That’s not what “right of way” means. They do not have the right of way. They are violating the right of way.
They can be arrested, charged, and convicted for obstructing traffic. Their act of violating the right of way can also constitute unlawful detention, and the detained can use force to escape or arrest their captor.
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.
That’s not what “right of way” means. They do not have the right of way. They are violating the right of way.
They can be arrested, charged, and convicted for obstructing traffic. Their act of violating the right of way can also constitute unlawful detention, and the detained can use force to escape or arrest their captor.
Removed by mod
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.
Removed by mod