAT PROPAGANDA WING, misconstrues the true intent of the bill.

If your life is in DANGER, if you're vehicle is being attacked by a mob, then you should have the right to DRIVE TO SAFETY, and if that means hitting a protestor or two by doing do, then that's the protestor's problem. It's illegal to block a road without a permit, and it's also illegal to attack people and their property, i.e., their vehicle.

But once again the DEMOCRAT PROPAGANDA WING lies about these laws making them sound as though it gives anyone FREE LICENSE to just MOW DOWN PEOPLE ON THE STREET AT WILL, and that's just plain LYING.
so, is there a need for a new law for the situation that you describe?
What do you think?
i think that there is no need for a new law. this is kabuki theatre.
 
so, is there a need for a new law for the situation that you describe?

Yes.

Brown Shirts assault motorists all the time. If a motorist does the right thing and runs the assaulters down, the motorist is prosecuted. Motorists mush have legal protection from the terrorist troops of the democrat party.

 
Some of these republican legislatures are starting to show weakness and not pushing hard enough to pass these bills...they are showing a reluctance to stand up for the call that "All Lives Splatter" .
Your silliness aside, if protesters want to be safe from being hit by vehicles, DON'T SURROUND THE VEHICLES. See how simple the solution to public safety can be? Oh... and seriously consider not standing in the interstate, assuming high-speed traffic gives a damn about your snowflake issue of the day.
The right to not be stopped on your way to Denny's overrides someone else's right to life.
 

"Republican lawmakers in six states have pushed this year for legal protections for motorists who hit protesters blocking traffic - they’re facing an intense backlash now that violent images of a car ramming into a crowd protesting a white supremacist rally have been seen around the world. The driver immunity proposals have been labeled “hit and kill” bills that undermine free assembly and embolden extremists by suggesting they have a free pass to drive through protesters; by the American Civil Liberties Union.

A North Carolina state senator said Monday there are no plans to advance the measure in that chamber. In Tennessee, a committee rejected the bill. In Florida, Sen. George Gainer said the intent of his now-failed bill was to protect only those motorists who unintentionally strike protesters blocking traffic. He denounced “the reprehensible actions of the evil person in Virginia.”


The evil person the Florida Senator was referring to was the guy who ran over protestors in Charlottesville -- as if this guy didn't have a right to run them over...he feared for this safety....Some of these republican legislatures are starting to show weakness and not pushing hard enough to pass these bills...they are showing a reluctance to stand up for the call that "All Lives Splatter" .

Well he wouldn't have been convicted if he had this alleged right to run people over because he was scared.
False....unless you think the people who wrote this bill are lying when they said the guy in Charlottesville was evil and should have been convicted for murder

You seem to believe evil people like him would be shielded by this bill; thus giving other evil people an excuse to do what he did...which is PRECISELY the argument that is being made by folks like the ACLU....

Which is why proponents of the bill have to keep trying to convince us that the bill doesn't do that....


"Bill supporters have rejected that claim and denounced the Charlottesville attack. They note that the wording of their bills would not protect drivers who deliberately target protesters, and any intentional attackers would still face criminal and civil liability."

So why do you think this guy in Charlottesville would protected?
 
so, is there a need for a new law for the situation that you describe?

Yes.

Brown Shirts assault motorists all the time. If a motorist does the right thing and runs the assaulters down, the motorist is prosecuted. Motorists mush have legal protection from the terrorist troops of the democrat party.

yeah, those protestors sure assaulted the vehicle.

guess what, turd: if you intentionally kill people, you have to face consequences.
 
Of course, the AP News, which is a member of the DEMOCRAT PROPAGANDA WING, misconstrues the true intent of the bill.

If your life is in DANGER, if you're vehicle is being attacked by a mob, then you should have the right to DRIVE TO SAFETY, and if that means hitting a protestor or two by doing do, then that's the protestor's problem. It's illegal to block a road without a permit, and it's also illegal to attack people and their property, i.e., their vehicle.

