Politics

The Politics of Weaponized Car Attacks

car attackBy – Tim Graham

As we learn more about the senseless SUV attack on the crowd attending a Christmas parade in Waukesha, Wisconsin, some liberal media outlets are energetically attempting to spin away from the suspect Darrell Brooks and his left-wing politics on social media.

That’s funny. With Kyle Rittenhouse, they quickly dug into his social media activity. The Washington Post warned last summer “the 17-year-old shadowed local law enforcement, filling his social media feeds with posts declaring that ‘Blue Lives Matter’ and photos of himself posing with guns.” For Brooks, the Post lamely mentioned Brooks wrote under the name MathBoi Fly and that “after multiple legal battles,” he “started turning the life he lived in the streets into music.”

In their Thanksgiving edition, USA Today’s front page explored the politics of “vehicle ramming.” But they shifted the scrutiny back to people who resent “Black Lives Matter” protests, especially the protesters that block roads and threaten drivers and passengers with violence.

Reporter Dennis Wagner wrote: “Weaponizing of vehicles is a practice sometimes used by terrorists abroad. But the wanton attacks have also surged in the United States. The increase began after the police murder of George Floyd prompted Black Lives Matter demonstrations, which in turn prompted angry or fearful motorists to run over protesters.”

This framing makes it sound like protesters are “peaceful” and not “angry” and pose no threat. Wagner added, “A Boston Globe survey identified at least 139 incidents in which vehicles ran into crowds of demonstrators since Floyd’s death in May 2020. Fewer than half resulted in criminal charges.”

Really? The original Globe story appeared on Halloween by reporter Jess Bidgood, who sounds more like an opinion writer. She began with the usual sympathetic figure: a man who was paralyzed after falling off an interstate overpass while blocking drivers in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Bidgood was outraged no one was arrested, despite admitting that the red pickup involved felt threatened as “protesters banged on its hood and threw things at the vehicle as it moved in.”

Bidgood wrote, “A Globe review of the recent incidents found there have been scores of people hit, dozens of injuries, at least three deaths, but precious little justice, much less sympathy, for the demonstrators injured, killed, or just plain terrified. Yet Oklahoma and 15 other states have considered bills protecting drivers, not protesters, as these ramming incidents have proliferated.”

In the minds of the Globe, driving into a road-blocking protest makes you guilty until proven innocent. “Given the choice between defending the safety of pedestrians protesting a police murder and the drivers of the vehicles running them down, prosecutors and lawmakers here have reserved their concern for the drivers.” You’re “running them down” if you attempt to escape.

In fact, Bidgood compared the drivers to Bull Connor and the violent racists who beat John Lewis and other civil rights protesters. “To those on the short end of this cold calculus, it feels like siding, during the 1960s civil rights protests, with Bull Connor’s firehoses over the Black children of Birmingham. Or with the cops with clubs over the brave, battered souls who traversed Selma’s Edmund Pettus Bridge.”

This article is littered with reckless smears like this. But this article is linked in Bidgood’s pinned tweet. She’s very proud of this.

The Globe’s ramming-incident numbers were accumulated in part with the help of “The Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project,” which sounds objective. But this ACLED group has also delighted the liberal media with the data that “the vast majority of Black Lives Matter protests — more than 93% — have been peaceful.”

Consumer beware: These studies are ideologically loaded.

Tim Graham is director of media analysis at the Media Research Center and executive editor of the blog NewsBusters.org.


We hope you've enjoyed this article. While you're here, we have a small favor to ask...

Support the AMAC Foundation. Our 501(c)(3) powers the AMAC Foundation’s Social Security Advisory Services. This team of nationally accredited advisors offers on-time, on-the-mark guidance for those approaching or receiving Social Security – at no cost.

Donate Now

If You Enjoy Articles Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter
and Download the AMAC News App

Sign Up Today Download

If You Enjoy Articles Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter!


Subscribe
Notify of
4 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Bill on the Hill
8 months ago

The wording of this so-called article SUCKS, period…It pulls you in both directions with no plausible answer…
Bill on the Hill…

Charles Nolan
8 months ago

At 74 years old, I have no energy for boxing with idiots. If you try to take me hostage, by blocking my vehicle, your family should not plan on an open casket funeral. If I believe you may be armed, I will make sure to render you unable to operate a firearm, such as backing back over a terrorist that is still moving after being run down.
Just as you have probable cause to think a home invader is armed, you can make the same assumption in the case of rioters blocking your vehicle. One or more are probably armed, as we see on the news.

John S.
8 months ago
Reply to  Charles Nolan

Sounds like you are no fan of the second amendment sir.

Dan W.
8 months ago

Hey Tim, speaking of car attacks, how about a shoutout to Jimmy Fields, Jr. who ran his car over a bunch of people in Virginia a few years back ? I wonder what his social media posts sounded like ?

4
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x