• Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Reasonable person standard applies to all use of force, so no, not really.

    The right to protest does not extend to infringing on the rights of another. My right to protest does not supersede your right to leave your home and travel in public. I cannot detain you or deny your free movement.

    You do not have a monopoly on the use of public roads, sidewalks, etc. “Taking” the public roads or sidewalks for your private use is not reasonable.

    • pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      So in other words you really don’t care.

      Pedestrians always have right of way regardless of why they’re on the street, to start…

      And the right to protest does protect their right to inconvenience you when on the road. Don’t like it, just turn around or go park your car and walk.

        • pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          They do when they’re protesting, or even for festivals, events, trying to cross and getting stuck. That’s a fact of life you just have to put up with.

          • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            No, that’s not a fact of life.

            It might be a fact of law, but if they have figured out some loophole that allows them to get away with it, the law can and should be changed to eliminate that loophole. And that’s the only real effect they will have: convincing the general public to adopt some authoritarian bullshit law that should not need to exist, because nobody should be enough of a cunt to deliberately impede movement.