Glenn explains his point (and not by saying it's a joke):
Sorry, blocking the interstate is dangerous, and trapping people in their cars is a threat. Driving on is self-preservation, especially when we’ve had mobs destroying property and injuring and killing people. But if Twitter doesn’t like me, I’m happy to stop providing them with free content."Driving on" is different from "Run them down." "Run them down" stresses hitting the people who are blocking you. "Driving on" is about prioritizing your own escape from danger. And Glenn obviously knows this and is saying that now:
I’ve always been a supporter of free speech and peaceful protest. I fully support people protesting police actions, and I’ve been writing in support of greater accountability for police for years.ADDED: The discussion at Twitter is collected at #FreeInstapundit.
But riots aren’t peaceful protest. And locking interstates and trapping people in their cars is not peaceful protest — it’s threatening and dangerous, especially against the background of people rioting, cops being injured, civilian-on-civilian shootings, and so on. I wouldn’t actually aim for people blocking the road, but I wouldn’t stop because I’d fear for my safety, as I think any reasonable person would.
“Run them down” perhaps didn’t capture this fully, but it’s Twitter, where character limits stand in the way of nuance.
पोस्ट्स
१३८ टिप्पण्या:
"Them" means the person blocking you.
Next they'd be blocking me, if I had a Twitter account.
I wondered how long it would be before blocking interstates became a routine part of protesting.
In the Bay Area they know pretty accurately when rioting is going to start, and they shut down transit beforehand. Because it's routine.
Twitter is in its death spiral.
@Eleanor:Twitter is in its death spiral.
I imagine they can do quite well restricted only to those who never want to hear any dissent.
Eh. Instapundit has said way more inflammatory things before this. The suspension rules are so arbitrary it's beyond laughable. It's why he didn't know why he was suspended and is still unsure.
"...but it’s Twitter, where character limits stand in the way of nuance."
I don't know, I added nuance to his quote and still fit within the Twitter character limit:
Run them down grind your tires into their flesh and bones and then take your car to the car wash and spray clean all the blood and debris from the underside of your car.
There is still room enough to add: Heh.
Laslo would know where to go from here.
I am The Replacement Laslo.
What's "Twitter"?
I'm thinking this first black president thing is not working out too well. But I am white. What do black people think about that?
I drive Uber on weekends in Milwaukee and I have had several rides to and from the Sherman Park area that went up in flames last month. I have considered what I would do if I were trapped in a situation like the one Glenn describes, and I think I would slowly but surely keep moving and get me and my passengers to safety. I'm not sure if there is really another option.
Centrally directed harassment.
Quite a few on the modern right have been banned. It's getting to be quite the thing.
At some point probably they will ban Trump.
Also, many suspect that Twitters current capital situation is the result of investors strategic political funding, in order to retain some control of a significant information channel.
I no longer think this sort of suspicion is paranoid.
I do not want to hurt anyone, but the hell if I'm going to let a mob pull me from my car and beat me. See the link on Drudge about the mob beating someone in a parking garage:
https://twitter.com/LibertarianQn/status/778845840496594944
A mob blocking the interstate and surrounding cars is inherently dangerous and provocative. Those driving down the interstate did nothing but find themselves surrounded by a mob. The only reasonable response is to drive the hell out of there. Shouldn't aim to hit anyone, of course, but don't let yourself get trapped.
The only response to a riot is to get away as fast as possible.
Twitter showing its political leanings again.
And if you're intentionally blocking a road (and not to flag a car down for an emergency, or acting out of some other necessity) then to hell with you. You don't have the right to do that. Want to march? Get a permit like everyone else. You're not special, no matter how special you think your cause is.
The bigger problem we have around here and in DC is motorized dirtbikers (unlicensed, of course) roving in packs around traffic and running lights. In some cases they've even killed pedestrians and assaulted other drivers (who accidentally ran into one of the thugs).
Restore order, or more of this will happen.
We've seen this with the NYC motorcycle gangs and with picketers blocking entrances. Outside of providing reasonable opportunity for someone detaining you to move there's precedent for doing precisely what Glen suggests.
The Soros funded Purple Grimmace woman got off easy when she was blocking the interstate.
If some people walking on an interstate don't get hit by cars, how will the rest of them learn not to do it?
We got to stop impeding the laws of natural selection.
I'm a big fan of Instapundit, and admire his work, even when I don't agree with his position. Admittedly, not often. To maintain a consistent perspective, free from hypocrisy and contradiction, if a feat unto itself.
A larger point, though, is the seeming mis-interpretation, willful, disingenuous, or otherwise, of the meaning behind the words. To any rational human being over the age of 12,Instapundit's comment meant: Protect yourself. Get out of harm's way. Run them over if you must.
He does not advocate unprovoked violence, but rather, protection of life and property, with a violent response as last measure. And indeed, what would you do? The threat is right in front of you, and the police are otherwise occupied. What then?
I daresay every rational adult knew what he meant. Yet, it seems media, and those with agendas, will twist those words somehow beyond that accepted meaning. I see it here now with Instapundit, and often with Donald Trump's comments.
I fear our discourse is less than civil, and impossible without once-common acceptance of meaning behind the words. I'm not explaining myself very well, but it is almost as if we've lost the ability to have any conversation with those of opposing opinions. Being conservative, I think it's more of a problem of the left, and its willful. They don't want any civil discourse; they just want you to shut up.
