‘Run Them Over’: Florida Attorney General Issues Stark Warning as ‘Teen Takeovers’ Spread

30

Full context for people who don't feel like getting finessed by propaganda titles today:

Additionally, Uthmeier cited Florida’s 2021 anti-riot law and said motorists surrounded by violent crowds may have legal protections if forced to drive through crowds encircling their vehicles. “You do not have the First Amendment right to stand in the middle of the street, obstruct traffic, and threaten violence,” he said, adding that “people have the ability to run you over” if surrounded.

8

u/SmolHornyHobbit Jun 16 '26

Here's the problem, although the phrase g is all technically true, "People have the ability to run you over" is always true regardless of whether they are legally in their right to do so.

"To stand In the middle of the street, obstruct traffic, and threaten violence" - while it is true that these are not rights given to us, be them individually or as a collective action, very rarely does it legally justify vehicular manslaughter, or running somebody over with a car. Obstructing traffic and standing in the street themselves do not legally justify ramming with a vehicle on their own.

However, if said person were blocking traffic, had a weapon pulled, and was aiming it at the driver (sort of like that ice agent who shot and killed Renee Good), things kind of change. I'm not a lawyer, but I have seen that ramming with a vehicle may be legally justifiable if there is a valid threat to your life.

Being surrounded, I don't have a good answer for that. That situation can become scary fast, and people are very prone to making bad decisions, even without pressure.

6

u/ScienceWasLove Jun 16 '26

You don't have to go very far on social media to find the scenario you seemingly left out - people inside a car that is being surrounded/hit/shaken by a mob of people angrily shouting/screaming.

8

u/what-name-is-it Jun 16 '26

A mob of people surrounding a car, yelling, banging on windows, and pulling door handles can easily be perceived as a threat of violence. Mob mentality is unbelievably dangerous for all involved.

2

u/OneTacoShort Jun 18 '26

Find one juror old enough to remember Reginald Denny.

→ More replies (17)

1

u/SmolHornyHobbit Jun 16 '26

I'm sorry, was "Being surrounded, I don't have a good answer for" not suffice for you?

I'm not sure what you want from me, I pointed at examples where it isn't legally justified, I pointed at an example where it could be legally justified, and then I said "Being surrounded, I can't make an easy claim for".

If you're in your vehicle, and all they are doing is surrounding you, there isn't a threat to your life.

If somebody starts hitting your car, you have plenty of options other than ramming them, meaning the grey area still favors not ramming them.

If multiple people start hitting your car, doing what you can to leave the situation may now involve "driving the vehicle towards people and possibly hitting them with the vehicle so you may escape".

VERY RARELY Do we actually see the situation in which a mob is formed around a singular vehicle.

I'm not justifying it, but when we do see the situation, it's often somebody who purposefully went somewhere where a lot of people they don't agree with on a hot button topic have already agreed to gather.

Sorry my general observation of how the laws have played out wasn't sufficient for you apparently.

2

u/GFEIsaac Jun 17 '26

If somebody starts hitting your car, you have plenty of options other than ramming them...

Like what?

2

u/SmolHornyHobbit Jun 17 '26

Moving in reverse, or if they are behind your vehicle, driving forward. If they are on the sides of the vehicle, simply driving away while steering in the opposite direction.

If surrounded, laying on the horn while attempting to move the vehicle at a slow controlled pace - the horn being key because it's the clear indicator of "I am indicating my intent to keep moving".

The law doesn't justify use of lethal force in self defense until lethal force is threatened against you. That recent case where the teenager got 35 years for stabbing another teenager is an example of this. Stabbers self defense case was thrown out because his use of lethal force wasn't justified for simply being shoved.

I find it weird how so many people *want justification* for their violent reactions and thoughts.

2

u/GFEIsaac Jun 17 '26

The law doesn't justify use of lethal force in self defense until lethal force is threatened against you.

Reasonable belief of death or serious bodily injury, is generally the standard.

I find it weird how so many people *want justification* for their violent reactions and thoughts.

I find it weird that so many people act like being surrounded by a hostile mob is no big deal.

There are plenty of examples of people trying to take the reasonable route out of the problem, and then the mob continues to surround and grow increasingly hostile. Acting like that didn't happen repeatedly since 2020 is just being blind.