But once again the DEMOCRAT PROPAGANDA WING lies about these laws making them sound as though it gives anyone FREE LICENSE to just MOW DOWN PEOPLE ON THE STREET AT WILL, and that's just plain LYING.
so, is there a need for a new law for the situation that you describe?
Yes, because liberals keep prosecuting people who flee mob scenes.
 
Some of these republican legislatures are starting to show weakness and not pushing hard enough to pass these bills...they are showing a reluctance to stand up for the call that "All Lives Splatter" .
Your silliness aside, if protesters want to be safe from being hit by vehicles, DON'T SURROUND THE VEHICLES. See how simple the solution to public safety can be? Oh... and seriously consider not standing in the interstate, assuming high-speed traffic gives a damn about your snowflake issue of the day.
The right to not be stopped on your way to Denny's overrides someone else's right to life.
What an absolutely moronic, twisted, genuinely retarded thing to say. But coming from you, not surprising.

Evidently according to you, the protestors blocking traffic, being violent, beating on vehicles and pulling drivers out and beating them to within an inch of death, have ALL the rights, and NO ONE has any rights to go about their life without being HARRASSED or to DEFEND THEMSELVES.

YOU, are a fucking IDIOT.
 

"Republican lawmakers in six states have pushed this year for legal protections for motorists who hit protesters blocking traffic - they’re facing an intense backlash now that violent images of a car ramming into a crowd protesting a white supremacist rally have been seen around the world. The driver immunity proposals have been labeled “hit and kill” bills that undermine free assembly and embolden extremists by suggesting they have a free pass to drive through protesters; by the American Civil Liberties Union.

A North Carolina state senator said Monday there are no plans to advance the measure in that chamber. In Tennessee, a committee rejected the bill. In Florida, Sen. George Gainer said the intent of his now-failed bill was to protect only those motorists who unintentionally strike protesters blocking traffic. He denounced “the reprehensible actions of the evil person in Virginia.”


The evil person the Florida Senator was referring to was the guy who ran over protestors in Charlottesville -- as if this guy didn't have a right to run them over...he feared for this safety....Some of these republican legislatures are starting to show weakness and not pushing hard enough to pass these bills...they are showing a reluctance to stand up for the call that "All Lives Splatter" .

Well he wouldn't have been convicted if he had this alleged right to run people over because he was scared.
False....unless you think the people who wrote this bill are lying when they said the guy in Charlottesville was evil and should have been convicted for murder

You seem to believe evil people like him would be shielded by this bill; thus giving other evil people an excuse to do what he did...which is PRECISELY the argument that is being made by folks like the ACLU....

Which is why proponents of the bill have to keep trying to convince us that the bill doesn't do that....


"Bill supporters have rejected that claim and denounced the Charlottesville attack. They note that the wording of their bills would not protect drivers who deliberately target protesters, and any intentional attackers would still face criminal and civil liability."

So why do you think this guy in Charlottesville would protected?

Ohhh look, Buff_Knobpolisher is lying again.

This has nothing to do with deliberate and premeditated acts such as the Charlottesville attack.

These bill protect motorists who are attacked by the BLM klan and ANTIFA Brownshirts.


 
Of course, the AP News, which is a member of the DEMOCRAT PROPAGANDA WING, misconstrues the true intent of the bill.

If your life is in DANGER, if you're vehicle is being attacked by a mob, then you should have the right to DRIVE TO SAFETY, and if that means hitting a protestor or two by doing do, then that's the protestor's problem. It's illegal to block a road without a permit, and it's also illegal to attack people and their property, i.e., their vehicle.

But once again the DEMOCRAT PROPAGANDA WING lies about these laws making them sound as though it gives anyone FREE LICENSE to just MOW DOWN PEOPLE ON THE STREET AT WILL, and that's just plain LYING.
so, is there a need for a new law for the situation that you describe?
Yes, because liberals keep prosecuting people who flee mob scenes.
flee mob scenes, like stepanek in iowa city, or alex fields, eh?
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top