To that point, why is there no conservative, or free speech version of Twitter? If there is, why wasn't I informed?
Bill
I think if you're running down someone to escape an unsafe situation, and that person you ran down was intentionally and illegally creating the situation making you unsafe, you should be perfectly justified in doing what you need to escape. If that means running down a scofflaw, so be it. It's not like we're depriving the world of a future surgeon or something.
Get a legal permit if you want to march. You're not so special you don't need one.
Twitter is dying. No young person tweets anymore. This is just proof that everyone should bail.
Twitter is a dumpster fire. It's certainly helpful to them that they aren't bakers.
I have considered what I would do if I were trapped in a situation like the one Glenn describes, and I think I would slowly but surely keep moving and get me and my passengers to safety. I'm not sure if there is really another option.
Lock your doors, windows up. Keep significant distance between you and other cars so their stopping doesn't block you in. Never under any circumstance leave your car, or even open your window to appeal to the mob. If the mob takes any action against your car drive away. Through them, over them, on the sidewalk, hit and move another car in your path, whatever it takes.
Look. It's common courtesy to think the best of other people and part of that is interpreting the things they say in a reasonably benign light.
How difficult is it to take "run them down" to mean "run them down if necessary?"
Not very.
Well, not for me, anyway. But it seems like there are a great many people out there who look for the worst in other people and they find it everywhere.
You don't want to get Reginald Denny-ed. If you are surrounded by rioters trying to break into your car, you do what you have to do in self-defense.
A temporary state of local martial law coupled with some mass summary executions of rioters will quickly put an end towards this kind of behavior. Early in the last century if I'm not mistaken one or more governors dealt with rioting that way.
People who riot and loot are rarely otherwise law abiding people so frankly running over to save one's life is on balance a good thing.
One thing - DON'T run anyone over in a mob if it won't let you escape. If you get stuck in between cars or other obstacles, or you can only drive 5 miles an hour, you will not get away, and they will smash/burn/lynch you. Only hit anyone if they are between you and freedom.
As a yute, I was with my elder sister driving to the large public library in Jamaica. A cop stopped us (or we stopped them asking for directions, whatever, I forget) and told her, If someone throws a blanket over your windshield, DRIVE, never mind if you hit anyone, keep going, DON'T STOP.
So I would say you are in the clear. My DON'T above is tactical, not legal/moral.
I was in Los Angeles for the Reginald Denny attack. Right in the thick of it. I will NEVER be immobilized in my car on a highway if I can help it. Anyone blocking my route to safety is going to get a two-ton Pete Rose treatment.
Hey, it ain't personal. Just business.
"Good afternoon, officer."
"License and registration, please. Do you know why I pulled you over?"
"I didn't signal when I changed lanes?"
"No, that's not it. Do you know you have a black man stuck under your car?
"Really? I just thought I needed new shock absorbers."
"It is definitely a black man under your car."
"Oh my. I don't know how that could have happened."
"Did you by any chance drive through the protest back on the interstate?"
"Sure. It was a mess. Glad I got out of there."
"Well, I think you ran over a protester. He's stuck under your chassis. Black man."
"Does he need help getting out from there?"
"I don't think that is an issue anymore. His legs came off about a mile back in front of the Burger King."
"This isn't good."
"Yeah. You've been driving with him face-down on the asphalt. He's like half a pencil with a worn-out eraser."
"What is going to happen to me?"
"This is a serious matter. You do realize I can't let you off with just a warning."
"I understand."
"So I'm writing you a ticket for changing lanes without using your signal."
"Oh boy. That's gonna jack up my car insurance."
"The law is the law."
"Yes, sir. Sir?"
"Yes?"
"What do I do about the dismembered black man under my car?"
"High-pressure hose would be my best guess."
"Thank you, officer."
Laslo would know where to go from here.
I am The Replacement Laslo.
Sure, Glenn may have meant driving on, or run them down if necessary. But the stark original version will have crossed more than a few minds around the country. So far, whites and Asians have held back. But Glenn's slip hints at what might happen. I hope it won't. I hope we don't give BLM the satisfaction of an actual racial conflict. But the next highway holdup, the next downtown riot may trigger something worse.
"I was in Los Angeles for the Reginald Denny attack. Right in the thick of it. I will NEVER be immobilized in my car on a highway if I can help it. Anyone blocking my route to safety is going to get a two-ton Pete Rose treatment."
Eesh--I remember how infuriated I was by the Denny video back then. Closest I came was last year's Baltimore riots--saved by the fact I was teleworking that day. The riots hit the CVS right on my usual route home from work, at the exact time I'm normally driving through. Being unarmed (because of course Baltimore knows we're much safer with law abiding citizens not allowed to carry handguns) and in a sedan (no truck or SUV) I doubt I would have made it out unscathed if I'd gone to the office that day.
Best to power through, though as Bad Lieutenant notes, if it's a crowd situation you may not be able to get far if you ram them. If there was a good way to electrify the outside of your car, though....
