Why So Many Drivers Are Ramming Into Protesters - "Bash the fash? Crash into trash!"

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
https://slate.com/business/2020/06/george-floyd-protests-cars-ramming-racism.html

1592442700714.png


On May 30 in Tallahassee, Florida, three white people in a red pickup truck yelled at protesters demonstrating against police brutality and the killing of George Floyd, revved their engine, and drove into the crowd. That same day, two NYPD SUVs rammed into crowds of protesters in Brooklyn. More vehicle-ramming incidents happened the next day in downtown Los Angeles and Boston, as well as in Oklahoma, during a march memorializing the 99th anniversary of the Tulsa Massacre. There, the driver of a pickup truck pulling a horse trailer reportedly threatened marchers with a gun and drove through the group. On June 3, a protester in Colorado Springs, Colorado, was hit by a Jeep and claimed it was done on purpose, his claim backed by galling video footage. The same day, a car hit several people at a protest in Cincinnati and sped off. Women protesting in Memphis, Tennessee, were also hit by a truck that day. That weekend, a man in Pensacola, Florida, jumped on top of a car that appeared to be heading straight for protesters blocking traffic on the Three Mile Bridge. This past Sunday, people drove their cars into protesters in Lansing, Michigan, and Seattle. In the latter incident, the driver got out and shot a demonstrator. Also on Sunday, a driver rammed into protesters in Richmond, Virginia, and was found to be an admitted Ku Klux Klan leader. The list of similar incidents goes on and on and on and on.


Cars striking demonstrators have become an unavoidable, undeniable part of our nationwide moment of anti-racism protests. As the rallies continue, the violence keeps repeating. A black man in Bakersfield, California, died on Sunday after being hit by a white driver during a rally. Though charges have not been brought, witnesses have alleged that the driver was trying to hit protesters.

Why is this happening so often, especially now? Vehicular attacks are not a new phenomenon. Throughout the past two decades, they were frequently employed by fundamentalists in the Middle East. The method’s popularity was, in part, a result of its uncomplicated nature—as my colleague Joshua Keating wrote back in 2014, its “crude simplicity makes it a tactic more likely to be employed by relatively unskilled ‘lone wolves’ than organized and trained terrorist operatives.” For self-justified vigilantes, it’s an easy means of striking terror—any one person can do it if they have an agenda and a vehicle. We’re now seeing this in the current spate of protests, as we saw it previously in bigoted attacks within the U.S., like the 2018 synagogue collision in L.A. and the killing of Heather Heyer in Charlottesville, Virginia, during a counterprotest against 2017’s white supremacist “Unite the Right” rally.


The recent, American versions of these incidents strike a specific contrast: a gory reclamation of the streets that protesters have been taking nonviolently for years. During the Dakota Access Pipeline protests and the uprising following the police killing of Philando Castile, activists adopted a new method of mass disruption, of “going on the interstates over and over and shutting down traffic.” This helped increase attention to their causes—and it heightened anger against them. Memes encouraging cars to run over street protesters soon spread among online groups of police and far-right extremists—Heyer’s killer took inspiration from this culture. And as researcher Ari Weil noted to Vox, the latest car and truck attacks are also being celebrated by extremists on Twitter and Facebook.* When protesters march against racism, a small number of people—made far more dangerous because of their chosen weapon—feel compelled to “run them down.”


Some of these drivers, like the Virginia KKK leader, have been explicit white supremacists. But these motorists don’t need to be blatantly racist for their actions to be shocking. In part that’s because in recent years, Republican state legislators across the country have proposed laws giving leeway to drivers who “unintentionally” hit protesters blocking roads, and you can see such deference to motorists repeating itself now. Look at what happened in Colorado Springs, where the police department arrested the driver who hit a woman and continued to bowl through the crowd, but then claimed the driver was “assaulted by protestors” and that the woman who was struck brought her injury upon herself.

Some of these cases might be dismissed as road rage rather than outright racism—the point of blocking a highway, after all, is to disrupt the normal movement of commuters in order to make a political point. But all of these incidents underscore a long history of racism and cars that has shaped the cities that are now erupting in protest, from the urban renewal that razed black neighborhoods in order to build highways to the disinvestment that followed the fleeing of white city residents to the car-enabled suburbs in the second half of the 20th century. If we’re going to have a national reckoning about racism in policing, then automobile attackers have unintentionally highlighted a related injustice we should also revisit: that our very infrastructure enables racist violence, too. (And that’s saying nothing of the vast disparity in car ownership and access to alternative transportation options between white Americans and people of color, a measure perniciously linked to prosperity in America, or of cars’ impact on climate change, which affects poorer and often more diverse communities first and hardest.)


