Top Menu

Descending Further Into Chaos With “Peaceful Protesting,” Double Standards

As I sit back and try to not consume any news because it's utterly depressing, I realize that it's my job to do just that and deliver at least some of it to you a couple of times per week. Over the weekend, Riley posted a screenshot in our company chat of an incident that took place on the Indiana streets that has me scratching my head.

The above picture was not a part of what he posted but is from the incident itself. I thought this particular scene was important from the video because it shows two guys with guns in their hands, stopping traffic under threat of force.

Most of the people talking about it don't seem to notice the second guy, only the first.

I had to do some digging to find out what happened, which brought me to the cesspool that is Twitter.

Here's the full, 50 second video from a Twitter post:

If this doesn't concern you in the least I'd say that you might be part of the problem.

This is not okay on many levels. First, as far as I can tell they're breaking the law. Which laws? After conducting a quick search for laws concerning idiots in the street in Indiana (where this allegedly occurred), these ones make sense to me:

IC 9-21-17-5
Walking or running into the path of a vehicle; prohibition
Sec. 5. A pedestrian may not suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle that is so close as to constitute an immediate hazard.
As added by P.L.2-1991, SEC.9.

IC 9-21-17-9
Marked crosswalks; adjacent intersections; duty to obey
Sec. 9. Between adjacent intersections at which traffic control signals are in operation, pedestrians may not cross at any place except in a marked crosswalk.
As added by P.L.2-1991, SEC.9.

IC 9-21-17-12
Sidewalk available; prohibition on walking along or upon roadway
Sec. 12. If a sidewalk is provided and the sidewalk's use is practicable, a pedestrian may not walk along and upon an adjacent roadway.
As added by P.L.2-1991, SEC.9.

IC 9-21-17-13
Sidewalk unavailable; use of shoulder
Sec. 13. If a sidewalk is not available, a pedestrian walking along and upon a highway shall walk only on a shoulder, as far as practicable from the edge of the roadway.
As added by P.L.2-1991, SEC.9.

IC 9-21-17-14
Sidewalk or shoulder unavailable; use of outside edge of roadway
Sec. 14. If neither a sidewalk nor a shoulder is available, a pedestrian walking along and upon a highway shall walk as near as practicable to an outside edge of the roadway. If the roadway is two-way, the pedestrian shall walk only on the left side of the roadway.
As added by P.L.2-1991, SEC.9.

IC 9-21-17-15
Yield of right-of-way to all vehicles on roadway
Sec. 15. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, a pedestrian upon a roadway shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the roadway.
As added by P.L.2-1991, SEC.9.

Now I admit that I didn't do any further research and don't know to what extent these are enforceable.

As far as I could tell, however, they broke all of those codes and went out of their way to do so. Not only that, but they purposefully blocked the traffic while masked and armed and ran after the truck to prevent them from passing, again.

The person driving the truck clearly did not want to run anyone over, and even tried to avoid it.

The people blocking the streets are terrorists. Not only that, but there is a double standard if they don't find and punish these individuals but are so willing punish other, seemingly law-abiding people for defending themselves (thinking about the McClosky couple).

We live in a world where it's NOT okay to defend yourself from an angry mob of “peaceful protesters.” By the way, concerning the McClosky case, the peaceful protesters broke down a gate to gain entrance to private property (AKA they broke the law).

We also apparently live in a world where it's okay for a person in a different angry mob of “peaceful protesters” to pull a gun out on a guy driving his truck down the road probably just trying to go to work or the grocery store.

I'm not sure how we got here, but I can see what's next if we're not very careful. Let's look at a timeline:

First we heard of the folks who just want to be left alone having to defend themselves with their guns and getting into trouble for it. Second, we see the angry mob pulling their guns out to prevent those people from conducting their everyday lives.

What's the third thing to happen? What's next? People are already scared, hungry, broke, and tired of being restricted to their houses, so what is the next thing to come?

At some point, which is kind of already happening in some parts of the country, like we see here, people are going to be shooting at each other. At some point, a camel's legs give out on it under the weight of the straw and the whole thing comes crashing down.

And the reason why this happens, is because the police are being prevented from doing their jobs. They can't help, they can't put away criminals, and their hands are tied in many areas.

At some point when the people who just want to be left alone come to the realization that the police cannot effectively do their jobs this is likely to get really messy.

And in fact, I think we're leading up to a culmination of sorts. At some point people are going to be sick of this and will start taking matters into their own hands. When and if that ever happens, we'll be in a world of hurt.

I hope I'm wrong.

Leave your thoughts on this in the comments below.

Learn about how to draw your gun while sitting in a vehicle, here.

, ,

48 Responses to Descending Further Into Chaos With “Peaceful Protesting,” Double Standards

  1. Brett August 10, 2020 at 2:38 pm #

    You’re exactly right about the double standard. If I were to pull my gun out and point it at someone, I would be charged with brandishing my weapon. Whereas these people don’t get charged because they’re part of the “peaceful protest”.

    • Rick Gablet August 12, 2020 at 3:14 pm #

      This is exactly why I bought multiple guns. Protesters may not care about their lives or others but I do. Unfortunately we have a weak ass justice system (Liberals) that worry and are more forgiving to crook and thugs than good law abiding people like us. I’m at the point now if a thug deserves it by doing wrong, he/she will get a bullet in the head. Worry about our BS judicial system later IF I’m still alive. Police are no help any more. Not their fault!!!

      • Jonathan Ware August 12, 2020 at 7:49 pm #

        @Rick Gablet,
        I have many friends on the police force and I feel lucky to be able to interact with them on a personal level as well as their fellow officers on a professional one. I observe them making difference in my community daily.

      • Ronald Lowe August 12, 2020 at 11:12 pm #

        Know the corruption the thugs are not given special treatment by the police black men are still being shot to death … a car full of black women, well one woman and 4 children were pulled out of their cried gunpoint and forced to lay Face down on the tarmac… Who do you mean when you say law abiding citizens like “US”

        I ask because I am a law abiding citizen I’m also a black man a veteran of the war in Iraq… A former mail man and now the cause of it all I am disabled… Do all of this I still and me law abiding citizen even though I am a black Man … I own guns just like you, I have a concealed carry license, and I have never had any badd experience with the police what so ever. I am almost 60 years old , and in spite of what you say I have been a law abiding citizen my whole life…. So please tell me who is this “US” you are referring to?

        • Jeff Kyle August 16, 2020 at 4:09 pm #

          US is the law abiding people of any color who are just trying to get to work and are being threatened this way. The law breaking protestors who harrass US are them.

          • Jonathan Ware August 17, 2020 at 10:09 am #

            The truck was driving into a group of protesters who were violating minor traffic laws. The protesters could be said to be provoking the truck. The truck could have easily, and unintentionally, seriously injured or killed someone. A woman in a minivan did exactly that in Indy back in June. The truck was also provoking the protesters. Weigh out blocking traffic against driving your truck into a group of pedestrians. Which is worse?

    • Rick Gablet August 12, 2020 at 3:14 pm #

      This is exactly why I bought multiple guns. Protesters may not care about their lives or others but I do. Unfortunately we have a weak ass justice system (Liberals) that worry and are more forgiving to crook and thugs than good law abiding people like us. I’m at the point now if a thug deserves it by doing wrong, he/she will get a bullet in the head. Worry about our BS judicial system later IF I’m still alive. Police are no help any more. Not their fault!!!

      • Jonathan Ware August 17, 2020 at 10:22 am #

        @Rick

        First of all, I am not sure how multiple guns is an answer. Its common practice to carry a primary firearm and a backup. I know a few folks that carry a third backup weapon.

        Secondly, its sounds like that in lieu of our WA justice system that you are in favor of justice being meted out in the moment with deadly force. That places you in the position of judge, jury, and executioner. That is clearly not acceptable any more than an ineffective justice system.

        Thirdly, shooting someone at close range isn’t as easy as you suggest and I am going to guess that you have never done it. Of course shooting at a distance (sniping) is but as I read your comment I dont think this is what you are suggesting be done. I am going to guess that you have never killed at a distance either.

    • Cary August 12, 2020 at 6:29 pm #

      How can I post this in Facebook?

      • Ronald Lowe August 12, 2020 at 11:24 pm #

        No the corruption and the thugs are not given special treatment by the police …black men are still being shot to death … a car full of black women, well one woman and 4 children were pulled out of their car at gunpoint and forced to lay Face down on the tarmac, Including a six-year-old girl. Who do you mean when you say law abiding citlizens like “US”

        I ask because I am a law abiding citizen I’m also a black man a veteran of the war in Iraq… A former mail man and now because of it all I am disabled… thru all of this I am still, Trying to exercise my 2nd amendment rights like everyone else I am still a law abiding citizen even though I am a black Man … I own guns just like you, I have a concealed carry license, and I have never had any badd experience with the police what so ever. I am almost 60 years old , and in spite of what you say I have been a law abiding citizen my whole life…. So please tell me who is this “US” you are referring to?

        • Jonathan Ware August 17, 2020 at 10:23 am #

          @Ronald well said sir

    • Jonathan Ware August 12, 2020 at 7:46 pm #

      @Brett,
      Possibly but as a responsible gun owner familiar with the applicable state’s laws, this is not necessarily the case and would greatly depend on context.

    • Jonathan Ware August 17, 2020 at 10:04 am #

      Wrong. Drawing your firearm in the face of a threat that could result in serious injury or death is not brandishing. Drawing your firearm in the face of someone yelling at you, damaging your property, or walking on your lawn is brandishing and unreasonable.

  2. Gary Schrock August 10, 2020 at 3:43 pm #

    And the guy in the foreground appears to have his trigger finger within the trigger guard. In other words he is ready to fire the weapon and has an intended target.
    OR he has zero training and has no clue about trigger discipline.
    Gary

    • Jim August 11, 2020 at 12:24 am #

      I cant tell if that’s a guy or a a girl named butch…

      • Rob August 12, 2020 at 9:02 pm #

        Jim,
        in the Daytime he holds trucks hostage in the city streets, but in the evening he sheds his tiger stripe body glove and owns/runs a music store. True it is Yoda says. You can probably Google it!

        – Ghostrider

    • yogi August 12, 2020 at 4:09 pm #

      I vote for no training. If I am in the truck and he raises that weapon at me, he is toast!

      • Jonathan Ware August 12, 2020 at 7:53 pm #

        @yogi,
        I dont understand. No training?

    • Jonathan Ware August 12, 2020 at 7:52 pm #

      @Gary
      I agree that his finger looks like it is on the trigger and agree this is not proper protocol. However the firearm is held in a proper at-the-ready position and the odds of injury to those in the area are reduced. There is evidence of some firearms training.

    • Jonathan Ware August 17, 2020 at 10:28 am #

      @Gary

      I agree that a finger on the trigger is a mistake. However the firearm is positioned at an at-the-ready position and eyes are on target. In this position, an unintentional discharge has a reduced change of harm to the driver, the person with the firearm, or anyone in the general area. Clearly this individual has received firearm training and you should know this from any training that you might have received.

  3. Stephen Crandell August 10, 2020 at 3:57 pm #

    So far the second amendment means very little to the law abiding citizens weve reached a point where the criminals are allowed to do whatever they want and we the law abiding citizens are punished for defending ourselves and our weapons are taken away causing us to further fear for our safety weaponless

    • VInce August 10, 2020 at 9:12 pm #

      Can’t trust that the bad guys will have firearm discipline. They don’t care.

    • Jonathan Ware August 12, 2020 at 7:57 pm #

      @Stephen Crandell
      I would give the benefit of the doubt to the driver of the truck and expect that they did not mean any harm. They could have still caused it, even if by accident, as the collision of a motor vehicle with a pedestrian is likely to result in either serious injury to or death of the pedestrian. I dont think they would have wanted that to happen.

  4. Jim A August 10, 2020 at 4:38 pm #

    1) Ind. Code 35-41-3-2(g)(1) says that a person is not justified in using force if “the person is committing or is escaping after the commission of a crime”; and

    2) Ind. Code §35-44.1-2-13 says that “a person who, with the intent to obstruct vehicular or pedestrian traffic, obstructs vehicular or pedestrian traffic commits obstruction of traffic, a Class B misdemeanor.”
    So the claim of self-defense is not legally sustainable, unless they had a permit to obstruct traffic on Meridian Street during the protest – and I haven’t heard a word about a permit being issued.

    • Jonathan Ware August 12, 2020 at 8:01 pm #

      @Jim A
      If the driver of the truck’s driver (I dont think that intent exists here) were intent on driving in to the protester with the goal of injuring and killing them would said protester still lack a sustainable and legal basis for self-defense?

  5. Shawn Corcoran August 11, 2020 at 9:07 am #

    This incident should be investigated and the individuals apprehended for questioning. They pulled their weapons and presented themselves as aggressors with a show of force. They should be answerable for their actions just as the McLosky couple should be. It is for a court of law to determine if those actions were justified and appropriate, not ours.

    I’m a little bit alarmed at the emotionally charged opinions I see here and elsewhere in the gun community, vilifying anyone (individuals or group) who would challenge a person’s world-view. The assumption in comments seems to be that the individuals with guns are despicable because they are part of the protest crowd. The writer also assumes a state of mind for the driver which he cannot know because of his own personal bias (“…a guy driving his truck down the road probably just trying to go to work or the grocery store…” ).

    We see a short clip of an incident after some bystander decided it was something to actively capture on video. What happened leading up to that in the seconds before? Was the driver acting in a threatening manner? Clearly, the video shows it’s a possible scenario as the driver makes repeated attempts to move through the crowd and continue his path. There have been more than 66 incidents of vehicles driving into crowds intentionally in the US since May which have included injuries and death. Did the two individuals fear their safety or the safety of others from harm? Did the driver of the truck have opportunity and means to create severe bodily harm? Thankfully this incident ends without tragedy as the driver makes the choice to turn around.

    Both parties made choices which escalated the situation yet this article paints a one-sided picture of the situation to support feelings of perceived injustice This article is a great example of how personal feelings can taint your ability to perceive reality. As you read this, what are you feeling now? As a defender and responsible gun owner can you afford to let emotions cloud your judgement?

    I’m thankful that I have the right as an American to carry a weapon to defend myself and others from harm. If you’re carrying a firearm then I would hope that you feel the same. What seems to be overlooked by many is that your choice to carry a weapon comes with individual responsibilities and acceptance of risks including acceptance of personal consequences for your actions. We should all remember to be mindful of how emotions can interfere with our ability to make appropriate judgements. We have a higher responsibility and accountability because we choose to carry.

    • Rod Steel August 12, 2020 at 12:13 pm #

      Shawn Corcoran you are a tool, and part of the problem.

    • Dale Daniels August 12, 2020 at 3:21 pm #

      @Shawn Corcoran

      1. They were in the street – protest if you want, but do not block me from getting home, to work, to pick up my kids from school etc etc. Yes, some have driven through crowds…good for them. After seeing videos of people in their cars being attacked, I would too.

      2. The driver backs up and tries to get out of there, yet the crowd RUNS TO BLOCK HIM AGAIN!

      3. BLM protests have frequently been accompanied with violence – does that “taint” my view…yep.

      4. And this is important so listem closely – BLM is a Marxist organization by admission that seeks to destroy America’s freedom and way of life. I took an oath as a Marines to defend our way of life from “all enemies, foreign and domestic.” So do I value their opinion? NO. Seeking to destroy our nation is an attitude which inspired the Second Amendment. They are terrorists and I proudly stand against them. If black lives truly mattered, they would take on Black on Black murder (over 4500 in 2019) or black abortion (232,000 in 2019) instead of police shootings (10 unarmed in 2019).

      • Patton August 12, 2020 at 9:08 pm #

        AGREED!

        If you identify as a Marxist you should be put in the ground…

        FACE DOWN!

    • Jonathan Ware August 12, 2020 at 8:02 pm #

      Well written response

    • Jeff August 14, 2020 at 6:42 am #

      I have an idea… stay out of the road. Problem solved.

  6. REB August 12, 2020 at 3:49 pm #

    So many excellent points in this response, a calm, dispassionate recommendation that we don’t have sufficient facts to make a judgment, as divorced from the “I’m going to put a bullet in someone’s head crowd.” Why do so many people just assume that this was not an authorized march/protest within an authorized area? I agree that confronting anyone with a gun is probably a terrible choice, but let’s not just assume that the people with the gun are the ones in the wrong.

  7. Alan Adams August 12, 2020 at 3:54 pm #

    How is this case not taken more seriously than the couple in Missouri? The were protecting themselves from an unruly mob while standing on their own property and were arrested on felony charges. These two threatened a motorist while they were illegally blocking traffic on a public roadway and they walk free???

    • Jim Dow August 12, 2020 at 5:50 pm #

      I get the impression that anyone that believes in true peaceful protesting and respecting laws is going to be cosidered “part of the problem” in your opinion and some of your readers so fire away..in a peaceful way 🙂 I believe in both the 1st and 2nd ammendments. I agree that your examples are of violent prone protestets and not peaceful protesters.

  8. Mike Russell August 12, 2020 at 3:54 pm #

    Mr Corcoran is correct, unfortunately we are dealing with weak mined cowards who only find courage behind a gun. If they were peaceful protesters they would not be threatening innocent people trying to go about their day. We have to be ready and willing to protect ourselves and our family but understand we will be the ones arrested.

  9. Gary Kiewiet August 12, 2020 at 4:01 pm #

    When you have to pull a gun it’s no longer peaceful, knowing the whole story is priority

  10. Austin August 12, 2020 at 4:26 pm #

    As an honorably retired LE/SWAT Operator/Detective Supervisor on a very liberal West coast state there are many considerations to think about before dispatching two thugs in the middle of the street. The threat imposed upon you, your ability to peacefully and tactically remove yourself from the situation and the apparent avoidance of a confrontation until it is placing you or someone else in a deadly threat situation are just a few. Unfortunately, if these idiots continue on harassing the general public it will be only a matter of time until someone with more shooting skills and a certain mindset will take an issue into their own hands.
    The current wave against LE is very concerning. Just a few months ago LE would have proned these two knuckleheads out immediately and their weapons confiscated. Brandishing a firearm would be one of the crimes charged along with the previously mentioned traffic crimes listed by other posters. If they were felons in possession of a firearm, then those would be charged. In my opinion BLM, Antifa, and everyone associated with them should be classified as terrorist organizations and dealt with accordingly.

  11. Board of Education August 12, 2020 at 5:03 pm #

    ~ The Road way is for motor vehicle’s not terrorist if a jumps in front of your car/truck and has a gun or weapon that is endangering your or your families life : “RUN OVER THE EVIL PIECE OF FECES. ~

  12. Tim Callahan August 12, 2020 at 5:16 pm #

    Pointing a gun at someone is deadly force which must be met with deadly force!

  13. Peter, JD, EMT-P (ret.), TECC August 12, 2020 at 6:11 pm #

    @Shawn Corcoran- Thank you for a well-reasoned response to an opinionated, judgmental commentary by the opinion piece’s author!

    @Rod Steel- your eloquent response reinforces the view that not all idiots should be allowed to possess a gun.

    @Dale Daniels- more racist, parroting of alt-right opinions without factual basis.

    @Austin- while not a sworn officer, I have volunteered thousands of hours providing medical support for tactical teams from around the world. The current opinions about LE are deserved and most of the officers I’ve had the pleasure of working with understand, if not support, the protests. Old school sh*t has got to stop! No more sleeper holds, no beatings on defenseless, cuffed individuals, etc.

    And finally to all who are trying to draw comparisons from the instant case to the rightfully charged couple in St. Louis, I noticed none of you mentioned the HUGE DIFFERENCES- 1) the St. Louis couple could not claim self-defense as the protesters were never a threat (unlike a pick-up driving into a crowd of people); and 2) the St. Louis couple clearly AIMED their weapons, including an assault rifle, at individuals in the street and on the sidewalk (do that to some people and you will catch three center-mass- the couple should be happy they are alive and they certainly deserve a lifetime prohibition) while the Indiana pair did NOT aim their upholstered handguns at the driver.