Agree with many others, Insty's meaning was clear and gained force from brevity. "Beta Rube" says well what I would try to do if facing that threat. Not too slow, but not so fast to make it impossible for the non-suicidal to jump clear. Besides, the faster you go, the more bodywork you'll need. A few dents and scrapes, OK. But digging pieces out of the undercarriage, not good.
Best tactics might differ for truckers wrestling with 40 tons of vehicle and payload. Maybe commercial driver training courses should include a module: "How To Escape Mobs With Least Carnage." The video of the Nice truck-jihadist in action would help inform the class.
I'm tired of hearing these being described as protests. These are RIOTS.
Another reason I love not driving a car very often.
I assume Twitter knew that Insta drove considerable traffic to Milo and has been biding its time. This probably has more to do with Milo than "run them down."
Just as a reminder of why Glenn said what he did. The Reginald Denny saga. And he was in a semi, if he had done what Glenn reccomended he wouldn't have had his skull broken in 91 places. RUN THEM DOWN.
Taking a shortcut off the Santa Monica Freeway down Normandie Avenue was nothing out of the ordinary for 33-year-old Reginald Denny. In the late afternoon of April 29, 1992, he had simply loaded up his 18-wheeler and headed down the road, driving for his employer Transit Mixed Concrete. Little did he know that he would drive smack into the middle of an angry mob looking for vengeance.
As his rig crossed Florence, a group of rioters enraged over the Rodney King verdict rushed toward him, pulled him out of the cab and beat him to within an inch of his life. The attack ended when Damian Monroe Williams took a cinderblock and bashed Denny's skull, fracturing it in 91 places and causing severe brain damage.
I dumped Twitter early on. I was an early signer and early leaver. I could see right away that this would not be a good thing and would take up too much time. Same thing with Facebook. Dumped it early on and my life is just fine. When I started getting Facebook friends sending me their baby shots and plates in restaurants, I knew it was time to dump it.
Now I spend too much time reading Althouse. Not sure what that's doing to me.
Excellent. I think it is high time Insty stopped providing Twitter with content.
Insty's Twitter feed was my go to for a quick scan of pertinent news. Variety of sources and topics is key.
sigh..
Reginald Denny may wish he hadn't stopped. Or maybe, as decent human, he would stop regardless.
TWITTER HAS UNBLOCKED MY ACCOUNT ON CONDITION OF DELETING THE OFFENDING TWEET. But lest I be accused of airbrushing, it’s preserved here. Still planning on quitting Twitter, though, after making a few points.
-Insty
Twitter responded to his tweet by running him over.
There is a free speech version of Twitter. It's called GAB.
Why do the taxpayers support an employee of a state university who spends most of his time posting on the internet? Care to weigh in Ann?
#FreeInstaPundit is trending.
Yes. There is a difference between driving on through a crowd of rioters who are blocking your ability proceed and running them down.
When it is me or them......I prefer the latter. It is more effective.
Kristian Holvoet said...
Reginald Denny may wish he hadn't stopped. Or maybe, as decent human, he would stop regardless.
Maybe as a decent human being his wife would have wanted him to return from work without life-altering brain damage. I see Kristian Holvoet may already have had severe brain damage inflicted on him, if he believes it is more decent to die for the mob than to protect an innocent life.
We're witnessing the destruction of our country aided and abetted by the corrupt liberal media.
Mutaman:
Have you seen Instapundit's resume? Have you published so many articles as Glenn Reynolds? Have they been as well-placed as are Glenn Reynolds' articles?
Perhaps you'll post a link to your resume so we may compare.
Yeah, and how about this.
"They’re robbed as they walk their dogs, go on moonlit strolls or sit waiting for buses.
They’re robbed as they lean on their canes or sit in their wheelchairs. In some cases, they’re shoved to the ground and even kicked while they’re down.
More than once a day on average this year, someone over the age of 65 was mugged somewhere in New York City. And the numbers are up, particularly in the Bronx and Manhattan."
http://nypost.com/2016/09/22/its-no-longer-safe-for-the-citys-senior-citizens-to-go-outside/
So. I'd heard reports that Scott Adams had also been suspended yesterday. Apparently there's a purge going on.
There's video complications on Youtube of cars running over and through BLM protest lines. And almost universal praise in the comments for the drivers. This whole "Block the road" tactic is not winning them any favors.
And there's one video where the person driving the car is seriously being attacked, with people beating on the car and windshield and yanking on the door handle. Totally justified when they run someone over trying to get away. I think it was from the Ferguson riots.
Drudge has a link up right now to a black mob hunting down and severely beating a white person in a parking garage from Charlotte last night. He's pleading for mercy as they viciously beat him.
That man should have had a weapon and put a few of them down-- and if he had, it was a clear, clear case of self defense. I hope that the governor will order the National Guard to open fire tonight if they try anything more. Riots, looting: this isn't protest, it's actively seeking to plunder and commit mayhem.
--Vance
I'll say this. I grew up in a mixed race town and attended a high school located in a very problematic black neighborhood. Violence and threats of violence from blacks were routine occurrences. Sad but true. How many times have I found myself in the middle of black mob violence? I can't count the times, can't recall them all. I learned life lessons from these experiences: 1) Don't stop moving under any circumstances; 2) fight back while you're moving, even if that means only that you're flailing your arms; 3) whatever you do don't fall to the ground and curl up in a fetal position, because you'll get stomped or stabbed or shot or otherwise beaten; if you're in a car, keep driving, don't stop, don't ever stop.
