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

[SavannahMann]

Of course. Amazing. Someone who actually follows the law. Unlike the democrat lawmakers.

Right. And the announcement that he would pardon before the trial was held?

 

[westwall]

Right. And the announcement that he would pardon before the trial was held?

People do that all the time.

Hell, Bragg and fani both ran on promises they would go after Trump. That's prima facie evidence of political prosecution, but yet again, you don't care about the corruption of the legal system.

Funny that.

 

[SavannahMann]

People do that all the time.

Hell, Bragg and fani both ran on promises they would go after Trump. That's prima facie evidence of political prosecution, but yet again, you don't care about the corruption of the legal system.

Funny that.

There are big differences. Ones you ignore.

First there are preliminary hearings where all the evidence and arguments are discussed. If you not like a decision you appeal it. As the Prosecution has in the Documents case. If the decision by the judge is wrong it is overturned. As in the documents case.

Then there is finally a jury trial. The defense makes the case and the Jury decides what happened. This is by the way the Constitutional system we created at the founding of our nation.

If the Jury got it wrong. Then there are appeals. New evidence that proves innocence.

A pardon is forgiveness. Not exoneration. It is forgiving the individual for their crime. Promising one before the trial is political. Imagine if a Democrat promised to pardon a black person for murdering a white. Before the trial was ever held. Before a Jury heard the case. You would be headed to the Hospital. Your head would literally explode.

 

[westwall]

There are big differences. Ones you ignore.

First there are preliminary hearings where all the evidence and arguments are discussed. If you not like a decision you appeal it. As the Prosecution has in the Documents case. If the decision by the judge is wrong it is overturned. As in the documents case.

Then there is finally a jury trial. The defense makes the case and the Jury decides what happened. This is by the way the Constitutional system we created at the founding of our nation.

If the Jury got it wrong. Then there are appeals. New evidence that proves innocence.

A pardon is forgiveness. Not exoneration. It is forgiving the individual for their crime. Promising one before the trial is political. Imagine if a Democrat promised to pardon a black person for murdering a white. Before the trial was ever held. Before a Jury heard the case. You would be headed to the Hospital. Your head would literally explode.

No, not all. Sheesh, you really are either lying through your teeth, or have no clue.

A prelim lasts in most cases half an hour to three hours. It is a presentation of just enough evidence to convince a judge that there is enough to go forward to an actual trial.

A Pardon EXHONERATES those who were convicted WRONGLY!

The various groups that use DNA to prove their clients are INNOCENT of the crime they were convicted of don't then tell them "okay, you are going to be Pardoned for the crime you didn't commit, but first you have to confess that you actually did it"!

Do you have any idea how stupid that makes you look?

 

[SavannahMann]

No, not all. Sheesh, you really are either lying through your teeth, or have no clue.

A prelim lasts in most cases half an hour to three hours. It is a presentation of just enough evidence to convince a judge that there is enough to go forward to an actual trial.

A Pardon EXHONERATES those who were convicted WRONGLY!

The various groups that use DNA to prove their clients are INNOCENT of the crime they were convicted of don't then tell them "okay, you are going to be Pardoned for the crime you didn't commit, but first you have to confess that you actually did it"!

Do you have any idea how stupid that makes you look?

No. The appeal overturns the wrongful conviction. A pardon forgives them of their crimes.

Nixon was pardoned. By doing so Ford didn’t say that Nixon didn’t do it. He said Nixon was forgiven for what he did.

Every year people are pardoned. They are forgiven their crimes. The President, or Governor issuing the Pardon isn’t saying they were innocent all along. They are saying the person is forgiven. If you didn’t learn that in Civics while in High School. I suggest you start reading some textbooks. Because you were screwed on your education.

 

[Mac-7]

When talking to me, when you feel you have to have an actual moral justification, you insist, by making incredulous arguments that this was about self-defense.