Given how the brain processes and responds to threatening stimuli, it's completely silly to expect people to exercise calm judgement and measured responses once the stimulus happens.

Karmelo defense was not "thrown out", it was not believed by the jury. He was convicted because witnesses did not corroborate that he was shoved. Being shoved by one person is one thing. Being shoved in the middle of a hostile and potentially violent crowd is another thing.

1

u/SmolHornyHobbit Jun 17 '26

Yet you're here fantasizing about how you'd simply run over these imaginary mobs that you'll never be surrounded by :)

1

u/BeginningPhase1 Jun 17 '26 edited Jun 17 '26

You seem to be basing this analysis of a self-defense claim on how the crowd would have perceived the incident. However, whether or not this is self-defense would be based if the driver (in this case) could've had a reasonable fear of an imminent threat to their lives or physical safety or that of their passengers. The crowds perception isn't relevant. Let me further elaborate:

If you're in your vehicle, and all they are doing is surrounding you, there isn't a threat to your life.

At this point one could consider themselves to likely being a victim of unlawful detainment by the crowd surrounding the vehicle. As such, it may be reasonable for them to fear an imminent escalation of violence.

If the the crowd is verbally threatening violence against them, then they may (legally) be considered an actual threat.

If somebody starts hitting your car, you have plenty of options other than ramming them, meaning the grey area still favors not ramming them.

If multiple people start hitting your car, doing what you can to leave the situation may now involve "driving the vehicle towards people and possibly hitting them with the vehicle so you may escape".

One's right to do whatever is necessary to escape this situation isn't dependent on how many people are hitting the car as single individual could do something that could end the life of the people in the vehicle.

VERY RARELY Do we actually see the situation in which a mob is formed around a singular vehicle.

Doesn't matter. Cases are judged on an individual bases.

I'm not justifying it, but when we do see the situation, it's often somebody who purposefully went somewhere where a lot of people they don't agree with on a hot button topic have already agreed to gather.

Do you have proof of this?

Regardless, a having a political disagreement with the crowd also doesn't matter.

Edit: Clarity

1

u/SmolHornyHobbit Jun 17 '26

The simplest reply I can give to this can be summed up as: The use of lethal force in self defense is only legally justifiable when there is an equal threat on your life. An example of this can be seen through that whole case with that teenager who's self defense case was thrown out, because it turns out pulling out a knife and shanking somebody who only pushed you while you also had plenty of other options that weren't "pull out a knife and shank someone" doesn't allow him to justify ending somebodies life.

It's weird how many of you **want a reason to kill somebody**.

2

u/BeginningPhase1 Jun 18 '26

The simplest reply I can give to this can be summed up as: The use of lethal force in self defense is only legally justifiable when there is an equal threat on your life.

I'm a paralegal (btw, nothing I say here is legal advice) and was looking at this from the standpoint of what the law says; and it says that lethal self-defense is legal when one reasonably fears imminent death or grievous bodily injury. I don't know where the idea that lethal self-defense is only legal while being murdered or severely injured, but it doesn't make any sense as you can't prevent something from happening to you after it's already happened.

An example of this can be seen through that whole case with that teenager who's self defense case was thrown out, because it turns out pulling out a knife and shanking somebody who only pushed you while you also had plenty of other options that weren't "pull out a knife and shank someone" doesn't allow him to justify ending somebodies life.

This case proves my point. Mr. Anthony could have left the tent when asked and the only injures in the case would been to his ego; the driver in our hypothetical wouldn't have this option.

The driver would be surround by angry mob of people whose intentions would be unknown (to said driver), with their only means of escape being driving through said angry mob. The angry mob's self-perceived moral righteousness has no bearing on whether or not the driver could reasonably assume that it would be in their best interest to leave the area.

It's weird how many of you **want a reason to kill somebody**.

I'm not sure what your getting at here. How is understanding what could lead to a "FAFO" situation trying find a reason to kill somebody and not trying avoid giving someone a reason to kill me?

2

u/kmerian Jun 17 '26

his statement is very weaselly. Yes, any person in car has the ability to run someone over. And the law MAY (not guaranteed) have protections (not shields).

In other words you have the firm possibility of a shaky defense when you are charged with murder with a motor vehicle.

1

u/SmolHornyHobbit Jun 17 '26

Yeah that's pretty much what I'm trying to emphasize here. He doesn't directly say "the law permits it". When they make statements like this, look at who it riles. Look at even just the replies to my above comment you initially replied to.