Nowadays I drive through several of the very worst neighborhoods on the South Side of Chicago to get to work, neighborhoods where there are several shootings every weekend. I get off work at night, so I have to be really, really alert to what's happening around me, I have to practice intense situational awareness when I walk to my car. I have worked out a protocol in case I get attacked, I look up and down the street to see who's out and about, I keep a careful watch on cars that pull up next to my car when I'm stopped at a traffic light, etc. And, yes, I'm armed.
Life in the 21st Century, who'd have thought.
"Maybe as a decent human being his wife would have wanted him to return from work without life-altering brain damage. I see Kristian Holvoet may already have had severe brain damage inflicted on him, if he believes it is more decent to die for the mob than to protect an innocent life."
I sort of read Holvoet's comment more as a lament that here was a decent man who didn't just run down thugs in the street because he had some humanity, and yet we live in a world where the thugs hold such sway that the decent thing gets you beaten and hospitalized.
I'd like to think I still have some decency, but if it's a life or death situation and the choice is me or some thug, I don't see how that's a choice at all. Sadly, I'm unarmed, at least until the courts knock out the repressive concealed carry restrictions (apparently they're grilling DC over it now).
Brando:
Your charitable interpretation may be correct. I used "...may already have...if..." because it is often difficult to tell tone online. If you are correct my uncharitable reading deserves an apology and I will wait for Kristian Holvoet to tell me so.
The truckers in Belgium and northeastern France run over "migrants" all the time.
At least France has erected high fences along the Autoroutes.
This will get worse as the election approaches, especially if Trump looks like he is winning. Somebody is planning this. I 85 in Charlotte is a major commercial route and fuel deliveries are only one consequence of blocking it.
Ann, you may remember the night of March 9, 2011 in Madison. After weeks of occupying the capitol, the protesters had left the building. The Democrat senators were still out of state. Suddenly with little notice Act 10 was amended to allow passage with a simple quorum. The Republican senators unexpectedly voted 18-1 without debate to pass the bill that evening. In the next few hours Madison erupted. I was with a group dining near the window at Francesca's that evening. As capitol staff returned to their cars to leave for the night, a mob of protesters streamed into the capitol square. We watched a young man wearing a suit and tie get into his car only to be surrounded by the angry mob. The protesters rocked the car violently back and forth until his head was cracking against the window. Finally he sounded the horn continuously and drove away, right through his tormentors. None of them were run over. They just got out of the way once he was moving. It was a legitimate, justifiable action in the circumstance.
This was just one of many instances of violence that night in Madison. About 9pm I watched a mob rocking the news van of a local Fox affiliate. After violent rocking and screaming protests from inside the van, the rocking paused and a man came out yelling that the people and equipment inside were being injured and shouting "we aren't Fox News were are the local Fox station". The mob then headed to the doors of the capitol where they broke past the security guards and illegally occupied the building.
Look, it is stupid to put yourself in the middle or a riot or a mob. It is self defense to go 85 on I85 rather than stop.
AOSHQ is reporting that Reynolds was reinstated only on the condition that he delete the offending Tweet. This alone is worth some blogging either from Reynolds himself or Althouse.
If anything Reynolds blogged about needing Twitter is to be believed he really does need to get on Gab, if only as an additional service. Putting Gab to the same free speech test as Twitter would be a primary benefit.
Birkel--fair enough. I hope he didn't mean that alternative interpretation, because a world in which the goons who attacked a truck driver whose only crime was doing his job (an alien idea to your average goon) get to hold sway, a little bit of society dies more each day. If he'd run a few of them down, just think of all the thug-spawn they wouldn't be producing to further terrorize Los Angeles and feed off of civilization.
Someone emailed him or asked him whether he should instead have said "keep driving" and he did admit that was a better way to phrase his statement.
However, what he said was absolutely valid. Many of us remember Reginald Denny. And if there is a fear that a mob of people are going to surround your car and inflict bodily damage on you or family, its totally ok to drive over/through the offenders to get out of the way.
And it occurs to me that for every thug in a road that people run over, we're only by natural selection making the existing thug gene pool ever more quick and coordinated. Eventually all remaining thugs will be able to run and leap like gazelles through our nation's cities.
“Run them down” perhaps didn’t capture this fully, but it’s Twitter, where character limits stand in the way of nuance.
Seems to me he left 127 characters on the table.
Once it happens, the need to do it in the future will be diminished, definitely by at least one, and possibly completely.
Darn those Trump voters, looting and rioting again! So dangerous, so lawless, so violent! When will Trump apologize?
Then again, these "protesters" never learned from the destruction they did to their own communities in the past. It never helps, and only hurts - just like getting run over.
The protestors are either ignorant or intent to starve, injure, or deprive men, women, children, and grandma, too.
If the Obergruppenführer gets up every morning and shoots a Jew from his balcony, it keeps all the rest of the captive Jews attentive.
If Jack Dorsey gets up every morning and suspends a Tweeter of note, it keeps all the rest of the captive Tweeters attentive.
Brando said... If there was a good way to electrify the outside of your car, though....
