HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Riverside protesters stru...

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 10:01 PM

 

Riverside protesters struck in hit-and-run

Source: ABC News (Los Angeles affiliate)

A Riverside protest over recent police killings in Ferguson, Missouri and New York spun out of control, when a BMW pushed through the crowd and struck a handful of protesters Saturday evening, Riverside police said.

About 50 people were blocking Mission Inn Avenue at about 7 p.m. during the city's Festival of Lights, an annual five-week attraction on Main Street Riverside that includes holiday decorations, lights, an ice skating rink and other entertainment, when the driver plowed through and drove off.

~snip~

"A guy was just honking at us and honking," protester Mariah McCoy said. "We wouldn't move because we were chanting, and he just sped over and hit me on my leg, but I was able to move before he hit my whole body."

Riverside police were searching for a dark-colored BMW involved in the hit-and-run. A report filed by the victims claimed they had their toes run over, officials said. None of the protesters had any major injuries.

~Continues at link.

Read more: http://abc7.com/news/riverside-protesters-struck-in-hit-and-run/425438/



Other broadcast reports say that protesters got the license plate info of the Nazi-mobile. I hope the Riverside, CA County DA throws the book at the driver for felony assault with a deadly weapon and leaving the scene of an accident.

Readers are advised to peruse the comments with caution, as you will see some really puerile right-wing sentiments there.

45 replies, 5029 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 45 replies Author Time Post
Reply Riverside protesters struck in hit-and-run (Original post)
KingCharlemagne Dec 2014 OP
Miigwech Dec 2014 #1
KingCharlemagne Dec 2014 #3
Miigwech Dec 2014 #6
KingCharlemagne Dec 2014 #7
Miigwech Dec 2014 #25
marym625 Dec 2014 #2
Thor_MN Dec 2014 #10
marym625 Dec 2014 #14
Yo_Mama Dec 2014 #4
KingCharlemagne Dec 2014 #5
Yo_Mama Dec 2014 #8
KingCharlemagne Dec 2014 #11
Yo_Mama Dec 2014 #21
marym625 Dec 2014 #15
Downwinder Dec 2014 #9
Yo_Mama Dec 2014 #13
7962 Dec 2014 #19
Yo_Mama Dec 2014 #23
C Moon Dec 2014 #31
Codeine Dec 2014 #36
Yo_Mama Dec 2014 #37
marym625 Dec 2014 #16
Xithras Dec 2014 #44
Thor_MN Dec 2014 #12
Maynar Dec 2014 #26
Thor_MN Dec 2014 #45
progree Dec 2014 #28
yeoman6987 Dec 2014 #17
NutmegYankee Dec 2014 #18
KingCharlemagne Dec 2014 #32
Spitfire of ATJ Dec 2014 #20
KingCharlemagne Dec 2014 #33
Spitfire of ATJ Dec 2014 #38
KingCharlemagne Dec 2014 #40
PeteSelman Dec 2014 #22
7962 Dec 2014 #24
Snow Leopard Dec 2014 #27
KingCharlemagne Dec 2014 #35
KingCharlemagne Dec 2014 #34
blackspade Dec 2014 #29
micraphone Dec 2014 #30
Sunlei Dec 2014 #39
ManiacJoe Dec 2014 #41
Sunlei Dec 2014 #42
ManiacJoe Dec 2014 #43

Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 10:12 PM

1. Now what?

 

"Stand your ground" --- using a vehicle? Excuse ... "I felt my life was in danger by these protesters"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Miigwech (Reply #1)

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 10:32 PM

3. The reason I cautioned readers about the Comments section is that several

 

comments insinuated or openly stated that the protesters 'deserved' to be hit.

Of course, had the protesters seized the driver and strung him up, those same commenters would be pissing and moaning about viligantiism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Reply #3)

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 10:56 PM

6. What are you saying?

 

I am using sarcasm here. I am in no way saying anything but that the idiot that hit innocent civilians might claim an excuse that has been used by police and/or, for example, George Zimmerman, where no reasonable person would ever agree to "stand your ground" excuse ... please!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Miigwech (Reply #6)

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 10:59 PM

7. I got your sarcasm loud and clear and was trying to validate it by referencing the

 

idiocy of some similar commenters in the comments section (who were arguing that the driver had a right to 'stand his ground' against the protesters in his vehicle).

