Climate Activists Block the Road as Man Rushes Home to Pregnant Wife
As he tries to drive off, others try to block him. But he refuses to back down. He ultimately breaks through the blockade and speeds away.
In recent years, a noticeable trend has emerged among activist groups: the deliberate disruption of everyday life to draw attention to their causes. Whether they are climate advocates stopping traffic, pro-Palestinian protestors occupying major intersections, or demonstrators rallying against President Donald Trump, a common thread runs through these actions — a belief that the urgency of their message justifies obstructing the rights and routines of ordinary citizens.
I came across a video on X featuring a small group of climate activists in Italy sitting/lying across a two-lane highway to raise public awareness about climate change. A young man, whom we are told is rushing home to get to his pregnant wife, pulls up, steps out of his car, and forcibly moves a protester out of his path. As he tries to drive off, others try to block him. But he refuses to back down. He ultimately breaks through the blockade and speeds away.
Italian citizen, who was trying to get to his pregnant wife, had to continue his way by crushing the climate activists who were blocking the roads. Was his actions justified?
pic.twitter.com/beJve81AmD— Out of Context Human Race (@NoContextHumans) June 24, 2025
The man who posted the video, which went up on Tuesday morning and has already garnered 20 million views, asked if the young man’s actions are justified. Every single response I read supported the driver.
One user suggested a better way the climate activists could make a difference:
Real climate activists pic.twitter.com/7og9XbF0XW
— The Immortal (@TheImmortal007) June 24, 2025
He also posted a “tutorial” to show others how to handle protestors who are blocking their way:
Guy going to work loses it when activists block roadway pic.twitter.com/7yWsJ0Cyhm
— The Immortal (@TheImmortal007) June 24, 2025
Another user pointed out the folly of this form of activism.
I’ll never understand what these activists think they’re accomplishing by these types of activities. Harassing every day citizens merely creates resentment against the cause. Makes me wanna go out and run my engine for an extra hour just for the sake of it..
— Cat (@catlaugh12) June 25, 2025
Frankly, it shouldn’t matter whether the young man in the video was racing to his pregnant wife’s side or simply driving home from work. The incident — and the overwhelming public attention it received — underscores the growing backlash against protest tactics that disrupt the lives of ordinary people.
Citizens are absolutely entitled to exercise their First Amendment rights, but when those rights are used to forcibly detain others or interfere with their daily routines, the line between peaceful protest and unlawful obstruction is clearly crossed.
If activist movements hope to persuade rather than provoke, they must rethink strategies that alienate the very public they need on their side. Blocking roads, trapping drivers, and creating public chaos may earn viral attention, but it does little to build genuine support — and often does more harm than good.
Protest is most effective when it appeals to conscience, not when it coerces through disruption. The message may be urgent, but the method matters. When activists choose tactics that respect the rights and dignity of others, they are far more likely to gain allies than enemies.
Our friend from Monday needs to hear this message.
Anti-ICE rioter is OUTRAGED after police “didn’t care” when she got hit by a car at a protest..
(She was rioting in the street btw) 💀💀 pic.twitter.com/XE1vd92qix
— American AF 🇺🇸 (@iAnonPatriot) June 22, 2025
Elizabeth writes commentary for The Washington Examiner and Legal Insurrection. She is an academy fellow at The Heritage Foundation. Please follow Elizabeth on X or LinkedIn.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Blocking the road is not exercising your 1st Amendment rights. Your right to PEACEABLY assemble is protected — not your right to imprison others, wasting the finite moments of their lives.
This is a simple enough problem to solve. Make obstructing the movement of people as part of your “protest” a violent felony, with a presumption of intent to cause death or severe bodily harm.
Call it the Reginald Denny Act.
This was in Italy. But, I certainly agree with your idea.
“…wasting the finite moments of their lives…”
I made similar comment on X. Those detained by the protesters are being robbed of time, an invaluable commodity.
“Between depriving a man of one hour from his life and depriving him of his life there exists only a difference of degree. You have done violence to him, consumed his energy. Elaborate euphemisms may conceal your intent to kill, but behind any use of power over another the ultimate assumption remains: “I feed on your energy.”