Google "South Africa theft prevention car" or "South African anti-carjacking." They go full James Bond--flamethrowers, spring loaded blades, electrified handles, the works.
I do wonder, honestly, about the ambulance that gets caught in the traffic caused by these "protests" and who pays the price for an innocent person bleeding to death while waiting to get to the hospital.
Completely unrelated: YT: Car Plows Through Dozens of Critical Mass Bike Riders in Brazil
Dude1394 at 9:29 reminds us of what happens if you just decide to be dudley doright in the midst of an angry, stupid and hysterical mob with violence and vengeance on its mind.
First Google, now Twitter; and we know Facebook does a more subtle form. Censorship in the open. It's enough to make one wonder about the First Amendment right some hold so dear. ( I know, you sign up for this censorship so don't nag, professor.} Of course the WSJ censors as well, but largely for dirty words and expressions - matters of taste , don't you know.
This insidious nose-under-the-tent approach reminds me once again of Pastor Neimoller's " First they came for the Socialists......." quotation.
A more interesting blog topic this morning would have been the white man with a gun, who, according to the Daily Mail, was "allowed to drive away". "Allowed to drive away". With a gun. Imagine that. I keep waiting for the Texas edition of Thuggy Street Nigger Mob. But oddly, we are never so blessed.
"Google "South Africa theft prevention car" or "South African anti-carjacking." They go full James Bond--flamethrowers, spring loaded blades, electrified handles, the works."
I remember reading about those--there have been times I wish I had them on my car!
Sadly, if I get caught up in something like that, instead of the headline "commuter spares welfare rolls of six thugs" it'd probably read more like "commuter who statistically was more likely to accidentally shoot a loved one, and therefore is better off unarmed, killed by demonstrators and probably deserved it for thinking he could drive on a public road."
@Brando, I've read about the South African anti-carjacking efforts. Those spring-loaded blades Hoodlum mentions are powered by very strong springs and are razor sharp -- designed to cost a carjacker both legs. It's also apparently perfectly legal in South Africa to drive off and leave the crippled carjacker to bleed out from his stumps. Some countries do not mess around.
After reading this article linked by Drudge, I think my wife and I need CCW permits and some practice time at the local range.
"Have you published so many articles as Glenn Reynolds? Have they been as well-placed as are Glenn Reynolds' articles?"
No, unlike Glenn and Ann I'm not on the public dole. I have to work for a living and that takes up most of my time. Would be nice to have the time to "publish articles" saying "run them down" but not enough time. Those are the burdens of not being supported by the taxpayers.
Big Mike said...After reading this article linked by Drudge, I think my wife and I need CCW permits and some practice time at the local range.
Good for you, Big Mike. Practice practice practice! Ammo is not that expensive, and you will probably find out even practice can be fun. Be smart, serious, and safe, and if you can find a local trainer who's halfway decent take some classes. NRA Training Course Portal
Just run them down might be more likely to get you killed than save you.
"It's also apparently perfectly legal in South Africa to drive off and leave the crippled carjacker to bleed out from his stumps. Some countries do not mess around."
Good for them--I figure the first few times a carjacker gets maimed or burned, carjackings will go way down and at least a few "on the edge" kids will re-think their life goals. Win win.
"After reading this article linked by Drudge, I think my wife and I need CCW permits and some practice time at the local range."
I'd have done it as soon as we moved up here, unfortunately we're one of the only states that does not allow CC permits unless you're a former cop, had two reported death threats, or some other compelling (e.g., your job requires you to ferry large amounts of currency around) justification. I don't see the political climate here changing anytime soon.
"Just run them down might be more likely to get you killed than save you."
It could, you have to judge the situation. Morally, I say run them down (I mean people intentionally blocking the street--not some poor sap pedestrian who is trying to get away from the mess).
At the very least, cars should have tear gas dispensers (if they can ensure the gas won't get back in through the car vents).
Twitter should change its name to "Hyperbole" because that's what it encourages. How much shock can I create in 140 characters.
I totally get Glenn's but would have worded it differently. However, if I found myself and family on an interstate blocked by an angry mob, I'm going to keep driving.
Mutaman said...
"Have you published so many articles as Glenn Reynolds? Have they been as well-placed as are Glenn Reynolds' articles?"
No, unlike Glenn and Ann I'm not on the public dole. I have to work for a living and that takes up most of my time. Would be nice to have the time to "publish articles" saying "run them down" but not enough time. Those are the burdens of not being supported by the taxpayers.
So you are against all those workers in D.C. too? Excellent. We have found an accord. I would like most of them fired so they may work for a living, as the excellent Mutaman demonstrates is possible. Let's turn all universities to the private sector. I could not agree more. Now that we are done reducing public payrolls by 90% we can return to our disagreements.
I will leave the kindly Althouse readers to decide if it is ability or time that is the limiting factor in your lack of publication history.
David, the choice is between be attacked by the mob, resulting in being injured or killed, and the alternate, "Run them down" if necessary, in an attempt to escape to safety. Attempting to escape to safety has the very solid implication attached, that staying in place was NOT safe.
It is better to seek safety than remain in place and under attack. Whether the attempt to escape works or not is indeed problematic, but the choice presented was "be attacked or attempt escape from the attack."
If you can't recognize the choice presented, you missed the point.