What we’ve seen as the COVID-19 pandemic and the anti-racism demonstrations have raged on is an unprecedented intersection: a long-fighting racial justice movement in an auto-centric world now left with significantly reduced car use. These are not necessarily mutually exclusive things. Streets with fewer cars have helped protesters to show up in vast numbers and make an unavoidable mark in the first place. And in the midst of unimaginable mass death, cities all over the world have envisioned ways to create healthier, safer, more community-oriented places. Oakland and Seattle have embraced open streets, while other metropolises have introduced more bike lanes and announced plans to restructure their cities to create closer, tighter communities. There are already measures cities have taken to stanch the more toxic effects of cars, including congestion pricing and caps on ride-share vehicles. As is implied in these actions, living spaces made to fit the needs of drivers over everyone else do not need to be the future. Now that we’re talking about reallocating some of the resources currently put to policing, that conversation should also include transportation and safety—as in, more car-free streets, more permanent pedestrian zones, denser and more accessible city plans, and more viable transit options to help close the disparities in transportation access between white Americans and people of color. And these plans need to be implemented in a way that does not reinforce the very racist structures that a century of car-centric building has given us.

None of this is to say that any of these fixes will do away with racism, or that getting more people out of cars and off highways will stop the few people who chose to use their vehicles for violence. Still, I can’t think of a better retort to the person who sees a crowd of people protesting racism and wants to use their vehicle to stifle their righteous dissent: We belong on these streets, and your car doesn’t.
 
Conversely, more cars=more need for road upkeep thus necessitating more taxes.

Then you have to deal with all of the idiots that want to text or use cell phones while driving, don't pay attention to traffic signals, insist on drinking or using marijuana while driving and so on. You also have the related issues of your own dealins with cops from traffic violations, broken headlights/taillights, expired stickers, speeding, any suspicion of intoxication ect.

Finally there is the other things like reduced exercise from more people driving even just a short distance from point A to B instead of walking or riding a bike and helping to create a nation of sickly lardasses who are used to not exercising and easy convenience, the smog inducing respiratory issues and grime, and tons and tons and tons of other things that work to suck money, taxes and health away from people.

I know some people like cars, but trying to lionize them as something more then just an ultimately expensive tool used for convenience and carting someone's fat ass around, is just absurd.
Yeah it totally makes more sense to pay $45 for an Uber every time I want to go to the grocery store or be totally at the mercy of the state who shut down mass transist because of the wuflu.

A friend of mine wanted to get rid of her old sofa, she called around and it was $400 - $500. She called me, we threw it in the bed of my truck and dropped it at the dump for free.

He's 110% right, the left hate private car ownership because it's freedom. The freedom to live where you want, work where you want, go where you want.

You're not limited to the crime ridden urban cities, you can escape the iron fist of King Coumo, you can literally do whatever you want, when you want it.

Cars are a money sink, depreciating as soon as you drive off the lot, requiring insurance, regular oil changes, tire rotations, inspections etc.
This comment espeically makes me think you either live on the Democrats plantation, under the age of 25, or both.

You don't need to "drive a car off the lot" you can go to Craigslist right now and easily find a quality car for $5,000

All of those things you listed cost less than the average Uber ride. And with minimal skill you can change your own oil, or rotate your own tires.
 
I know some people like cars, but trying to lionize them as something more then just an ultimately expensive tool used for convenience and carting someone's fat ass around, is just absurd.

If you're having a heart attack, we'll send a horse for you, since internal combustion does nothing but "cart fat asses around" apparently.

Cars are indeed freedom to move, you can say car culture brought the bads of pollution and foreign politics being weighted by petroleum interests, but, how is the average person being able to see and travel whatever they want AND be more productive not a benefit that justifies it? How much of our economy is dependent on being able to go places without having to do a weeks worth of advanced scheduling by bus or train? How much GDP is just us caring for our cars? I wouldn't have a JOB without them as I'm the guy you call when yours no go vroom-vroom anymore....

It's not laziness, it's efficiency, I can get TEN times as much done in a given day with a car than I could on foot. That's like arguing an oven rewards laziness because you should just build a campfire every time you want to cook something....

You don't need to "drive a car off the lot" you can go to Craigslist right now and easily find a quality car for $5,000

All of those things you listed cost less than the average Uber ride. And with minimal skill you can change your own oil, or rotate your own tires.

