They have the right of way regardless of whatever they’re doing on the road. You don’t get to run them over like you’re in a Newgrounds game no matter how much you want to.
That means even when protesters are sitting on the road, you have to put up with it. Turn around. Find another route. Park and find another route.
That’s not what “right of way” means. They do not have the right of way. They are violating the right of way.
They can be arrested, charged, and convicted for obstructing traffic. Their act of violating the right of way can also constitute unlawful detention, and the detained can use force to escape or arrest their captor.
Yes it is what right of way means. You can’t just run over pedestrians on the street no matter how much they inconvenience you. You especially can’t run over protesters.
Get over their presence and get a life that doesn’t revolve around your 9 to 5, or you in general.
No, sorry, it is not. “Right of way” means they are legally permitted to be there. If they had the right of way, it would not be lawful to remove them.
They do not have the right of way. It may not be completely legal in all cases to run their asses over, but they do not have the right of way. The travelers they are obstructing have the right of way. Travelers have the right to use the road, but non-travelers are illegally infringing on that right.
Yes, actually, it is, and you have to deal with them whether you want to or not. You can’t justify your hatred and bloodlust against protesters with the law; the law sides with them.
So yes, protesters on the street have the right of way. That’s the price you pay to live in a country that claims to be free. Don’t like it, move to Russia with your topsie Putin.
They have the right of way regardless of whatever they’re doing on the road. You don’t get to run them over like you’re in a Newgrounds game no matter how much you want to.
That means even when protesters are sitting on the road, you have to put up with it. Turn around. Find another route. Park and find another route.
Deal with it.
That’s not what “right of way” means. They do not have the right of way. They are violating the right of way.
They can be arrested, charged, and convicted for obstructing traffic. Their act of violating the right of way can also constitute unlawful detention, and the detained can use force to escape or arrest their captor.
Yes it is what right of way means. You can’t just run over pedestrians on the street no matter how much they inconvenience you. You especially can’t run over protesters.
Get over their presence and get a life that doesn’t revolve around your 9 to 5, or you in general.
No, sorry, it is not. “Right of way” means they are legally permitted to be there. If they had the right of way, it would not be lawful to remove them.
They do not have the right of way. It may not be completely legal in all cases to run their asses over, but they do not have the right of way. The travelers they are obstructing have the right of way. Travelers have the right to use the road, but non-travelers are illegally infringing on that right.
Yes, actually, it is, and you have to deal with them whether you want to or not. You can’t justify your hatred and bloodlust against protesters with the law; the law sides with them.
So yes, protesters on the street have the right of way. That’s the price you pay to live in a country that claims to be free. Don’t like it, move to Russia with your topsie Putin.