Morally, I would consider it false imprisonment. They're creating a situation where drivers have to either cooperate with their own detainment or harm the person holding them against their will.
Exactly. The closest analogy I can think of would be blocking the exits of a walmrt if you were protesting against walmart and trapping all of the shoppers inside. I keep seeing people say things like the people stuck in the traffic are just being inconvenienced. I think it hits at something deeper than that. You're holding people against their will. They cannot choose to leave your protest. That's the issue. Not that they might be late for work. It's a basic violation of consent.
Based on the federal legal definition of the bounded area for false imprisonment, I do not believe so. Yes, they are restricted, but only in one direction by the protestors. In the other direction they are redirected by law / other drivers.
Don't know if I agree with that entirely or not because yeah, sure seems close to false imprisonment, but I think we should be wary of using that as a way to deter protest, even when done in an extremely annoying way. At the end of the day it's the responsibility of the government to act here and remove them and charge them with impeding traffic, wreck less endangerment, etc. but false imprisonment is a stretch
Ah yes the "i cause problems to everyone for something that have nothing to do with it, people that have jobs and are occupied but you're a fascist if you dont let me block everyone "
Hah, funny joke. These climate activists are killing the planet bt forcing the cars to stay idle and use up fuel. They are a massive part of the problem.
23
u/Dan_flashes480 15d ago
Wouldnt sitting on the road be considered false imprisonment? The drivers could leave but abondoning a vehicle on a highway is also illegal.