I never have, and never will, buy a car "off the lot" , it makes more sense to let someone else pay for the privilege of being the first owner and taking that hit. The world is FULL of good-running secondhand cars. I've never paid more than $3,000 for a daily driver, cash, and walked away the owner, free of having to make finance payments.

Heck, my current daily is a retired Crown Vic cop car... $1,500 at auction, with a $1,500 investment to replace a LOT of worn parts. But, they made them for 10 years, unchanged, those parts are everywhere from Autozone to Junkyard, for a pittance, and those "fleet" vehicles have the constitution of a vending machine, indestructible vinyl floor that won't pick up smells like carpet and can be cleaned with a mop, no bells and whistles to inflate the cost of parts (doesn't even have cruise control ) no thousand-dollar LCD dash, no billion sensors, the dash cluster looks like it was lifted direct from a 95' Explorer, all the gauges are old-school analogues and idiot lights, so there's very little that can break., great highway cruiser and everyone still gets out of your way :P

And, having already paid itself off, I could come out of the grocery store and find it fully engulfed in FLAMES and have the luxury of thinking "Well, aint that a kick?" instead of possible financial hardship and reams of paperwork now being in play. I can just drop 3K and just get another, just like it, tomorrow. That's a load off your mind to not always have to worry every time it's out of sight.... like, buying new shoes is great, until you see your first mud puddle. When they're worn-in, you don't really care.

You can easily "game" the modern world for a cheap, reliable car, and only pay $3,000, and the internet will show you how to do all the maintenance yourself. Owning a car is not some kind of slavery the same way having a job isn't wage - induced servitude.


Are people free and happy right now, despite the vast, vast majority of people in the US owning a car?

I certainly don't speak for everyone, but, I'm quite happy to have a car and everything positive it brings.

The real question, if we took away their cars, would they be happier or better off? Doubt it.
 
Last edited:
Yeah it totally makes more sense to pay $45 for an Uber every time I want to go to the grocery store or be totally at the mercy of the state who shut down mass transist because of the wuflu.
I don't take an Uber every time I need to go somewhere. And if mass transportation shuts down I can simply walk? It's free.
A friend of mine wanted to get rid of her old sofa, she called around and it was $400 - $500. She called me, we threw it in the bed of my truck and dropped it at the dump for free.

He's 110% right, the left hate private car ownership because it's freedom. The freedom to live where you want, work where you want, go where you want.
I'm not saying nobody can own cars, I'm just asking 'What's the point to owning a car when there are ultimately cheaper ways of getting around?'' And it was good that you did that for her, however, what would you think if she said to you, 'No, I want to spend $500 on a moving service instead of taking your completely free option.' Which would be her right of course, but most people would think, 'Why spend that much money when you can get the same thing for free?' Which is what I'm saying with car ownership. There are some people that absolutely can't do without them for whatever reasons or are car hobbyists, but if there are cheaper options available, why keep it?
You're not limited to the crime ridden urban cities, you can escape the iron fist of King Coumo, you can literally do whatever you want, when you want it.[/QQUOTEThat is because they are poor and can't afford the expenses and upkeep a car requires.

This comment espeically makes me think you either live on the Democrats plantation, under the age of 25, or both.

You don't need to "drive a car off the lot" you can go to Craigslist right now and easily find a quality car for $5,000

All of those things you listed cost less than the average Uber ride. And with minimal skill you can change your own oil, or rotate your own tires.
I could practically get a car for free if I wanted it. But it is much more cheaper for me not to own one over time, because I have cheaper alternatives to using one.

As for other reasons why I am not keen on them, they enable sprawl which cuts into natural places that is prime deer, rabbit, squirrel, duck and turkey habitat. This also means no more hunting in those areas. People are still being idiots and traveling heavily in them, spreading COVID and making it harder for the local shooting range to reopen so I can start practicing, and no practice may mean no hunting this year.
 
I'm not saying nobody can own cars, I'm just asking 'What's the point to owning a car when there are ultimately cheaper ways of getting around?''


And what is this "cheaper" solution where I live?

I live in an unincorporated area.

There is no bus service here

There is no rail service here

There are no sidewalks or bike lanes

Getting groceries is a 20-mile round trip, the closest supermarket is 10 miles

There is a "general" store and gas station closer for "essentials" like bread and milk, but, it's down in the valley and I'm on the ridge top, it'd be a six mile round-trip walk, and given it's all steeply uphill for 3 of those miles, it'd take me 2 and a half to three hours to do... so, I can lose 10 minutes of the day for a milk run in my car, or maybe 3 hours by hoofing it, and choosing the former makes me "lazy"?