Argh, sometimes communicating on the internet gets really complicated; I think i may have somehow given you the wrong impression when I actually agree with you 100%.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Reply #7)

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 11:50 PM

25. Sorry

 

Everything is cool ..... I took your message the wrong way. Peace.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 10:18 PM

2. When a Minneapolis guy

Ran over a 16 year old at a protest, the driver was called a victim by the cops. On 2 different videos too

Update and good news for once

http://m.greenfieldreporter.com/view/story/901c9868210d4167a3621ec74e5e19e8/MN--Ferguson-Minnesota-Driver

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marym625 (Reply #2)

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 11:16 PM

10. They have not as yet, charged him.

 

His claim of escaping from a mob is like throwing the first punch and then claiming self defense...

I will give him the slightest shred of credit for calling 911, but then complaining of damage to your car after hitting several people...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thor_MN (Reply #10)

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 11:23 PM

14. and the girl ended up in the hospital

It's better than at first when cops called him a victim. It's a start

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 10:46 PM

4. Protesters were perhaps guilty of crimes here.

Apparently pounding on a car?

If the car was trapped by the protesters so that it could not move, I believe that it's a felony under CA code? It probably depends on whether the car had another way out. Protesters don't have the right to unlawfully detain other people.

And it was a push-through, not a hit and run. Nor is there any legal obligation to stop if the driver reasonably believes doing so may place his or her in danger.

This is more complicated than apparently you think, depending on all the circs. Anyone's right to protest ends when it involves denying other persons' civil liberties.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama (Reply #4)

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 10:48 PM

5. Are you a cop? - nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Reply #5)

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 11:08 PM

8. Heck no, don't like them, won't call them except if the situation is extremely dangerous

because I don't trust them.

Is this the same incident?
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2014/12/06/police-confirm-hit-and-run-outside-mission-inns-festival-of-lights-in-riverside/

I wouldn't encourage protesters to do this - it's basically dangerous. And if someone gets stuck and can't get out and has a heart attack and dies, they can be charged with felony murder in most states.

The thing is that that when you are standing on the ground, you never know everything that's going on. This could have been a jerk that just didn't care, or someone who was frightened and trying to get out, or someone who NEEDED to get out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama (Reply #8)

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 11:19 PM

11. Well, it sure sounded as though you were blaming the victims (the

 

protesters who were struck by the hit-and-run driver). The only people who are doing that (victim blaming) right now are cops, copologists or outright racists. Both your link and my link mention that the driver was honking at the protesters, then gunned his engine and just bowled into them. There's no way that constitutes 'self defense' or 'exigent circumstances.'

So what's your interest in backing this driver?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Reply #11)

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 11:44 PM

21. "Perhaps"???

If you do wall someone in it is unlawful detainment or false imprisonment or some such charge in all states.

But I'm not blaming them. If there was another way out I don't think it was unlawful - maybe jaywalking, but not even really that because wasn't this a festival in which I assume people do walk on the streets?

But I am sure there is video and so forth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama (Reply #8)

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 11:26 PM

15. Have to prove danger

If no one was causing any damage or attacking and other vehicles didn't do the same, pretty hard to prove.

And the guy in Minneapolis was deliberately running over protesters

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama (Reply #4)

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 11:10 PM

9. I can remember a CA in my lifetime where

pedestrians had an absolute right-of-way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Downwinder (Reply #9)

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 11:20 PM

13. Yes and no.

They absolutely do not have the right to shut down public thoroughfares for hours. A right of way doesn't allow blocking of the way except in transit.

Any single person who goes and stands on a public street for hours blocking traffic will be arrested under CA law.

I can't find any actual information about what happened in this incident enough to know whether the driver could be charged. There must have been plenty of witnesses, you would think some of them officers, and certainly cell phone video??? I'm sure the cops will find the car - proving who drove it might be difficult.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama (Reply #13)

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 11:40 PM

19. Stay out of the damn road. Stupid. It doesnt further the goal of the protest.

 

And the continuation of blocking roads, taking over stores, blocking bridges, does NOT help get more people on your side.
Look at the video of this guy in Ferguson fears he may lose his job because of the protestors. And he's on their side!!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2853714/I-got-six-kids-feed-going-fired-Moment-angry-father-three-jobs-took-students-blocking-highway-Ferguson-protest.html

this type of stuff NEVER gets more people supporting you. It just becomes a protest to disrupt, not inform.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 7962 (Reply #19)

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 11:47 PM

23. Depends on circs, but you never, never want to trap people.

Also for safety. I think you can get permits to hold such demos, if police can safely shut down traffic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama (Reply #23)

Mon Dec 8, 2014, 02:07 AM

31. If they were slamming on a car, surrounding it...yeah, that's not the right thing to do.

The person would probably fear for their life and hit the accelerator. Fight or flight.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama (Reply #13)

Mon Dec 8, 2014, 07:49 AM

36. It wasn't hours.

 

It was a short blockage during the hugely crowded Festival of Lights, which snarls up traffic on University Avenue and on Mission Inn Drive anyway. After making a quick nuisance of themselves the protesters cleared one lane in either direction because the festival crowd was turning ugly and making it clear that they were hijacking what is traditionally a very family-friendly atmosphere. Mr. Road Rage decided to act like a dick and shove through.