"Just run them down might be more likely to get you killed than save you."
Eminently wise.
"So you are against all those workers in D.C. too? "
????? I guess there's some sort of tea bagger analogy going on here, but damn if I can figure out what it is. I suspect Birkel has a hard time holding in his mind that there are many in the public sector who do an honest days work, and that there are those like Glenn who spend most of their time on the internet.
I also suspect Birkel has a hard time wiping himself.
Meade said...
"Just run them down might be more likely to get you killed than save you."
Eminently wise."
Speaking of those who are ripping off the taxpayer.....
Straight up and simple: If you are initiating the use of violence, force, or the threat of violence of force against other people in a political context, you are a Brownshirt, and you have forfeited any moral claims WRT how much force other people use against you.
Who are people who fall under this:
1: Someone who goes to someone else's event and tries to disrupt it by shouting down people with opposing points of view, or otherwise making it impossible for them to get their message out.
Example: you go to a "Take Back the Night" protest and carry a sign that says "Regret isn't Rape". You're fine. You go there with a loudspeaker and chant "Regret isn't Rape" over it, drowning out other people? They have a right to stop you.
2: You illegally block a road / street / intersection / highway / whatever. You deserve to be run over. You are trampling over other's people right to go about their business and ignore you, as such, you deserve to be trampled over.
So yes, "run them over" is absolutely the correct response. We, the decent human beings of the world, have an absolute right to ignore the left wing protestors of the world. If they attempt to force us to pay attention to them, we have the absolute moral right to do whatever is necessary to force them to leave us alone. In the Charlotte case, that means drive straight forward and run over anyone who gets in your way.
westwing said...
"Ann, you may remember the night of March 9, 2011 in Madison."
We remember.
"Speaking of those who are ripping off the taxpayer....."
99% of the "protesters" in Charlotte, almost certainly.
On the other hand, they're effective campaigners for Trump in NC, so it's not a complete loss.
I had bad experiences with facebook and quit. Twitter is run by the same kind of people, brilliant at some things so naturally they think they are brilliant at politics. They're not. But, I don't care. At a reunion, all my ex-colleagues were pulling out their latest iPhones and were showing me how great they were. I smiled and pulled out my LG flip phone, and said "Dumb phone, but it makes emergency phone calls." I think facebook and twitter are good examples of what Buckminster Fuller said about history: it came to pass but not to stay.
So Mutaman decides which people are on the dole and which are not?
I know of two middle-aged white men with no criminal record being arrested for assault with a deadly weapon in San Francisco because they inched their cars forward and touched someone who had been blocking them, banging on their hoods, and refusing repeated requests to get out of the way. One of them was driving a cab and had passengers in the back and felt responsible for their safety as the "victim" chased him from red light to red light and banged on the hood when the cab couldn't move.
Neither was charged but being arrested and spending a night in jail can be very hard on someone who's never been arrested before in his life. My advice: don't run anyone down, and don't inch the car forward to persuade them to move, either.
Szoszolo, are you telling us to be intimidated by unruly and dangerous mobs? I think I'll risk a night in jail.
"Birkel said...
So Mutaman decides which people are on the dole and which are not?"
There's a factual issue as to whether the old professors (Althouse and Reynolds) are employed by their respective states and are paid out of the public purse? I think not.
So you are for firing D.C. bureaucrats?
And really, after reading about stuff like this, why would you ever choose to not be a "white man with a gun".
"There's a factual issue as to whether the old professors (Althouse and Reynolds) are employed by their respective states and are paid out of the public purse? I think not."
I thought "on the dole" was defined as people on relief, or welfare--not literally everyone who is paid by the government. Otherwise that means the military, government employees (from cops to town clerks), and even old age SS recipients are on the dole.
"And really, after reading about stuff like this, why would you ever choose to not be a "white man with a gun"."
Because white men with guns are statistically more likely to shoot family members and therefore we must allow government to decide when we're allowed to carry guns, because that will bring down crime. Do you think it's just coincidence that Chicago and Baltimore have such low gun violence rates? And Canada and Switzerland, with much higher per capita gun ownership rates than the U.S., have such horrifyingly high levels of gun deaths?
Mutaman @12:45
What public job are you protecting?
Fun facts: Damian "Football" Williams, the guy who tried is best to kill the already-badly-beaten Reginald Denny (by, you know, smashing Denny's head open with a cinder block) was only convicted of 4 misdemeanors & mayhem--he ultimately served 4 years of a 10 year sentence.
Henry Watson, the guy you can see on the tape stomping on Denny's neck and holding Denny's head down with his foot (while Denny is beaten with a hammer & kicked) was charged with misdemeanor assault for that felony assault for an attack on another driver in that same intersection that day. He was convicted of the misdemeanor and got time served (the conviction was for 6 months, he'd be in jail awaiting trial for 17) and after the jury deadlocked on the felony charge (despite lots of testimony & physical evidence...) he plead guilty to that one and accepted probation.
So, you know, the justice system sure is rigged against some people.
Black Lives Matter, and what not.
Matt said.... In the process he gained more conservative fans who dislike black people when they step out of line and threaten the idealized version they have America.
You got me there, Matt! My idealized version of America doesn't involve accepting riots and violent lawless behavior, and apparently that makes me a deplorable racist. Buuusted.
