This is the first I've heard of the incident but it sounds terrible. Even the original post on this matter, which sounds sympathetic to the motorist, says he "sped through the crowd, running over several individuals" - as I understand it, well before any shots were fired. How is that not really bad? Depending on intent that could be way worse than shooting him.
My interpretation is that he started being more aggressive / pushy once the gun was pointed in his direction (on the left at the start of the video). So even though the shots were "after", the gun being pointed was the first escalation. I too thought this incident was a borderline people being pushy with eachother type of deal where it unfortunately escalates, but this was clearly someone with a mask on walking up to the car with a gun pointed at it with the intent of intimidation/murder. Seeing that, I fully understand the motorist speeding away, and I probably would have done so even less-patiently.
The poster who said "sped through the crowd" seems to be sympathetic to the motorist. The poster who posted the video that you seem to think exonerates him (the flagged and downvoted post) is strongly unsympathetic to the motorist and may sympathise with the protestors. I don't have much sympathy for either...my opinion is still that this was violent behaviour from both the motorist and the protestors. Violence that would normally be bad, but is possibly excusable if, for example, you were in fear of your life. It's not really clear from the video who initiates the violence.
The flagged post that was attempting to justify violent and illegal behavior of shooting a motorist?
Where do I suggest "exonerates"? I plainly state he was trying to intimidate the people illegally blocking the road. Which he was. By revving his engine and edging forward.
That isn't even a shadow of an excuse for shooting and I'm actually horrified both you and OP would suggest that. My only question is why you would do so.
Generally speaking, trying to force your way through a crowd with a large vehicle is a very, very fucking bad idea and at the very least is tantamount to assault. The crowd turned violent the moment he started honking his horn and you can see in the video the individual with the gun drew it as the driver started trying to push his way through the crowd.
The person w/ the gun should not have escalated the situation like that, but the driver at minimum escalated things first.
I think you're underestimating the perspective and feelings of the driver in that situation. It's easy to safely sit in the comfort of your home with a cuppa commenting on Hacker News, but imagine you're in the situation: you're driving home as usual, and suddenly your car is surrounded by a group of seemingly angry strangers shouting at you, trying to block your car, and do who-knows-what to you.
It's not like you know who those people are, why they're there, or what they want from you.
I'd be intimidated and scared as hell.
I certainly have no interest at all in driving through a crowd of protesters, and I hope I'd resolve the situation better than this driver, but I can't honestly tell you what I'd do in that situation. Panicking would be quite a normal human response.
Incorrect. Rewatch the video. You can see the protesters only start to crowd around the vehicle as he honks and attempts to push his way through the crowd.
Regardless if someone is illegally in the road or not, that does not give you the right to run them over or attempt to push them out of the way with your vehicle, full stop. That would still be considered vehicular assault. Note that the other vehicles in the situation were being left alone.
That line of thinking only works if social order is maintained and the police come to intervene in the illegal road block. As we've seen in the last few years, that almost never happens and the police actively let the protestors block roads illegally. At this point, it's probably being argued as a "free speech" issue rather than a safety/law one. I.e. that "protestors" have the "right" to "peacefully assemble" on a road.
Yea fuck that, I hope anyone reading realizes people like you are a common part of every protest movement and are frothing at the mouth to go after people whose only crime was not wanting to die.
These road blockades have a long history of attacking drivers and should always be assumed to be violent, the movements have completely failed to police themselves and so if there's no police around assume the worst and let a jury sort it out.
Funny, considering you can read the comments on the video posted and see people almost literally frothing at the mouth wanting to run over protesters and murder people.
Especially since this comes off the heels of a person literally being murdered just like that in Seattle.
Wrong. Objectively wrong. There have been multiple updates on this situation.
> At about 1:30 a.m. Saturday, the suspect allegedly drove into a group of protesters on a section that the WSP had closed about midnight. Mead said a car drove around a series of “support vehicles” that protesters were using to block I-5 and protect themselves, and onto the shoulder of the freeway, where protesters were standing.
> “A vehicle drove through the closure and struck multiple pedestrians on the freeway,” Trooper Rick Johnson said in a tweet. [1]
Actual video of the murder in question [2]. The driver was driving on the wrong side of the road, drove past multiple barricades and swerved into protesters. He hit them and then fled the scene. I'm going to assume good faith and say you were not aware of these updates.
The Provo event didn't "come on the heels" of the vehicle plowing into protesters in Seattle.
The Provo event happened June 29. The Seattle event happened early morning July 4th.
And what in the links you post show poster to which you are responding is objectively wrong?
At this point it appears you are disregarding facts all together and arguing from some type of religious fervor. Something like a young earth creationist. I don't mean this in an offensive fashion but just as a reality check for you.
> At this point it appears you are disregarding facts all together and arguing from some type of religious fervor. Something like a young earth creationist. I don't mean this in an offensive fashion but just as a reality check for you.
That's optimistic, as the conflict between reality and their argument is probably what has elevated the fervor.
I was referring specifically to his comment calling me essentially looking for murder. He was claiming that people 'like me' are part of protest movements looking to kill people, and his comment was incredibly tone deaf considering we had another example of someone literally being murdered by someone driving a car into them. It's amazing his comment is getting upvoted, but I'm not surprised. Terrible comments are becoming more the norm every day.
Now that said, I want you to watch the video and tell me how it was an accident. The driver drove to the highway using the wrong entrance past multiple barriers (as said by the police), turned around, drove past another set of cars blocking him and then proceeded to swerve into two individuals and then drive away.
Can you tell me which part of that video indicates it was an accident?
The I-5 incident wasn't the first case. On June 7th a car was run into protesters in Seattle.
And the video shows that the car was the aggressor (and yes, revving your engine like that is assault even by itself. Assault can just be a legitimate threat of violence). It also shows that the car hit protesters, which is now aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.
You don't get to run people over just because they're in the street when you start from a standstill.
> Ok, but that is the case referred to as clearly showed by the links. So it didn't "come on the heels".
They only brought the links out once a third person was clearly referencing the I5 incident and spreading falsehoods about it.
There was about a dozen recent instances of cars running through protesters prior to this.
> No it isn't.
You do know the car wasn't in a lane anymore, right? That road only has two car lanes and a bus lane. That SUV is driving through a bike lane, and probably a bit on the sidewalk.
I'm not saying the shooter was justified, but I am saying that the SUV committed assault by driving through protesters before being shot at.
This should not have been allowed to happen in the first place, and us arguing whether the driver was in the right is not entirely where we should be. People should have been arrested for:
