Gov. Greg Abbott pardons Daniel Perry, veteran who murdered police brutality protester in 2020

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

Ok so he was waving a gun around and got shot...in Texas.

Meh...ya gits but ya pays fer 

"waving a gun around" as CLAIMED by the guy who shot him. Are you saying that the JURY never heard SWORN TESTIMONY that Perry was threatened with a gun?

[Hodad]

5 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

I looked at some articles about the case and I don't see anything that said he was going to kill protestors. He did say he would shoot looters.

Benefit of the doubt, but your search is incomplete.

 

He had a lot of conversations about killing people. About what one could get away with in a "good shoot." All of those messages were shared in court. Making it pretty clear that this encounter is something Perry at least fantasized about, if not outright planned. Not a single witness testified that Foster pointed a gun at Perry. Perry didn't claim so either. 

He ran a red light to drive into the crowd, and when somebody complained about it Perry pre-emptively shot the person. Fulfilling his fantasy.

Messages in court

On the night of the protest, Perry’s revolver was in between his seat and the center console. [not where he normally kept it]

Safari searches also entered into evidence revealed Perry looked up protests happening in Austin and Dallas.

“Make sure you only use one shot on the protestors so if they try you have enough. I’ll only shoot the ones in the front and push the pedal to the metal,” said a prosecutor, reading off the message.

[Hodad]

2 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Ok so he was waving a gun around and got shot...in Texas.

Meh...ya gits but ya pays fer 

Open carry is legal. It's also (in my view) asking for trouble. But the gun nuts disagree wholeheartedly--until the guy open carrying is protesting something they disagree with. 

At any rate, open carrying does not give someone the right to shoot you "just in case" you might point your gun at them. That's why Perry was convicted of murder instead of being sheltered under Texas generous "stand your ground" law.

There is no reason whatsoever this murderer should be back on the street. 

[Hodad]

5 hours ago, User said:

A. Just saying false doesn't make it so. Your comment about running a red light doesn't make what I said false. Also, his running a red light was basically a rolling stop on a right-hand turn. It's something 99% of everyone in the world does when making right turns... 

B. Foster was part of an illegal protest blocking the streets, which stopped Perry from freely traveling. 

C. And a Pardon Board and Governor pardoned him. 

My point was quite simple and still true: When the left supports lawlessness in the streets like this, be prepared for the consequences. When you participate in lawlessness like this, carrying a rifle in a threatening way... be prepared for the consequences. 
 

Indeed, my saying that your statement was false doesn't make it false. The fact that it's false, makes it false. You said, "These "protestors" angrily surrounded and stopped this guy in his car." When what really happened is that he ran a red light to drive into the crowd of protesters. Ergo, your description of the event is false. Now I suppose instead of just acknowledging that you got it wrong, you'll lie about it for 7 pages.🙄

Are you going to go on record saying that open carrying a rifle is an invitation of some sort to be shot? That the shooter shouldn't face consequences? What exactly are you hedging at?

[Legato]

28 minutes ago, robosmith said:

The fact that you choose to believe LIES does not make them facts. Perry is quoted as saying HE BELIEVED the weapon WOULD BE POINTED at him.

 

What would you do, pacify him with a rainbow coloured unicorn. It only takes a couple of seconds to point and fire

[robosmith]

12 minutes ago, Legato said:

What would you do, pacify him with a rainbow coloured unicorn. It only takes a couple of seconds to point and fire

I would make open carry illegal so scaredy cats are not tempted to kill them.

[Nationalist]

3 hours ago, robosmith said:

"waving a gun around" as CLAIMED by the guy who shot him. Are you saying that the JURY never heard SWORN TESTIMONY that Perry was threatened with a gun?

What? Have you been drinking?

[Nationalist]

3 hours ago, Hodad said:

Open carry is legal. It's also (in my view) asking for trouble. But the gun nuts disagree wholeheartedly--until the guy open carrying is protesting something they disagree with. 

At any rate, open carrying does not give someone the right to shoot you "just in case" you might point your gun at them. That's why Perry was convicted of murder instead of being sheltered under Texas generous "stand your ground" law.

