Running over protesters may soon be legal in North Dakota

[TITAN308]

in North Dakota? for the 5 people living there?

lol I admit I laughed

[Wells]

The logic in these threads seems to go:

Peaceful protests in the streets? FUCKING KILL THOSE ASSHOLES!!!

Armed takeover of a government owned bird habitat? Patriotism!

It makes sense when you understand that the overriding ideology is a need to lick boots.

[BuckSparkles]

I don't see a problem with this. Protestors play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

You can protest without shutting down traffic and being a pain in the ass to all the people who don't care about your protests or even what is being protested.

[Anevers]

This bill was aimed at the Native Americans protesting the pipeline.

[callipygoustp]

It's OK. Nobody posting in this thread would really follow through on it. They'd stop and honk and yell and get angry because when push comes to shove talking about how they'd kill someone for inconveniencing them is as far as they'd ever go. What is it they call this? Virtue signaling? I think that's the word. It let's all the angry authoritarians waggle their authoritarian dicks at each other for mutual stroking and commiseration over how terrible it is that they have to share the world with anyone who might ever act or think differently than they do.

Are you implying that people talk tough from the security of their computer desk? I call bullshit sir, complete bullshit!

[Very Tired]

Unintentionally running over someone purposefully blocking the road. These aren't exactly people who should be punished in the first place.

[Cerus]

Which is why I think its a bad law. A parade, permitted or not, is still technically an obstruction.

SO either word it so you ONLY include unpermitted protesting (because accidents and emergency services would also fall under unpermitted obstructions), or dont bother with the law at all.

- - - Updated - - -



Sure, but on the least amoutn of harm principle, being more spicific in this case is better than less specific, considering the intent is to only cover one specific incidence (unlawful protesting)

Again - it boils down to proving intent which isn't a new issue. But with a law like that you'll have more issues. What about cities that don't require permits? What about protests that have permits? A permit doesn't automatically give you the right to impede public roads.

And hitting an emergency vehicle or worker is already covered under other laws. But just because you hit one in that situation doesn't mean you're automatically guilty of a crime. Vague laws ensure that a crime is only a crime when commission of said crime is intentional....among other stilulations.

Too specific and people will abuse it and find more loopholes by simply arguing that the specific laws don't cover their situation 100%. Like I said before - if you try to be too specific then something will inevitably be left out and the guilty will go free. Or worse - the innocent will be locked away because there were no exceptions to their particular circumstances.

[callipygoustp]

If you get a bunch of friends and make a circle around someone preventing them from leaving the circle you can most certainly be charged for assault. Go ahead and try it. Same with blocking a doorway. A road is a bit of a stretch currently, but I'd argue that since it's unreasonable to abandon your vehicle it's the same thing.

Challenge accepted!!!

- - - Updated - - -

great law, ND ahead of the rest.

get the hell off the god damn road it's for traffic not your bitching and whining.

Kind of disappointed. California is usually the "progressive" state.

[callipygoustp]

in North Dakota? for the 5 people living there?

Hey, those 5 people control 3 electoral votes.

[SL1200]

They'll just use cars or trucks to block the highway now. Nothing will actually change.

[callipygoustp]

They should use animals. I bet the laws protecting animals are more severe than those that protect the human protesters.

[mickybrighteyes]

A permit isn't going to magically stop someone from getting hit by a car.

Still worth more than a sign and stating you're protesting if you get hit while standing in the road.

edit:

permit being notarized statement of permission to be in a stated place performing a stated action. incidents resulting from that stated action in stated location can then be looked at in a different perspective than, say, someone just showing up and doing whatever.

[Dug]

So now protesters will just carry fire arms on them so when they see someone barreling towards them in a car they are justified in opening fire on them since they don't know whether that car is going to threaten their life or not.

[Zantos]

I hope the intent of purposing this law is the shock value. Get people to think twice before standing in the middle of the road as a form of protest. They probably don't intend for it to actually pass, but to get people to understand that standing in the road is dangerous. They don't know the condition of the persons car that comes up to them. Heck, they don't even know if, at that time, the persons brakes give out and they just run them all over due to a malfunction. You can't just stand in the road and hope "citizens have the right away" stops people from running you over. Some will run you over. You won't be able to prove who did it. Its a dangerous situation and they need to stop going into it.

[Miztickow]

It's like a $2k fine in Missouri if you hit a construction worker with your car. If that law and this new one existed at the same time in the same state, wtf would happen?

[Zantos]

It's like a $2k fine in Missouri if you hit a construction worker with your car. If that law and this new one existed at the same time in the same state, wtf would happen?

$2k? I've seen signs for $10k as well as immediate removal of your license and driving privileges.

[hydrium]

Reminds me of the Oklahoma woman that just got life for killing 4 people during a parade. She was having personal issues and didnt exactly intend on killing 4 people, but she still acted negligently enough that it was worth a long prison sentence. One wonders how this law would apply to her.

- - - Updated - - -



What if someone kills people during parades though? Parades technically obstruct street use, even though they are allowed to be there because permits.

I too like to pretend to be retarded.

Infracted - Flaming

[Gen4Glock21]

...parade people? marathons? emergency services? Accidents covering all lanes?

I mean I hate unlawful road protestors too, but the law needs to be sper super SUPER specific and not vague as all hell.

This was not meant for planned, permitted events, it is for retards spontaneously running out into traffic and blocking the road. All they need is to add is an exception to the law listing the specified planned events. This is not likely the final version of the law and my guess the full law will listed them.

[TITAN308]

So now protesters will just carry fire arms on them so when they see someone barreling towards them in a car they are justified in opening fire on them since they don't know whether that car is going to threaten their life or not.

They are welcome to try that defense in court, sure.

[Powerogue]

That is not OK. What if they were just jaywalking? It's not a responsible thing to do but it shouldn't let the motorist get off scot free.