–FRANK HERBERT
“Blocking roads, trapping drivers, and creating public chaos may earn viral attention, but it does little to build genuine support — and often does more harm than good.”
It NEVER does any good. Never. No one’s mind has ever been changed, no cause ever promoted because a bunch of people are acting like thugs.
Even a progressive can understand this, so why are they doing it? It’s not to garner support for whatever The Current Thing™ is. Street cred with their peers? A chance for a hopeful young man to get laid? Daddy issues?
To trigger The Revolution, of course. They’re commies.
They need a severe beating. Wash, rinse, repeat.
Leftists’ and Dhimmi-crats’ agitprop stunts are performative narcissism. “Me, me, me. Look at me!”
These evil reprobates don’t give a damn about, or, think about, anyone else, so entranced are they by their theatrical performances.
Feverishly working on industrial grade pepper spray projectors for gar grilles.
Needn’t be pepper spray. Household ammonia works just as effectively in dispersing agitators as well as aggressive dogs.
Just a super soaker will work.
Ammonia could cause physical harm.
I suggest using cat piss.
Should we care about harming the scumbags?
No
No, we shouldn’t. But we also care if we end up charged with a serious offense when doing harm isn’t strictly necessary to get these idiots out of our way. Note this is different from my take on suitable actions against threatening mobs of Antifa/BLM types. If they’re threatening violence, just run them over, no cat piss necessary.
The three dollar restaurant grade spritz bottle used for cleaning the table after you leave works just fine. The nozzle is adjustable…. a single strong stream that can reach ten or more feet, or a fog that will barely be felt, or anywhere in between. The bottle holds a quart/litre, a fair supply of your preferred liquid. Anywhere from plain sterile water to lye, battery acid, strong saltwater,
Yeah, but he wants to rig it in the grill and activate it from inside the car. Probably need something sturdier than a Dollar Store spray bottle.
I would suggest something like a windshield washer fluid tank. Because ammonia works real nice to clean your windshield, too. (They put it in Windex for years, maybe still do.)
Sabre brand bear repellant spray, 7.9oz size, is the way to go. I’ve run off a couple of bears with the stuff, ought to work well on your typical “protester”.
This product gets good reviews:
https://www.amazon.com/Liquid-Ass-Mister/dp/B000OCEWGW
This overlooks the fact that these miniature Ernst Röhms want everyone who is not part of the Wokestapo to be dead or enslaved. The “political statement” they are making is: We can do what ever we want to you and no one will be able to stop it.
Until someone comes along who refuses to play tiddlywinks and insists on hand grenades instead.
The reason these shenannigans continue is that wimps abound who kow-tow to the rabble and perpetuate the madness.
Makes me think back to when the tree huggers chained themselves to the trees on the logging side, at which point the loggers were forced to bow down and worship the tree huggers. What SHOULD have happened is that a few MEN give a strong yank on the starting ropes of their Stihl falling saws and continue as they were, felling those big firs chained idiots included.
Spotted owls, my great big size sixteen and a half caulked Danners.
Blocking people from important things (pregnant wife) is perfect for the climate crazies and their ilk. It’s immensely passive aggressive, making it sham peaceful. It’s loud, attention grabbing and also completely pointless.
Of course. Just look at the video of them being dragged out of the road. They’re all just passive-aggressively flopping around, not actually FIGHTING but just making it as hard as possible.
The second they think actual violence is imminent they cower.
They rely on the people they are ‘protesting’ to be better people than they are.
And not long-haul truckers, most of whom have bottles of pee in their cab that need emptying.
This seems to fall squarely within the purview of the FAFO doctrine. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
I said years ago when these idiotic ‘protests’ started that exactly this was going to happen.
When citizens just trying to go about their lives realized that calling the police on these CRIMINALS – because they ARE criminals – not only would not end the so-called ‘protest’, but the police would actively protect them for hours while ‘negotiating’ with them, the only logical course of action would be to deal with them yourself, before the cops came.
And that’s an extremely dangerous place for a society to be.
