• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Man runs over anti-war protesters with his car

ark

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbVMUAcKnxE

Am I eveil if I laughed a little?
 

tabernac

Sr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
German word for taking pleasure in someone elses pain: Schadenfreude.

;)
 

NavalGent

Jr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
While I do not agree with their cause, or their method of protest, these people did not deserve to be run over. The idea that they suffered a severe, potentially life-threatening assault for their political beliefs, however misguided, is not the kind of action that I would defend.
 

ballz

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
237
Points
710
NavalGent said:
While I do not agree with their cause, or their method of protest, these people did not deserve to be run over. The idea that they suffered a severe, potentially life-threatening assault for their political beliefs, however misguided, is not the kind of action that I would defend.

They weren't injured because of their political beliefs, they were injured because their method of protest. It could just as easily happen to a bunch of pro-war protestors that sit in the middle of a busy street.

If you mount a hunger strike, you risk the starving to death. If you sit in the middle of a street during rush hour, you risk getting run over. I agree with the above poster about this being another fine example of a great thing called Darwinism.
 

MikeM

Sr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Pretty simple, sit in the street, don't be surprised if you're hit by a vehicle. Political belief or not, it's pretty stupid to sit there.
 

TN2IC

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
0
GIVE THIS GUY A MEDAL!!!


I"ll forward him my Queen Jubilee thingy mic-blooper...
 

wannabe SF member

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
As much as i disagree with that method of protest, the guy deserves to be punished for his actions. As stupid as the cause or methods for the protest were, the were people and you don't, for any reason, run over people.
 

PMedMoe

Army.ca Legend
Donor
Reaction score
387
Points
880
I agree, charge the driver and while they're at it charge the students too!!!
 

wannabe SF member

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
PMedMoe said:
I agree, charge the driver and while they're at it charge the students too!!!

+1

They disrupted public order, and they should be held partially responsible for their little friend's mishap.
 

1feral1

Banned
Banned
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I dont think there was deliberate criminal intent here, as he most likely thought they would move as he inched forward, but then when it was obvious he ran over someone, he must have thought, 'if I stop I will be beaten or killed by the mob', so panic yes, deliberate try to kill, no.

Antiwar protests are a way of life these days, but another method could have been used for the same effect to get a message accross.

Lucky no one was killed.

As for the 'stupid cause' mentioned above, I might not agree with these protests, but its a democracy, and everyone deseves to put forward their point of view as long as its done with some decorum, and within guidelines which do not obstruct others in they normal way of life.

Cheers,

Wes
 

Greymatters

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Wesley  Down Under said:
I dont think there was deliberate criminal intent here, as he most likely thought they would move as he inched forward, but then when it was obvious he ran over someone, he must have thought, 'if I stop I will be beaten or killed by the mob', so panic yes, deliberate try to kill, no.

The question that has to be asked here is "What was so important that the driver had to continue going forward, despite the obvious risk of injury to protesters?"  As long as there was no immediate threat to the driver's life, there was really no reason for the driver to continue moving forward.  All you can do is wait for the police/security forces to show up and restore order... which will be the exact question asked of him when he goes to trial for some form of vehicular homicide. 

Its the same kind of mentality that gets people into trouble at union picket lines...



 

midget-boyd91

Sr. Member
Reaction score
1
Points
210
Greymatters said:
The question that has to be asked here is "What was so important that the driver had to continue going forward, despite the obvious risk of injury to protesters?"  As long as there was no immediate threat to the driver's life, there was really no reason for the driver to continue moving forward.  All you can do is wait for the police/security forces to show up and restore order... which will be the exact question asked of him when he goes to trial for some form of vehicular homicide. 

Its the same kind of mentality that gets people into trouble at union picket lines...

The man was on his way to work. What did he do to deserve being stopped? Who knows what could have been waiting for him at the office. Maybe a meeting, maybe he was told that if he showed up late for work again he would lose his job. This man as an individual did not declare war. This man as an individual was being blocked from getting to work.
Had he been on foot walking to work on the sidewalk and was approached by some hippy telling him that he can't go to work because Bush went to war, and forcing him to cease walking forwards, I don't see why he wouldn't force his way through the hippy.
This is not to say that plowing through the human barricade in a car was the wisest decision, but I honestly think that he should only face a minor charge such as paying for the hospital bills for the injured protester.
The man did not start the war. The man should not be the one to take flak from the potheads forcing him to miss work. (IMO, of course)

Midget
 

Greymatters

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Its the argument that never ends - when do my personal rights take precedence over somone else's personal rights? - only the courts can settle this one...
 

Sig_Des

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
410
You know,

As much as I hate the ignorant war-protestors, I don't believe they should be run over.

As for the "give him a medal, instead of charging him" statements....

We'll go all crazy about a soldier throwing a puppy off a cliff, but, sure give someone who runs over multiple people a medal???
 

Yrys

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
410
Beadwindow 7 said:
We'll go all crazy about a soldier throwing a puppy off a cliff, but, sure give someone who runs over multiple people a medal???

Humans are inconsistants...
 

Lumber

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
38
Points
530
uncle-midget-boyd said:
...but I honestly think that he should only face a minor charge such as paying for the hospital bills for the injured protester.

This just seems wrong on so many levels. He drove into a group of people ran over a person! Regardless of whether or not he meant to hurt anyone, he used his vehicle in a very dangerous manner.
 

ballz

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
237
Points
710
So charge him with reckless driving or something, not attempted homocide. I dunno about you but if I was attempting homocide, those people wouldn't of had a chance to jump on the hood of my car.
 
Top