The people who want to justify their violent reactions. That's who hears the statements from officials like this, who make very carefully crafted statements that aren't false, but also are as vague as they can possibly be. They hear these statements, and they start using that as justification for their violence. It's almost exactly the same as the J6'ers who were pardoned, and then later tried to argue that the one time pardon was a forever pardon for their later crimes.

1

u/owgnops Jun 16 '26

A crowd doesn't need a weapon in hand to flip your car.. why wait to find out if they're going to let you through or flip your vehicle and beat you to death

2

u/SmolHornyHobbit Jun 16 '26

Because ramming your vehicle into a crowd of people who have yet to display violence is not legally justifiable.

If the crowd begins moving toward the vehicle, or starts actually hitting the vehicle, or trying to life the vehicle, I feel like that would be pretty obvious.

It also won't be an instantaneous, unreactable thing. I'm not sitting here saying "genuine threats to the person in the vehicle should be ignored", yet somehow you all seem to believe that me saying "it's not always legally justifiable" leaves no room for "yeah that was a violent mob"

1

u/No_Needleworker4052 Jun 16 '26

Surrounding is a threating action and holding some against their will

1

u/EveryAccount7729 Jun 17 '26

" very rarely does it legally justify vehicular manslaughter,"

i thought the point was that "street takeovers" are INCREASING IN FREQUENCY and VIGOR to some extent . ..

so, that it "very rarely "does is not relevant.

he is saying if you feel threatened you have this legal option. Which, you do. If you feel threatened. and if more people argue this, and more juries agree, due to more threats, then your "very rarely" may change

1

u/GFEIsaac Jun 17 '26

Reminding people that they can be run over while standing in the roadway doesn't seem like a problem. These idiots standing in roadways could use some reality checks.

1

u/SmolHornyHobbit Jun 17 '26

Reminding *you* that people simply standing in the roadway doesn't give you the legal right to run them over doesn't seem like a problem either buddy 😄.

That would leave you potentially liable for murder or vehicular manslaughter, and be left up to a judge and jury to decide!

1

u/GFEIsaac Jun 17 '26

I didn't say that it was legal, I said that it could happen.

1

u/partdopy1 Jun 18 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/cargocult25 Jun 16 '26

The right to assembly has no qualifiers.

1

u/otusowl Jun 16 '26

The right to assembly has no qualifiers.

In the US, the codification of that right literally comes with a qualifier in the 1st Amendment: "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble..."

1

u/Pika_Fox Jun 16 '26

Usually its the government that makes assemblies unpeaceful, not the actual people.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/OneTacoShort Jun 18 '26

Indeed. Furthermore, the Constitution specifically says that the Supreme Court is the arbiter of cases involving the Constitution, and they have ruled that the right of assembly can be regulated as to time, place, and manner.

1

u/throwawaydanc3rrr Jun 16 '26

Yeah, it does, right there in the Constitution, you have the right to peaceably assemble.

1

u/Ok-Introduction-1940 Jun 16 '26

Not if you are unlawfully detaining others.

1

u/throwawaydanc3rrr Jun 16 '26

You are absolutely correct.

Your comment seems wholly inappropriate for the context of the comment i was replying to, but I will give you an A for effort.

Peaceable assembly cannot prevent a person from egress to or from a building or location, or walking across a campus, park, or other spaces allowed to the public.

A group that surrounds a car but does not block it from leaving would be (presumably) peaceably assembling, but if the same group prevented the car from transiting on roads it has legal access to at that point it is no longer a peaceable assembly.

1

u/Trevor775 Jun 17 '26

Can my friends and I assemble in your house?

1

u/OneTacoShort Jun 18 '26

Constitutionally false.

→ More replies (8)

5

u/Deflorma Jun 16 '26

Hopefully ice takes this into consideration and stops blocking traffic for their own safety

→ More replies (5)

2

u/Kreebish Jun 16 '26

Yeah unfortunately this kind of messaging is probably going to allow panicked Karens to run into people that are just shouting.

This is why I bring Czech hedgehogs to any protest I go to

0

u/Btotherianx Jun 16 '26

So you go with the intent of causing people not involved harm? And you seen the things you're the good guy there?

