Getting real tired of your shit

...or put someone in the hospital

Well he could've picked up a few of these guys and taken them to the hospital as well...

Yeah but this was a bit harsh. I would drive at a steady pace so they have time to get out of the way. If not, that's natural selection.

He didn't speed up while he was approaching them though, just maintained his speed.

And a bunch of them actually looked like they went in the way on purpose.

Those are the most fucked up ones. Luckily in both ways, because there is a video of them jumping in front of the car.

You are seeing his angle change. from the looks of it, he was stuck behind the other car in the gif and decided to go around him. i would guess he making somewhere between 5-10 mph from when he enters the frame to when he hits the line.

Or get to their jobs at the hospital

The best I could do.

awesome


like daffydills

awesome

damn, why did your gif loaded faster than the post and looped more than once

could you give it starpower as well?

Yes

you should of added OC to the stopped car and repost to the moving one

hypnotoadtrance!!! we know you're unemployed and have nothing better to do.

If people just sit silently on the sidelines like an obedient dog no one will listen, cause they have no reason to.

To be heard, you need to scream.

Those people were probably screaming a lot after they got run over

then scream on the fucking sidewalk like a normal protester

Yes, because all protesters are supposed to keep the infrastructure from working, because they disagree with something?

The best way to be heard is to get an innocent bystander fired and associate your cause with annoyance.

A busload?

**betesta rolls 20** And this is where the dubs used to be.

I lol'd so hard when he knocked the bucket off and there was another one under it

me too, that was the funniest thing that happened to me today.

Except you wouldn't have the balls, pathetic keyboard lion

Well, it would involve learning how to drive. Which I should have started last year.

And yeah, I'm pretty confidant if when faced with that prospect that I'd do exactly the same as the guy in the content. You need to stop generalizing everybody on the internet as some autistic 12 year old.

Yeah ok, I'm looking forward to your murder trial.

When it's my safety against the safety of others. I will always choose my safety.

The law will see it as choosing to hit people, as the safest action for you would be to sit there. I do think they deserved that though.

The law only requires subjective recklessness.
If I saw my action as self defense due to my knowledge of people getting dragged out of cars and beaten half to death at protests then that would have to be taken into account.
I don't feel a jury would be sympathetic to the protesters if they understood that my reaction was proportionate to the level of threat I was feeling.

What you are talking about is called preemptive action, it is considered a baseless defense in court. The prosecutor would ream you in to next Tuesday mercilessly and you'd be found guilty of attempted murder, reckless endangerment and assault with a deadly weapon.

What are you talking about ?
Pre-emptive striking is fully legal;

"There is no rule in law to say that a person must wait to be struck first before they may defend themselves, (see R v Deana, 2 Cr App R 75). "

No, but, there has to be probable cause for defense. "Some people get pulled out of cars" is not probable cause. It is a paranoid assumption and will be treated as such. Now If someone was heading towards your car in an aggressive manner, by all means, defend yourself. But without probable cause, you will be considered the aggressor.

Palmer v R 1971 AC 814);

" It will be recognised that a person defending himself cannot weigh to a nicety the exact measure of his defensive action. If the jury thought that that in a moment of unexpected anguish a person attacked had only done what he honestly and instinctively thought necessary, that would be the most potent evidence that only reasonable defensive action had been taken ...

You just proved my point for me, thanks mate. "a person attacked" not a person assuming the could be attacked. Anyone can assume the can be attacked at anytime. I could assume the person walking past my house right now is planning to break in and steal my stuff at gun point, that doesn't give me the right to run out there and beat him shitless. There has to be proof that you were actually under threat.

That's where the subjective recklessness is concerned.
As long as I had knowledge of people being dragged from cars then that will be taken into account. That's a qualifying trigger for self defense.

It really doesn't though, like I said, it is a paranoid assumption which will quickly get you convicted. Proof of that, The case about the murder of travon Martin, the man that killed him, assumed he was up to no good and when Travon tried to get away when contronted, he killed him because he assumed Travon would do something against him, that dude (I can't remember his name) is in prison now. Now back to the scenario we are talking about, the protestors are just walking back and forth in the way of traffic (annoying as shit, but not a danger), none of them are even paying attention to they guy that hit them until he pulls up to run his way through. The only anguish in that situation is coming from the two people being ran over.

>MFW double bucket action

me

what is that from?

Sorry I don't know :/

I second the motion to reveal sauce

shitheads deserved it, I got places to be.

And this is a reason to run over people
really
thanks god I don't have to ovetake you guys