No, but you can't hit them and must use 'due care' to avoid collision.
"In every event, speed shall be so controlled by the driver as may be necessary:
(1) to avoid colliding with a person, vehicle or other conveyance on or entering the highway..."
Rittenhouse found not guilty on all counts
- Thread starter moosedog
- Start date
"In every event, speed shall be so controlled by the driver as may be necessary:
(1) to avoid colliding with a person, vehicle or other conveyance on or entering the highway..."
Perhaps except when you get surrounded by rioters while you are driving. Due care could be blowing your horn and moving slowly ahead. Am not aware of any law saying you must submit yourself to unlawful detention and assault. As soon as you are surrounded and not allowed to leave, the story changes, and is not the same as deliberately driving into a crowd of protesters.
pantannojack
US Veteran
When Reginald Denny was dragged from his cement truck and beaten senseless with concrete blocks, or if fire fighters are beaten and shot while responding to fires within a riot or other "Occupied" zone are they wrong to be there?
pantannojack
US Veteran
Maybe someone would say that the thousands of Marines and soldiers killed and maimed on Omaha Beach and Iwo Jima ".. should not have been there".
Of course what is legal depends upon the immediate circumstances and the reasonableness of one's actions. The bad news is that often you'll be in court to find out what folks in your community see as 'reasonable.'
An example: There was a coal mine strike in NW New Mexico. Strikers were encamped by where the mine road met a public highway. The coal company continued operations using manasgement personnel (even as oilers on the dragline - their suits got messy) and a few 'scabs,' or workers crossing the picket line. All vehicles had to stop where the mine access met the highway (both because of the law and heavy traffic) - strikers surrounded a 'scab's' car and started beating it and screaming at the guy inside. When someone started using a chain on his windshield, he pulled his 303 Enfield off the floor, fired one round out of his driver's side window, nearly straight up. The crowd backed off posthaste.
The DA's analysis was that his use of a warning shot was close to reasonable under the circumstasnces and was not something they would prosecute. A different DA might have decided differently.
An example: There was a coal mine strike in NW New Mexico. Strikers were encamped by where the mine road met a public highway. The coal company continued operations using manasgement personnel (even as oilers on the dragline - their suits got messy) and a few 'scabs,' or workers crossing the picket line. All vehicles had to stop where the mine access met the highway (both because of the law and heavy traffic) - strikers surrounded a 'scab's' car and started beating it and screaming at the guy inside. When someone started using a chain on his windshield, he pulled his 303 Enfield off the floor, fired one round out of his driver's side window, nearly straight up. The crowd backed off posthaste.
The DA's analysis was that his use of a warning shot was close to reasonable under the circumstasnces and was not something they would prosecute. A different DA might have decided differently.
Last edited:
Doug M.
Member
*
No. It is wrong for LE to tolerate that. It did not go over well when I pointed out in writing that the actions of WSP command staff in doing so made them accomplices to the felonies committed. (I have found no legal authority that allowed them to do that.) They also did a poor job of blocking the roadway, and a motorist (motivations unknown, but pretty clearly deliberate) ran into some of the rioters and killed one.
That's just weird that a state police organization has no authority to close roads and bridges during emergencies. It's routinely necessary and has to be done.
Doug M.
Member
It was not an emergency, but a choice. They did rather than make arrests, and admitted that was the reason. They do have the authority to do so for collision investigations, weather and the like. Major difference.
The legal advice they get is often abysmal, if they even seek it. They only have two AAGs for the whole agency (which has a variety of roles and a staffing level of almost 2K across all duties. My county has 5 civil attorneys for 400-ish staff and we stay busy. The legal training generally at WSP is some of the worst I have ever seen. I have referred to them as an "adhocracy" for years. Their litigation history over pretty clear misconduct at the command level is awful. The troopers are generally pretty good. Command? Ugh.
The legal advice they get is often abysmal, if they even seek it. They only have two AAGs for the whole agency (which has a variety of roles and a staffing level of almost 2K across all duties. My county has 5 civil attorneys for 400-ish staff and we stay busy. The legal training generally at WSP is some of the worst I have ever seen. I have referred to them as an "adhocracy" for years. Their litigation history over pretty clear misconduct at the command level is awful. The troopers are generally pretty good. Command? Ugh.
Last edited:
Got it.
In the NMSP, I was promoted to captain and sent to HQ in Santa Fe. There I learned my worst fears about HQ were grossly inadequate. Both they and I were pleased when they 'punished' me with a field command to get me out of their odd little world.
In the NMSP, I was promoted to captain and sent to HQ in Santa Fe. There I learned my worst fears about HQ were grossly inadequate. Both they and I were pleased when they 'punished' me with a field command to get me out of their odd little world.
Doug M.
Member
We have a retired Assistant Chief on the Brady list. He retired the day after a trooper got a $1M jury verdict in a whistleblower retaliation lawsuit. Perjury was alleged, probably true. Incompetence is a no-brainer. He is not an outlier to me.
Know one Captain pretty well, decent guy. He has refused multiple promotion offers for reasons similar to your experience.
Know one Captain pretty well, decent guy. He has refused multiple promotion offers for reasons similar to your experience.
The real issue about incompetence in command is 'impunity.' Mostly no one sues anyone except the chief, and the folks in the exec staff are careful to have plausible deniability in each and every action and decision.
Incidentally, I found this too be pretty much true in the Philippine National Police, Indonesian National Police, Iraqi Ministry of the Interior, and nearly all of Bosnia & Herzegovina' 17 agencies, especially Republka Srpska. My hard-learned belief is that nearly all executive functions should be handled by civilian employees and be reviewed by utterly independent civilian boards with power to discipline all commissioned and civilian personnel from reprimand to termination. You'll find such results in far fewer disciplinary actions for petty rule violations and far more terminations for brutality and corruption.
Incidentally, I found this too be pretty much true in the Philippine National Police, Indonesian National Police, Iraqi Ministry of the Interior, and nearly all of Bosnia & Herzegovina' 17 agencies, especially Republka Srpska. My hard-learned belief is that nearly all executive functions should be handled by civilian employees and be reviewed by utterly independent civilian boards with power to discipline all commissioned and civilian personnel from reprimand to termination. You'll find such results in far fewer disciplinary actions for petty rule violations and far more terminations for brutality and corruption.
Last edited:
Beemer-mark
Member
So there is a court case right now in ( I think) Austin Tx. A Military officer moonlighting as a Uber driver to make some extra dollars gets stopped on the freeway during a riot. People are trying to over turn the car, smashing this windows with bricks. A person with his face covered approaches the car with an AK-47 pointed at the driver. Drives shoots same with handgun. A year later he's charged with homicide. Even if innocent think about the trauma, bail, jail time, lawyer fees, and upcoming trial.