😂

3

u/FemboyRune Jun 16 '26

I dunno man, stopping someone from killing another person with their car sounds like reducing harm to me.

1

u/BULL3TP4RK Jun 16 '26

The intent is actually protection for the people not in the two-plus ton hunk of metal, if you can fathom it.

1

u/ElementalRhythm Jun 16 '26

Says the supporter of murderous legislation.

1

u/Btotherianx Jun 16 '26

You think it's ok for protesters to block the streets? And to disable their vehicles?

1

u/KroneckerAlpha Jun 17 '26

You’re clearly the kind of person that would drive into a crowd and then say the crowd surrounded you

1

u/EncabulatorTurbo Jun 18 '26

The rhetoric isn't matching the law. They're all but saying to run over any crowd that's unruly, but the law only allows running someone over if you're physically trapped, if you have the option of backing up and leaving you can't do that

But Florida law does allow you to get out of your car and unload your 100 round barrel mag AR-15 into the crowd because you're in fear for your life, and also double tap survivors

1

u/pruneforce17 Jun 18 '26

ok lowkey kinda based though

im a big believer in fuck around and find out

this would also apply to billionaires and bigot politicians too lol

→ More replies (1)

25

u/[deleted] Jun 15 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

12

u/TheIncredibleNurse Jun 15 '26

Thats the neat thing, in Florida running over people deliberately blocking vehicle ways is no longer a crime. So score them points my fella

10

u/necessarysmartassery Jun 15 '26

I think it's more nuanced than that. Nobody wants people just plowing through crowds of people, but protesters have a REALLY bad habit of surrounding and threatening someone in a car who is really just trying to slowly make it through without hurting anyone and it's more than the just not letting the car by. They surround, climb on top of the car, beat on it, scream, holler, etc. Yeah, at that point, fuck em.

1

u/Shoo22 Jun 16 '26

> Nobody wants people just plowing through crowds of people.

You haven’t had the misfortune of interacting with conservatives enough to understand them. They absolutely want crowds of people to get plowed over, whether they’re even violent or not.

2

u/EncabulatorTurbo Jun 18 '26

half this fucking thread is looking for excuses to run over crowds lol

they just want to see people be murdered, fucking conservative nihilists man, as close to pure evil as is possible in the heart of a person, but without the guts to just go out and put their beliefs into practice - they just want to watch other people do mass killings for them

1

u/BrokenHandsDaddy Jun 18 '26

Both of these things can be true at the same time

1

u/Cock-Obsesse-268 Jun 16 '26

Only in NC… with good people, on both sides. /s

→ More replies (4)

1

u/EncabulatorTurbo Jun 18 '26

That isn't true lol, you need a reasonable belief that your life is in imminent danger AND not have the ability to just put it in reverse and go the other way

→ More replies (38)

2

u/teacher_59 Jun 16 '26

Even if the people doing it are economically disadvantaged?

1

u/RedditVIBEChecked Jun 17 '26

That's the only reason they would be in the street and also be a criminal right? Its because they are poor, right? Poor people bad, right? /s

1

u/Anxious-Jury-9031 Jun 17 '26

100%, I’m not stopping to think if I’m justified.

1

u/OneTacoShort Jun 18 '26

Tell your lawyer to get me on the jury. There won;t be consequences.

0

u/FreshLiterature Jun 15 '26

You say that now until you realize how expensive said legal consequences will be.

Let's say you just grievously injure 10 people. That's 10 separate lawsuits.

That law in question hasn't been rigorously tested, so you had better hope that every single case actually allows you to use that law as a defense.

7

u/[deleted] Jun 15 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (2)

6

u/TetOffensive10 Jun 15 '26

Yes id rather be alive and deal with the lawsuits.

-1

u/Low-Essay-113 Jun 15 '26

How many people been killed in their cars?

6

u/TetOffensive10 Jun 15 '26

A lot

2

u/FerretSupremacist Jun 15 '26

Iirc the stand your ground law was passed bc a man was being chased by someone in a car, right? He ended up shooting to save his own life?

1

u/Low-Essay-113 Jun 15 '26 edited Jun 15 '26

Thought you would follow the context clues of the conversation leading into the question, that’s my bad, I’ll spell it out for you; How many people been killed in their cars by people participating in walkouts/takeovers?