"Fun facts: Damian "Football" Williams, the guy who tried is best to kill the already-badly-beaten Reginald Denny (by, you know, smashing Denny's head open with a cinder block) was only convicted of 4 misdemeanors & mayhem--he ultimately served 4 years of a 10 year sentence."
But he had such a promising future! He was a gentle giant!
And that thug was probably a hero in prison. The only solution is to allow any lawful (no history of violent crime) citizens to carry weapons in their cars. Eliminate a few thugs, trim the state budget, it's all good.
And "Black Lives" don't matter. "White Lives" don't matter. And "All Lives" definitely don't matter.
SOME lives matter. The lives of ordinary people minding their own business and living lawfully, not trying to hurt anyone else. Their lives do matter.
Random thugs and scofflaws of any race? Their lives are a waste.
If inching your car forward is "Assault with a deadly weapon" refusing to allow somebody to move is kidnapping.
I just want to remind everyone that Hillary Clinton's big idea on "protecting" us against terrorism is to work with SIlcon Valley.
So this is the kind of thing she wants, and wants to make more of.
You illegally block a road / street / intersection / highway / whatever. You deserve to be run over. You are trampling over other's people right to go about their business and ignore you, as such, you deserve to be trampled over.
Does that include armed white guys in Oregon and Nevada who occupy and shut down facilities and roads on public lands?
Freder Frederson said blabbity blah...9/22/16, 4:06 PM
You just have to be talking, don't you?
Bad Lieutenant
Answer the question. Does that include armed white guys in Oregon and Nevada who occupy and shut down facilities and roads on public lands?
Pardon me if I missed it, but has no one recalled Reginald Denny?
"Answer the question. Does that include armed white guys in Oregon and Nevada who occupy and shut down facilities and roads on public lands?"
The white guys burning and looting and dragging innocent people from their cars and beating them up based on the color of their skin? Those white guys?
Apples, meet oranges. Oranges, meet apples.
Now let us compare the men arrested in Orgeon for their crimes and the men arrested in Charlotte for their crimes.
Matt and Freder Frederson demand we pretend apples = oranges.
Richard asks: Pardon me if I missed it, but has no one recalled Reginald Denny?
HoodlumDoodlum at 2:49.
I was responding specifically to this statement:
You illegally block a road / street / intersection / highway / whatever. You deserve to be run over. You are trampling over other's people right to go about their business and ignore you, as such, you deserve to be trampled over.
You have not addressed my question.
Weren't those guys protesting on deserted roads? I didn't think anyone went there during the season they were protesting.
Matt said...
Bad Lieutenant
Answer the question. Does that include armed white guys in Oregon and Nevada who occupy and shut down facilities and roads on public lands?
9/22/16, 4:23 PM
First, I don't work for you.
Second, ceteris paribus, absolutely.
But ceteris is never paribus, and certainly not in this case.
Turn it around, Matt, Freder: should the Feds go to Charlotte and start shooting black people? Do the rioters in Charlotte deserve to be arrested and killed? Answer the question!
Do the rioters in Charlotte deserve to be arrested and killed?
Maybe after they have occupied the interstate for twenty-six days and are reaching for a gun when they are killed.
Did the Bundy people hurt anybody? I missed that.
You're not honest, you just want to win an argument on the Internet.
Did the Bundy people hurt anybody? I missed that.
Shots were fired at Federal Agents, that is why they stopped patrolling the BLM land Bundy was illegally grazing his cattle on.
Regardless, I was addressing a specific comment, which of course you have ignored
Maybe after they have occupied the interstate for twenty-six days like the Bundy protesters never did and are reaching for a gun or other deadly weapon when they are killed.
Apples, meet oranges.
Oranges, meet apples.
Freder, your comments are rarely worth the breath to reply, let alone take seriously. You are advocating these riots and that's enough. Not interested in your Tu quoque shtick. It's tired.
Well, since this post got badly sidetracked, I will point out that the white guy in Charlotte who pulled out his gun, pointed it at people who were blocking his car, and slowly moved through the crowd got away without a scratch because the people standing in front his car didn't want to get shot. There is more than one way to skin a cat, as the saying goes.
But, getting back to the main point, Instapundit's gripe is that he was banned while lefty's who made death threats against conservatives specifically by name were unmolested. So, the unstated motto of Facebook and Twitter is "say whatever you want....so long as you are a lefty." They should openly state that and I would be fine with it.
Someone above suggested that learning to shoot can be fun. It has been for me. It is weird. Part maybe the instant feedback. And the joy of mastering a difference cult tool. And, it is somewhat atavistic. Something almost primal as you try to smoothly pull the trigger, it finally breaks, and the gun recoils. Trying to control the recoil, without anticipating, which results in pulling down and left if you do anticipate. Practice, practice practice. But fun. Well, not so much the dry firing which I practice in order to keep from anticipating. But live firing can be great fun.
