No, sorry, it is not. “Right of way” means they are legally permitted to be there. If they had the right of way, it would not be lawful to remove them.
They do not have the right of way. It may not be completely legal in all cases to run their asses over, but they do not have the right of way. The travelers they are obstructing have the right of way. Travelers have the right to use the road, but non-travelers are illegally infringing on that right.
Yes, actually, it is, and you have to deal with them whether you want to or not. You can’t justify your hatred and bloodlust against protesters with the law; the law sides with them.
So yes, protesters on the street have the right of way. That’s the price you pay to live in a country that claims to be free. Don’t like it, move to Russia with your topsie Putin.
No, sorry, it is not. “Right of way” means they are legally permitted to be there. If they had the right of way, it would not be lawful to remove them.
They do not have the right of way. It may not be completely legal in all cases to run their asses over, but they do not have the right of way. The travelers they are obstructing have the right of way. Travelers have the right to use the road, but non-travelers are illegally infringing on that right.
Yes, actually, it is, and you have to deal with them whether you want to or not. You can’t justify your hatred and bloodlust against protesters with the law; the law sides with them.
So yes, protesters on the street have the right of way. That’s the price you pay to live in a country that claims to be free. Don’t like it, move to Russia with your topsie Putin.