... after the driver of that car makes an "L" (for loser) sign at her, which she responds to by giving him the finger, and he responds to by pointing a Smith & Wesson .380-caliber handgun at her. She told the police she got "scared and jerked the steering wheel, which caused her to lose control of the vehicle," and he told the police he thought he “made a bad choice” but the bumper stickers were “stupid.”
This happened in Missouri. The man was arrested for unlawful use of a weapon. The woman was not arrested for hitting him with her car.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
To live freely in writing...
Click here to enter Amazon through the Althouse Portal.
Amazon
I am a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for me to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Support this blog with PayPal
Make a 1-time donation or set up a monthly donation of any amount you choose:
Posts
Blog Archive
-
►
2024
(2514)
- 11/03 (16)
- 10/27 (62)
- 10/20 (49)
- 10/13 (49)
- 10/06 (59)
- 09/29 (58)
- 09/22 (62)
- 09/15 (52)
- 09/08 (58)
- 09/01 (56)
- 08/25 (51)
- 08/18 (57)
- 08/11 (54)
- 08/04 (64)
- 07/28 (60)
- 07/21 (75)
- 07/14 (69)
- 07/07 (63)
- 06/30 (49)
- 06/23 (68)
- 06/16 (58)
- 06/09 (61)
- 06/02 (59)
- 05/26 (56)
- 05/19 (54)
- 05/12 (53)
- 05/05 (56)
- 04/28 (65)
- 04/21 (57)
- 04/14 (68)
- 04/07 (56)
- 03/31 (55)
- 03/24 (56)
- 03/17 (59)
- 03/10 (52)
- 03/03 (63)
- 02/25 (59)
- 02/18 (45)
- 02/11 (60)
- 02/04 (56)
- 01/28 (50)
- 01/21 (64)
- 01/14 (62)
- 01/07 (59)
-
►
2023
(3115)
- 12/31 (58)
- 12/24 (43)
- 12/17 (55)
- 12/10 (66)
- 12/03 (57)
- 11/26 (56)
- 11/19 (44)
- 11/12 (55)
- 11/05 (69)
- 10/29 (63)
- 10/22 (54)
- 10/15 (62)
- 10/08 (69)
- 10/01 (70)
- 09/24 (55)
- 09/17 (49)
- 09/10 (62)
- 09/03 (54)
- 08/27 (54)
- 08/20 (45)
- 08/13 (50)
- 08/06 (54)
- 07/30 (62)
- 07/23 (50)
- 07/16 (49)
- 07/09 (59)
- 07/02 (61)
- 06/25 (63)
- 06/18 (53)
- 06/11 (63)
- 06/04 (67)
- 05/28 (53)
- 05/21 (60)
- 05/14 (66)
- 05/07 (66)
- 04/30 (67)
- 04/23 (54)
- 04/16 (55)
- 04/09 (64)
- 04/02 (63)
- 03/26 (64)
- 03/19 (76)
- 03/12 (60)
- 03/05 (52)
- 02/26 (63)
- 02/19 (49)
- 02/12 (66)
- 02/05 (63)
- 01/29 (60)
- 01/22 (57)
- 01/15 (60)
- 01/08 (66)
- 01/01 (60)
-
►
2022
(3553)
- 12/25 (55)
- 12/18 (56)
- 12/11 (73)
- 12/04 (71)
- 11/27 (76)
- 11/20 (76)
- 11/13 (80)
- 11/06 (71)
- 10/30 (72)
- 10/23 (60)
- 10/16 (61)
- 10/09 (63)
- 10/02 (70)
- 09/25 (56)
- 09/18 (62)
- 09/11 (64)
- 09/04 (76)
- 08/28 (75)
- 08/21 (63)
- 08/14 (71)
- 08/07 (76)
- 07/31 (74)
- 07/24 (71)
- 07/17 (66)
- 07/10 (67)
- 07/03 (70)
- 06/26 (73)
- 06/19 (79)
- 06/12 (74)
- 06/05 (87)
- 05/29 (54)
- 05/22 (66)
- 05/15 (72)
- 05/08 (76)
- 05/01 (62)
- 04/24 (62)
- 04/17 (70)
- 04/10 (69)
- 04/03 (82)
- 03/27 (67)
- 03/20 (64)
- 03/13 (64)
- 03/06 (79)
- 02/27 (64)
- 02/20 (66)
- 02/13 (68)
- 02/06 (59)
- 01/30 (70)
- 01/23 (58)
- 01/16 (61)
- 01/09 (64)
- 01/02 (68)
-
►
2021
(3054)
- 12/26 (55)
- 12/19 (52)
- 12/12 (53)
- 12/05 (51)
- 11/28 (44)
- 11/21 (62)
- 11/14 (54)
- 11/07 (54)
- 10/31 (65)
- 10/24 (73)
- 10/17 (61)
- 10/10 (62)
- 10/03 (64)
- 09/26 (59)
- 09/19 (48)
- 09/12 (53)
- 09/05 (60)
- 08/29 (76)
- 08/22 (67)
- 08/15 (66)
- 08/08 (53)
- 08/01 (55)
- 07/25 (56)
- 07/18 (58)
- 07/11 (59)
- 07/04 (52)
- 06/27 (57)
- 06/20 (57)
- 06/13 (65)
- 06/06 (64)
- 05/30 (50)
- 05/23 (64)
- 05/16 (56)
- 05/09 (65)
- 05/02 (63)
- 04/25 (62)
- 04/18 (56)
- 04/11 (64)
- 04/04 (71)
- 03/28 (68)
- 03/21 (57)
- 03/14 (66)
- 03/07 (60)
- 02/28 (53)
- 02/21 (56)
- 02/14 (40)
- 02/07 (62)
- 01/31 (53)
- 01/24 (61)
- 01/17 (56)
- 01/10 (58)
- 01/03 (58)
-
►
2020
(3644)
- 12/27 (49)
- 12/20 (40)
- 12/13 (56)
- 12/06 (61)
- 11/29 (57)
- 11/22 (59)
- 11/15 (57)
- 11/08 (71)
- 11/01 (76)
- 10/25 (68)
- 10/18 (69)
- 10/11 (64)
- 10/04 (70)
- 09/27 (71)
- 09/20 (64)
- 09/13 (61)
- 09/06 (70)
- 08/30 (72)
- 08/23 (78)
- 08/16 (71)
- 08/09 (50)
- 08/02 (76)
- 07/26 (62)
- 07/19 (70)
- 07/12 (64)
- 07/05 (74)
- 06/28 (84)
- 06/21 (88)
- 06/14 (73)
- 06/07 (91)
- 05/31 (99)
- 05/24 (82)
- 05/17 (76)
- 05/10 (93)
- 05/03 (78)
- 04/26 (72)
- 04/19 (63)
- 04/12 (71)
- 04/05 (74)
- 03/29 (79)
- 03/22 (64)
- 03/15 (83)
- 03/08 (75)
- 03/01 (78)
- 02/23 (70)
- 02/16 (69)
- 02/09 (67)
- 02/02 (81)
- 01/26 (68)
- 01/19 (61)
- 01/12 (63)
- 01/05 (62)
-
►
2019
(3453)
- 12/29 (81)
- 12/22 (51)
- 12/15 (74)
- 12/08 (73)
- 12/01 (66)
- 11/24 (74)
- 11/17 (77)
- 11/10 (68)
- 11/03 (69)
- 10/27 (83)
- 10/20 (83)
- 10/13 (92)
- 10/06 (65)
- 09/29 (49)
- 09/22 (60)
- 09/15 (68)
- 09/08 (67)
- 09/01 (54)
- 08/25 (64)
- 08/18 (61)
- 08/11 (56)
- 08/04 (57)
- 07/28 (53)
- 07/21 (68)
- 07/14 (61)
- 07/07 (60)
- 06/30 (65)
- 06/23 (67)
- 06/16 (54)
- 06/09 (42)
- 06/02 (64)
- 05/26 (62)
- 05/19 (60)
- 05/12 (64)
- 05/05 (77)
- 04/28 (78)
- 04/21 (43)
- 04/14 (58)
- 04/07 (67)
- 03/31 (75)
- 03/24 (65)
- 03/17 (68)
- 03/10 (70)
- 03/03 (71)
- 02/24 (62)
- 02/17 (88)
- 02/10 (72)
- 02/03 (55)
- 01/27 (68)
- 01/20 (72)
- 01/13 (76)
- 01/06 (76)
-
►
2018
(3410)
- 12/30 (59)
- 12/23 (45)
- 12/16 (76)
- 12/09 (83)
- 12/02 (69)
- 11/25 (68)
- 11/18 (61)
- 11/11 (61)
- 11/04 (68)
- 10/28 (76)
- 10/21 (71)
- 10/14 (53)
- 10/07 (53)
- 09/30 (61)
- 09/23 (61)
- 09/16 (63)
- 09/09 (57)
- 09/02 (55)
- 08/26 (54)
- 08/19 (63)
- 08/12 (59)
- 08/05 (69)
- 07/29 (64)
- 07/22 (60)
- 07/15 (69)
- 07/08 (67)
- 07/01 (67)
- 06/24 (62)
- 06/17 (68)
- 06/10 (65)
- 06/03 (65)
- 05/27 (54)
