Politics
Politics
Out of context: Reply #23691
- Started
- Last post
- 33,468 Responses
- BuddhaHat1
'Shocking': North Dakota Republicans Want to Legalize Running Over Protesters
http://www.commondreams.org/news…"Running over protesters may soon be legal in North Dakota, if conservative lawmakers are successful in advancing legislation introduced last week.
House Bill Number 1203 (pdf) states that, "Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a driver of a motor vehicle who unintentionally causes injury or death to an individual obstructing vehicular traffic on a public road, street, or highway, is not guilty of an offense."...
..."Tara Houska, an Indigenous water protector and attorney who has resided at the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) resistance camps since August, told NBC News that the bill was "a direct violation of our First Amendment rights."
"It's shocking to see legislation that allows for people to literally be killed for exercising their right to protest in a public space,"..."
- lolmoldero
- omfgmonospaced
- a bit extremevero_vandal
- at least they added "unintentionally" to the wordingGnash
- Anti-Trump Protester Hit By Car On Highway
https://www.youtube.…omg - ^^ ha havero_vandal
- robo_vero_omg logging in/out to laugh at his own post of someone getting hit by a car. Sad! Would QBN laugh if you were hit by a car? I'm not saying I would...BuddhaHat
- but it needs investigating!BuddhaHat
- this happen recently where i live. actually involving ND protests. a person got ran over. it was kind of justified in idiots vs idiotsdeathboy
- blocked traffic, words spoken kick car and punches thrown at ppl, kid drove through, running over one breaking hip, pulled over 2 blocks away and called cops.deathboy
- court still going through but i think the kid wont be charged with running person over because of overall stupidity and violencedeathboy
- don't know why you would need any specific law. think a court can find intention. but protestors who block roads are just cunts. do it on the sidedeathboy
- overall stupidity and violence + person injured = the person won't be charged. That's a solid argument.BuddhaHat
- BuddhaHat. That car who hit the Anti-Trump protestor just unknowingly murdered someone. How many years do you think that person deserves?omg
- I'm not intimately familiar with the penal code in whatever state that occurred in. It would be fair to say that they could still be charged with something, no?BuddhaHat
- The linked vid, posted by user OverweightF*ck, shows nowhere that the person hit has died. Are you jumping to conclusions? Sad!BuddhaHat
- i look at it like i look at any fight with equal participation. you cant complain if you come out on the losing side. both pay for their own lossesdeathboy
- No cameras, alone in the car, pedestrians have the right of way. There will be a court case. Anti-Trump supporter just died. Motivation looks strong.omg
- in this case its kind of sad because both parties involved and charged with stuff let emotions get the better of them. person ran over was dumb old ladydeathboy
- so, 1st amendment expression of freedom of speech vs legally being run over (the original post) is an 'equal participation fight'?BuddhaHat
- part of protest so must take responsibility for group actions and standing in front of truck. now she feels she needs to be compensated for stupiditydeathboy
- SMASH!vero_vandal
- you should tweet @ the Don and have a word about paying for his own losses, instead of declaring bankruptcy 4 times. Not a good businessman. Sad!BuddhaHat
- they started damaging vehicle and punching driver and passenger, not to mention blocking road without permits.deathboy
- im just commenting on what i saw locally. i find no need for any new laws. i think a judge who finds unintentional intent can make own decisiondeathboy
- Ahh yes, I think I can still see you deathboy, standing way over there on that totally irrelevant tangent.BuddhaHat
- ha well bankruptcy is a whole different topic than being compensated for stupidity much like spilling coffee on oneself and blaming a labeldeathboy
- irrelevant tangent? does the court not already possess the power to pass judgement without new rules?deathboy
- sorry? what's that? you're too far away now deathboy! It's like you're off the tangent and have started a whole new totally irrelevant argument!BuddhaHat
- Just grazed him.instrmntl
- maybe we can pick up our conversation when you come back to the original topic :)BuddhaHat
- what do you think is the topic buddha? isnt it about creating a particular law that makes a judge have to give no charges if no intent?deathboy
- If it passes, what's stopping DAPL employees from running these people over and claiming 'I didn't mean to!'BuddhaHat
- 'I was late for work, your Honor... you know, at the pipeline! The same pipeline that these people are legally protesting, no less!'BuddhaHat
- due process, a judge and jury, evidence. same as anything else. why the headline is completely emo baiting and insinuatingdeathboy
- if i were to guess it is actually in defense of a person who was found to have 0 intentions and judge tossed book at themdeathboy
- but that is why their is court of appeals, because judges make mistakes or can have biasdeathboy
- do u think a judge would really uphold "i was late defense so i ran them over, i didnt mean to harm or kill them defense?" i really hope notdeathboy
- but i swear everyday i see all kinds of new levels of stupidity. a rule telling judges how to rule point incase..deathboy
- or case in point i guessdeathboy
- I'd hope in any court that the judge wouldn't, but by not passing this law it would make it a moot point. By passing it, it opens the door for all of those...BuddhaHat
- possibilities to play out. If I'm not mistaken, it would also make ND unique in holding a law that declares the driver not guilty of any offense.BuddhaHat
- i dont think it should pass, the second part about suing the fed is interesting. seems like they should be able sue without a special rule toodeathboy
- i was thinkin bout it at lunch. and what bugs me is the knee jerk reaction to call for new rules whenever something doesnt work out as expected.deathboy
- even in personal job. a mistake happens 1 in 1000. and someone cries for new rules or regs to prevent that 1 in 1000 that wasnt a big deal.deathboy
- it says something about today's culture and what ppl desire, how they judge, and value, ability of foresight and it scares medeathboy