Anybody driving those streets this time of year is going to get held up by the Festival of Lights crowd anyway; pedestrians, horse carriages, and idiots looking for parking make it quite the snarl. This protest just extended the hold-up a bit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Codeine (Reply #36)

Mon Dec 8, 2014, 12:08 PM

37. Thank you!!! That's the sort of info I was looking for.

And of course, could not get from any of the news reporting. I looked up a bunch of stories.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Downwinder (Reply #9)

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 11:28 PM

16. yep

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Downwinder (Reply #9)

Mon Dec 8, 2014, 05:13 PM

44. While the belief is common, I don't know that the law ever actually said that.

21950. (a) The driver of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way to
a pedestrian crossing the roadway within any marked crosswalk or
within any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection, except as otherwise
provided in this chapter.
(b) This section does not relieve a pedestrian from the duty of
using due care for his or her safety. No pedestrian may suddenly
leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path
of a vehicle that is so close as to constitute an immediate hazard.
No pedestrian may unnecessarily stop or delay traffic while in a
marked or unmarked crosswalk.


...

21954. (a) Every pedestrian upon a roadway at any point other than
within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an
intersection shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the
roadway so near as to constitute an immediate hazard.


A quick search shows that 21954 has been cited in cases going all the way back to the early 1960's, so it's been around for at least that long. And I was personally cited for violating 21950 (impeding traffic) during a Redwood Summer protest, which was nearly 25 years ago.

Both of those laws have additional clauses requiring drivers to exercise due diligence, but the law doesn't actually give pedestrians any particular right of way outside of crosswalks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama (Reply #4)

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 11:19 PM

12. "Push through" is hitting pedestrians with a deadly weapon.

 

Not stopping after hitting a pedestrian with your car is leaving the scene of an accident.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thor_MN (Reply #12)

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 11:53 PM

26. In this circumstance

I might characterize it as "leaving the scene of an intentional."

Since he deliberately assulted people with his vehicle.

Just my 2 cents.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maynar (Reply #26)

Mon Dec 8, 2014, 11:44 PM

45. I haven't seen any video of the Riverside one, but the Lake St. in Minneapolis was intentional

 

I don't have a single doubt that the driver is guilty in the Minneapolis hit and run.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 8, 2014, 12:35 AM

28. "it was a push through, not a hit and run"

Last edited Mon Dec 8, 2014, 01:44 AM - Edit history (1)

You've got quite a way with words!

He plowed right into the crowd at a considerable speed -- too fast for people in the middle to see what was happening and get out of the way, for sure.



[font color = red]On Edit:[/font] I thought you were talking about the Minneapolis Nov. 25 one, which is what's in the video above. Later I noticed your comment was directed at the OP, which is about the Riverside one. I looked at the video in the OP, it doesn't show the vehicle at all, so I can't comment with certainty whether it was a "push through", whatever that is. But any vehicle going into a crowd at faster than 1/2 mph without advance notice is very dangerous! People in the middle of even a small bunch of people have almost no mobility.

As for some of the comments here -- I don't believe in deliberately blocking freeways or intersections either. But more generally, when there is a march of more than a few dozen, the crowd has a momentum, and its impossible for someone in the middle of the crowd to do anything but march along, at least in a short amount of time -- it takes someone in the middle some time to work their way to the outside of the crowd and escape. But if the march is orderly -- marshalls and police blocking off intersections while the crowd marches through -- that's First Amendment to me. Just like regular parades.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 11:30 PM

17. I am thankful more of this doesn't happen

 

Especially with protesters on the highway with cars going 80MPH. We seriously are lucky nobody has been killed especially on the highway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 11:34 PM

18. I knew this was going to start happening.

There was a psychology study a few years back about how people often act far more aggressive behind the wheel than they would if they were on foot. My fear was a few people would get enraged and smash through a crowd of protesters.