There is no reason whatsoever this murderer should be back on the street. 

Was the guy carrying a weapon, or waving it around?

[Aristides]

Americans think gunfights in the streets over any dumb excuse are a fine thing.

[Hodad]

14 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Was the guy carrying a weapon, or waving it around?

He was never accused of brandishing, AFAIK.

[robosmith]

4 hours ago, Nationalist said:

What? Have you been drinking?

That is YOUR SCHTICK. Made you unable to answer the question.

2 hours ago, Aristides said:

Americans think gunfights in the streets over any dumb excuse are a fine thing.

Sorry but you don't get to tar us all with the same brush.

[Aristides]

29 minutes ago, robosmith said:

 

Sorry but you don't get to tar us all with the same brush.

Yet you do nothing to change it.

[Nationalist]

Apparently Foster was waving his AK-47 around. The police had previously warned him about that. Perry claims Foster pointed the gun at him...so he shot Foster.

Welcome to Texas BLM...

[Hodad]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

Apparently Foster was waving his AK-47 around. The police had previously warned him about that. Perry claims Foster pointed the gun at him...so he shot Foster.

Welcome to Texas BLM...

Go ahead and quote "waving around."

Not even a single witness testified that he so much as raised the weapon, let alone brandished.

 

Edited May 25, 2024 by Hodad

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

Yet you do nothing to change it.

In FACT I am doing what I can to change what Americans think HERE.

What else can I possibly do beyond speaking out and voting to change the laws?

[User]

7 hours ago, Aristides said:

Americans think gunfights in the streets over any dumb excuse are a fine thing.

I get it, you don't like guns, but this is just silly nonsense now. 

There are plenty of laws regarding guns that preclude gunfights in the streets over any dumb excuse... 

[User]

12 hours ago, Hodad said:

Indeed, my saying that your statement was false doesn't make it false. The fact that it's false, makes it false. You said, "These "protestors" angrily surrounded and stopped this guy in his car." When what really happened is that he ran a red light to drive into the crowd of protesters. Ergo, your description of the event is false. Now I suppose instead of just acknowledging that you got it wrong, you'll lie about it for 7 pages.🙄

Are you going to go on record saying that open carrying a rifle is an invitation of some sort to be shot? That the shooter shouldn't face consequences? What exactly are you hedging at?

The fact that he ran a red light (again, what amounted to a rolling stop on a right-hand turn) and was then stopped by the crowd... does not preclude the fact that the crowd then angrily surrounded his car, including Foster, who approached him with a gun.  

My description of events is accurate. 

What I said was quite clear: "When the left supports lawlessness in the streets like this, be prepared for the consequences. When you participate in lawlessness like this, carrying a rifle in a threatening way... be prepared for the consequences. "

 

[Hodad]

24 minutes ago, User said:

The fact that he ran a red light (again, what amounted to a rolling stop on a right-hand turn) and was then stopped by the crowd... does not preclude the fact that the crowd then angrily surrounded his car, including Foster, who approached him with a gun.  

My description of events is accurate. 

What I said was quite clear: "When the left supports lawlessness in the streets like this, be prepared for the consequences. When you participate in lawlessness like this, carrying a rifle in a threatening way... be prepared for the consequences. "

 

The crowd "stopped him" by existing as he drove into them? 🤣

That's about the intellectual equivalent of, "Hey, you assaulted my fist with your face!"

Goddamn. You're hitting new lows. Seems there is absolutely nothing you won't say to defend the indefensible.

Edited May 25, 2024 by Hodad

[Nationalist]

9 hours ago, Hodad said:

Go ahead and quote "waving around."

Not even a single witness testified that he so much as raised the weapon, let alone brandished.

 

"I believe he was going to aim at me. I didn’t want to give him a chance to aim at me,"

That's Perry's testimony. In Texas, that's all that's necessary.

A BLM terrorist got what he asked for. An armed confrontation. He lost.

End of story.

[Aristides]

5 hours ago, User said:

I get it, you don't like guns, but this is just silly nonsense now. 

