A source told the BBC police shot at Arezoo Badri's car before targeting her directly.

A mother of two has been left paraplegic after being shot by Iranian police over an alleged violation of the country’s strict hijab rules, a source with knowledge of the case has told the BBC.

“She is paralysed from the waist down, and doctors have said it will take months to determine whether she will be permanently paraplegic or not.”

Arezoo Badri, 31, was driving home with her sister in the northern city of Noor on 22 July when police attempted to pull her over to confiscate her car.

The driver did not comply with the order to stop, prompting the officers to shoot, the police commander in Noor told Iran’s state-run news agency, without naming Ms Badri.

The incident comes after Iranian police announced a clampdown on women defying the nation’s compulsory dress code.

  • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1145·
    3 months ago

    Conservatism is a global plague of oppression and death. There is no place for hate-based ideologies like conservatism in a modern civilization.

      • Kalysta@lemm.eeEnglish
        51·
        3 months ago

        This is the definition of conservative.

        They’re enforcing a rule that’s over 1000 years old on penalty of death. And the rule makes no logical sense.

        • ArchRecord@lemm.eeEnglish
          221·
          3 months ago

          Here’s a great mini comic that explains that paradox I picked up a while ago:

          • Phoenicianpirate@lemm.eeEnglish
            111·
            3 months ago

            Funniest part of this is that I have seen many fascists use this to claim that their opposition is the intolerant ones, while others say that kicking out any group is going to provoke them to be ultra violent so they need to let them do as they please…

            Unless that group is antifa. They want the machine guns on them.

          • Schmoo@slrpnk.netEnglish
            4·
            3 months ago

            I don’t think this comic explains it well. I don’t like the “it is a paradox but we just have to make an exception” approach. A better solution to the paradox of tolerance is to explain that it isn’t a paradox at all, that tolerance is a contract, not an absolute rule. A tolerant society agrees to tolerate you so long as you tolerate others, and if you violate the contract you lose its’ protection.