See how a car is the "best" solution?


This is the problem with one-size-fits-all-and-abolish-the-rest thinking. If the solution was as easy as "just walk" people would do it. This is where the blue/red divide comes from, an inability or unwillingness for people to realize that their situation is not universal. So "easy" answers to them are not even on the board for others, and vice versa.

And now, maybe, you can see why some people feel very threatened indeed when the source of their productivity and livlihood is threatened by a mob? And they get attacked for not just saying "oh well, kids gotta protest SOMEWHERE I guess..."
 
Last edited:
I'm not making this shit up. Commies got the idea of destroying private, individual transport in the late 60's, and really started to get to it in the mid 70's.


TL;DR of the article: commies want to abolish cars, because when people are free and happy, they won't vote for commies. They've been at it for decades.

And commies want to destroy private individual transport for the thee but not for me. Nice mansions for me but not for the thee like Lenin's last refuge.
 
You can easily "game" the modern world for a cheap, reliable car, and only pay $3,000, and the internet will show you how to do all the maintenance yourself. Owning a car is not some kind of slavery the same way having a job isn't wage - induced servitude.
You said you bought your car at an auction? Where and how else do you recommend your first car?

I thought a first used car would be worth $1-2K. I guess the $3K accounts for maintenance.

What about insurance? What would be a good brand for a used car?
 
Are people free and happy right now, despite the vast, vast majority of people in the US owning a car?
I never said that owning a car alone would make one happy and free.
Also the odds are, a lot of these 'protesters' drove to these places via personal vehicles. How many of these people would've even shown up if they had to have the 'effort' or 'inconvenience' of walking to get there or waiting to take a bus? Odds are most of them would not have bothered because in a lot of people now, laziness is king.
Well, couldn't they just have done what you do?
I don't take an Uber every time I need to go somewhere. And if mass transportation shuts down I can simply walk? It's free.
I'm just going to say that in most socialist countries, let alone communist, people wouldn't have the right to protest over anything. Taking away their cars would be a good first step. Going to a protest that you'd like to go when the government shuts down public transportation to that specific place? Couldn't really do that with a car, could you?
 
You said you bought your car at an auction? Where and how else do you recommend your first car?

I thought a first used car would be worth $1-2K. I guess the $3K accounts for maintenance.

What about insurance? What would be a good brand for a used car?

Every car I've ever bought aside from that one was a private-seller, it was in their driveway/yard with a FOR SALE sign in it. Cheapest ever was $250 scrap value for a wrecked one that just needed a bumper and $1,000 of suspension parts replaced. That one lasted me 7 years until the transmission died and it was junked.

Rule of thumb, less than $3,000 for a car means you are buying a project, and I've bought several $500 and $1,000 cars that needed spending in drips and drabs up to $3K before it was reliable.

A running car is worth $3,000, if you get it for less than that, expect issues.

I don't want to derail this thread, so, I'll keep it short, there are plenty of advice places online to search, I can afford to buy "junk" cars because I have the skill to fix them and can freely borrow a tow truck at big discount, luxuries a lot of people don't have.
 
I don't take an Uber every time I need to go somewhere. And if mass transportation shuts down I can simply walk? It's free.
I'm not saying nobody can own cars, I'm just asking 'What's the point to owning a car when there are ultimately cheaper ways of getting around?'' And it was good that you did that for her, however, what would you think if she said to you, 'No, I want to spend $500 on a moving service instead of taking your completely free option.' Which would be her right of course, but most people would think, 'Why spend that much money when you can get the same thing for free?' Which is what I'm saying with car ownership. There are some people that absolutely can't do without them for whatever reasons or are car hobbyists, but if there are cheaper options available, why keep it?
Try to wrangle a baby, stroller, diaper bag, and four bags of groceries on public transportation.
It isn't fun or easy.
 
Every car I've ever bought aside from that one was a private-seller, it was in their driveway/yard with a FOR SALE sign in it. Cheapest ever was $250 scrap value for a wrecked one that just needed a bumper and $1,000 of suspension parts replaced. That one lasted me 7 years until the transmission died and it was junked.

Rule of thumb, less than $3,000 for a car means you are buying a project, and I've bought several $500 and $1,000 cars that needed spending in drips and drabs up to $3K before it was reliable.