This is why I don't support blocking roads, but do support clogging malls and government centers. Protest please, but do so in ways that don't put yourself in danger.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NutmegYankee (Reply #18)

Mon Dec 8, 2014, 07:38 AM

32. During the Iraq War, whille I was participating in my neighborhood (at the time) peace

 

vigil in Palms, CA (corner of Palms and McLaughlin), one of those big SUV land yachts (Escalade, Hummer, Naviagator, etc.) made a right turn at a very high rate of speed, went up on the curb and almost struck 1-2 of my fellow vigillers. To this day, I remain convinced that they made a deliberate attempt to assault or at least frighten us into not exercising our First Amendment rights.

Moral of the story: you don't have to be "blocking roads" to be assaulted by a motor vehicle, expecially one driven by a crazed lumpenproletariat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 11:43 PM

20. "you will see some really puerile right-wing sentiments there."

 

Don't you mean "glee" or "gloating"?

Hell, those idiots probably believe the cops are on their side too.

(The sad thing is that many are)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spitfire of ATJ (Reply #20)

Mon Dec 8, 2014, 07:40 AM

33. It's getting to be like Bleeding Kansas out there, sides drawn and

 

possibilities for political compromise narrowing dramatically.

Those same gleeful gloaters you reference would have been in high dudgeon were protesters to have forcibly removed driver from car and subjected him to some people's justice on the spot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Reply #33)

Mon Dec 8, 2014, 02:32 PM

38. Things went there under Bush. Remember this?

 



For YEARS I have seen a section of the population pumped full of hate and waiting for the "go" order.

They have a fantasy of mass extermination that extends to the entire PLANET. Real "Turner Diaries" stuff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spitfire of ATJ (Reply #38)

Mon Dec 8, 2014, 03:46 PM

40. I never saw that particular piece of filth, but it doesn't surprise me. Even though

 

it functions as a dog whistle to stochastic terrorists who hide among us in plain sight, its creators can always say "We were just joking" if anyone calls them out on it. Same with the folks I used to bump into who would say gays should be interned and executed. When called on that, it was always, "We were just joking."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 11:45 PM

22. "We couldn't move because we were chanting..."

I don't agree with running people over but this is a pretty stupid reason for not moving.

It was only a matter of time before this started happening. I don't think you're bringing people to your cause by stopping them from getting where they need to go.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PeteSelman (Reply #22)

Sun Dec 7, 2014, 11:49 PM

24. +1000 its ridiculous.

 

I guess they cant walk and talk at the same time?
And your last sentence is spot on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PeteSelman (Reply #22)

Mon Dec 8, 2014, 12:05 AM

27. Yep

 

Not like the guy just willy nilly ran them down. I'm betting a few were trying to provoke the driver.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Snow Leopard (Reply #27)

Mon Dec 8, 2014, 07:49 AM

35. The testimony from eyewitnesses directly refutes your wager. The guy was

 

sitting there, according to eyewitnesses, then started honking his horn, gunned his motor and bowled into the crowd. How is that "provoke the driver"?

Oh, wait, the eyewitnesses are people of color and leftists, so their version doesn't count. See Fergsuon Grand Jury.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PeteSelman (Reply #22)

Mon Dec 8, 2014, 07:46 AM

34. See Progree's comment in post #28. Often protesters in the middle of a

 

crowd have no practical mobility.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Mon Dec 8, 2014, 01:26 AM

29. Another one?

These people are fucked in the head.
Plowing into a crowd of protestors? Stupid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Mon Dec 8, 2014, 01:36 AM

30. It was deliberate

As I wrote here http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=953057

At the start of the video, you clearly see this moran driving around a stationary car to hit the protesters.

Book, meet driver.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Original post)

Mon Dec 8, 2014, 03:24 PM

39. pedestrians have the right of way, even when they're crossing illegally

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sunlei (Reply #39)

Mon Dec 8, 2014, 04:03 PM

41. That would be highly dependent on you state laws

In WA state, pedestrians are only golden if they are in the crosswalk and obeying the signals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ManiacJoe (Reply #41)

Mon Dec 8, 2014, 04:40 PM

42. even WA. requires drivers have 'due care'

"every driver of a vehicle shall exercise due care to avoid colliding with any pedestrian upon any roadway"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sunlei (Reply #42)

Mon Dec 8, 2014, 04:49 PM

43. While true,

that still does not come close to suggesting that the pedestrians have the right of way in all cases. When the pedestrian is at fault, the pedestrian is at fault.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread