Charlottesville Driver May have Been Panicked into Losing Control of His Car

[hadit]

It's possible. Hard to tell the way "shatterproof" glass spreads the shock. But clearly he sets up, accelerates (which is in no way necessary for "defense" if you're already inside a steel car), crashes into the car and pedestrian, suspiciously without the air bags going off, and then puts it in reverse and tears back up the road. And reportedly was watching and "casing" the street before he did it.

Yea, Pogo, 'cause if a mob has been attacking you, even after you get into your car, the last thing you'd do is speed off in your car. It's no wonder we call them "libtards."

If this boy wanted to hurt someone, he would have rammed the libtards, not another car. But, maybe your bigotry gives you incite I don't have. Do you think this boy disconnected his air bags in planning to ram another car and possibly give himself whiplash?

That's exactly what I think, minus the whiplash. After all ramming your car into a crowded street doesn't exactly indicate the brightest bulb in the light tower does it.

Disabling the air bags means he knew before doing it he was going to deliberately plow into something. And that's premeditation. Which blows the ridiculous theory of the OP into the tiny shards of hapless apologism that it is.

Trust me, the prosecution will be all over that if he tries to plead "panic".

Then of course there's leaving the scene. Ain't no way around that.

There's also this, as long as we're required to play Captain Obvious ---
A "mob" can't "attack you" if you aren't even in their vicinity until you ram your car into them.

It has to proven that he deliberately disabled the airbags.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[hadit]

The bottom line remains, though, that violent counter protesting has become mainstream in America. This will not stop, but will only accelerate. More people will die.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I see the Nazi sympathizer defense force is still active.

We've all hit the gas accidentally before. But we've never plowed into a crowd of people. You generally immediately stop before going at full speed.

The driver drove at full speed into that crowd and then backed up.

Even if he did accidentally hit that crowd of people, its still a hit a run with a charge of manslaughter.

Why did he back up after hitting all those people?

Maybe it had something to do with the terrorist on his car smashing in the rear window with a deadly weapon.

So the solution is to ram your car into a crowd of people?

If you feel threatened yes.

That would be similar to randomly firing a machine gun into a crowd because one guy pulled a knife on you. You could get sympathy for brandishing a gun, but not for trying to kill as many as possible. Using your car as a deadly weapon is hard to defend.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That has to be the stupidest analogy I've ever heard.

 

[hadit]

I'm sorry, but I'm a right winger that at this time can see little defense of what the guy did. As a driver, when you see a crowd of people in the street in front of you, especially when you know violent demonstrators are in the area, stop. That's it, stop and back up or turn around. You have no justification for approaching the crowd at any speed. You're driving a car, you have the responsibility to avoid hitting people. At the very least, this kid is not mature enough to have a license to drive.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[hadit]

I have been watching a series on Netflix about string theory, which says that if it is true, then there must be 11 other invisible dimensions, and possible alternative universes. This thread seems to have drifted over from one of those universes, with the RW figuring out how this guy who was photographed carrying a shield, and chanting white supremacist slogans, whose teacher says was fascinated with Hitler, managed to accidently run his car into anti-white supremacy protesters. I leave you here, secure in the knowledge that, while in this universe, up is down, and airbags don't deploy at 65 MPH crashes with deer, I will return home to where rational thinking prevails, and my airbag deployed at a 20 MPH argument with a yearling in Redwood National Park.

I've had an airbag deploy from getting hit on the side of my car and not deploying from hitting a deer head on at normal speeds. Unless it's proven that de deliberately disabled them, it's not much to argue over.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[hadit]

I didn’t expect to have to compliment the KKK for having the good sense to wear hoods.

Even the makers of the Tiki Torches that they use has made it clear they do not approve.

Trump CREATED them.

They are his children.

There’s a reason someone initially declines to condemn white supremacist groups then waits a full 48 hours to do so and Trump statement was a direct reflection of the fact that his chief strategist, Steve Bannon, is an alt-right white supremacist sympathizer.