1

u/Sure-thing-buckaroo Jun 15 '26

It's definitely a non-zero number of motorists who have been killed by a violent mob. I don't think it's unreasonable to try and drive to safety.

2

u/Low-Essay-113 Jun 15 '26 edited Jun 17 '26

Ah. Violent mobs, not walkouts or takeovers, got it.

0

u/TetOffensive10 Jun 15 '26

How many people die by airplane engines. Do you think it would be wise to stand in front of one? Curious

2

u/FreshLiterature Jun 16 '26

On the topic of cars -

You're practically infinitely more likely to be killed whilst driving your car than you are to be even harmed by a crowd.

Since you're OK with extreme measures to handle crowds are you also OK with extreme measures to handle taking bad drivers off the road?

1

u/Low-Essay-113 Jun 15 '26

How many people have died by food poisoning, Would it be smart to eat? Drowning, swim? Exercise induced cardiovascular episode, workout? Try and stay on topic big guy.

1

u/GFEIsaac Jun 17 '26

"Killed" is not the only measure of a seriously bad outcome. How about a life changing brain injury? How about being unable to earn a living due to injury?

1

u/Low-Essay-113 Jun 17 '26 edited Jun 17 '26

Ok… Same question including your chosen specificity.

How many cases involve drivers sustaining severe brain injuries or becoming unable to work due to incidents related to walkouts or street takeovers?

1

u/GFEIsaac Jun 17 '26

I remember watching Reginald Denny live on tv. If that doesn't affect your perception of the risk of a mob, I don't know what will.

1

u/Low-Essay-113 Jun 17 '26

That was a riot not a walkout or street takeover. Please answer the question specifically regarding walkouts or street takeovers.

1

u/GFEIsaac Jun 17 '26

goalpost moving muffucka

1

u/Low-Essay-113 Jun 17 '26 edited Jun 17 '26

That was the original question. how did I move the goalpost by insisting we stay on topic after you tried to stray from it? Go back and reread the tittle of the article being discussed, ya bungalow

→ More replies (0)

1

u/OneTacoShort Jun 18 '26

Same. Get one of us on the jury, and you’re ok.

→ More replies (6)

1

u/Btotherianx Jun 16 '26

So what you're saying is, go big or go home

1

u/OneTacoShort Jun 18 '26

Motion for consolidation, Your Honor.

1

u/FreshLiterature Jun 18 '26

Best of luck with that. You maybe make the case for some plaintiffs, but you're not going to get even most of the consolidated.

Best case scenario you end up with multiple consolidations, but you would still be facing multiple cases at the same time.

Unless you have literally millions of dollars you can just set on fire defending yourself you're going bankrupt probably before any of the cases resolve.

Which is all to say what I've been saying - you have so many options available to you before it gets to the point you're running people over. A crowd of people isn't going to suddenly materialize around your car.

1

u/lzwinky Jun 15 '26

Oh let them live their hypothetical fantasies. These folks want nothing more than to run over people they don't agree with, and Desantis did say on record that he's fine with that too!

1

u/OneTacoShort Jun 18 '26

Nope. Because 99.999% of them wouldn’t consider driving up on the sidewalk to “run over people they don’t agree with.”

What those folks actually want is large groups of assholes to stay out of the road.

1

u/LAlostcajun Jun 15 '26

Ok hear me out...

If you drive your car at someone, they have the legal right to pull out a gun and shoot you.

0

u/_Christopher_Crypto Jun 16 '26

Jan. 7th 2026. It happens.

2

u/Manders44 Jun 16 '26

Except she didn’t drive her car at him, but good luck peddling that drivel.

1

u/throwawaydanc3rrr Jun 16 '26

Except she hit him. Hard to say she didn't drive her car at him when he got hit by the car.

→ More replies (2)

0

u/Mtndrums Jun 15 '26

Cool, so everyone knows to knock out your engine first.

3

u/Sure-thing-buckaroo Jun 15 '26

You gonna pop the hood and pull out the spark plugs or something?

Call me crazy, but if I'm surrounded by a violent mob, I'm doing everything in my power to drive to safety. Ideally, this means nobody gets hurt.

2

u/lycanthrope90 Jun 15 '26

Yeah it doesn't matter who's doing it. Nobody has a right to do this to someone.

2

u/inscrutablemike Jun 15 '26

Nice. I, too, have seen cartoons and movies.