Let’s just say whose fault it is here. The police who refuse to arrest them and their masters who refuse to prosecute and jail them. This is the case regardless of where the protest is or what it is for (unless of course you’re right of center in which case you have no rights, and the system will treat you with impunity and even shoot you down in cold blood).
I’ve never seen anyone stupid enough to try something like that around here. First of all, most people have trucks or SUV’s with 4WD. If you push over them slowly enough, it won’t damage your vehicle. Secondly, most people also have ready access to firearms, either on their person or in their vehicle. It might be interesting to see just how dedicated they are to their cause.
This is what it’s coming to.
Don’t know about running them over but punching a few in the face seems more than warranted. Almost obligatory in fact.
The perfect case for a Trunk Monkey.
Not sure. Monkeys are messy. Who wants to clean the trunk after they’ve been in there a while. Then when you let them out, they might turn on you. But I’m open to other animals. And this is Italy, maybe some Fettuccine to bribe them to move?
https://youtu.be/Rx6WB5YJia8?si=WlF5rr5goxF89s2m
There are more of these out there. But you get the idea.
The last video clip convinced me. Ok we go with the monkey.
@Concise that was good but I’d like the helicopter version from (at least) several hundred feet a la Pinochet.
Andrew Branca had a recent podcast with the title: “Swarmed Car, Mob Attack, Unintended Victim!” In some states, under the proper circumstances, one can use his car as a weapon to defend against a threat. You don’t have to risk being dragged from your car and seriously injured. Of course passively blocking the road won’t generally justify running over people. Listen to Branca, he’s the expert on this stuff.
The drivers in the video strike me as being somewhat gentle. Using non-lethal force to get through the mob might be justified in emergency situations. If I had to get to a pregnant wife I would be inclined to be somewhat rough with the blockers. Like a very painful kick. Don’t do this blocking stuff in Texas. Many people here travel armed, and don’t know the law. The blockers could end up seriously injured.
Actually, the law says they are illegally detaining you. And that crime is identical to kidnapping in many jurisdictions (like Texas) in terms of it being a violent felony – which can be resisted via deadly force. If you do not have an easy means of escape (like you’re right at a highway exit), you are being detained, no matter your urgency or the cause.
Real climate activists pic.twitter.com/7og9XbF0XW
— The Immortal (@TheImmortal007) June 24, 2025
Ah, but that’s actual hard, messy work, and you don’t get the thrill of bullying anyone. Where’s the fun in that? /sarc
I don’t care why the driver needs to get through. It doesn’t matter. He’s going about his lawful business, and the public roads are dedicated to allowing people to do exactly that. Nor do I care for what cause someone is blocking it. I don’t care whether they’re union picketers, civil rights activists, peace marchers, or a religious procession; if they’re on a public road without having first obtained a permit from the appropriate authority to officially close that road for the duration, with drivers appropriately redirected to an alternative route, they’re obstructing traffic.
And I have advocated for at least four decades that it ought to be lawful for a person going about his lawful business to go about that business regardless of who is obstructing him, by driving through or over the obstructors. If they get hurt that should be entirely their problem.
I logged in to give you that up vote.
So did I
This is what jury nullification is for. I would absolutely never convict a person who drove through a blockade of protesters for the harm he may have caused if it wasn’t done maliciously. Just don’t do it (convict). If we were all physically together, I’d make you all pinky swear it.
Bump bump.
.
Bump bump
What was that?
I think you hit a Californian.
Why do you think that?
I heard him say something about “sunny beaches.”
Back up once, to check what the bump cause was.
Pretty sure this is old and has been recycled. I saw it on the X last year. Sometimes this happens and things can go viral if they missed the inter NET* the first time.
*NET = the mythical net that ensnares a critical mass of views for internet vitality to manifest.
The UN’s “useful” idiots.
I just don’t get these speedbumps. Blocking a road just makes people angry and will win over nobody and does anyone at this point need to “raise awareness of climate change”? It’s shoved down our throats non stop
“whom we are told is rushing home to get to his pregnant wife”
It’s “who,” not “whom.” It’s the subject of “is rushing,” not the object of “are told.”
Easy test for this common news-report mistake is try leaving out “we are told” and see how it sounds.