- 05/20 (63)
- 05/13 (53)
- 05/06 (78)
- 04/29 (74)
- 04/22 (68)
- 04/15 (71)
- 04/08 (53)
- 04/01 (76)
- 03/25 (64)
- 03/18 (78)
- 03/11 (67)
- 03/04 (71)
- 02/25 (66)
- 02/18 (70)
- 02/11 (64)
- 02/04 (68)
- 01/28 (80)
- 01/21 (73)
- 01/14 (65)
- 01/07 (82)
-
▼
2017
(3818)
- 12/31 (85)
- 12/24 (66)
- 12/17 (75)
- 12/10 (74)
- 12/03 (77)
- 11/26 (75)
- 11/19 (58)
- 11/12 (70)
- 11/05 (75)
- 10/29 (67)
- 10/22 (76)
- 10/15 (72)
- 10/08 (70)
- 10/01 (63)
- 09/24 (59)
- 09/17 (63)
- 09/10 (65)
- 09/03 (66)
- 08/27 (69)
- 08/20 (59)
- 08/13 (66)
- 08/06 (73)
- 07/30 (89)
- 07/23 (79)
- 07/16 (81)
- 07/09 (75)
- 07/02 (64)
- 06/25 (83)
- 06/18 (70)
- 06/11 (67)
- 06/04 (74)
- 05/28 (75)
- 05/21 (77)
- 05/14 (81)
- 05/07 (89)
- 04/30 (83)
- 04/23 (80)
- 04/16 (71)
- 04/09 (78)
- 04/02 (74)
- 03/26 (83)
- 03/19 (74)
- 03/12 (77)
- 03/05 (60)
- 02/26 (49)
- 02/19 (72)
- 02/12 (74)
- 02/05 (88)
- 01/29 (91)
- 01/22 (82)
- 01/15 (47)
- 01/08 (60)
- 01/01 (48)
-
►
2016
(3557)
- 12/25 (61)
- 12/18 (62)
- 12/11 (59)
- 12/04 (60)
- 11/27 (74)
- 11/20 (68)
- 11/13 (79)
- 11/06 (62)
- 10/30 (88)
- 10/23 (75)
- 10/16 (68)
- 10/09 (58)
- 10/02 (72)
- 09/25 (70)
- 09/18 (70)
- 09/11 (79)
- 09/04 (64)
- 08/28 (53)
- 08/21 (62)
- 08/14 (70)
- 08/07 (67)
- 07/31 (68)
- 07/24 (57)
- 07/17 (71)
- 07/10 (53)
- 07/03 (53)
- 06/26 (80)
- 06/19 (81)
- 06/12 (73)
- 06/05 (65)
- 05/29 (74)
- 05/22 (67)
- 05/15 (70)
- 05/08 (89)
- 05/01 (79)
- 04/24 (67)
- 04/17 (59)
- 04/10 (61)
- 04/03 (52)
- 03/27 (68)
- 03/20 (76)
- 03/13 (68)
- 03/06 (81)
- 02/28 (65)
- 02/21 (69)
- 02/14 (70)
- 02/07 (75)
- 01/31 (68)
- 01/24 (59)
- 01/17 (69)
- 01/10 (80)
- 01/03 (69)
-
►
2015
(3788)
- 12/27 (71)
- 12/20 (68)
- 12/13 (81)
- 12/06 (70)
- 11/29 (78)
- 11/22 (58)
- 11/15 (76)
- 11/08 (84)
- 11/01 (73)
- 10/25 (74)
- 10/18 (65)
- 10/11 (75)
- 10/04 (87)
- 09/27 (59)
- 09/20 (71)
- 09/13 (55)
- 09/06 (63)
- 08/30 (72)
- 08/23 (70)
- 08/16 (70)
- 08/09 (65)
- 08/02 (65)
- 07/26 (55)
- 07/19 (66)
- 07/12 (69)
- 07/05 (62)
- 06/28 (83)
- 06/21 (79)
- 06/14 (69)
- 06/07 (81)
- 05/31 (84)
- 05/24 (78)
- 05/17 (90)
- 05/10 (85)
- 05/03 (86)
- 04/26 (77)
- 04/19 (78)
- 04/12 (63)
- 04/05 (63)
- 03/29 (79)
- 03/22 (73)
- 03/15 (63)
- 03/08 (79)
- 03/01 (66)
- 02/22 (82)
- 02/15 (78)
- 02/08 (67)
- 02/01 (84)
- 01/25 (79)
- 01/18 (63)
- 01/11 (87)
- 01/04 (70)
-
►
2014
(3825)
- 12/28 (62)
- 12/21 (44)
- 12/14 (78)
- 12/07 (97)
- 11/30 (84)
- 11/23 (82)
- 11/16 (70)
- 11/09 (71)
- 11/02 (91)
- 10/26 (79)
- 10/19 (71)
- 10/12 (86)
- 10/05 (61)
- 09/28 (58)
- 09/21 (67)
- 09/14 (56)
- 09/07 (70)
- 08/31 (64)
- 08/24 (63)
- 08/17 (51)
- 08/10 (79)
- 08/03 (71)
- 07/27 (75)
- 07/20 (81)
- 07/13 (75)
- 07/06 (67)
- 06/29 (41)
- 06/22 (80)
- 06/15 (78)
- 06/08 (91)
- 06/01 (59)
- 05/25 (58)
- 05/18 (90)
- 05/11 (73)
- 05/04 (72)
- 04/27 (72)
- 04/20 (73)
- 04/13 (82)
- 04/06 (81)
- 03/30 (77)
- 03/23 (66)
- 03/16 (56)
- 03/09 (77)
- 03/02 (90)
- 02/23 (73)
- 02/16 (91)
- 02/09 (77)
- 02/02 (91)
- 01/26 (86)
- 01/19 (81)
- 01/12 (90)
- 01/05 (67)
-
►
2013
(5117)
- 12/29 (83)
- 12/22 (82)
- 12/15 (51)
- 12/08 (95)
- 12/01 (87)
- 11/24 (79)
- 11/17 (71)
- 11/10 (94)
- 11/03 (86)
- 10/27 (73)
- 10/20 (88)
- 10/13 (79)
- 10/06 (65)
- 09/29 (65)
- 09/22 (78)
- 09/15 (81)
- 09/08 (77)
- 09/01 (79)
- 08/25 (79)
- 08/18 (96)
- 08/11 (64)
- 08/04 (82)
- 07/28 (84)
- 07/21 (110)
- 07/14 (112)
- 07/07 (91)
- 06/30 (101)
- 06/23 (101)
- 06/16 (106)
- 06/09 (133)
- 06/02 (111)
- 05/26 (86)
- 05/19 (126)
- 05/12 (125)
- 05/05 (133)
- 04/28 (103)
- 04/21 (126)
- 04/14 (98)
- 04/07 (100)
- 03/31 (110)
- 03/24 (121)
- 03/17 (120)
- 03/10 (102)
- 03/03 (98)
- 02/24 (129)
- 02/17 (104)
- 02/10 (116)
- 02/03 (135)
- 01/27 (125)
- 01/20 (125)
- 01/13 (123)
- 01/06 (129)
-
►
2012
(4971)
- 12/30 (88)
- 12/23 (103)
- 12/16 (129)
- 12/09 (120)
- 12/02 (126)
- 11/25 (98)
- 11/18 (62)
- 11/11 (87)
- 11/04 (111)
- 10/28 (98)
- 10/21 (105)
- 10/14 (101)
- 10/07 (94)
- 09/30 (90)
- 09/23 (83)
- 09/16 (93)
- 09/09 (114)
- 09/02 (93)
- 08/26 (91)
- 08/19 (103)
- 08/12 (68)
- 08/05 (74)
- 07/29 (108)
- 07/22 (117)
- 07/15 (93)
- 07/08 (88)
- 07/01 (85)
- 06/24 (76)
- 06/17 (92)
- 06/10 (126)
- 06/03 (96)
- 05/27 (100)
- 05/20 (124)
- 05/13 (99)
- 05/06 (110)
- 04/29 (87)
- 04/22 (98)
- 04/15 (82)
- 04/08 (87)
- 04/01 (90)
- 03/25 (85)
- 03/18 (98)
- 03/11 (94)
- 03/04 (96)
- 02/26 (91)
- 02/19 (88)
- 02/12 (74)
- 02/05 (78)
- 01/29 (74)
- 01/22 (80)
- 01/15 (77)
- 01/08 (71)
- 01/01 (76)
-
►
2011
(4463)
- 12/25 (93)
- 12/18 (87)
- 12/11 (88)
- 12/04 (73)
- 11/27 (84)
- 11/20 (71)
- 11/13 (77)
- 11/06 (78)
- 10/30 (70)
- 10/23 (79)
- 10/16 (95)
- 10/09 (77)
- 10/02 (99)
- 09/25 (82)
- 09/18 (91)
- 09/11 (79)
- 09/04 (83)
- 08/28 (82)
- 08/21 (91)
- 08/14 (80)
- 08/07 (89)
- 07/31 (69)
- 07/24 (102)
- 07/17 (66)
- 07/10 (90)
- 07/03 (89)
- 06/26 (69)
- 06/19 (80)
- 06/12 (93)
- 06/05 (110)
- 05/29 (90)
- 05/22 (88)
- 05/15 (92)
- 05/08 (83)
- 05/01 (95)
- 04/24 (84)
- 04/17 (77)
- 04/10 (90)
- 04/03 (96)
- 03/27 (83)
- 03/20 (96)
- 03/13 (97)
- 03/06 (105)
- 02/27 (91)
- 02/20 (83)
- 02/13 (79)
- 02/06 (75)
- 01/30 (78)
- 01/23 (78)
- 01/16 (104)
- 01/09 (80)
- 01/02 (103)
-
►
2010
(3835)
- 12/26 (73)
- 12/19 (72)
- 12/12 (96)
- 12/05 (76)
- 11/28 (77)
- 11/21 (75)
- 11/14 (92)
- 11/07 (82)
- 10/31 (84)
- 10/24 (64)
- 10/17 (79)
- 10/10 (84)
- 10/03 (88)
- 09/26 (77)
- 09/19 (69)
- 09/12 (73)
- 09/05 (62)
