Gov. Abbott Pardons Sgt. Perry After Killing BLMer with an AK-47

Oh really? Mind doing it again. When can self defense NOT be invoked?

What's there to prevent you for instance killing me when I'm walking towards you while open carrying?

What's there to prevent me from killing you during a discussion of the only thing I need to claim is that I felt threatened.


You have described self defense as a nearly universal excuse for murder. I want to know if you think there are limitations?
You are making zero sense. No one can go kill someone because they "feel" threatened. There has to be a legit reason for concern.

A mob of people, surrounding your vehicle, screaming at you, and one approaches with a rifle is a legit fear for your life.

Here's a suggestion.

STOP MOBBING CARS IN THE STREET!

THAT ISN'T PEACEFUL PROTEST!
 
So, a guy purposefully drives into a crowd. So he gets surrounded and then shoots a guy. And it's the crowd who instigated it? Riiiiight... sounds logical.
I cant say if Perry was looking for trouble as you imply

Yet there is no question that was the protesters intention

Which is not to say that they planned to kill or do serious bodily harm to Perry as was the case with Reginald Denny during the LA riots

But the possibility was there
 
Last edited:
I cant say if Perry was looking for trouble as you imply

Yet there is no question that was the protesters intention

Which is not to say that they planned to kill of do serious bodily harm to Perry as was the case with Reginald Denny during the LA riots

But the possibility was there
The jury sure as hell could. On account of Perry running a red light, honking and squealing his tires while turning into them.

This on top of the social media posts I showed you. If you think it's reasonable that was simply all accidental and coincidental I can't help you. Especially because his explanation for his driving was proven to be a lie.
 
You are making zero sense. No one can go kill someone because they "feel" threatened. There has to be a legit reason for concern.

A mob of people, surrounding your vehicle, screaming at you, and one approaches with a rifle is a legit fear for your life.

Here's a suggestion.

STOP MOBBING CARS IN THE STREET!

THAT ISN'T PEACEFUL PROTEST!
If somebody DRIVES INTO A GROUP OF PEOPLE, the car will be surrounded by definition. As for him approaching. He was there already and knocked on Perry's window. Again by Perry's own admission.
 
Oh BS. BLM BLOCKED ROADS and used intimidation tactics.

Stay out of the dang road..OR WIN STUPID PRIZES.

NO SMPATHY HERE. NONE
I see. "I don't think stupid people should have any protections under the law, so I'm for pardoning an idiot who purposefully drove his car into a group of protesters and shot one of them thinking simply claiming self-defense would get him of the hook."

Stupidity works both ways, if you want to look at protesting as stupid.
 
Does the DA have video of that?

Or is it based on BLM testimony?
No based on Perry's initial statements.

Gonzalez reminded jurors that Perry initially told police that he ran a red light into the group; that he lied by later telling them that he’d been texting on his phone and pulled into the group by mistake; and that he lied again when he later claimed that the light had been yellow when he rounded the corner.

 
The jury sure as hell could. On account of Perry running a red light, honking and squealing his tires while turning into them.

This on top of the social media posts I showed you. If you think it's reasonable that was simply all accidental and coincidental I can't help you. Especially because his explanation for his driving was proven to be a lie.
A partisan jury you meant to say. Led about by an unethical DA.
 
I see. "I don't think stupid people should have any protections under the law, so I'm for pardoning an idiot who purposefully drove his car into a group of protesters and shot one of them thinking simply claiming self-defense would get him of the hook."

Stupidity works both ways, if you want to look at protesting as stupid.
Stupidity is blocking roads..then approaching their cars, shsking the car and threatening the driver and then go....WHY DID HE SHOOT?

 
No based on Perry's initial statements.

Gonzalez reminded jurors that Perry initially told police that he ran a red light into the group; that he lied by later telling them that he’d been texting on his phone and pulled into the group by mistake; and that he lied again when he later claimed that the light had been yellow when he rounded the corner.

I will concede one thing

If I were in Perry’s place I would have avoided that street if possible

But if I was Foster I would not be carrying an AK47 to a violent street protest either

Both Perry and Foster had a constitutional right to do what they did

Meaning Foster carrying the AK and Perry driving down a public street

And both were unwise to exercise those rights on that night
 
I will concede one thing

If I were in Perry’s place I would have avoided that street if possible

But if I was Foster I would not be carrying an AK47 to a violent street protest either

Both Perry and Foster had a constitutional right to do what they did

Meaning Foster carrying the AK and Perry driving down a public street

And both were unwise to exercise those rights on that night
One action was unwise. One action was criminal. Again, self-defense is NOT a valid defense when you are determined to have started the action.

I'm glad you conceded what you did. It is still a cop-out. The problem isn't that he didn't avoid that street. The problem is that he wanted to be in that street because he wanted to provoke.
 
On action was unwise. One action was criminal. Again, self-defense is NOT a valid defense when you are determined to have started the action.

I'm glad you conceded what you did. It is still a cop-out. The problem isn't that he didn't avoid that street. The problem is that he wanted to be in that street.
You have claimed that Foster had a right to carry the AK47 that night

But Perry had an equal right to drive his car down that public street
 
You have claimed that Foster had a right to carry the AK47 that night

But Perry had an equal right to drive his car down that public street
Sure. But that action invalidated his right to self-defense under Texas law. Because the reason for it.

That's one of the few restrictions that Texas recognizes on self-defense. Namely that you can't provoke a fight and then claim self-defense.
 
So it wasn’t pointed at him and therefore he didnt have grounds to claim he was actually threatened by it.

Get out of a car when a cop stops you holding an AK pointed at the ground and see if the cop shoots you or thinks its ok because you're not pointing it at him.

Ask that black guy who opened the door for a cop holding a handgun pointed at the ground if that cop didn't think he was a threat and immediately shoot him. And he was in his own home. This guy was in a rabid mob on a public street at night surrounding this guys car. TOTALLY different.
 
Sure. But that action invalidated his right to self-defense under Texas law. Because the reason for it.

That's one of the few restrictions that Texas recognizes on self-defense. Namely that you can't provoke a fight and then claim self-defense.

Perry did not provoke a fight

he had a legal right to drive on that public street
 
Perry did not provoke a fight

he had a legal right to drive on that public street
You keep on repeating that like it will all of a sudden become valid. If you run a red light, so you can ride into a group of people, almost hitting one of them, those people will NOT look upon you kindly. That is called a provocation.

If I drive a car on a street and aiming for pedestrians, the fact that I'm allowed on the street doesn't all of a sudden negates my purpose for being on that street.
 
You keep on repeating that like it will all of a sudden become valid. If you run a red light, so you can ride into a group of people, almost hitting one of them, those people will NOT look upon you kindly. That is called a provocation.

If I drive a car on a street and aiming for pedestrians, the fact that I'm allowed on the street doesn't all of a sudden negates my purpose for being on that street.

Are you really this fucking stupid? You can't be. Whose sock are you? Craponus, is that you? There is only one poster here as stupid as you, you have to be his sock. That's gotta be you. Man, you almost had me fooled into thinking TWO liberals could be as stupid as you. Good to know, it's just you as a sock.

Where is the proof he "ran a red light?" and WTF does that have to do with the shooting of an armed guy crowding his car? And since when does a "group of people" have authority on a public road over a car? You cannot block public streets. That's illegal, so the group of people were committing a crime.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top