The most common news version is “police said.”
For people who can’t tell who/whom cases, in modern English “who” sounds right when “whom” is prescriptively required, so just always use “who.”
The exception is fronted prepositions: “for whom the bell tolls.” “Who the bell tolls for” is okay though. That’s a register mistake, not a case mistake. Fronted prepositions are formal register and require a formal register “whom.”
Thurber says “whom” should be used when a note of austerity or dignity is wanted regardless of requirements.
https://www.ling.upenn.edu/~beatrice/humor/whom-thurber.html
except that a preposition isn’t a good word to end a sentence with……….
That’s the sort of nonsense up with which I will not put.
Pregnant wives are the worst complainers so it’s not a priority claim.
Blocking streets counts as fighting words in Ohio, which changes the nature of any charges.
rhhardin It’s remarkable how you manage to be a dick in all circumstances.
Good for him. Keep your car moving. They’ll get out of the way.
Same way I treat Canadian Geese. Had one not move.
Everyone else stops entirely for them and lets them have their way.
FYI, it’s “Canada goose” and “Canada geese.” “Canada” is always “Canada.”
Fun fact: The species was split a few years ago into “Canada goose” and “cackling goose,” with the larger subspecies being retained in the former and smaller subspecies being assigned to the latter. There are physical differences (besides size), but the easiest way to tell the difference is the former “honks” and the latter “cackles” (obviously).
Go ahead and run one down. You do realize they are covered under the Migratory Bird Act and are a game animal, right?
Better yet, drive your Kenworth whenever
“the weather” looks like it will be “stormy”. As far as I recall, Rodney King was the last guy to stop on demand. After what they did to him, no one stops for the mob anymore when in a large vehicle.
Reginal Denny was after King.
Confident that’s what he meant. Good clarification tho.
An injury lawyer told me if I ever ran over someone in my car to back over him again to make sure he was dead. The possible financial cost is lower.
community notes says from 2023 and guy was saying he was going to work.
who knows?
still, block the road then you will kiss a grill hard.
Was his actions justified?
Yes. And he honestly should have been less concerned about their well-being.
I liked it better before cellphones. He could have done what was needed and then denied it.
alienate the very public they need on their side
Well, actually, they don’t need the public on their side. They’re about fomenting a revolution (they are communists). They want to start something so they can have a Glorious October or something and they can finally install a government of the proletariat. They are NOT out there to convince anyone. They’re manning the barricades against the supposed aristocracy – you know, the middle and working “classes.”
Why do they always haul the protestors away on their back? Cross your arms before you grab the legs, straighten your arms, and turn them 180 degrees; then haul them off the road.
I missed the presentation covering Italians’ First Amendment rights. When exactly did they get them?
Like all people, their Creator endowed them with these unalienable rights. The problem is that the Italian legal authorities don’t care.
Hey, it’s not some trendy thing like yours.
Theirs go all the way back to the Romans!
We need laws that are very clear and not up to the whims of a leftist judge, saying that the presumption is in favor of the driver, and it is absolutely not a crime to hit or even kill someone who is intentionally blocking or surrounding your car on a roadway, unless it’s a crosswalk and you have the light.
It’s very dangerous to have the driver hesitate and have to figure out what he or she can do to get out of the situation.
The Governor of the (Free) State of Florida — long may he serve — signed a law that essentially permits a driver caught in a protest to continue on through it. I suppose there may be some limitations on the speed the driver can use to get through the obstruction, but am not sure.
It is past time we reexamine the definition of the word “protest” and stop calling criminal acts, “protests”.
“Riot” is a good word with significant applicability.
We’ve seen thoughts and ideas popularly described as “micro-aggressions”; I posit that kidnapping, unlawful detention, wanton violation of (civil / human / natural / Constitutional) rights must be “bigger than micro” and can therefore easily be referred to at least as “assaults”, with the perpetrators being referenced as such and/or as “assailants”. At least as “alleged assailants”.
People who use terms like “protestors” to describe “assailants” are “liars”, intentionally spreading falsehoods.
TAKE
OUR LANGUAGE
BACK.
This is where it begins.