Crime TX man murders BLM protestor. Abbot vows to pardon murderer ASAP

[Loiosh]

Read the exchange. We were discussing the BLM POS being warned by the police about how he was acting. But, I'm well aware your partisan brain is incapable of understanding thats its possible I think both are a POS.

You calling me partisan shows a staggering lack of self-awareness. I've crossed "party lines" many times (most notably Rittenhouse) and I don't think I've seen you do it once.

Celebrating the murder of a BLM activist is pretty despicable, even for this place. Taking the time to call the victim a POS is particularly petty.

 

[Mr Holmes]

You calling me partisan shows a staggering lack of self-awareness. I've crossed "party lines" many times (most notably Rittenhouse) and I don't think I've seen you do it once.

Sure sure, weren't you defending Hillary being cozy with a literal klans member not too long ago?

Celebrating the murder of a BLM activist is pretty despicable, even for this place. Taking the time to call the victim a POS is particularly petty.

I don't see how being a blm activist is supposed to be a shield for criticism.

 

[Confucamus]

Lol show where there was any violence at this protest before Perry actions. I get you are another one that wants to classify every BLM protest as violent to justify sickening actions taken against this protester exercising multiple rights. However the violence that took place during this particular protest was carried out by the shooter who stated he wanted to take such actions. Apparently you find this key information unimportant.

I don't need a reason to classify BLM as violent. They do that all on their own. Even their "mostly peaceful" protests were filled will protestors calling for violence against police.

That's not how the law works. You don't get to take actions against others because you don't like or agree with what they are doing. Perry ran a red light turned when the road wasn't clear for him to do so, these actions are not to be ignored. Nor are his statement about how he would go about being able getting away with shooting protestor.

Two wrongs don't make a right. It's a bit insane for you to label someone brandishing a loaded weapon as something Perry "didn't like or agreed with."

He was at a full stop because otherwise he would have driven into the protester. He started his actions and the protesters reacted in the short amount of time they had to react. You don't get to drive your vehicle into pedestrians in the street on purpose then claim you did nothing wrong.

So he drove into them but stopped because he didn't want to drive into them?

You don't want to answer the question because it's a key point that would make your backwards opinion wrong lol. Foster legally open carrying his firearm doesn't make him a threat. The same would apply to anyone open carrying where the laws allow them to do so. The police officers opinion isn't a statement of law. The way Foster was carrying the weapon was not against the law, otherwise the officer himself failed to enforce the law.

Did it need to be against the law? The officer was warning him that could come across as aggressive. He didn't listen.

Foster was open carrying at a protest you don't like so you are fine with his death this is clear.

This is a lazy mischaracterization of my point of view. I haven't said any of that, but I think you realize you don't have a very good rebuttal other than to twist people's words.

You hold this opinion even though the jurry found the defenses evidence unsatisfactory include the officers statement to justify the murder of Foster.

You claim I'm making a strawman, yet you bring up other protest to show that this protest was violent. When Foster loses his right to open carry is very pivotal to this case and the fact you want to call it a strawman is ridiculous. You don't lose your rights because someone else creates a situation.

He didn't lose any rights, for the 10 millionth time. You keep fighting against a point that nobody is making.

 

[Confucamus]

That interview was like an hour before he got killed too. "They won't let us block roads anymore so I started carrying my rifle. The people who hate us are pussies and won't do anything about it."

Just a peaceful protestor exercising his rights!

 

[Loiosh]

Sure sure, weren't you defending Hillary being cozy with a literal klans member not too long ago?



I don't see how being a blm activist is supposed to be a shield for criticism.

Do you think Hillary is racist and supported what that Klansman stood for? How do you feel about all the conservative leaders hanging out with active white supremacists who not only haven't denounced white supremacy but are currently practicing antisemitism and race hatred?

I know this is hard for you to understand but being a BLM activist has nothing to do with anything for me. He's a murder victim but because of who he is and where you stand politically, you took the time to call him a POS.

All that matters here is that a scumbag that talked about murdering a protestor and getting off on self defense did exactly that, but was convicted. This guy did exactly what Rittenhouse was accused of and you guys don't care, because law and order mean nothing to you.

 

[LMP]

I don't need a reason to classify BLM as violent. They do that all on their own. Even their "mostly peaceful" protests were filled will protestors calling for violence against police.