There are plenty of laws regarding guns that preclude gunfights in the streets over any dumb excuse... 

I’m not anti gun but the American obsession with them is insane.

Abbot’s actions say otherwise.

The phoney thoughts and prayers every time a school room full of kids get massacred says otherwise.

Edited May 25, 2024 by Aristides

[Hodad]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

"I believe he was going to aim at me. I didn’t want to give him a chance to aim at me,"

That's Perry's testimony. In Texas, that's all that's necessary.

A BLM terrorist got what he asked for. An armed confrontation. He lost.

End of story.

Great, you quoted the exact same line I quoted on page 1 in response to your false claim that Foster was aiming at Perry. This is like a treadmill.

So, in summary, even Perry admits Foster wasn't aiming at him. Foster simply had a rifle on a sling. Which is not just cause to shoot someone. Hence, why Perry was convicted. Well, that and the substantial evidence that Perry planned the murder. 

I do find it funny that you are arguing that it's justified to shoot anyone who is open carrying. 

[User]

8 hours ago, Hodad said:

The crowd "stopped him" by existing as he drove into them? 🤣

That's about the intellectual equivalent of, "Hey, you assaulted my fist with your face!"

Goddamn. You're hitting new lows. Seems there is absolutely nothing you won't say to defend the indefensible.

Yes, by illegally protesting in the streets. They certainly did stop him. It is a road, meant for driving on. He was forced to stop because those people illegally taking over the streets were in his way. 

There is some video, and you can see after he comes to a stop, many in the crowd start running to swarm the vehicle, including Foster, who approaches him with a gun. 

Had they simply walked on past him and left him be, none of this would have ever happened. Had Foster simply walked on by and let him be, none of this would have ever happened. 

These are facts, trying to insult me doesn't make your case any better. 

 

[User]

21 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Foster simply had a rifle on a sling. Which is not just cause to shoot someone. Hence, why Perry was convicted. Well, that and the substantial evidence that Perry planned the murder. 

No, that is not accurate to what was claimed at all. Perry did not claim he merely had a gun, he claimed that he was raising the gun towards him, and that is when he feared for his life. You do not have to wait for someone to actually be shooting you before you defend yourself. 

This is simply a matter of fact for what Perry perceived and claimed, which is more than he simply had a rifle on a sling. 

 

2 hours ago, Aristides said:

I’m not anti gun but the American obsession with them is insane.

Abbot’s actions say otherwise.

The phoney thoughts and prayers every time a school room full of kids get massacred says otherwise.

Of course you are anti-gun. That has been your schtick with me for the last few days now. 

Who are you to judge what other's feelings are regarding their sincere thoughts and prayers? 

[Nationalist]

30 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Great, you quoted the exact same line I quoted on page 1 in response to your false claim that Foster was aiming at Perry. This is like a treadmill.

So, in summary, even Perry admits Foster wasn't aiming at him. Foster simply had a rifle on a sling. Which is not just cause to shoot someone. Hence, why Perry was convicted. Well, that and the substantial evidence that Perry planned the murder. 

I do find it funny that you are arguing that it's justified to shoot anyone who is open carrying. 

Welcome to Texas.

Foster had no business rushing Perry's car with a gun.

A Terrorist got shot.

Good fcking riddance. 

[Aristides]

8 minutes ago, User said:

No, that is not accurate to what was claimed at all. Perry did not claim he merely had a gun, he claimed that he was raising the gun towards him, and that is when he feared for his life. You do not have to wait for someone to actually be shooting you before you defend yourself. 

This is simply a matter of fact for what Perry perceived and claimed, which is more than he simply had a rifle on a sling. 

 

Of course you are anti-gun. That has been your schtick with me for the last few days now. 

Who are you to judge what other's feelings are regarding their sincere thoughts and prayers? 

I'm not anti gun, just pro sanity. I don't agree with the Trudeau governments policy on guns, I think Canada's laws were already a good compromise between ownership and public safety and didn't need changing

The people expressing those phoney thoughts and prayers won't lift a finger to prevent it happening again, and again, and again. That's why they are phoney.