A running car is worth $3,000, if you get it for less than that, expect issues.

I don't want to derail this thread, so, I'll keep it short, there are plenty of advice places online to search, I can afford to buy "junk" cars because I have the skill to fix them and can freely borrow a tow truck at big discount, luxuries a lot of people don't have.
Just want to add that 3k will get you a solid, reliable car. 5k will get you that and fun, besides. A decade-old Mustang isn't a terrible investment for just a fun cruising machine, and has a similar parts situation as you described given how many Ford makes and sells.
 
You said you bought your car at an auction? Where and how else do you recommend your first car?

I thought a first used car would be worth $1-2K. I guess the $3K accounts for maintenance.

What about insurance? What would be a good brand for a used car?
Honestly I wouldn't mess with auctions

You can get a good deal but you can also get a lemon.

They're not a bad option for someone with the tools and skills to repair something, otherwise you're risking a money pit.
 
Honestly I wouldn't mess with auctions

You can get a good deal but you can also get a lemon.

They're not a bad option for someone with the tools and skills to repair something, otherwise you're risking a money pit.
What about CarFax?
 
What about CarFax?
Usually with the auctions there's a limited time for inspection.

They're in a field or a lot, you can walk around and look at them but that's about it.

If you had a carfax subscription and a mobile device you could run the VIN but I'm not sure how many you'd get done before the auction started.

I don't know if you have Craigslist where you live but there's some steals on there. A few months back I saw a Ford Freestyle (looks like a lowered car version of the explorer) the guy wanted $3,500 an it only had 60,000 miles. Not the greatest looking car ever made but it's nice and clean.
 
I'm gonna go against the grain here on the used car thing, although I've had a couple when I was younger.

I buy new and have for the past 25 years. Yeah, depreciation and shit. But, you're covered by warranty and I buy the extended warranty as well. Financially, I've been in a position to do this and it makes absolute sense for me.

My previous truck was a 2001 F250 diesel. I paid it off and drove it for 18 years. I demand reliability because I'm often towing and often deep south of the border in Mexico (for fishing tournaments). It never let me down.

At the dealer for service in 2017 and the manager offered me 10k, no questions asked, in trade-in. That was 1/3 of what I paid for it in 2001, 250k miles later.

Went for it and now have a 2017 diesel F250 ultimate Lariat. Just did a road trip of over 4000 miles in the span of 9 days. Again, reliability. I wouldn't think of doing that in a used car/truck.

The other piece of the puzzle comes in knowing every mile that's been put on the vehicle since new and how it's been maintained. I'm a complete anal boy on oil changes and maintenance. I'm older and it's likely this is the last new vehicle I'll purchase.

Anyway, if you're young and just need to get from A to B and back, a used car is fine. When you get my age, you don't wanna have to play fuck-fuck everytime something goes wrong. And shit does indeed go wrong.
 
I don't take an Uber every time I need to go somewhere. And if mass transportation shuts down I can simply walk? It's free.
I'm not saying nobody can own cars, I'm just asking 'What's the point to owning a car when there are ultimately cheaper ways of getting around?'' And it was good that you did that for her, however, what would you think if she said to you, 'No, I want to spend $500 on a moving service instead of taking your completely free option.' Which would be her right of course, but most people would think, 'Why spend that much money when you can get the same thing for free?' Which is what I'm saying with car ownership. There are some people that absolutely can't do without them for whatever reasons or are car hobbyists, but if there are cheaper options available, why keep it?

Not all of us live in the hive world of modern cities. FFS.
 
This is the problem with one-size-fits-all-and-abolish-the-rest thinking. If the solution was as easy as "just walk" people would do it. This is where the blue/red divide comes from, an inability or unwillingness for people to realize that their situation is not universal. So "easy" answers to them are not even on the board for others, and vice versa.
This.
For years I lived 15 minutes walk from the Melbourne cbd. If I wanted to go to work, or have a night out drinking, I'd just walk. My entire life was basically within walking distance of my home, so having a car would have been pointless, there was always taxis and public transport if the weather was bad, or I was in a rush.
Now I live in the country and would literally not be able to survive without a car. I drive an hour to work, my weekends are spent in forests and other small towns in my area, it's 20 minutes drive to the nearest pub, supermarket, medical service.
I completely understand my city friends who couldn't fathom owning a car, because it would just sit on the street 320 days a year, but it's not even a possibility if you move out of a city.
And I would never move back to the city.
 
Back
Top Bottom