- 08/29 (67)
- 08/22 (65)
- 08/15 (82)
- 08/08 (67)
- 08/01 (83)
- 07/25 (67)
- 07/18 (76)
- 07/11 (73)
- 07/04 (60)
- 06/27 (86)
- 06/20 (66)
- 06/13 (57)
- 06/06 (53)
- 05/30 (79)
- 05/23 (88)
- 05/16 (85)
- 05/09 (81)
- 05/02 (81)
- 04/25 (71)
- 04/18 (61)
- 04/11 (80)
- 04/04 (62)
- 03/28 (64)
- 03/21 (66)
- 03/14 (49)
- 03/07 (71)
- 02/28 (76)
- 02/21 (66)
- 02/14 (82)
- 02/07 (61)
- 01/31 (79)
- 01/24 (87)
- 01/17 (80)
- 01/10 (72)
- 01/03 (69)
-
►
2009
(3716)
- 12/27 (58)
- 12/20 (53)
- 12/13 (84)
- 12/06 (77)
- 11/29 (78)
- 11/22 (50)
- 11/15 (83)
- 11/08 (78)
- 11/01 (74)
- 10/25 (85)
- 10/18 (69)
- 10/11 (63)
- 10/04 (91)
- 09/27 (86)
- 09/20 (82)
- 09/13 (60)
- 09/06 (64)
- 08/30 (81)
- 08/23 (82)
- 08/16 (72)
- 08/09 (70)
- 08/02 (45)
- 07/26 (76)
- 07/19 (71)
- 07/12 (42)
- 07/05 (57)
- 06/28 (105)
- 06/21 (86)
- 06/14 (71)
- 06/07 (83)
- 05/31 (83)
- 05/24 (57)
- 05/17 (74)
- 05/10 (83)
- 05/03 (57)
- 04/26 (70)
- 04/19 (67)
- 04/12 (82)
- 04/05 (63)
- 03/29 (62)
- 03/22 (67)
- 03/15 (68)
- 03/08 (50)
- 03/01 (60)
- 02/22 (53)
- 02/15 (55)
- 02/08 (68)
- 02/01 (89)
- 01/25 (81)
- 01/18 (83)
- 01/11 (91)
- 01/04 (77)
-
►
2008
(3407)
- 12/28 (75)
- 12/21 (44)
- 12/14 (63)
- 12/07 (78)
- 11/30 (87)
- 11/23 (68)
- 11/16 (75)
- 11/09 (85)
- 11/02 (81)
- 10/26 (79)
- 10/19 (86)
- 10/12 (70)
- 10/05 (66)
- 09/28 (76)
- 09/21 (84)
- 09/14 (75)
- 09/07 (73)
- 08/31 (81)
- 08/24 (75)
- 08/17 (73)
- 08/10 (73)
- 08/03 (56)
- 07/27 (57)
- 07/20 (55)
- 07/13 (42)
- 07/06 (47)
- 06/29 (58)
- 06/22 (62)
- 06/15 (53)
- 06/08 (65)
- 06/01 (53)
- 05/25 (45)
- 05/18 (62)
- 05/11 (73)
- 05/04 (69)
- 04/27 (69)
- 04/20 (68)
- 04/13 (64)
- 04/06 (63)
- 03/30 (49)
- 03/23 (54)
- 03/16 (56)
- 03/09 (72)
- 03/02 (70)
- 02/24 (61)
- 02/17 (62)
- 02/10 (68)
- 02/03 (60)
- 01/27 (58)
- 01/20 (51)
- 01/13 (49)
- 01/06 (69)
-
►
2007
(2915)
- 12/30 (67)
- 12/23 (50)
- 12/16 (51)
- 12/09 (51)
- 12/02 (50)
- 11/25 (51)
- 11/18 (57)
- 11/11 (64)
- 11/04 (68)
- 10/28 (57)
- 10/21 (55)
- 10/14 (57)
- 10/07 (52)
- 09/30 (60)
- 09/23 (66)
- 09/16 (39)
- 09/09 (61)
- 09/02 (65)
- 08/26 (54)
- 08/19 (55)
- 08/12 (58)
- 08/05 (59)
- 07/29 (53)
- 07/22 (58)
- 07/15 (51)
- 07/08 (63)
- 07/01 (66)
- 06/24 (54)
- 06/17 (45)
- 06/10 (55)
- 06/03 (69)
- 05/27 (60)
- 05/20 (68)
- 05/13 (72)
- 05/06 (56)
- 04/29 (49)
- 04/22 (52)
- 04/15 (52)
- 04/08 (50)
- 04/01 (41)
- 03/25 (50)
- 03/18 (50)
- 03/11 (62)
- 03/04 (54)
- 02/25 (47)
- 02/18 (53)
- 02/11 (50)
- 02/04 (61)
- 01/28 (65)
- 01/21 (50)
- 01/14 (51)
- 01/07 (61)
-
►
2006
(2745)
- 12/31 (53)
- 12/24 (55)
- 12/17 (54)
- 12/10 (65)
- 12/03 (82)
- 11/26 (50)
- 11/19 (54)
- 11/12 (58)
- 11/05 (65)
- 10/29 (56)
- 10/22 (64)
- 10/15 (63)
- 10/08 (55)
- 10/01 (60)
- 09/24 (59)
- 09/17 (43)
- 09/10 (36)
- 09/03 (56)
- 08/27 (54)
- 08/20 (47)
- 08/13 (54)
- 08/06 (51)
- 07/30 (47)
- 07/23 (45)
- 07/16 (42)
- 07/09 (60)
- 07/02 (46)
- 06/25 (52)
- 06/18 (50)
- 06/11 (55)
- 06/04 (54)
- 05/28 (41)
- 05/21 (54)
- 05/14 (47)
- 05/07 (63)
- 04/30 (52)
- 04/23 (40)
- 04/16 (38)
- 04/09 (54)
- 04/02 (48)
- 03/26 (52)
- 03/19 (45)
- 03/12 (47)
- 03/05 (49)
- 02/26 (46)
- 02/19 (50)
- 02/12 (43)
- 02/05 (47)
- 01/29 (56)
- 01/22 (45)
- 01/15 (44)
- 01/08 (44)
- 01/01 (55)
-
►
2005
(2920)
- 12/25 (56)
- 12/18 (49)
- 12/11 (67)
- 12/04 (73)
- 11/27 (62)
- 11/20 (65)
- 11/13 (67)
- 11/06 (68)
- 10/30 (64)
- 10/23 (64)
- 10/16 (68)
- 10/09 (61)
- 10/02 (75)
- 09/25 (59)
- 09/18 (58)
- 09/11 (54)
- 09/04 (57)
- 08/28 (82)
- 08/21 (58)
- 08/14 (67)
- 08/07 (61)
- 07/31 (54)
- 07/24 (62)
- 07/17 (70)
- 07/10 (59)
- 07/03 (65)
- 06/26 (78)
- 06/19 (53)
- 06/12 (54)
- 06/05 (44)
- 05/29 (51)
- 05/22 (53)
- 05/15 (34)
- 05/08 (38)
- 05/01 (61)
- 04/24 (55)
- 04/17 (55)
- 04/10 (63)
- 04/03 (61)
- 03/27 (51)
- 03/20 (42)
- 03/13 (57)
- 03/06 (45)
- 02/27 (48)
- 02/20 (44)
- 02/13 (36)
- 02/06 (50)
- 01/30 (50)
- 01/23 (37)
- 01/16 (29)
- 01/09 (41)
- 01/02 (45)
-
►
2004
(2035)
- 12/26 (48)
- 12/19 (41)
- 12/12 (46)
- 12/05 (47)
- 11/28 (53)
- 11/21 (45)
- 11/14 (46)
- 11/07 (60)
- 10/31 (48)
- 10/24 (45)
- 10/17 (60)
- 10/10 (37)
- 10/03 (42)
- 09/26 (37)
- 09/19 (46)
- 09/12 (30)
- 09/05 (40)
- 08/29 (43)
- 08/22 (39)
- 08/15 (27)
- 08/08 (36)
- 08/01 (32)
- 07/25 (43)
- 07/18 (28)
- 07/11 (35)
- 07/04 (34)
- 06/27 (31)
- 06/20 (35)
- 06/13 (35)
- 06/06 (21)
- 05/30 (32)
- 05/23 (40)
- 05/16 (35)
- 05/09 (46)
- 05/02 (52)
- 04/25 (52)
- 04/18 (45)
- 04/11 (36)
- 04/04 (37)
- 03/28 (31)
- 03/21 (40)
- 03/14 (33)
- 03/07 (36)
- 02/29 (41)
- 02/22 (31)
- 02/15 (33)
- 02/08 (43)
- 02/01 (33)
- 01/25 (43)
- 01/18 (56)
- 01/11 (30)
157 comments:
The woman was not arrested
White lefty female privilege.
What the fuck was he doing pointing a gun at her anyways? What a sick bastard.
I think she can claim self defense.
Pointing a gun at her? That is really scary. It was a funny story until then.
I do have to say the idea that "America is Already Great" seems to have fallen by the wayside with the left.
A couple of simpletons in charge of deadly weapons.
MayBee,
I don't know if I agree it was funny before the gun. It's the worst in us that makes us want to antagonize each other because of who we voted for. Just because we do it more and more doesn't make it any less ugly.
And, many of us liberals rejected Clinton's "already pretty darned great" sloganeering, and wanted real problems addressed by her candidacy.
"LOVE TRUMPS HATE" involves alot more vehicular assault than I anticipated.
That is an entirely correct charging decision - he pointed a weapon at her without any justification. You need probable cause to arrest or charge the lady who hit him - and it is a hard sell on that point. Most people would not respond to the sight of a handgun being aimed at them by willingly causing a collision. The general response is evasion.
The First Amendment covers the bumper stickers and even the hand gestures. Pointing the handgun is not speech, but a threat.
I have a " Crooked Hillary" sticker on my car. One quiet Sunday morning, on the way home from the dog park, my two dogs and I were nearly run off the road by a car with a "Hillary 2016" sticker. The one with the stupid circle with the arrow. We were the only two cars on the country road and as the man roared by me and tried to swerve into me, he gave me the finger. I didn't wave my Sig Sauer at him, even though I am licensed to carry and have it with me. I did think briefly of shooting out his back window, but I realized I wasn't the crazy one. And Hillary will never be president. I just laughed.
It could read 'He got scarred an pointed a gun, she got violent and tried to kill him', except for one of them lied.
I don't know if I agree it was funny before the gun. It's the worst in us that makes us want to antagonize each other because of who we voted for. Just because we do it more and more doesn't make it any less ugly.
Eeeeh. I thought it was two people who deserved each other.
Perhaps its because when I lived in LA, I came to believe what people with "Coexist" bumper stickers really wanted to do was coexist their cars with mine. Seriously, they were the least observant drivers.
In general, bumper stickers shouldn't exist.
harrogate said...
And, many of us liberals rejected Clinton's "already pretty darned great" sloganeering, and wanted real problems addressed by her candidacy.
I believe you.
But I also know my Facebook friends who repeated this (and "Love TRUMPS hate" ) are the ones who now regularly spew pretty hateful messages. I think it's hilariously un-self aware.
Driving while advertising politics seems imprudent.
I agree that bumper stickers are stupid.
Although, I did have a Buffalo Sabres sticker on my first car. Odd propaganda for a Southerner, but then, I've always been a bit off.
Yep, guy's at fault. Shouda ended at the "finger." He got her goat. The guy should have realized that he had "won" at that point.
It's the worst in us that makes us want to antagonize each other because of who we voted for.
The election is over. I see cars in Tucson, which is a kind of left wing town because of the U of A, with Hillary and "Resist" stickers.
I laugh but wonder why the "Resist" stickers ? That's after the election.
I can even remember Hillary saying that to refuse to accept the election result would be unAmerican.
Two goofballs behaving badly. Not particularly newsworthy. And for what it's worth, I generally hate bumper stickers of any variety. Whenever I see one plastered in political sloganeering (whether from the right or the left), I think, "This is someone I probably would not enjoy having a drink with." That said, I tend to find the "terrific student" and anything having to do with running to be the most obnoxious. The latter probably because my oldest sister and her husband are into the whole marathoning scene, which is pretty much a cult.
Very few bumper stickers in Vegas. Driving here is dangerous enough without unnecessarily antagonizing half of the other drivers. Plus, there's very little virtue signalling in Sin City.
The scenario doesn't make sense. You don't point a gun unless you plan to shoot it, and you don't plan to shoot it except to save yourself (or a third party) from serious injury or death. More likely is that he flashed the "L" sign at him and she bashed his car with hers while flipping him the bird. He then pulled the gun to stop her from further assault.
So which is true? My version or the official one? The way to determine that would have been to arrest both, charging her with attempted vehicular homicide and determine the truth with both in custody.
They both misused deadly weapons, but her excuse is more plausible.
"He then pulled the gun to stop her from further assault. "
What the hell?
Do you work for Trump?
The Coexist sticker is priceless though. The guy should have his permit revoked. She needs counseling, anger management, letting her go is a missed opportunity.
He admitted to pulling the gun. He needs anger mgmnt too, and since he was charged, he might get it.
Q: Why does this guy drive around with a gun?
A: So that he feels free to act like asshole he is.
Mike says: "I can even remember Hillary saying that to refuse to accept the election result would be un-American"
That WAS then, this is now
Hillary Clinton officially launches 'resistance' outside group
http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/15/politics/hillary-clinton-resistance-onward-together/index.html
It's the Show Me state.
Agreed, he is an asshole, but I wish you guys would make up your mind though, is the Constitution sacred and Trump should be impeached for blocking tweets, or can we throw the electoral college overboard because it makes liberals mad?
But I also know my Facebook friends who repeated this (and "Love TRUMPS hate" ) are the ones who now regularly spew pretty hateful messages...
People I've known since high school, they've lost their flinkin' minds.
or can we throw the electoral college overboard because it makes liberals mad?
Fisrt we have to excise all the Due Process amendments from the Constitution.
One of those contretemps where the one you want to be in the wrong isn't.
Dick move, gun owner.
The woman was not arrested for hitting him with her car.
This is my shocked face.
I live in a deep blue area. During the campaign and to this day, anyone sporting a Trump or GOP sign, t-shirt, etc., was subject to abuse. Signs were routinely torn down or burned, Democrats confronted them with the "How could you?" attitude, teachers felt comfortable telling children that anyone supporting GOP (let alone Trump) were wingnuts, etc. Most of the time, they sported Coexist bumper stickers and (my personal favorite) signs declaring our area to be a "Tolerance Zone." As someone pointed out, self-awareness is not their long suit. James Hodgkinson merely took this rage the next logical step.
Hillary bears some responsiblity for this. She is the first candidate in history who did not graciously go away for a while. Her relentless blaming everyone and everything but herself, including nefarious conspiracies, emboldens people to be hyper-aggressive. It also shows why she had no business being President of the United States.
It is good they charged him with pulling a gun. THey should hav also charged her with a road-rage related charge.
An armed society is a polite society.
I recently parked behind a Prius with a "Coexist" sticker on the left side, and a sticker that said "MOAB" on the right.
Yeah, I know, it meant *that* Moab, not *that* MOAB, but it was in all caps, which made the first-glance interpretation funny as hell.
I think I may have already told this anecdote here.
I have to laugh, in that the back of her Toyota looks like the back of my fruitloop '9/11 was an inside job', 'BOOOSH is evil', brother's Toyota. Except our story was a little different.
We arrived at my parent's house for a holiday dinner. Noticed his car plastered with as many bumper stickers sitting out front. At first not sure it was his as we hadn't seen him for years. The night ended early after he got verbally abusive when we refused to subscribe to the idea Bush ordered the Towers to come down. His red-faced rage and balled fists gave me reason to believe that had my husband not been there, he would have hit me. We called it a night and haven't seen him since.
@McCharlie2, I take it that your mind is shut tight.
There's a lot of illogic owing to HRC's "unexpected" loss. Social media abounds with it. Amazing how many longstanding issues are real problems now that would be of no concern if she had won.
cronus titan: She is the first candidate in history who did not graciously go away for a while. Her relentless blaming everyone and everything but herself, including nefarious conspiracies...
I can't be the first person to notice this, but doesn't this show Hillary fulfilling every "misogynist" claim about how women can't follow the rules of the game, how women complain about the how unfair the rules are when they lose, how they can't lose graciously, etc.
Thanks again for making the team look bad, Hils...
On the other hand, maybe that just means that Al Gore was America's first female major party presidential candidate.
That guy needs to learn the "I have no comment until I speak to my lawyer" line that all my kids have memorized.
Shorter form: Cop asks question, you say "lawyer."
-XC
Right after posting my earlier comment, we were asked to put "Kindness" signs outside our homes, by the same people who do not hesitate to lecture others or defend Hodgkinson and Antifa with "gee, he went too far but I understand why THOSE people have to be confronted."
You cannot make this up.
I believe the correct escalation of hand signs according to Hoyle is:
1. Loser sign.
2. Middle finger.
3. Turning fingers into a gun, pointing it at her, and pulling the imaginary trigger.
People in blue states have banned finger guns on all playgrounds because "it's a weapon" to them. It likely would have ended her aggression right then and there, running into someone who is so brazenly comfortable with "violence".
Bonus points as she tries to get the police got arrest him for "shooting" her with his fingers.
Blogger MrCharlie2 said...
Q: Why does this guy drive around with a gun?
Maybe for this reason, you dope.
That guy should lose his permit at a minimum. You are beyond help.
If the story in the article is true, then he probably should have been arrested, and she likely was legally justified in ramming his car. Pointing a (not obviously unloaded) gun at someone very likely puts that person in reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily injury, which very typically legally justifies them using deadly force (in this case, the automobile) in self-defense. Of course, he could have used his firearm if she had rammed, or credibly threatened to ram his car first. But the facts, as currently presented, show him as escalating to the threat of deadly force first.
That's got to be an awkward few minutes waiting for the cops to get there.
@Bruce, that was my point. The facts as currently presented say the guy was out of line. If the guy said something to the effect that she hit him first and he pulled the gun in self defense, that would be different, would it not?
Angel-Dyne: Good point. My sister-in-law remarked that Hillary is acting like every misogynist stereotype, pitching a fit when she did not get her away and acting like if she pitches a big enough fit we will give her what she wants just to make her stop. SOme truth to it.
I think you should be able to brandish a weapon, not point it at someone, but warn them that violence might be a bad idea. Not in this case, since she apparently was not a threat yet, but if she swerved toward him, he should be able to show her he's armed. Unfortunately, the very sight of a gun makes liberals panic. Here in Las Vegas, you can openly carry a gun, and very easily get a concealed carry permit. I do see people occasionally with a gun openly displayed on their waist. It never seems to draw any attention, and it makes me feel a little safer. The same thing in L.A. would probably start a riot.
This is what happens when two unstable molecules come in contact. That neither participant took this idiocy to the Extreme and actually killed the other is the only ray of good news in this tabloid tale.
I guess that if the guy had enough brains to turn it into a "he said - she said" he'd have had enough brains not to pull a gun in the first place.
On the road I make it a point to give cars like that as much room as I can. If they're that stupid in their politics, they're probably very stupid drivers, too.
I've packed heat for over 20 years legally. Been to many shooting schools as well as legal schools. You learn not to get into arguments, and if you do end up in an argument the one thing you don't do is produce a weapon.
Now I am a conservative. To the right of John Wayne but, the idiot who pulled the S&W got what he deserved, an assault charge.
"He admitted to pulling the gun. He needs anger mgmnt too,"
He needs to buy about 20 IQ points too.
Even if he was dumb enough to point it, why admit it?
Never point a gun at someone unless you mean to shoot.
Gun Safety 101.
Obviously the guy was at severe fault, but if her defensive reflex was to swerve TOWARD the one wielding the weapon, her story seems a bit off.
I guess the author wasn't into reporting what the sticker that had to be censored/blurred said.
I was betting on it being a Subarau Outback.
walter:
On that point, you are probably correct. Swerving into a car is an awkward thing to do. If pressed, I believe the person who swerved would affirm that they had a plan to swerve if this situation came to pass. Now that could be a reasonable thing to plan, like finding the exits when entering a new environment, but it could also be the basis for a strong defense.
I foresee the defense as:
The woman was driving like a crazy person, making me fear for my life. She admitted having a plan to ram a car if involved in a political dispute on the highways. I was reasonably in fear of my life, having already avoided her swerves before brandishing my weapon. Not guilty, to follow.
I'm in no way saying that those facts are present here. But I can foresee that defense. A person who has already planned to swerve at another driver may not be innocent, even if they are not guilty.
All that said, the guy was not smart about this situation. Don't signal the other driver, first. Once you see they are aggressive, brake and let them go about their business. If you must defend yourself, only then should the weapon appear. And don't speak to the cops other than to express your fear of the other driver.
I see the anti-Second Amendment people are already trying to position this story as a reason to restrict the right.
Blogger MrCharlie2 said...
"Q: Why does this guy drive around with a gun?"
I guess I am evil, but so is most everyone else here in MT. But, then again, I noted in a survey I saw a day or two ago, that this is one of the states where over half the households are armed. Which very likely translates to more guns than people in the state. We definitely help the average. But, then, we live in a county that is maybe 100 miles long, and sometimes has a single deputy working late some nights, which can translate into better than an hour to respond. Which translates into a lot of self-help and working together.
In the pickup, I have a perfect place for a full sized Glock under the lid of the console. Fits more compact handguns less well. Planning on upgrading from a 9 mm G17 to a 10 mm G20 when they come out with a Gen 5 G20 (initial announcement of Gen 5 was only the G17 and G19). In a semiautomatic handgun, 10 mm is typically considered the best bear gun caliber, esp for brown bear. With wolves also moving into the county, I think a semiautomatic with 15 round magazines is much more prudent than the larger caliber revolver a good friend carries as his bear gun.
I suspect that you would be surprised at the percentage of the people you see on the road, and esp in Red America, who have a gun in their vehicles. Far higher that most hoplophobes realize.
rcocean said...
He needs to buy about 20 IQ points too.
You think 20 is enough? I completely agree with folks here who say the guy was in the wrong. It was a totally irresponsible gesture with a firearm.
People who have won (in this case a subset of Trump supporters) really need to avoid gloating over their victory. They should ignore the sore losers on the other side. Otherwise those losers might just lose it.
"I want a lawyer."
"Q: Why does this guy drive around with a gun?"
So he can shoot and then rape any one-eyed border collies he runs across.
Also, micro-penis.
And, MENSA has added driving with a gun and pointing it at strangers as another method of obtaining the "exclusive" membership bragging privileges.
Yeah..he's already said what he did was "stupid". I see no defense here..and yes, he managed to bolster the "gun nut" stereotype which can only help arguments for gun control.
Yes, if someone truly feels a threat, their panic MIGHT make them do something as odd as swerving towards threat. But given the context, she seems quite likely to have been "triggered" into a rage of her own.
The blurred sticker says "Don't be a ____"
He was being a __.
To a far lesser degree though, so was she.
Putting that much political text in front of anyone who happens to be behind her at a stop light is a bit like sliding into a restaurant booth while you're trying to eat and sounding off on a myriad of contentious issues.
"What the fuck was he doing pointing a gun at her anyways?"
He was making a "bad choice." He admitted it.
A: So that he feels free to act like asshole he is.
Projection. MrCharlie2 — the 2 indicates second prize.
Tinder for incontinent douchebags. Glad these two found each other, though I think I'll skip the wedding.
"What the fuck was he doing pointing a gun at her anyways?"
Yes, but he didn't shoot it. But she struck with her deadly weapon. It's harder to know if she deliberately hit him or just lost control, as she told police. But this was 2-way road rage.
I think the key loss of control point has to do with the finger. I've never understood people who really lose their temper over the finger. What's the big deal?
The Cracker Emcee Activist:
Shotgun wedding?
(Too soon?)
"What the fuck was he doing pointing a gun at her anyways?"
Given the behavior of the anti-Trumpers over the last 15 months or so the fellow may have a plausible self-defense argument to make in court.
Come on..I bet he wasn't that outraged..but enjoyed "triggering" her that way. He just didn't anticipate an accident would result..turning his little game into a far more serious, documented situation.
PREDICTION:
This case will recede from public view when it comes to light the swerving driver has previously announced her desire to do bodily harm to Republican voters.
"this was 2-way road rage." 2-way? You sure?
I drive with a gun too, though it's a 110 year old 5-shot Iver Johnson top-break with a seemingly supernatural ability to shoot sideways. Nevertheless, I've managed to avoid throwing down on the many threatening Bernie-stickered Priuses one encounters in Olympia.
If I could trust what the press actually writes in stories with political implications, I would tend to believe that the man actually did point the gun at her prior to the traffic accident- he, at least, isn't quoted as denying it.
However, I can no longer actually trust this sort of reporting, and will simply wait for the court case where he can make his argument without a journalist possibly filtering it for me.
In any case, he did act badly by initiating it- and stupidly, too.
"I think the key loss of control point has to do with the finger. I've never understood people who really lose their temper over the finger. What's the big deal?"
Especially when its a woman. I've had women road-ragers "rage" at me, and it was hard to keep from laughing.
Plus, whether its a man or a woman, you never knew who you're dealing with. They could be crazy, on drugs, have super low IQ, or just plain weird. But I guess some people like the drama.
Blogger rcocean said...
"Never point a gun at someone unless you mean to shoot.
Gun Safety 101."
Well, no. "Never point a gun at anything you are not prepared to destroy", is how it is usually phrased. Because the fact is, people point guns all the time at people they don't mean to shoot unless they have to. And rightly so. "Stop or I'll shoot" works best when you are pointing a gun.
"He was making a 'bad choice.' He admitted it."
Nah, this asshole doesn't get the authoritative word in framing / describing his actions. He clearly needs help, though, and I hope he gets it.
Getting sushi from the gas station is a "bad choice."
Nah, this asshole doesn't get the authoritative word in framing / describing his actions. He clearly needs help, though, and I hope he gets it.
He knows his action was wrong and regrets it. Why is it so important to others how he chooses to frame it?
I suppose he now must undergo extensive and repeated sensitivity training. This will enable him not just to regret his actions, but better enable him to loudly and publicly place them in the proper context of how they serve to maintain the white patriarchy.
Even were he to never touch a gun again, his penance would be incomplete without a drastically changed life course which included everyday acts to acknowledge his inherent racism and unseen but too-terrible-to-be-comprehended efforts to keep women out of the workforce and uncomfortable with their breasts and vaginas.
That's what people really want from him. And they wanted it the minute he signaled she was a loser. Frankly, that was more of an outrage to them than the actual pulling of a weapon.
harrogate:
Offer your thoughts about deliberately crashing your car into another car.
And then square those thoughts with Glenn Reynolds comment about not stopping if confronted with rioters blocking a highway.
I'll wait here.
"Well, no. "Never point a gun at anything you are not prepared to destroy", is how it is usually phrased. Because the fact is, people point guns all the time at people they don't mean to shoot unless they have to. And rightly so. "Stop or I'll shoot" works best when you are pointing a gun."
People may do it all the time, but that doesn't make it smart. Legally smart that is. Pretty much, if you point a (not obviously unloaded) gun at someone, you are essentially reasonably threatening imminent death or great bodily injury. If you yell out that you won't shoot unless you have to, you may be ok, if you can show the that they heard and understood you. Otherwise, absent a deadly threat on their side, you may be providing legal justification for them to use deadly force in response to your threat to do so. Remember - if you are going to credibly threaten imminent death or great bodily injury (with the aiming of a deadly weapon), you need to be doing so in self defense. In short, the first one tho escalate to the threat or use of deadly force typically cannot avail themselves of a defense of self defense. I am not saying don't do it, but rather evaluate whether you are facing such a deadly threat, and/or whether you could sell it to a jury. Which is why a "low ready" presentation may be safer legally in many cases - you are showing yourself ready and able to protect yourself with deadly force, but not actually actively threatening the other party with it (first). (And note that the rules for police are typically much more liberal in this respect).
Birkel,
If it happened as reported? Then crashing her car into his seems to me to fall into one of two general categories : panicked loss of vehicular control (because he pointed a gun at her); or a deliberate act of self-defense (because he pointed a gun at her). Perhaps it's some hybrid of these two. So those are my thoughts on her actions.
As for Reynolds' comment? I'd have to go back and re-read it again to see how precisely it applies to this situation. Surely if a pedestrian of any stripe (including demonstrators, or in your words "rioters") in fact threatened a driver's life , and the driver ran them over, then they'd have a pretty strong case for self-defense, I reckon.
What I recall of The anti-Reynolds pushback, though, had nothing to do with denying people's right to defend themselves.
"harrogate:
Offer your thoughts about deliberately crashing your car into another car.
And then square those thoughts with Glenn Reynolds comment about not stopping if confronted with rioters blocking a highway."
My thoughts are that a vehicle is a deadly weapon. In order to use it legally in self defense, you need to be facing a reasonable threat of death or great bodily injury (which typically includes broken bones). My view is that Antifa fascist thugs routinely provide such a threat, when engaged in their routine mayhem. The other issue though is that you can't legally kill or maim innocent bystanders in self defense. So, if they are intentionally part of the rioting mob, then they are presumably part of the conspiracy or association threatening deadly harm (even if they had no personal intent). But, if not, if actually innocent, you are probably SOL.
Crashing your car into another car in self defense should undergo similar analysis - were you reasonably threatened with imminent death or great bodily injury? And, if so, were the occupants in the other vehicle innocent or somehow involved with that threat?
Let me add in regards to Glenn Reynolds, that he is a law professor who has apparently carried concealed weapons for some time and taught 2nd Amdt and self-defense law, which means that he almost assuredly understands the subtleties that I have laid out above, and would go through the sort of analysis I set out before utilizing his vehicle as a deadly weapon. He knows where the legal line is. The real danger that I see in his statement is that someone might hear that and then run over innocent bystanders in order to escape. Obviously not the case though if the mob is attacking you, or running towards you in an apparent attempt to do so, and you choose to engage in self defense by running them over. And that is how I interpreted what he said.
harrogate is forced to lie or poorly remember because his position is motivated by political expediency.
Bruce Hayden has identified a principle beyond advancement of political ends and does not have to lie.
It's liberating.
Maybe the better option is to turn the car around before you're close to them...
I would quibble with the idea of innocent bystanders blocking a downtown Interstate Highway, the issue in Reynolds' tweet. That seems implausible.
walter,
What other magical thinking will you suggest?
Not an option on highways though..which makes the protesters' blocking that much more aggressive. I seem to remember off-ramps in Milwaukee being "occupied". Idiots.
Yeah, yeah. Ya got me Birkie. Me so dumb.
So now walter admits interstate highways like the one at issue in Reynolds' tweet do not allow U-turns.
Progress.
Birkel,
I take it by accusing me of "lying" or showing poor memory, you're referring to my response to your question about Reynolds.
Surely you don't mean my response to the incident that is the topic of this thread?
As for Reynolds, my memory isn't so poor and if you saw a lot of rhetoric suggesting a driver, if attacked during a demonstration, had to just sit there and take it, then please "liberate" me by showing some good links.
Yes, Birkel. I forgot Reynolds' tweet was highway specific. But your earlier point stretching toward a ridiculous defense above is not a memory issue.
Bruce Hayden said...
"People may do it all the time, but that doesn't make it smart. Legally smart that is."
Look Dude, don't tell me, tell the cops. I'm sure they'll be fascinated by your in-depth and scholarly analysis. And I am equally certain that they will draw and point their firearms at anyone they feel may be a threat. Just 'cause you went to law school doesn't mean you know what you're talking about.
Of course, during the incident in NC to which Reynolds was reacting when he said "Run them down," motorists were not being threatened with violence, via gun or any other way.
It's likely they were inconvenienced, tho. Whether he meant to say it or not, a lot of people read Reynolds' argument as "they deserve to be run down for inconveniencing people."
Why Reynolds' uproarious tweet is some sort of useful reference point for discussing the incident at the center of this thread, is a question requiring some awfully gymnastic rhetorics to explain, tho.
Although Reynolds did back off from the tone of "Run them down":
"I wouldn’t actually aim for people blocking the road, but I wouldn’t stop because I’d fear for my safety"
He might have gone with something like that initially..
"Pointing a (not obviously unloaded) gun at someone very likely puts that person in reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily injury"
Yes, this happened to me on a Detroit freeway nearly 40 years ago after I gave a driver the finger for blasting his horn at me without justification. My response was to duck and accelerate, which could have resulted in an accident (not with the armed driver, though, as I was passing him). Her story is more plausible. When you illegally pull a gun you're not likely to win your case.
What Paul said @11:15.
Yes, but he didn't shoot it. But she struck with her deadly weapon. It's harder to know if she deliberately hit him or just lost control, as she told police. But this was 2-way road rage.
What nonsense. How can a law professor not distinguish between the inherent violence of brandishing/aiming a deadly weapon in any situation where no immediate danger to one's life is apparent and a car accident - which happens every day and is almost never accompanied by charges of malevolent intent?
Can't a minimum of effort be put into this? The amateurs are schooling the pros.
I used to be heavily into knitting. Bear with me, this story is relevant. I witnessed two women in a near knock-down, drag-out argument over...yarn.
One was all about natural fibers. The other really like synthetics. I thought they were going to tear each other's eyes out.
Our species will fight over just about anything. When it comes to faith based systems (religion/politics) people get really defensive and extra aggressive. I am surprised that things like this don't happen more often.
She is a loser for the bumper stickers, but at the point he pulled the gun, she had every right to hit him with her car.
Good for the cops for their arrest, and for their non-arrest.
Ann, your headline is unfair to her.
walter and harrogate,
I accept your respective abject surrenders.
The argument that blocking an interstate highway does not constitute a violent act is an interesting one. Reginald Denny was only inconvenienced, after all. And that wasn't even a highway.
Birkel,
It seems like you're arguing that "Run them down" was an appropriate message regarding demonstrators in the way of traffic. And that in and of itself, blocking traffic is Reginald Denny territory.
To use your word, these arguments, if your arguments they be, are "interesting ones."
Meanwhile I'm not lying when I say I'm in sure what you're saying about the incident in Missouri under consideration here. Just re-read your first post and you seem more focused on the Second Amendment than anything else. Which, tho bizarre, in fairness makes more sense than the arguments Ann has been making .
*mechanics correction:
I meant "when I say I'm unsure"
No, dumb ass. I am juxtaposing your support of this lady running the guy with the gun off the road and your objection when Reynolds suggested the running people over who were blocking interstate highways.
Idiocy in defense of ideology is entertaining.
Because pointing a gun at someone and blocking an interstate are analogous?
Again, interesting idea.
Also, you failed to understand my first comment. I was suggesting a criminal defense strategy.
I was critical of the gun possessor. Past statements by the bumper sticker person may be admissible w/rt state of mind.
Those three things are not mutually exclusive.
harrogate,
Are you suggesting the bumper sticker person could not just stop? Your failure at analogies is humorous.
I like the idea forwarded by Leftist Collectivists that restricting the movement of another person is not a violent act. I
Violence for the resistance must be excused, one supposes.
I dare say that the emotional and cognitive reactions of most every single human, including yourself, would not be analogous , in the following two scenarios:
1)someone points a gun at you while you're driving;
2)while driving, you come upon demonstrators with picket signs and such, and probably media crews, blocking the road.
Meanwhile, I think it would be pretty odd for any person in the first scenario to stop their car and be an even better target for person brandishing a gun. Maybe "oh he'll just keep driving" would occur to you, but that's an outlier response, I think. Even less common than swerving (through panic or deliberation or some combination of both) into the antagonist's car. Probably a hell of a lot less common than swerving away from the antagonist.
I mean, I'm well aware that many of my positions are outside the mainstream in American opinion.
By the same token, I hope you know that in saying that this lady was justified in her actions and that Reynolds' "Run them down" line was horrible, you'd get fairly broad agreement from most people. Your sense that blocking traffic is analogous to pointing a firearm at someone, is a harder sell than you're acknowledging.
It's funny that driving a car makes so many normal adults slip into acting like aggressive children. Why is that?
Oh, the irony of bigotry, sanctimonious hypocrisy.
She showed him a finger. He showed her a "finger". And that's where it should have stopped.
If someone is in the way at the store and moving slowly, it's extraordinarily rare for anyone to yell, "Fuck you! Move your ass!" But put the same people in cars and in a similar situation...
I find "the finger" completely hilarious.
It reminds me of an old friend of mine - happens to be gay, always doing non-PC hi-jinks.- why we get along so well. Anyway, I'd be chatting with his mutual friends and one person would say - 'Hey, I saw Jeff today driving down the street - he flipped me off!' we would laugh and laugh. Yep - that's Jeff.
When some road rage-er flips you the bird, laugh and give him/her a hearty nerdy thumbs up.
Two idiots. She should have been charged too, tho. Car was used as a weapon.
Freeman Hunt,
You'll have to ask harrogate why blocking a road and preventing your movement is no big deal. Would somebody(s) blocking your path in public, deliberately and with a plan to agitate be no big deal?
Your grocery store example is unrelated, sadly.
The person who stops a car for violent Leftist protesters miraculously does not become an easier target.
Right, harrogate?
The protestors in NC were pointing guns at , or otherwise physically threatening the drivers, were they?
Or do you mean "target" in another sense?
You mean Reginald Denny remains unhurt?
A .380? What kind of a man carries a 9mm kurz?
Obviously the woman is at fault. The man simply showed the .380 in the exchange of visual communications to indicate he was being "triggered" by her micro-agressive display of bumber stickers.
Birkel,
Perhaps we can agree on this: if you "run them down" at a protest on a road, you'll be arrested and face charges, notwithstanding your argument that violence had been done to you, and regardless of your crucial evidentiary submission of Reginald Denny.
And yet, as we just saw, the woman here was not arrested or charged with anything.
However so sure you may be that you have a perfect analogy between a Reynolds crowd-power and the woman from this story, the law is no more on your side than I am, here. Good luck getting everyone to agree with you that the two are the same anyways, tho.
*Reynolds crowd-plower
Do you not see that it is you applying two different standards, harrogate?
The real question at the heart of our sub-thread discussion involves this:
If people did what Reynolds suggested, they'd go to jail.
If people do what this woman did, they don't.
I'm glad both of these things are true.
Why aren't you?
File "do you not see you're applying two different standards" to arguments that won't get you out of trouble after plowing your car into a crowd of demonstrators.
No. The question is whether the person was reasonably and subjectively in fear for their life in either situation. You cannot understand. It's ok that you have blinkered yourself.
Sure, if someone is threatened they can defend themselves. No one here denied that. No one who critiqued Reynolds at the time (at least from what I saw) denied that either.
Tell you what, tho: go "run down" some protestors in the road and then when arrested, tell the police you were "reasonably and subjectively in fear for your life," and see how far it gets you.
Unless you are a cop yourself, you'll need to be able to do more than say "I feared for my life," but rather you'll have to show actual cause, is what I'm guessing.
Rioters; protestors.
Potato; spud.
Ask Bernard Goetz.
They were lighting bonfires on an interstate highway.
In what universe is that protesting?
Blinkered must feel comfortable to you.
MTell you what, tho: go "run down" some protestors in the road and then when arrested, tell the police you were "reasonably and subjectively in fear for your life," and see how far it gets you.
It will get you farther than Reginald Denny.
What is it today ? The weather ? The hurricane ?
We need a better class of trolls.
Birkel,
And yet nobody ran them over, and no drivers were harmed.
Amazing!
Michael K.
Your definition of troll has always seemed quite odd to me. Really it's just "I don't like what this commenter is saying," for you, I guess.
Meanwhile back in the world, the police in this case made the right call, and thankfully, nobody in NC heeded Reynolds' "advice."
Blogger harrogate said...
It seems like you're arguing that "Run them down" was an appropriate message regarding demonstrators in the way of traffic. And that in and of itself, blocking traffic is Reginald Denny territory.
Yes, and yes.
1: Your free speech ends when you start demanding that I listen to you. You want to protest where I can ignore you? Great, have fun.
You want to block the road, and assault me by stealing my time? You deserve to be run over.
Leave me alone, or else.
2: By the time I know you're going to turn me into another Reginald Denny, it's too late for me to do anything about it.
You pull a gun, you're threatening me with Great bodily Injury. And that frees me to use deadly force against you.
You block the road, you've gone beyond mere threats into actually using force against me. It is right and appropriate that I use whatever level of force i need to to force you to stop using force against me.
for fucks sake - if a crowd of leftwing antfia rage-filled leftist leftwinger leftwinger whack jobs with baseball bats crowd my car- I will floor it.
gregq:
Even not counting the fact that you would very likely wind up in prison.
Would you, really? One minute you're driving along. Then the road is blocked by protestors. They're not threatening you or the other drivers but they're not getting out of your way.
Let's posit it that way. Would you *really* just drive through some people?
Whatever your answer, in Charlotte every single person who had a car on the road, didn't do it. And I'd wager none of them had to struggle within themselves on it, either
Birkel said...walter and harrogate,
I accept your respective abject surrenders.
--
Accept my "digital" response.
Reynolds backed down..but you will stupidly hold forth.
Strength!
The two of them should have to spend a weekend together on a community service litter policing detail.
"Meanwhile back in the world, the police in this case made the right call, and thankfully, nobody in NC heeded Reynolds' "advice."
I don't hold with the guy waving a gun in such an altercation.
However, if a mob blocks my path in the street and I am moving forward in my car and they are trying to stop me, I will run them over.
You know what ? That is self defense and no jury will convict me for that. All I would need to do is show video of Reginald Denny being battered with cement blocks by the black rioters.
No cop will arrest me and no DA will indict me.
I guess you are just a garden variety lefty since you are upset at being called a troll.
It is often hard to tell with lefties here as they rarely make decent arguments.
Mostly just seminar talking points.
..walking inner city dog shelter pit bulls..pooper scoopers or mere plastic baggies in hand.
harrogate said...
Would you, really? One minute you're driving along. Then the road is blocked by protestors. They're not threatening you or the other drivers but they're not getting out of your way.
Let's posit it that way. Would you *really* just drive through some people?
Fuck yes. They will either get out of my way, or I will run them over. And you can be damn sure they'll start beating on my car when i refuse to bow down to them.
Steal my money, steal my time. In either case you're a thief. And in this case you are a thief using force, or the threat of force.
You do that, you deserve to die.
Harrogate- If leftwing progressive antfia fascists swarm our cars with baseball bats, and use those baseball bats as weapons, hitting our cars - we are flooring it.
We know this leaves you stunned.
We know in up-side down universe delusional prog-land, the mask wearing, baseball bat smashing leftist antifas are innocent folks, just out for a nightly stroll. If they happen to smash your face in, you had it coming.
Harrogate is stunned. OMG! These people will defend themselves !
Harrogate (1:46pm):
"Of course, during the incident in NC to which Reynolds was reacting when he said 'Run them down,' motorists were not being threatened with violence, via gun or any other way."
Really? I'm going to need some references for that. I have a distinct memory of an "incident in NC" in which a woman driving a tractor-trailer trapped by a mob on the interstate had to flee for her life while the mob set fire to her cargo. Was that the incident "to which Reynolds was reacting"? If it was, then Reynolds is right. When the mob is setting fire to your vehicle, your life is quite obviously in danger, and you have a right to run over the minimum number of mob-members it takes to save your life. In other words, you should start out slow and honk your horn to give them a chance to step aside, and you certainly shouldn't swerve back and forth to try to get as many as you can on your way to safety, but as long as you keep the deaths of the guilty to the minimum required to save your own life, you seem to me (not a lawyer) entirely justified.
https://hotair.com/archives/2017/09/09/antifa-militants-ready-break-bones-invade-homes/
Pro-Fa threatens home break-ins and broken bones. And somebody should slow their car?
Test that theory, harrogate. I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
Weevil,
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2016/09/22/instapundit-glenn-reynolds-defends-run-them-down-tweet-during-charlotte-unrest/?utm_term=.44ae56f0e67c
I saw your digital middle finger and laughed, walter. Your ill-natured surrender is noted.
Thanks. Now was that before or after the tractor-trailer incident? And if they were "stopping traffic and surrounding vehicles", were the people in those vehicles really "not being threatened with violence, via gun or any other way"? Not being allowed to leave a place you wish to leave looks a lot like kidnapping to me. If someone were to prevent me from leaving my house by leaning on all the doors and blocking the windows, I would feel intensely threatened, would feel like a kidnapping victim, even if none of them brandished a gun or a knife. The same goes for motorists. And there have certainly been incidents where BLM protesters have refused to allow ambulances through their lines.
To put it another way, I think it's disgusting to see blocking of streets called 'protesting'. When you wave your signs from the sidewalks, or rent billboards to display them, that's protesting, and fully protected, no matter how offensive or contemptible your message. Neither Reynolds nor anyone else has suggested it's OK to drive up on the sidewalk and run over protesters just because their ideas are horrible or stupid. Well, no one on the right, I mean. The left's "Punch a Nazi" policy seems to be morally equivalent.
Birkel,
If only that driver with the gun had such an interpretation...
Dr Weevil
False imprisonment, more likely.
walter,
I won't apologize to you for your inability to understand my points. You can pretend I have defended the driver with the gun, but you'd be wrong.
Oh Birkel..not all is about you in the forum. But your whimsical response to my virtually raised digit would certainly have been a better path for the gunman.
You could say as much..but ya don't.
Actually I did. I was riffing off an Althouse comment above. I can hold multiple thoughts on my head.
Like every other conservative I offered criticism of the gun wielding driver.
"All that said, the guy was not smart about this situation. Don't signal the other driver, first. Once you see they are aggressive, brake and let them go about their business. If you must defend yourself, only then should the weapon appear. And don't speak to the cops other than to express your fear of the other driver." and
It's like you're a liar.
As it all played out, I guess the police did the right thing, but this woman was an idiot who could have gotten herself killed with her irrational behavior, and I don't get why people can't admit that.
Whoa. Pointed a gun at her? The driver was completely within her rights to hit him with the car, if she thought that the best response.
I'm with her.
She was within her rights once the jerk pulled the gun, but up to that moment, they both behaved like people who should have their license revoked.
I had a Beat Farmers bumper sticker for years on my truck. Every now and then, I'd look over and somebody would be waving at me like crazy. It was always about that bad boy.
Post a Comment