'Trump Designates Antifa "A Terrorist Organization"'

[TECSHARE]

yeah, just driving down the road....

"hey the on ramp is blocked by police, guess i'll just use the exit"

"hey there's cars parked in the middle of the highway, guess I'll just go around them"

"oops, I just ran over two ladies, guess I better flee the scene"

"why am I in jail for just a traffic violation???"

Yes, just driving down the road. Again, a minor traffic violation at most. This is not a punishment commensurate with his crime, this is a political prosecution to appease a mob riot. Hey dipshit, I know basic physics are a problem for you, but he was coming around a corner, at night, at a speed that is common for highway traffic. He had nowhere near enough time to identify the road was blocked by black cars at night, around a curve, then have time to break before hitting some one. That "going around" you describe is called swerving to avoid a collision, and not seeing retard soy ninjas on the highway.

The responsibility for this event is 157% on the dead idiots. As far as fleeing the scene, we have just watched about a month straight of endless cases of people being attacked in their vehicles, shot, pulled out, beaten, etc. He doesn't know who these fuckwits are. He had every right to get himself to safety AWAY from a violent mob descending upon his vehicle. You will notice also he did stop at first until they started running toward him. Of course again, he is 100% responsible for dipshits dressing in black and playing revolutionary on the highway at night, even when they want to violently attack him. You are entitled to form your own opinion, not form your own reality.

[1715165113]

1715165113

[1715165113]

1715165113

[1715165113]

1715165113

[1715165113]

1715165113

[TwitchySeal]

Yes, just driving down the road. Again, a minor traffic violation at most.

Except the whole hit and run that resulted in a death part...which is most likely what he'll be charged with in the end.

[Spendulus]

Yes, just driving down the road. Again, a minor traffic violation at most.

Except the whole hit and run that resulted in a death part...which is most likely what he'll be charged with in the end.

All this illustrates is the cops should not have allowed libtards to put people at danger (including themselves) on the freeway. The Dead Tard should be charged with reckless endangering himself.

Standing in front of a car bearing down on you at freeway speed and not getting out of the way is no more than suicide. Attempting to put the issue on the driver to see and avoid or stop is really not an excuse.

Clear lights and signs to the effect the freeway was shut down could change the dynamics...maybe.

[TECSHARE]

Yes, just driving down the road. Again, a minor traffic violation at most.

Except the whole hit and run that resulted in a death part...which is most likely what he'll be charged with in the end.

Yeah, what  a selfish asshole. He should have stopped and let them beat him to death.

[suchmoon]

Clear lights and signs to the effect the freeway was shut down could change the dynamics...maybe.

Right. Maybe they should have closed the entrance ramp and posted "wrong way" signs on the exit ramp.

[suchmoon]

You forgot that he also at some point had to cross the median of the freeway to be on the correct side of the road.

Not necessarily - if he picked the exit ramp on the "correct" side (the one that he needed) of the freeway he could have made a sharp left turn without crossing the median.

Get-on-the-freeway-via-exit-ramp accidents happen quite regularly and tend to result in the driver charged with a felony if someone dies... granted most of those are wrong-way head-on collisions, so not sure in this case.

[Spendulus]

Clear lights and signs to the effect the freeway was shut down could change the dynamics...maybe.

Right. Maybe they should have closed the entrance ramp and posted "wrong way" signs on the exit ramp.

What I was trying to say was that if the section was marked similar to signs and lights for a section of freeway closed because it's under construction, that's 100% CLOSED and no excuses for hitting a worker on that piece of road.

But I do not think it was marked like that.

[suchmoon]

What I was trying to say was that if the section was marked similar to signs and lights for a section of freeway closed because it's under construction, that's 100% CLOSED and no excuses for hitting a worker on that piece of road.

But I do not think it was marked like that.

There is no excuse for going the wrong way on the exit ramp. If he didn't think the road was closed he was risking a head on collision at freeway speed on the ramp itself or upon merging / crossing the traffic lanes. But since he ended up pointing in the correct direction on the freeway then likely he knew the road was closed and got on it anyway.

[Spendulus]

What I was trying to say was that if the section was marked similar to signs and lights for a section of freeway closed because it's under construction, that's 100% CLOSED and no excuses for hitting a worker on that piece of road.