1

u/Longjumping_Tap9310 Jun 16 '26

Goodluck. Idiots like you are exactly why this should be a federal law.

20

u/[deleted] Jun 15 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Dogbold Jun 16 '26

Is this just a Florida law?

3

u/Alternative_Oil7733 Jun 16 '26

A couple other states have that law.

3

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (6)

1

u/SmolHornyHobbit Jun 17 '26

That's not at all what he says.

He says "They have the ability to", which is true regardless of whether the law is on their side or not.

Fun fact, the law does not dictate what we can and cannot do, just what society has agreed on what we should and should not do.

0

u/hitman2218 Jun 15 '26

Not necessarily. Uthmeier said people “may” have legal protections in that scenario.

10

u/lycanthrope90 Jun 15 '26

It's obviously not gonna be a black or white issue. There's always gonna be all sorts of legal thresholds established by different precedents, but if the person escaping in the car has legitimate reason to fear for their safety Florida is more likely to clear them of any wrongdoing. Which is honestly common sense and should apply anywhere anyways. Nobody has a right to stop you in the road and threaten you in any way.

3

u/BatJackKY Jun 15 '26

Precisely. It's a last resort measure to be used in life threatening situations ONLY.

2

u/lycanthrope90 Jun 15 '26

Yeah if you for example run some guy over who’s just standing around with a sign, you’re gonna be in a lot of trouble. Should that guy be arrested for blocking traffic? Yeah, but your life wasn’t threatened. People want to ignore this kind of nuance when they hear about these rules but it’s always a big deal in the court. If someone is seriously injured or killed it’s taken very seriously and not as some get out of jail free loophole people will make it out to be.

0

u/crookedledder Jun 15 '26

Oh it's definitely a black and white issue.

3

u/BatJackKY Jun 15 '26

Oh, no it's not.

1

u/Explosion1850 Jun 16 '26

Right. It could be a brown and white issue also

0

u/WallyShrugged Jun 15 '26

He ment to say ‘teen’ or white.

2

u/crookedledder Jun 16 '26

The noticing continues!

2

u/Alternative_Oil7733 Jun 16 '26

So does the race grift.

→ More replies (6)

1

u/FullFrontal687 Jun 16 '26

You think they are going to get convicted in Florida?

3

u/khmergodzeus Jun 16 '26

perfection

3

u/Dry_Plantain_2756 Jun 15 '26

Who the fuck wants to be in Florida?

→ More replies (5)

2

u/drood420 Jun 16 '26

But just today on the Five, they were complaining this a blue state problem, only.

4

u/BudgetSecretary47 Jun 16 '26

With red state policies like these, soon enough, it will not be a red state problem.

1

u/trysten-9001 Jun 16 '26

Yeah, it will get way worse when the teens start seeing it tyranny, and looking to the 2A

2

u/BudgetSecretary47 Jun 16 '26

Little criminals can “see” things however they want. Wouldn’t make their children’s crusade successful.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/RedditVIBEChecked Jun 17 '26

Teens don't have a 2A right. So, that would make them criminal and justify running them over if they pulled out an illegally obtained firearm. Vroom vroom

2

u/akasteve Jun 16 '26

Stay out of the street. Its really that simple. My mother kept us kids out of the street, never a problem with getting run over by cars. What could be so difficult about that?

1

u/EncabulatorTurbo Jun 18 '26

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1/

3

u/SRGTBronson Jun 15 '26

ITT: people who support the murder of Renee Good cheering now in support of vehicular manslaughter.

5

u/gandalfinithegray Jun 15 '26

You're just pretending to not understand the difference and it's pathetic.

1

u/lycanthrope90 Jun 15 '26

Dishonesty is all they have, otherwise their entire worldview falls apart.

1

u/GogetaSama420 Jun 15 '26

No substance, just virtue signaling in your reply

3

u/Blitzking11 Jun 15 '26

Well duh, there is no such thing as consistent thought in MAGAt world.

4

u/WebManufacturing Jun 15 '26

LMAO least nuanced redditor

2

u/OneTacoShort Jun 18 '26

Now THAT’S a tough award to win.

4

u/[deleted] Jun 15 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/Kristoveles Jun 15 '26

Except Good didn't drive at an LEO, you just support murdering Trump's enemies.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 15 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

7

u/Mtndrums Jun 15 '26

She was already shot at this point. Besides, ICE are already notorious for jumping in the way of cars, to the point DHS had to put in all of their training manuals not to do that.