My argument hasnt changed

If you review I said a long time ago that Perry should have avoided a confrontation if possible

If I were in his place I would have - if possible

But Foster brandishing a weapon the way he did was just asking for trouble also

That's why I called him a pussy

He was a wannabe tough guy who was playing games when he should be taking a dangerous weapon seriously

 

[westwall]

No. The appeal overturns the wrongful conviction. A pardon forgives them of their crimes.

Nixon was pardoned. By doing so Ford didn’t say that Nixon didn’t do it. He said Nixon was forgiven for what he did.

Every year people are pardoned. They are forgiven their crimes. The President, or Governor issuing the Pardon isn’t saying they were innocent all along. They are saying the person is forgiven. If you didn’t learn that in Civics while in High School. I suggest you start reading some textbooks. Because you were screwed on your education.

You have everything backwards, as usual.

INNOCENT people get Pardoned all the time.

Your claim that to get it they have to admit to a crime they didn't commit is asinine.

 

[SavannahMann]

My argument hasnt changed

If you review I said a long time ago that Perry should have avoided a confrontation if possible

If I were in his place I would have - if possible

But Foster brandishing a weapon the way he did was just asking for trouble also

That's why I called him a pussy

He was a wannabe tough guy who was playing games when he should be taking a dangerous weapon seriously

I am not a supporter of open carry for that exact reason. It is done strictly for intimidation. It is a narrow gap to jump from intimidation to fear.

However. Open carry is legal. Even if unwise. So when dealing with open carry you have to adjust your responses. Was he pointing the weapon at you? The one picture I’ve seen was very fuzzy. Foster appeared to be very close to the door. So close that there wasn’t any way he could have been pointing the weapon. The presence of the but-stock also seemed to back up that assessment. The rifle appeared to be pointing downwards. In a safe direction.

In that situation. Foster appeared to be in compliance with the law.

At the same time Perry ran a red light to get to the protestors. Easily as aggressive as just possessing a weapon. Then according to witnesses he bumped people in the road including a person in a wheelchair. That is assault. Even if they are jaywalking or whatever.

There was a case in Florida. Where two idiots with their families in the car got to road raging. One pulled a gun, and then the other and shots were exchanged.

One was determined to have acted defensively. Pulling his weapon only after the other idiot did. Firing back, instead of initiating the fire.

As far as I am concerned they were both wrong. They went looking for trouble, and found it. That is hard to justify in my mind. But my personal opinion is not the law. And the law said that one was guilty of attempted murder and the other was justified.

The law said Foster was legally carrying the rifle. Wise? No. But legal. Perry was not justified in his actions.

I don’t care about the idiots protesting. I don’t care about their ranting and raving. I don’t give a shit if they are walking down the road and making asses of themselves. That is a problem for the cops and the government to sort out. They are the ones we have empowered to deal with the situation. If they don’t do a good job we can vote them out and try someone new.

It isn’t Perry’s place to charge the crowd and try and clear the road. He isn’t trained or empowered by law to do so. That is not his job. He went looking for trouble and found it.

It wasn’t self defense. On that I have to go with the jury and the evidence. He is forgiven for his crime. That is again, the law. The Pardon is the final word on the issue.

 

[forkup]

My argument hasnt changed

If you review I said a long time ago that Perry should have avoided a confrontation if possible

If I were in his place I would have - if possible

But Foster brandishing a weapon the way he did was just asking for trouble also

That's why I called him a pussy

He was a wannabe tough guy who was playing games when he should be taking a dangerous weapon seriously

Lol, at this point I'm amazed you aren't choking on your own BS. You don't call someone you perceive as acting foolishly a pussy. You call them dumb, or foolish. Or whatever. Pussy is reserved for cowards. Someone shying away from an unpleasant duty.

Look if you want to polish turds for a racist, grooming, murderer. All words I can use in the literal sense of the word and prove true that's your business.

But please for the love of God, don't insult my and your own intelligence.

 

[Mac-7]

It isn’t Perry’s place to charge the crowd and try and clear the road. He isn’t trained or empowered by law to do so. That is not his job. He went looking for trouble and found it.