But I do not think it was marked like that.

There is no excuse for going the wrong way on the exit ramp. If he didn't think the road was closed he was risking a head on collision at freeway speed on the ramp itself or upon merging / crossing the traffic lanes. But since he ended up pointing in the correct direction on the freeway then likely he knew the road was closed and got on it anyway.

There most certainly is an excuse.

Stupidity....

Stupid met Stupid...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pibqo6Z4Cgo

[dupeddonk]

spendulus either really enjoys arguing in bad faith for entertainment or he is dumb as a rock.

[TECSHARE]

"BLM Idiots Vandalize Statue of a Former Slave Outside Black Church in Indiana"

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/07/way-go-blm-idiots-vandalize-statue-former-slave-outside-black-church-kentucky/

[suchmoon]

"BLM Idiots Vandalize Statue of a Former Slave Outside Black Church in Indiana"

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/07/way-go-blm-idiots-vandalize-statue-former-slave-outside-black-church-kentucky/

"Is it Kentucky or Indiana"?

https://www.yourass.com/2020/7/where-you-pulled-this-story-from/

Your ass is broken:

"Internal Server Error

The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request.

Please contact the server administrator at webmaster@yourass.traxen.com to inform them of the time this error occurred, and the actions you performed just before this error.

More information about this error may be available in the server error log.

Additionally, a 500 Internal Server Error error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request."

[TECSHARE]

"Putting things in quotes automatically makes them true"

https://www.yourass.com/2020/7/where-you-pulled-this-story-from/

No putting things in quotes is a requirement of forum posting rules on plagiarism. It is Indiana, and it is true, and you would know this if you bothered to read the article that has sources, but hey I guess a typo in the URL invalidates everything else right?

[TECSHARE]

https://www.yourass.com/2020/7/where-you-pulled-this-story-from/

Your ass is broken:

"Internal Server Error

The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request.

Please contact the server administrator at webmaster@yourass.traxen.com to inform them of the time this error occurred, and the actions you performed just before this error.

More information about this error may be available in the server error log.

Additionally, a 500 Internal Server Error error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request."

Oh, sorry, let me fix the link, which is completely relevant to the topic of discussion BTW:

https://www.yourass.com/2020/07/where-you-pulled-this-story-from/

Somehow took out the "0" in "07".

The story is basically a report suggesting that just because something is in quotes or in what is considered by some to be the "news", it means that it is true.

If that link still doesn't work, you can check here:

https://www.yourass.com/ass%20of%20the%20decade.html

That is pretty fucking hilarious you criticizing a typo in a URL exactly at the same time as you do it yourself.

[Spendulus]

spendulus either really enjoys arguing in bad faith for entertainment or he is dumb as a rock.

This actually all makes me laugh.

There is no excuse for going the wrong way on the exit ramp. If he didn't think the road was closed he was risking a head on collision at freeway speed on the ramp itself or upon merging / crossing the traffic lanes. But since he ended up pointing in the correct direction on the freeway then likely he knew the road was closed and got on it anyway.

In the real world, which you guys are not in because you are chasing wrongness in different_thinkers_than_right_thinkers_like_us, going the wrong way on a road is simple a traffic ticket. It's breaking the law. No more or less.

But you guys are reading capital murder into an exit ramp issue.

Good luck with that.

[suchmoon]

In the real world, which you guys are not in because you are chasing wrongness in different_thinkers_than_right_thinkers_like_us, going the wrong way on a road is simple a traffic ticket. It's breaking the law. No more or less.

But you guys are reading capital murder into an exit ramp issue.

Good luck with that.

Vehicular homicide is a thing and that's what you can get charged with if you go the wrong way (or do something similarly reckless with your car) and kill someone. A ticket is what you get when you're pulled over before killing someone.

[TwitchySeal]

In the real world, which you guys are not in because you are chasing wrongness in different_thinkers_than_right_thinkers_like_us, going the wrong way on a road is simple a traffic ticket. It's breaking the law. No more or less.

Except when you kill someone.  Then it's more.

But you guys are reading capital murder into an exit ramp issue.

No.  I don't think it's capital murder.

