In addition to the replies you have already received, did you watch any of the footage from the Berkley standoffs?
Our side was forcefully repelling the Antifa street shutdowns, using their bodies & force of will to escort vehicles trying to negotiate public thoroughfares. They were opening holes in the crowd while waving drivers around.
Personally, I got no problem with mowing them down. If the practice of ‘free speech’ involves pretending to be a speed bump, the natural consequences should apply. Sadly, the law frowns upon this.
How can I, or any other law-abiding citizen going about the business of her day, avoid participating in political activity if the participants refuse to let me leave the area? So as a person with a life & job to attend to, I heartily thank the Conservawarriors for keeping the streets open.
If an individual or group won't permit you to leave, and actively impedes your ability to do so, isn't that a crime called "false imprisonment"?
From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_imprisonment:
"False imprisonment occurs when a person is restricted in their personal movement within any area without justification or consent. Actual physical restraint is not necessary to a false imprisonment case. False imprisonment is a common-law felony and a tort. It applies to private as well as governmental detention."My understanding is that an individual may use force, including deadly force, to act in self defense (or defense of another) to avoid becoming a victim of false imprisonment.
Of course, it might ultimately be necessary to convince some entity—a prosecutor or jury, for instance—that you (or a third party you were acting on behalf of) felt legitimately that life or limb were a risk.
It might be up to a jury to determine whether the action in question was "reasonable" given the circumstances and the frame of mind of the person who acted defensively.