You and forkup are making the same inconsistent argument

Yes Foster had a legal right to foolishly open carry an AK47 during a riot/protest

But you deny that Perry had a legal right to drive his car on a public street whether Black Liars Matter rowdies like it or not

And they had no legal right to mob his car

A little common sense by everyone involved was missing

 

[Mac-7]

Lol, at this point I'm amazed you aren't choking on your own BS. You don't call someone you perceive as acting foolishly a pussy.

I said Perry acted foolishly

But he was no pussy who was playing a game of Billy Bad Ass - maybe to impress his girl friend - the way Foster was

 

[SavannahMann]

You and forkup are making the same inconsistent argument

Yes Foster had a legal right to foolishly open carry an AK47 during a riot/protest

But you deny that Perry had a legal right to drive his car on a public street whether Black Liars Matter rowdies like it or not

And they had no legal right to mob his car

A little common sense by everyone involved was missing

Right to drive? Yes. Right to make contact with people? No. Right to bump them with his car? Absolutely not. That would be illegal no matter what.

 

[Mac-7]

Right to drive? Yes. Right to make contact with people? No. Right to bump them with his car? Absolutely not. That would be illegal no matter what.

Do do expect to stand in traffic like a sacred cow in India?

The mob of BLM wackos were illegally blocking the street

I would not have done that

Would you?

 

[westwall]

Right to drive? Yes. Right to make contact with people? No. Right to bump them with his car? Absolutely not. That would be illegal no matter what.

If they mob your car in an attempt to prevent your movement that is de facto kidnapping. Expect a violent response from now on.

We have too many videos of innocent people being dragged out of their cars and violently attacked.

The rioters screwed the pooch when they started that bullshit. Now, EVERYONE has the legit right to be concerned for their safety in that situation.

You should either tell your terrorists to stop that bullshit or expect a violent response.

You asked for it, you will get it in the long run.

 

[SavannahMann]

Do do expect to stand in traffic like a sacred cow in India?

The mob of BLM wackos were illegally blocking the street

I would not have done that

Would you?

Regardless. What does the law say about it? If you hit them you have committed Assault right? In Georgia it is Assault with a Deadly Weapon, even if you just bump them.

We are debating two things. How smart it was. And if it was a crime. We both agree it wasn’t smart. But the law says that Perry committed a crime.

 

[westwall]

Regardless. What does the law say about it? If you hit them you have committed Assault right? In Georgia it is Assault with a Deadly Weapon, even if you just bump them.

We are debating two things. How smart it was. And if it was a crime. We both agree it wasn’t smart. But the law says that Perry committed a crime.

It says it's against the law to block a road.

 

[forkup]

You and forkup are making the same inconsistent argument

Yes Foster had a legal right to foolishly open carry an AK47 during a riot/protest

But you deny that Perry had a legal right to drive his car on a public street whether Black Liars Matter rowdies like it or not

And they had no legal right to mob his car

A little common sense by everyone involved was missing

The only reason you claim it's inconsistent is because you start from the premise that carrying a weapon legally and using a car to run a red light and purposefully drive into a crowd are equivalent. They are not. Running a red light is a misdemeanor and purposefully driving into a crowd is assault. Carrying a weapon on the other hand is perfectly legal in Texas. It's all about intent. As most crimes are. This is not about competing rights. This is about one person murdering another, because he thought he could get away with it.

 

[Mac-7]

If you hit them you have committed Assault right?

Perry didnt hit anyone with is car

 

[forkup]

I said Perry acted foolishly

But he was no pussy who was playing a game of Billy Bad Ass - maybe to impress his girl friend - the way Foster was

Nah he was the cool kid that KILLED a guy because he didn't like his politics. As I said. You applaud political violence aimed as those you don't like. Something you are willing to admit to other people who share your political affiliation.

 

[westwall]

Nah he was the cool kid that KILLED a guy because he didn't like his politics. As I said. You applaud political violence aimed as those you don't like. Something you are willing to admit to other people who share your political affiliation.

You mean the asshole in North Dakota who murdered that 16 year old by running him over, that poor kid?