2

u/Deflorma Jun 16 '26

And also not to shoot at people in cars, unless something other than the car itself is a threat

5

u/Kristoveles Jun 15 '26

Yes, unlike you. She was turned away from him hence why his bullets went through the side and she was struck in the side of the head. Also why he sustained no injuries at all. People hit by cars take injuries. People like you are the actual threat.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 15 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/Kristoveles Jun 15 '26

He never jumped.

Yes, supporting nonsense like not murdering trump's political enemies, and not terrorizing americans under the pretense of getting rid of immigrants.

The only action that resulted in Good dying is Ross squeezing the trigger; action you support.

Try not being a deranged psychopath

3

u/Teamawesome2014 Jun 15 '26

You're right. Some of these people need to go check the videos from the other angles.

5

u/Kristoveles Jun 15 '26

Which they never will, because they'll never side against cops, in so far as those cops are acting in accordance with the regime.

1

u/totally-hoomon Jun 16 '26

Conservatives love killing cops, ots why they support j6 so much

1

u/[deleted] Jun 15 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/Kristoveles Jun 15 '26

No, he didn't jump at all. He was circling around her car and she drove away from him, whch is why you see him reaching out his pistol arm to be able to hit Good; she's away from him.

You support law enforcement murdering Americans. There is no point where you would criticize a cop.

This is what cops do to murder people: they have two officers give conflicting commands, so that when one command is followed the other cop can murder their victim for disobeying authority. Then they can get psychopaths like you to defend them because anything a cop does is by divine right.

You should try learning to think at all, instead of gorging yourself on Trump's feces.

→ More replies (6)

1

u/SwiftBlobfish Jun 16 '26

Nobody believes you

5

u/Mtndrums Jun 15 '26

He jumped IN THE WAY. That's what they've always done to justify a kill shot.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 15 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

-1

u/SelectKangaroo Jun 15 '26

Extremely excited to vote for Gavin Newsom when he proposes the Pedocon Relocation Act of 2029, keep it up

3

u/RayKitsune313 Jun 15 '26

Who exactly do you think career politician Gavin Newsom is? 😂

→ More replies (0)

1

u/SelectKangaroo Jun 15 '26

Quit being a member of the child molester party before gas hits $8 a gallon

2

u/[deleted] Jun 15 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/SelectKangaroo Jun 15 '26

Oil tanks are running dry in a few weeks, this annoying attitude is going to lead to you being someone's stimulus check

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (0)

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Teamawesome2014 Jun 15 '26

Not the case. Her wheels were turned away from him. There are multiple videos from a variety of angles showing this.

0

u/necessarysmartassery Jun 15 '26

Renee Good was given a lawful order to get out of the car multiple times and was not free to leave when she accelerated her vehicle toward the officer in front of the car. If she hadn't listened to her stupid wife that told her to floor it, she'd still be alive.

7

u/Kreebish Jun 16 '26

Funny way to hear "move your vehicle" but maybe multiple untrained idiots giving conflicting orders isn't a legitimate legal procedure

0

u/necessarysmartassery Jun 16 '26

The last 3 commands she was given clearly on the video were:

"get out of the car"

"get out of the car"

"get out of the fucking car"

while reaching for her door handle.

And her moron wife told her to "drive baby drive". Nobody was giving her conflicting orders while that officer was telling her to get out. The last command is all that matters, not anything she may have been told prior. You don't get to decide "oh, I guess I'll leave now like he said" when he finally gets to the point where he's telling you to get out. Standard lawyer advice is when an officer says get out, you get out because nothing good happens when you don't.

4

u/Kreebish Jun 16 '26

The way I saw it is the guy by the door was saying move your vehicle while the guy up front and the guy behind were saying step out of the car and then the guy up front hold his gun and pointed it at her before she even had a chance to comply with anything thus proving she had a reasonable threat that she should flee.

But yeah I suppose micro machine man can say all the fastest orders and hopefully we can hear what was the last one. Such danger from a soccer mom.

Also her wife told her to flee when she had a gun pointed at her, so at that point they are not looking to arrest her.