Yeah sure Trump called white supremacists ‘repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans.’

Big words don

But notice he ain't talked about punishing them ?

Why ?

Because Trump’s entire administration is filled with well-placed promoters of white supremacy, Bannon is just the tip of the iceberg.

See when it comes to black people (unarmed black people) protesting

We get the real deal.

He was right, however, to condemn violence in general. This won't stop and more people will die, because the groups that tangled are two sides of the same violent coin, they just have different things to complain about.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Montrovant]

bgrouse, post: 17939182

So I guess your "peaceful college town" filled with peaceful liberals who cherish "diversity and higher education" are so violent they would beat someone's brains in for holding an unpopular belief.

An 'unpopular belief'? There is no violence if the Nazis don't show up.

It's like saying there would have been no jews killed in Germany if they all moved to Madagascar!

I don't condone any kind of violence. The point is Nazis did their share of beating brains in.

The point is that has nothing to do with this discussion. The liberals were the ones being violent here. Yes, your peace loving, ultra tolerant, college-educated liberals.

You make excuses for a murderous Nazi coward who pleasures himself by marching around with other likeminded goons that would annihilate entire races and religions if they had enough numbers. That is if their beliefs became popular.

Instead of discussing hypothetical situations involving hypothetical Nazis and hypothetical numbers, why don't we stick to the topic and discuss your ACTUALLY violent liberals?

The liberals were the ones being violent? So the white nationalists weren't being violent, then?

 

[hadit]

If you feel threatened yes.

That would be similar to randomly firing a machine gun into a crowd because one guy pulled a knife on you. You could get sympathy for brandishing a gun, but not for trying to kill as many as possible. Using your car as a deadly weapon is hard to defend.

If one is surrounded by a hostile crowd and your ability to move out of it is blocked by these people, you have the right to plaow through them toprotect your life.

That is a legal fact in most states.

These people do not have the right to stand in the streets and prevent you from moving.

That is the equivalent of unlawful detainment.

Of course, but he had ample opportunity to avoid the situation in the first place.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[hadit]

I see the Nazi sympathizer defense force is still active.

We've all hit the gas accidentally before. But we've never plowed into a crowd of people. You generally immediately stop before going at full speed.

The driver drove at full speed into that crowd and then backed up.

Even if he did accidentally hit that crowd of people, its still a hit a run with a charge of manslaughter.

Why did he back up after hitting all those people?

Maybe it had something to do with the terrorist on his car smashing in the rear window with a deadly weapon.

So the solution is to ram your car into a crowd of people?

If you feel threatened yes.

That would be similar to randomly firing a machine gun into a crowd because one guy pulled a knife on you. You could get sympathy for brandishing a gun, but not for trying to kill as many as possible. Using your car as a deadly weapon is hard to defend.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That has to be the stupidest analogy I've ever heard.

I'm sure you've heard stupider, or you haven't been on this board for long.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JimBowie1958]

Of course, but he had ample opportunity to avoid the situation in the first place.

Yes, and that argument can be used for anyone that uses lethal force in self defense, 'He could have not gone to Charlottesville!'

 

[hadit]

Of course, but he had ample opportunity to avoid the situation in the first place.

Yes, and that argument can be used for anyone that uses lethal force in self defense, 'He could have not gone to Charlottesville!'

Not as ridiculous as that, because he had every right to assume he could join a legal protest without fear of attack from violent leftists. Like I said, however, when you see a group of people in the street in front of you, stop. How much simpler does it have to be?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Maybe it had something to do with the terrorist on his car smashing in the rear window with a deadly weapon.

So the solution is to ram your car into a crowd of people?

If you feel threatened yes.

That would be similar to randomly firing a machine gun into a crowd because one guy pulled a knife on you. You could get sympathy for brandishing a gun, but not for trying to kill as many as possible. Using your car as a deadly weapon is hard to defend.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That has to be the stupidest analogy I've ever heard.

I'm sure you've heard stupider, or you haven't been on this board for long.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's a terrible analogy.

 

[hadit]

So the solution is to ram your car into a crowd of people?

If you feel threatened yes.

That would be similar to randomly firing a machine gun into a crowd because one guy pulled a knife on you. You could get sympathy for brandishing a gun, but not for trying to kill as many as possible. Using your car as a deadly weapon is hard to defend.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That has to be the stupidest analogy I've ever heard.

I'm sure you've heard stupider, or you haven't been on this board for long.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's a terrible analogy.

Still a stupid thing to do.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Pogo]

Of course, but he had ample opportunity to avoid the situation in the first place.

Yes, and that argument can be used for anyone that uses lethal force in self defense, 'He could have not gone to Charlottesville!'

Not as ridiculous as that, because he had every right to assume he could join a legal protest without fear of attack from violent leftists. Like I said, however, when you see a group of people in the street in front of you, stop. How much simpler does it have to be?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

WHO "joins a legal protest" by ramming his car directly into it??

And WHO has a right to expect he can run people over --- in two directions --- "without fear of attack" in retaliation?

And WHAT THE FUCK does "leftist" have to do with anything when you're being run over with that car?

Might could be that you need to think your posts through rather than "sending from your iPhone using Tapatalk" during TV commercials.

 

[Pogo]

I have been watching a series on Netflix about string theory, which says that if it is true, then there must be 11 other invisible dimensions, and possible alternative universes. This thread seems to have drifted over from one of those universes, with the RW figuring out how this guy who was photographed carrying a shield, and chanting white supremacist slogans, whose teacher says was fascinated with Hitler, managed to accidently run his car into anti-white supremacy protesters. I leave you here, secure in the knowledge that, while in this universe, up is down, and airbags don't deploy at 65 MPH crashes with deer, I will return home to where rational thinking prevails, and my airbag deployed at a 20 MPH argument with a yearling in Redwood National Park.

I've had an airbag deploy from getting hit on the side of my car and not deploying from hitting a deer head on at normal speeds. Unless it's proven that de deliberately disabled them, it's not much to argue over.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm sure that's already been looked into. I'm just saying it should be, because it's significant.

That is --- IF the kid is dense enough to try to use the ridiculous premise of this thread as a defense, which is a big IF.

 

[Pogo]

I know this will not even penetrate into the minds of our SJWs who just wanna have ANY reason at all to hate some random white guy, but it seems that the driver was hit with a bat and that might have panicked him.

It might be that the driver in Charlottesville was panicked into losing control of his car, and did not intentionally run his car into the crowd.
VIDEO: Protesters Attacked Charlottesville Driver's Car With Baseball Bat

Sorry but I watched the video from the start and the cave monkey accelerated way before the car was attacked. His acceleration is what caused the guy to take a swing.

Thanks. The OP's video was in slow mo, making it appear that the guy was proceeding at a crawl to get through the group when his car got hit with the bat. I was wondering why they would hit his car to begin with--unless he was wearing his hood, how would they know whose side he was on-- but the fact that he was plowing through them like a driver from New Jersey would answer that question.

Actually that would be a driver from Connecticut. A New Jersey driver would just be lost with no sense of direction whatsoever.

 

[Pogo]

If you feel threatened yes.

That would be similar to randomly firing a machine gun into a crowd because one guy pulled a knife on you. You could get sympathy for brandishing a gun, but not for trying to kill as many as possible. Using your car as a deadly weapon is hard to defend.

If one is surrounded by a hostile crowd and your ability to move out of it is blocked by these people, you have the right to plaow through them toprotect your life.

That is a legal fact in most states.

These people do not have the right to stand in the streets and prevent you from moving.

That is the equivalent of unlawful detainment.

There is no state or municipality where you can legally "plaow" through people and/or crush them and then use that as an excuse for their being hostile. Let alone "blocking" them (as if a human can "block" a Dodge Challenger that is in the process of running them over in two directions).

*NOR* is there a state or municipality where you can just take off after smashing into another vehicle and killing a pedestrian.

Go ahead --- try to prove me wrong. I didn't even look this up.

 

[OldLady]

I know this will not even penetrate into the minds of our SJWs who just wanna have ANY reason at all to hate some random white guy, but it seems that the driver was hit with a bat and that might have panicked him.

It might be that the driver in Charlottesville was panicked into losing control of his car, and did not intentionally run his car into the crowd.
VIDEO: Protesters Attacked Charlottesville Driver's Car With Baseball Bat

Sorry but I watched the video from the start and the cave monkey accelerated way before the car was attacked. His acceleration is what caused the guy to take a swing.

Thanks. The OP's video was in slow mo, making it appear that the guy was proceeding at a crawl to get through the group when his car got hit with the bat. I was wondering why they would hit his car to begin with--unless he was wearing his hood, how would they know whose side he was on-- but the fact that he was plowing through them like a driver from New Jersey would answer that question.

Actually that would be a driver from Connecticut. A New Jersey driver would just be lost with no sense of direction whatsoever.

NOT SO, oh Great One. Connecticut drivers are far more technically savvy than to mess up their paint job by plowing into a crowd. NJ drivers are second only to Mass for driving like maniacal assholes; particularly NJ drivers in Porsches.

 

[Pogo]

[...]

There's only one reason a car's airbags would not deploy upon a head-on crash like that, and that is that they were deliberately disabled before the crash. It's clear from the front shot of the car, after the collision, that no air bags deployed.

That tells us he disabled them beforehand, and that in turn tells us his collision was premeditated. And THAT in turn mops the floor with the ridiculously desperate premise of this thread hoping against hope to find an excuse for this terrorist asshole.

And you'll notice that the OP who started it ran away. Which is coincidentally, probably your best option at this point. Unless of course you'd like to grow a pair and admit you were engaging in the same apologism.

Why would he disable the airbags?

And the fact that he did not remove or otherwise alter his license plates raises serious question about premeditation.

I've already explained like six times why he would disable the air bags and why it matters if he did.

The fact that he didn't remove or cover his license plates --- or wear a disguise, or decline to be photographed earlier chanting racist memes with a Vanguard shield, or not have a Nosebook page festooned with Nazi shit or have a history going back to high school of what's been called "infatuation with Nazis" --- means that he obviously didn't think of everything and obviously isn't the sharpest knife in the proverbial drawer.

Disabling the air bags takes a few seconds and can easily have been thought of just prior to the attack, independent of all of the above. The air bag switch and indicator is right in front of the driver; the license plate is not.

• Sit on perch casing the street, assess what one sees.... a straight street with people at the end one defines as "the enemy"....
• Muse that "if I just gun it from here to there, I can take me out some Liburruls"... then I'll slam it into reverse and get away"....
  
• Further muse that "if I run into that car my air bag will be all up in my face and smother me, that will make it hard to see, better kill that"
• Disable air bag
• Hit gas

The rest is bloody history.

 

[Pogo]

The point is that has nothing to do with this discussion. The liberals were the ones being violent here. Yes, your peace loving, ultra tolerant, college-educated liberals.

Link to James Fields' "college education" is where?

We know all about his Nazi infatuation gong back to high school, so that rules out "Liberal" but that's high school.

We also know about his violent past, threatening his disabled mother with a foot-long knife and her 911 calls...

Got new info then?

Instead of discussing hypothetical situations involving hypothetical Nazis and hypothetical numbers, why don't we stick to the topic and discuss your ACTUALLY violent liberals?

That's what this topic is about. Read the title -- "Charlottesville Driver May Have Nazi Apologtsts Dreaming Up Bizarre And Pathetic Excuses to Get Him Off the Hook".

Indeed that's exactly why you're here.
Isn't it.