Could I shoot someone? Definitely if they were threatening a loved one with imminent death or great bodily injury. A guy who lives at the range in the next town over told me that this is one of the questions he asks in any self-defense class he teaches. And he has had to, both in Vietnam, and since, when someone had a gun to his head. If I could shoot someone, could I run them down, given the same color not rains? Yes. If there is a riot, and the rioters are breaking windows to get people out to beat, or turning cars over, then my plan would probably be to move forward slowly until someone got aggressive in trying to break the Windows or turn it over. Then, I would probably floor it, honking the horn madly. There is a saying that it is better to be tried by a jury of 12, than be carried by 6. Essentially, the same laws apply if you shoot someone, or run them over - self defense most typically requires a reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily injury of yourself or an innocent third party. Compounding this, my partner is physically fragile, due to an accident maybe a decade ago. Someone pulls her out of the car, they are likely to cause grave bodily damage to her. Yes, I Can and would take that into consideration. And, yes, I would expect to spend time in jail in either case, before being let off.
Of course, up here in NW MT, the chances of a decent riot are close to nil. This county is bigger than Delaware, and has a population barely breaking 5 digits. About the only time you get a sizable group (likely far smaller than the number or rioters in Charlotte) is at football games. Why would anyone want to live anywhere with a population density such that riots could occur?
"Why do the taxpayers support an employee of a state university who spends most of his time posting on the internet?"
Why do the taxpayers support a POTUS who spends most of his time playing golf?
USA Today suspended Reynolds' column for a month.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/09/22/glenn-reynolds-bill-sternberg-editorials-debates/90868144/
Interesting analysis by the author of The Law of Self Defense.
Suspending Reynolds for his Tweat is not going to help USA Today any circulation. Probably will, ultimately, lose some, but they do have an interesting marketing and distribution plan, of concentrating on hotels who provide the paper to their guests. So, they may actually not lose that much circulation. I know though that I will complain the next time I am offered the paper.
Matt said...
"Glenn Reynolds took his mask off and showed he is just another deplorable racist who encourages murder. He tried to nuance it by making a more measured statement later but no one should be fooled. In the process he gained more conservative fans who dislike black people when they step out of line and threaten the idealized version they have America."
That's right, Matt, he did.
You got a problem with that? Make a sign, and go block some traffic.
mikee said...
David, the choice is between be attacked by the mob, resulting in being injured or killed, and the alternate, "Run them down" if necessary, in an attempt to escape to safety. Attempting to escape to safety has the very solid implication attached, that staying in place was NOT safe.
It is better to seek safety than remain in place and under attack. Whether the attempt to escape works or not is indeed problematic, but the choice presented was "be attacked or attempt escape from the attack."
If you can't recognize the choice presented, you missed the point.
(Quoted in full to avoid misrepresenting Mikee.)
I learned some stuff about mob behavior in the late 1960's via direct personal experience. Mobs are funny things. They can roar and beat their chests but never be overtly and dangerously aggressive. Or they can go nuts from the slightest spark and become violent quickly. You are assuming that mobs are always attacking. But that is not the case. That is why going on the attack yourself is a tricky thing, best saved for obvious and eminent peril.
Perhaps at base we do not disagree but I think you are making assumptions about mob behavior that are not warranted.
"Morally, I say run them down (I mean people intentionally blocking the street--not some poor sap pedestrian who is trying to get away from the mess)."
You think you can tell the difference? Might not be so easy.
I don't think Reynolds Column is in the print edition of USATODAY anyway. I suspect only Instapundit readers ever read it.
And the SJWs are now following their standard playbook and demanding that the law school fire Glenn. I was very disappointed that Glenn issued another apology via USA Today in an effort to keep his column on there.
David:
"Going on the attack" is not advocated by me, nor by Instapundit.
Escaping attack is advocated by me, and by Instapundit.
I am not assuming that mobs are always attacking. If people forcibly detain me unlawfully, threatening my safety by their violent actions, resistance to their force to escape their violence is both sensible and justified.
I, too, have some small experience of mobs and of violence. I refuse to participate in either whenever possible.
Perhaps I can explain myself better, David. Let's say I come up to you, a perfect stranger going about your lawful business in public, grab your shirt and yell at you, "I'm gonna kick you right in the nuts!"
Would you not at least flinch and pull your knees together?
Self defense is an instinctual, inherent, individual and inalienable human right.
Self defense is meant to stop an attacker, or escape an attack. Self defense, logically and under law in most places, is itself not a criminal attack on the one doing the attack on you. Your refusal to allow for self defense, even in the face of an already violent mob that "can go nuts from the slightest spark and become violent quickly" is disingenuous at best and an outright lie at worst.
As a man of words, his choice was pretty bad..and plays nicely into hands of opponents.
He might have said.."Gun it. They'll get out of the way."
That's what my Dad had to do at times in parts of Chicago at night, driving cab.
Matt said...
"Glenn Reynolds took his mask off and showed he is just another deplorable racist who encourages murder
--
Where did Matt say that? Did he delete it?
The trouble with people driving slowly through an interstate crowd is that the street-blockers keep doing it. You really do need to go through at an intimidating clip. Also, it's rare you get a chance - usually the cars up front all stop and you can't get through to decide for yourself what you'll do.
Remember if you need to go crashing through stuff or push stuff with your car, do it in R if you can, unless you have a rear-engine job. If aware of local turmoil / paid agitation and see traffic stopped on the freeway, don't drive up on it. Get to the shoulder, and get into R or turn around and drive the wrong way. Oncoming traffic should avoid you.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा