I know it is not a Christian thing to say, but short of BLM/Antifa, Critical Mass is an event that makes you wish you could play bumper cars against bicycles. The legal problem is they are considered a “woman”: No matter how you slice it or dice it, they will be seen as the poor weak individuals attacked by the mean guy husky #300 guy for no reason. A close third are people riding two-wheeled rice burners like they lived in a video game, but they sometime end up trying to occupy the same space at the same time as a much bigger steel and glass object or vertical construction.

Spread the love

By Miguel.GFZ

Semi-retired like Vito Corleone before the heart attack. Consiglieri to J.Kb and AWA. I lived in a Gun Control Paradise: It sucked and got people killed. I do believe that Freedom scares the political elites.

27 thoughts on “Still amazed that Critical Mass does not generate bodies”
  1. They are breaking the windows of your car, using bicycles as weapons while screaming “get out the car, nigga” I refer to Florida 776.013:

    (2) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using or threatening to use defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:
    (a) The person against whom the defensive force was used or threatened was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle;

    This is why I have a dash camera.

        1. @Divemedic: In this particular event, most of the attacks were from the rear and sides. One might need 4 of the cameras. 😉

    1. Birdog357 – so does Florida, but prosecutors still will prosecute self-defenders for political reasons and for political power.

  2. What, if anything, did these people do to attract the loving attention of these lovely people? There were other vehicles stuck in traffic.

  3. I counted like three potential good shoots in thar video. Divemedic is spot on, anyone using force to enter or extract the driver from a vehicle with the windows up and door locked is a legal target. Had a window actually shattered it’s game on.

    1. I was told in CCW class, by a 35+ year cop, when they hit your glass, it turns them into a free fire zone, shoot the closest one first and work your way around the perimeter.

      1. Till the perimeter is not breached, it could go either self-defense or Assault with a deadly weapon against you. Glass is broken and as much as a hair goes in, Castle Doctrine applies at least in Florida

        1. Indiana really does have the best gun laws.
          Indiana Code 35-41-3-2 states that, “a person is justified in using reasonable force, including deadly force, against another person and does not have a duty to retreat…if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent or terminate the other person’s unlawful entry of or attack on the person’s dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle.” 

          My read is that they don’t even need to actually gain entry for force to be justified, merely the attempt is enough.

          1. Birdog, how much does it matter one’s read of the law? I question that it hardly matters in the course of events which involve a jury of your ‘peers’ and power hungry prosecutors and ambulance chasing lawyers and public opinion in this highly divided and politicized culture. Many people think themselves reasonable yet are surprised to find it ain’t so, at least to the degree they thought. With one’s life hanging in the balance in the after action, they best be very sure and solid in their perception.

            The key word is ‘reasonably’. Since you’ll likely have to convince a jury that you acted reasonably, with the prosecutor throwing all kinds of BS at you, in this day and age, I think waiting as long as you can would further solidify the case for self-defense.

            Without video or strong testimony by others, not waiting may not be convincing to a jury who were not there therefore did not feel the emotions when grave threat to their person was imminent. The deeper into the threatening event you can wait, the better your case. Too, would it change your thoughts or behavior when knowing that attackers may employ the tactic of false movement to the purpose of eliciting a certain response from you?

            (In the Rittenhouse trial, I think it was Rosenbaum who first initiated false movements towards Kyle in order to provoke Kyle to escalate. Kyle would have been roasted if he fell for what in hindsight was seen as false steps.)

            The moment you squeeze that trigger your life will drastically change and not for the better. That applies even when everyone agrees you were in the right. Be very careful.

            This is a question I tangle with and have yet come to a satisfactory answer. The several firearm instructors of whom I have attended their classes haven’t instilled any confidence in the matter. The best answer so far is, Don’t be there. That too is unsatisfactory because it presumes that one went to where trouble can be found. We know that isn’t always true because trouble sometimes finds you.

            1. I would say that once they start beating on your windows, they’ve made their intent clear. Note also, that force is not only firearms, but the 4,000 lb hunk of iron you are sitting in. You can use the force of your vehicle to make an escape. Then, you have the additional argument that you made an attempt to retreat, even though it’s explicitly not required here(we are SYG and Castle Doctrine, and that includes in your vehicle)

              1. One would think that a person sitting on your chest and pounding your head into the pavement would make an assailant’s intent clear, but George Zimmerman was prosecuted anyhow.
                One would also think that a person saying “If I catch you alone, I am going to fucking kill you” who later catches you alone and chases you for more than 100 meters, then continues to advance to the point where he grabs your weapon to take it from you is a signal of intent, but there are still people who scream that it was enough of a provocation for Rittenhouse to even HAVE a gun so as to justify trying to kill him.

                  1. But Zimmerman had a $2 million legal bill, Rittenhouse $1 million. The process itself is the punishment.

                    1. Sadly, it’s too late for fixing anything. $30 trillion is debt, a declining economy, our military now out classed by China.

                      We are riding this to the collapse. That is the only possible outcome

              2. @Birdog357: When the guy shot forward, I thought “Why doesn’t he back up suddenly.”

                Then I thought with people filming, he’d be the white supremacist attacking poor unarmed people with his racist vehicle. Sigh.

                Another reason to avoid cities. Or traffic.

                I have added a non-LE ECD device to my vehicular options and I planning to go for the above mentioned dash cam.

  4. The other day in Boston an 82 year old motorist was severely beaten by a mob of ATV and dirt-bike riders who forced him to the side of the road, and he foolishly opened his window. Clearly he had not read the “drive over Antifa rioters” rule. It seems that mobs of unlicensed riders terrorizing the city streets is an every day occurrence in Boston, where the authorities don’t do much about it. (They did say they have “confiscated 100 cycles” but no indication that they arrested anyone. And did they confiscate permanently or temporarily? I’ve been known to observe that loss of the vehicle should be one of the penalties for 2nd or subsequence offense DUI.)

  5. I do not miss that shit at all in Miami/Broward. The “MLK Rideout” and similar fuckery in Broward made me wish for an MRAP or Saracen to drive to work instead of a Ford Escape.

Login or register to comment.