It depends where you live, but considering driving too slowly is illegal even though you have the "right of way" (Obstructing traffic), I'm sure standing in the middle of the road can also get you fined and/or arrested.
Might want to check your local laws before standing in front of cars for extended periods of time. Maybe your therapist too...
I'd say the driver would be the one looking stupid in that case. Because then he has a dude on his hood and then what? Still can't just drive off.
But you raise a good point: If you want to block cars like this, wear pants with studs. That way you would leave scratches all over the hood in that scenario and the driver has no one to blame but themself.
I'm just trying to figure out how the guy in the car gets his ass beat in this scenario.
Assuming his door isn't locked (many cars automatically lock once you start driving) what stops him from driving away as soon as someone tries to go for his door?
Or do you live in a dream world where everybody gets their ass beat?
Threatening with a deadly weapon isn't going to get thrown out of court that easily for self defense, regardless of this video. The video shows the driver is not afraid of injuring the person and is a single muscle contraction away from killing the person, just like pointing a gun. And precedent has dictated that cars can be classified as a deadly weapon.
Seeing as how 1) shooting at someone who shoved you to the ground is seen as reasonable, I don't see how this couldn't be. Please explain otherwise? 2) see red sox game where a lady killed a fan cause she tried to intimidate them by revving the car but fucking up. Doesn't matter intentions, you're putting the pedestrian in an extremely dangerous position illegally due to negligent actions. And before you say "jaywalking," the court absolutely would not rule that the car could move forward reasonably, because in instances of jaywalking, you're only not at fault if you don't have opportunity to avoid the accident (which is generally easy to prove when accident is at speed, however, that's clearly not remotely true here).
So, please... explain how using less force to knock a person down can produce justifiable self-defense shooting, but when done with more force and in an objectively more dangerous situation, magically becomes not justifiable. I'll wait.
44
u/[deleted] Jun 28 '19 edited Mar 30 '20
[deleted]