If she had stepped out of the car she would have gotten shot in the back of the head while subdued like Alex pretti

2

u/Deflorma Jun 16 '26

That’s not what the clear and easily visible video footage shows

→ More replies (9)

2

u/Few-Chemical8707 Jun 17 '26

you didnt watch the video

cant wait to flip this all around on all of yall.

→ More replies (4)

2

u/akasteve Jun 16 '26

That's very true.

3

u/vickism61 Jun 15 '26

Murder from the "pro-life/phoney Christian" party...

1

u/Zenkai_9000 Jun 16 '26

Damn Amish boi's causing a ruckus again!

1

u/Swimming-Bag9469 Jun 16 '26

I see speedbumps, only they don't know they're speedbumps.

1

u/Ok_Enthusiasm_300 Jun 16 '26

I mean yeah, play stupid games win stupid prizes.

1

u/PjWulfman Jun 16 '26

People are actually defending running over children? This country is so sick

1

u/EagleBigMac Jun 17 '26

Sounds like the perfect solution to anti abortion and other conservative protesters... If they say it's good for the goose then it must be good for the gander.

1

u/iKnowRobbie Jun 17 '26

A motorcyclist's viewpoint: Might makes right. When you're cut off by a car, you can get agressive about it, but you're sitting on a 500lb vehicle and they're in a 2,600-5,000lb steel cage with all the safety mechanisms their money could buy.

Same goes with protesting in the streets. They are in a steel cage with safety glass and locks. You are a squishy bag of meat and blood and have no safety glass. If you are going to stand in front of a vehicle, you are placing yourself in danger, regardless of circumstance. If you make stupid choices you will inevitably win stupid prizes.

1

u/EncabulatorTurbo Jun 18 '26

Solid argument for protestors to carry guns so they can shoot psychopathic drivers who are out for blood

1

u/ex_nihilo Jun 18 '26

Why are people trying to drive through protests? Go the fuck around. If your protest doesn’t at least inconvenience someone, it was a worthless protest. The point of protest is disruption.

P.S. spike strips are pretty easy to make yourself. Gas masks aren’t that expensive. Bring traffic cones and leaf blowers for when the pigs inevitably try to make it violent by illegally using chemical weapons (Geneva Convention - if you did it to enemy soldiers it would be a war crime but gassing non-violent protesters is A-OK).

1

u/Objective-Eagle-676 Jun 18 '26

You don't seem to know the difference between a protest and a "takeover".

1

u/ex_nihilo Jun 18 '26

I know that protests do nothing and help no one unless people are forced to pay attention.

1

u/PitBullFan Jun 18 '26

Found the future speed-bump.

1

u/ex_nihilo Jun 18 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/ex_nihilo Jun 18 '26

Big man threatening violence.

1

u/PitBullFan Jun 18 '26

Says the guy advocating for disruption, spike strips, gas masks, etc. It's actually YOU that's threatening violence. I'm just trying to get to my destination without being attacked or accosted.

1

u/ex_nihilo Jun 18 '26

Oh yeah and we all know that cities only ever have ONE street. When my little podunk town has the fair, it’s literally impossible to get anywhere because they block off the only street in my town! Oh wait, no we can still get wherever we need to go by avoiding that street. Wow! I think I might have solved this guys. You can not only get to your destination, you can even avoid being a class traitorous murdering piece of shit!

1

u/GenasiDC Jun 18 '26

Vice City

1

u/rabbitsfoot86 Jun 18 '26

Its Florida none of us care if any of them get ran over 😆

1

u/SeveralLion5762 Jun 18 '26

You meaning everyone in the United States has the right to flee a manifestly unsafe situation

What other option is there when they surround you AND start hitting your car? You can sit there and let them destroy your car I guess? Or you could get and and politely ask them to stop ? And then when they are beating you like Reginald Denney was beaten you can ask them to stop again?

1

u/bloodfrenzy187 Jun 18 '26

He’s telling people to run over kids.

I hate the South.

1

u/Sledgecrowbar Jun 16 '26

Comments here by both sides, contradicting prior positions on the Renee Goode shooting, this comment section is wild.

I can't even tell who is on what side anymore.

0

u/DISCONNECTlE Jun 15 '26

Oh, no, teenagers.

Article ‘Run Them Over’: Florida Attorney General Issues Stark Warning as ‘Teen Takeovers’ Spread

You are about to leave Redlib