Yea, as I said you are fine with this protester dying because you don't like the protest. Would you call this mischaracterizing? Wonder if you will be crying about mischaracterizing stuff later.....

Two wrongs don't make a right. It's a bit insane for you to label someone brandishing a loaded weapon as something Perry "didn't like or agreed with."

Perrys own words said Perry didn't like the protesters and he wanted to shoot them. He also stated what reaction he would need from the protesters so that he could shoot them. We're at like five or six wrongs from Perry, I guess that's when it makes it Right?

So he drove into them but stopped because he didn't want to drive into them?

He sure didn't wait for his path to be clear did he?

Did it need to be against the law? The officer was warning him that could come across as aggressive. He didn't listen.

Yea, rights by definition aren't against the law. Expressing your rights are now dangerous and aggressive? This is the argument you're going with?

This is a lazy mischaracterization of my point of view. I haven't said any of that, but I think you realize you don't have a very good rebuttal other than to twist people's words.

You haven't said you think all BLM protest are violent and that you don't like them? And you haven't said that you are siding with Perry, the guy that said he wanted to kill protester that you don't like, then did it? Seems pretty much on character huh?

He didn't lose any rights, for the 10 millionth time. You keep fighting against a point that nobody is making.

He didn't lose his right to open carry, but Perry shot him in self defense, because he was open carrying? Yo bud get your story straight.

 

[Limbo Pete]

Yea, as I said you are fine with this protester dying because you don't like the protest. Would you call this mischaracterizing? Wonder if you will be crying about mischaracterizing stuff later.....

Perrys own words said Perry didn't like the protesters and he wanted to shoot them. He also stated what reaction he would need from the protesters so that he could shoot them. We're at like five or six wrongs from Perry, I guess that's when it makes it Right?

He sure didn't wait for his path to be clear did he?



Yea, rights be definition aren't against the law. Expressing your rights are now dangerous and aggressive? This is the argument you're going with?

You haven't said you think all BLM protest are violent and that you don't like them? And you haven't said that you are siding with Perry, the guy that said he wanted to kill protester that you don't like, then did it? Seems pretty much on character huh?

He didn't lose his right to open carry, but Perry shot him in self defense, because he was open carrying? Yo bud get your story straight.

Bud they don't care about what happened, they care about who did it. That's how you rationalize shooting or driving over someone for standing in the road, that's how you wallow in a 2A open carry double standard. There's a hierarchy of acceptable violence. We all know it, but everyone knowing and not being able to "prove" one side is actually being disingenuous is... well, that's about as classic of a troll move as you can get.

 

[LMP]

Bud they don't care about what happened, they care about who did it. That's how you rationalize shooting or driving over someone for standing in the road, that's how you wallow in a 2A open carry double standard. There's a hierarchy of acceptable violence. We all know it, but everyone knowing and not being able to "prove" one side is actually being disingenuous is... well, that's about as classic of a troll move as you can get.

Yea, they have literally said they don't care about anything before when Perry shot Foster. So shooting Foster was always justified in their minds regardless of any evidence. They have said "Perry could have changed his mind last second...." When you have to say that, you know you are just carrying water.

 

[HereticBD]

How do you feel about all the conservative leaders hanging out with active white supremacists who not only haven't denounced white supremacy but are currently practicing antisemitism and race hatred?

You really want to go down the antisemitism route, as Liberal college students are dressing up as Islamic terrorists and celebrating October 7th?

Bold move, dipshit.

 

[Mr Holmes]

You really want to go down the antisemitism route, as Liberal college students are dressing up as Islamic terrorists and celebrating October 7th?

Bold move, dipshit.

Thats (D)ifferent

 

[Confucamus]

Yea, as I said you are fine with this protester dying because you don't like the protest. Would you call this mischaracterizing? Wonder if you will be crying about mischaracterizing stuff later.....

Stop acting like a broad. Nobody is crying about anything here. In my opinion, being a BLM protestor makes you an asshole but you most certainly don't deserve to die. You keep dodging Foster's actions that caused all of this.

Perrys own words said Perry didn't like the protesters and he wanted to shoot them. He also stated what reaction he would need from the protesters so that he could shoot them. We're at like five or six wrongs from Perry, I guess that's when it makes it Right?

He sure didn't wait for his path to be clear did he?