    Finally, how convenient no one mentions Charlottesville or the hundreds of extra-judicial killings carried out by racists over the past few decades. Oh, he’s jogging in our lily-white neighborhood- we can shoot and kill him.

    THERE IS A REASON FREEDOM OF PRESS, SPEECH AND ASSEMBLY ARE IN THE FIRST AMENDMENT!!

    • Dale Daniels August 13, 2020 at 8:08 am #

      Oh no! You called me a racist…do you idiots have any other word to use? Call me what you will…be a commie…whatever. I stand by my words.

      • Alan Radford August 14, 2020 at 8:29 am #

        Please remember your history the last time we had a lack of law enforcement people formed “citizen committees ” and enforced their own brand of justice. Sometimes they got the right perpetrator sometimes not. But government acted quickly to instate proper law enforcement. Do you really want to defund the police and risk devolving into that again???

  14. David P Aria August 12, 2020 at 6:17 pm #

    Josh:
    You are correct, but it is much worse than you portrayed: We have animals burned alive, children burned alive, firemen and police officers shot, children executed on purpose, children killed in drive-by shootings, the elderly and handicapped beaten, a grandmother burned alive, buildings destroyed, looted, burned to the ground and the list goes on and on all in the name of “peace,” “Antifa,” and “BLM.”

    Additionally, felons such as murderers, rapists, robbers, gang members, child molesters, etc. are being let out of prison or jail early only to commit the same crimes again and again, sometimes going after the victims and seeking revenge for being arrested.

    Additionally, there is a HUGE push to continue sexualizing young children in school and teaching them and the rest of the world that child molesters are being discriminated against because child molestation should be a protected life-style. They are teaching communism and the hate of America in school and teaching the children about the propaganda of BLM.

    The police and military will not respond and the politicians want to take the guns away from the law abiding citizens. The government in some locations is trying to disarm the police or get rid of them completeley.

    I see no end in site because it is obvious that the Democrats will commit fraud with mail in voting in November, 2020. This will create lawsuits. The president will stay in office until the lawsuits are settled, but that could take forever. The Democrats will continue to riot. At some point shots will be fired and it will spin out of control.

    • REB August 13, 2020 at 10:47 am #

      Mr. Aria, I can only laugh at the absurdity of some of these tired allegations you make here. I would however comment on one specific allegation. You make a misreading of the Constitution (well several actually), but you share one with President Trump. Obstructing the results of the election will not keep him in office. His term expires at noon on January 20, 2021, irrespective of pending lawsuits, etc. In fact, if a couple of factors fall into place, the result could be that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi would become President.

  15. Ronald Lowe August 12, 2020 at 11:45 pm #

    So much hate… There is really nothing for me or anyone else to say … Because the hatred has already dirtied your spirits … so much hate!
    I can truly say that I think that when God comes to judge us He will simply walk out of the Room and turn off the light

  16. M Johns August 14, 2020 at 3:01 pm #

    My understanding is the second they drandished their guns it was a car jacking, at that point you can defend yourself.

  17. Rick554 August 16, 2020 at 9:33 am #

    If it comes to it, I will let GOD sort it out, rather then trust politicians, “activists” and a mob. I will defend myself , my Family and the Constitution to my last breath.

  18. Jonathan Ware August 17, 2020 at 9:58 am #

    Terrorism

    Blocking roads is civil disobedience and considered a minor violation. Like driving over the speed limit (also a minor violation) enforced by fines. Repeated and deliberate convictions result in larger fines and can include jail time. It is not terrorism.

    Terrorism is the use of random and violent action to create an atmosphere of fear. Randomness is important as you never know when or if the next bomb will go off and that’s how the atmosphere of fear is created.

    Drawing a Weapon

    Drawing a firearm in the face of property damage, verbal arguments, etc is not terrorism. Its is a felony in most states. Drawing a firearm randomly for no particular reason could be considered terrorism. Regardless it is also a felony.

    Drawing a firearm in the face of an action outside of your home that could result in serious injury or death is a protected action under “stand your ground” laws. Its a reasonable response to an unreasonable action.

Leave a Reply