[Spendulus]

In the real world, which you guys are not in because you are chasing wrongness in different_thinkers_than_right_thinkers_like_us, going the wrong way on a road is simple a traffic ticket. It's breaking the law. No more or less.

But you guys are reading capital murder into an exit ramp issue.

Good luck with that.

Vehicular homicide ...

Or manslaughter.

Okay, if I was on that jury I'd be strongly inclined to let the guy off, but you don't have to worry about that. He'll no doubt plea bargain for a couple of years and this particular ugly incident will be taken off the radars.

Need to clear up some media time and space for the election propaganda, right?

[TECSHARE]

In the real world, which you guys are not in because you are chasing wrongness in different_thinkers_than_right_thinkers_like_us, going the wrong way on a road is simple a traffic ticket. It's breaking the law. No more or less.

But you guys are reading capital murder into an exit ramp issue.

Good luck with that.

Vehicular homicide is a thing and that's what you can get charged with if you go the wrong way (or do something similarly reckless with your car) and kill someone. A ticket is what you get when you're pulled over before killing someone.

The problem with your logic is that fault does not rest on the driver alone. If a bicycler was on a restricted highway for example, they would share some if not all of the liability. These roadways are restricted form pedestrians for a reason. Even on non-restricted roadways, if a person crosses the street outside of a crosswalk, they are legally seen to have partial if not full liability for any injuries.

You are also glossing over the fact that the driver did not cause injury while in the act of driving negligently. You argue the road was closed, but it was not officially closed, but "attempted" to be closed as an emergency protective measure for the people violating the law by blocking it. You seem to want to hold the driver fully responsible when the "protestors" made the most significant contributions towards making themselves unsafe.

"Criminal Negligence Law and Legal DefinitionCriminal negligence is negligence which requires a greater degree of culpability than the civil standard of negligence. The civil standard of negligence is defined according to a failure to follow the standard of conduct of a reasonable person in the same situation as the defendant. To show criminal negligence, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt the mental state involved in criminal negligence."

https://definitions.uslegal.com/c/criminal-negligence/


"Contributory Negligence

The concept of contributory negligence is used to characterize conduct that creates an unreasonable risk to one's self. The idea is that an individual has a duty to act as a reasonable person. When a person does not act this way and injury occurs, that person may be held entirely or partially responsible for the resulting injury, even though another party was involved in the accident.For example, Dave, a motorist, strikes Sally, a pedestrian who was crossing the street without carefully checking traffic or heeding the warning of the do-not-cross sign of the nearby streetlight. Who's at fault in this situation?After an injured party files a negligence claim, the defendant (the person sued) may then assert a contributory negligence claim against the plaintiff (the person bringing the lawsuit), effectively stating that the injury occurred at least partially as a result of the plaintiff's own actions. This would be a contributory negligence counterclaim, a common defense to negligence claims.If the defendant is able to prove the contributory negligence claim, the plaintiff may be totally barred from recovering damages or her damages may be reduced to reflect her role in the resulting injury. The pedestrian in the example, Sally, probably would be considered at least partially at fault (and therefore liable for contributory negligence) for carelessly crossing the street.



Comparative Negligence

Most states have now adopted a comparative negligence approach to contributory negligence, wherein each party's negligence for a given injury is weighed when determining damages.Traditionally, the courts viewed contributory negligence as a total bar to the recovery of any damages. Under the traditional view, if a person had contributed to the accident in any way, the person was not entitled to compensation for his or her injuries. In an attempt to reduce the harsh, oftentimes unfair outcomes resulting from this approach, most states have now adopted a comparative negligence approach."

https://injury.findlaw.com/accident-injury-law/contributory-and-comparative-negligence.html



Under civil law, if a person fails to act reasonably and acts in such a manner to endanger themselves, the defendant may be liable for less, or have no liability at all. As you can see, criminal law sets a higher bar for negligence claims than does civil law, thus it is clear that a claim of criminal negligence on the part of the plaintiff simply would not hold water. This prosecution is purely a political one designed to appease the riot mob and has no basis in law.

[TwitchySeal]

"Driver Charged With Vehicular Homicide in Death of Seattle Protester"

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/08/us/dawit-kelete-seattle-protest-driver-charges.html