Then we agree.
Good luck with that. I doubt the state will agree that simply blockading a truck is a license for the driver to kill.
And if a driver is threatened, the system allows him to make that argument in court in his defense.
Umm, they wouldn’t?
from https://edition.cnn.com/2021/04/22/us/oklahoma-law-drivers-protesters/index.html
CNN —
Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt signed a bill Wednesday granting immunity to drivers who unintentionally injure or kill protesters while attempting to flee and which stiffens penalties for demonstrators who block public roadways, according to the Oklahoma State Legislature.
That’s exactly what I am talking about: that law requires unintentional killing. It is not a carte blanche license to kill, and to my knowledge, has not yet been tested in court. Even you should be able to see that is significantly different than:
In the course of escaping the mob was implied. If you can go around without running them over, do that, if not…
Sure.
What happens to the metro bus driver when some idiot trips out in front of his bus and is killed?
Your attempted point is stupid.
It goes to intention.
If your bus driver intentionally hits the guy, he gets in trouble.
So prove the truck driver intended to run over these idiots.
Why? We are clearly discussing a hypothetical.
That is hypothetical. Quit playing games.
I’m not playing games, you asked for proof of a hypothetical, which is antithetical to the exercise.
Your problem is that you walked into the middle of a discussion without bothering to read it first.
My post was part of your hypothetical. It’s not that hard to fallow. If the protester doesn’t get out of the way and is killed, prove that the truck driver intended to kill him.
And I have read every post here. Perhaps the problem is, you have forgotten what you have posted.
And now you are backfilling.
I know you simply can’t let anybody else have the last word, but be advised: I’ve had my fill of your nonsense this evening. Final word is all yours.
As long as you keep remarking in my posts, I will keep responding to yours. That’s how conversations work. I’m astounded how many of you guys don’t understand that.
What’s this “backfilling” you are accusing me of? Is that what you call me having to explain the obvious to you?
1 Like
I am struggling to find the connection between a truck driver getting protesters stuck in their grill and a good guy with a gun… 
That’s because you’re not a lib. Only they can see the connection between seemingly unassociated nodes in the Universe. 
1 Like
Ask this guy.
Dude, you’re all over the place. You gave ME a hypothetical, and when I dismissed it, you even went so far in complaint about that dismissal that your response was removed.
Now you’re complaining about hypotheticals being asked of you.
Stop with libbing posts. They look bad on you.
You had to remove multiple posts of conversation and quote a post not addressed to you, (and with an entirely seperate context) in order to make this personal attack. Well done.
