ICE ran over protester in LA

[orangecrush]

Judge for yourself.

Looks like they survived but injured.

?si=b00lEFLaGaewMxUX

[ForgedCrank]

1. That's not

a protester. Protests happen on the sidewalk and don't include violence. That's a rioter trying to block a vehicle that was clearly under attack.
When we do dumb things, it can often be followed up with consequences.

[moniss]

2. It is still hit and run. nt

[Dumpy]

16. Guy running backward and fell

His fault, not hit and run.

[moniss]

19. Any time and for any reason if a vehicle contacts a pedestrian

and leaves without stopping it is hit and run regardless of whether any action by the pedestrian contributed to the contact.

[Dumpy]

34. Vehicle didn't contact a pedestrian

He ran out in front of it to stop it. Much different.

[moniss]

39. It doesn't matter if the pedestrian steps in front of you.

He had his hands on the hood of the vehicle for some time and the vehicle kept pushing forward. There is no legal defense for taking off once they knew he went down and they had been pushing him backward.

[Dumpy]

40. The vehicle didn't hit him.

He was running backwards, tripped, fell and removed himself from the gene pool.

[k_buddy762]

5. Absolutely correct

There is no place for violence. If someone gets in front of a moving vehicle, that someone is a special kind of person

[Swede]

6. He sure is.

[GP6971]

15. Morning Sunshine!

[WhiskeyGrinder]

13. lol what on earth

[MineralMan]

14. Protests do NOT just happen on sidewalks.

You are woefully incorrect.

[ForgedCrank]

17. Protests do

not include violence and attacking and assaulting law enforcement, and it does not include interfering with law enforcing operations. I'm not sure when rioting became fashionable and acceptable. Seems we have been calling out a bunch of people and prosecuting them for doing that in DC a few years ago, but now it's Ok? So is this kind of rioting acceptable? If so, how do you differentiate this violence from that violence?
The answer is: this was a riot, it was a violent riot, and the guy who got hit by the vehicle was blocking the vehicle from trying to escape what is very obviously a violent mob (which he was a part of). You've been around here for a long time and I generally respect your grounded opinions, so I'd like to hear the justification for all of this.

[MineralMan]

18. Nope. Sorry.

[ForgedCrank]

20. Sorry about?

This doesn't answer any of the questions. If I'm wrong, and you insist that I'm wrong in the comment you wished to contribute, I'm asking you to explain your position. I can make snipe comments and the refuse to provide a foundation for my position too, but that's not discussion. Show me where I'm wrong in any of my points and I'll apologize.

[MineralMan]

27. My comment, like your post, is my opinion.

I do not owe you any further explanation. Now, I would not, personally stand in front of a vehicle to block it. Not alone. However, in the 1960s, I have locked arms with a group of people to block vehicles from moving. I was protesting a war, along with many, many others. The vehicle did not pass. It did not run over us. It stopped until we made way for it.

Protests take many forms. Often, they take place in public streets. You claimed that protesting in the street is not a real "protest." I disagreed with you, and have participated in such protests in the past.

I do not have to justify my opinion for you. I can simply state it, as I have done in this case.

You do not have any overriding authority over me. Nope. I will state my opinion as I choose. Injuring a protestor on foot with a vehicle is an assault. Protesting is a legal activity. It is protected by the Constitution.

[ForgedCrank]

37. You are correct.

If you don't wish to validate your position, you can stick with "you disagree with me therefore you are wrong". Maybe throw in a couple of reference incidents that share no relationship to this one for perceived justification.
Its not a very sound argument, no reasonable or logical, but I suppose if that's how you wish to present it then yes, it's your right.

Me? I do not sacrifice my convictions in order to go along with the crowd. Wrong is wrong, and that is what rioting and violence are: 100% wrong.
By the way, was the vehicle that didn't run you over being attacked by a mob with rocks and projectiles at the time?
Next up: my posts condemning violence will get flagged off for "right wing talking points".

[WhiskeyGrinder]

21. The violent mob is the one roaring into communities, sowing militarized terror and tearing families apart, and it must

be stopped.

[ForgedCrank]

22. I believe

there is a whole lot of missing context from that opinion.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

23. You're right, I forgot to mention the violence of a criminal response for a civil matter, the violence of defunding

schools and libraries and rec programs and food programs in favor of cops, and the violence of treating people as less than human. Thanks for the reminder. If I've missed anything, feel free to chime in.

[ForgedCrank]

24. While I

may not disagree with the points you made, that still doesn't excuse violent rioting. There is no valid justification for it.
The guy was trying to block the car from leaving. The car was under attack. Had they simply stopped and sat there and waited for the eventual and final outcome, what do you suppose that would have been? The argument that this guy was doing something commendable is without grounds. I wish he hadn't been hit by the car, but I certainly understand why he was. Were I behind the wheel of that car at that time, the same thing would have happened. I'm not going to sit there and get stoned to death by a violent mob, and I'm not going to excuse violence.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

25. I was typing a line-by-line response to your post until I got to this one:

Were I behind the wheel of that car at that time, the same thing would have happened...I'm not going to excuse violence.

You just did. Fix your heart.

[MineralMan]

28. Exactly.

[k_buddy762]

29. Protip:

Self defense is justified.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

30. Protip:

Knowing the burden of proof and definitions involved in any state's self-defense case law and code is important.

[k_buddy762]

32. So post them.

[ForgedCrank]

38. The real truth

is that the SECOND group of LE that came "roaring into the community, sowing militarized terror" came in response to the mob rioting and preventing law enforcement from leaving the area after they made a few (not sure of the number) arrests. It's right in the video. In my opinion, anyone involved in the rioting and violence also needs to be arrested.
We need to protest for sure, but this is not the way. This is one of the many behaviors that is costing us position and credibility.

[AloeVera]

3. Awful. Left a man lying on the ground and took off fast.

Hit and run. Attempted murder.

Their car kept pushing him and he had no choice but to keep running backwards as fast as he could until he fell under the car.

My heart is still pounding after that. Bastards.

[B.See]

7. Exactly. The day we start trying to

rationalize that kind of s--- is the day we're as good as done, imo.

[k_buddy762]

4. crowds and vehicles are incongruent

[orangecrush]

11. So are barricades and vehicles.

Especially when the barricades are formed on both ends of a block.

[IronLionZion]

8. That's why ICE wears masks

they don't want anyone knowing their badge numbers or any identifying info to hold them accountable. Some day we may have Nuremburg style trials.

It's not advisable to try to block a vehicle Tiananmen square style. These goons will run you over no matter how many witnesses and cameras are watching.

[C Moon]

9. I was thinking the same about trials. In a correctly run U.S., these "agents" would be brought to court eventually...

but the mask wearing and lack of identification is making that impossible.
Hopefully, they screwed up somewhere else so that they can be tracked down.

[Prairie Gates]

10. The newscasters are absolutely unbelievable fascist idiots

"They are going to run you over. Tra la."

We're fucking cooked.

[J_William_Ryan]

26. And this is just the beginning.

Citizens will continue their justified, warranted confrontations with ICE thugs.

And the fascist Trump regime will respond with more lawless violence and violations of civil liberties.

[David__77]

31. "Protest" isn't necessarily confined to following the rules.

Strikes emerged in the face of laws against “criminal syndicalism”, and involved shutting down their target. There are lots of different types of protests and strikes and of course people will have different opinions of which if any are appropriate.

[Passages]

33. It was not wrong to say abolish ICE

They should be...clearer than ever.

[cbabe]

35. Protest on the sidewalk? Not always.

https://m.

[OneGrassRoot]

36. Do we ever find out what the hardened criminals they're after actually did?

Yes, that's facetious. But are they even trying to act like they're going after dangerous criminals at this point?

[flamingdem]

41. ICE doesn't care

That guy cares

[Jack Valentino]

42. Where's "a good guy with a gun" when you need one ????