Uh, yeah he did actually. He didn't run anybody over. He stopped. Those people need to get the fuck out of the way of traffic.

Yea, rights by definition aren't against the law. Expressing your rights are now dangerous and aggressive? This is the argument you're going with?

This has been a tiring exercise of you lazily mischaracterizing quotes and actions to suit a narrative you want to support. You didn't read or care about what the officer in the link I provided stated about what they warned Foster on. Foster was the one looking for trouble, and he found it. You don't get to let him off the hook just because you think BLM is righteous.

You haven't said you think all BLM protest are violent and that you don't like them? And you haven't said that you are siding with Perry, the guy that said he wanted to kill protester that you don't like, then did it? Seems pretty much on character huh?

I don't like any protest that turns violent. BLM is not unique in the area of violent protests. I'm looking at the facts of what actually happened during this interaction. It's not a difficult thing to do.

He didn't lose his right to open carry, but Perry shot him in self defense, because he was open carrying? Yo bud get your story straight.

You see how lazy you're being by repeating this? Foster brandished the weapon at Perry. That's not simply "open carry,"

 

[GhostZ06]

I don't need a reason to classify BLM as violent. They do that all on their own. Even their "mostly peaceful" protests were filled will protestors calling for violence against police.


Two wrongs don't make a right. It's a bit insane for you to label someone brandishing a loaded weapon as something Perry "didn't like or agreed with."



So he drove into them but stopped because he didn't want to drive into them?


Did it need to be against the law? The officer was warning him that could come across as aggressive. He didn't listen.


This is a lazy mischaracterization of my point of view. I haven't said any of that, but I think you realize you don't have a very good rebuttal other than to twist people's words.



He didn't lose any rights, for the 10 millionth time. You keep fighting against a point that nobody is making.

BLM had no direction and crappy leadership an got hijacked by fucking idiots.


Understanding why they were upset is not hard to calculate. Do support them? No, do i understand? Yes....
Our laws need a serious rework, not on a police level, but on a higher leadship level.

It's funny because people are quick to jump down BLM throats but not the riot in Washington an the proud girls, MAGA fucktards who have the education of a caveman...

 

[Strychnine]

BLM had no direction and crappy leadership an got hijacked by fucking idiots.


Understanding why they were upset is not hard to calculate. Do support them? No, do i understand? Yes....
Our laws need a serious rework, not on a police level, but on a higher leadship level.

It's funny because people are quick to jump down BLM throats but not the riot in Washington an the proud girls, MAGA fucktards who have the education of a caveman...

They're more upset with Colin Kaepernick's knee than Derek Chauvin's.

 

[LMP]

Stop acting like a broad. Nobody is crying about anything here. In my opinion, being a BLM protestor makes you an asshole but you most certainly don't deserve to die. You keep dodging Foster's actions that caused all of this.

Foster was open carrying, which was legal, in your mind that means everything was his fault. You literally keep saying so yourself. Foster never lost his rights and you nor anyone else including the defense can show that the riffle was ever pointed at Foster. However, Perry who stated that he wanted to kill protesters then did it is innocent?

Uh, yeah he did actually. He didn't run anybody over. He stopped. Those people need to get the fuck out of the way of traffic.

Perry doesn't have a responsibility to watch where he is driving? It's the pedestrians responsibility to watch what Perry is doing? You don't have a right to drive period. You have to follow the laws. Using your vehicle as a way to intimate and illicit a reaction is illegal and puts fault on Perry regardless of the protesters marching in the street.

This has been a tiring exercise of you lazily mischaracterizing quotes and actions to suit a narrative you want to support. You didn't read or care about what the officer in the link I provided stated about what they warned Foster on. Foster was the one looking for trouble, and he found it. You don't get to let him off the hook just because you think BLM is righteous.

The officer said he had SEEN other officers warn Foster. Officer Cleveland had never spoken to Foster. Third hand testimony an a very interesting Interesting defense strategy here. Where have I stated that any protester is righteous? You are the one between the two of us stating one way or another what the Protesters are. I believe you said they are "assholes" and "violent" for using their first ammendment rights. Let me clear this up for you, rioting is not part of the first ammendment, you don't get to destroy property. Anyone who does that should be punished regardless of their politics. You have gone out of your way to mischaracterize this protest in order to justify a murder. Let that sink in before you start crying again.

I don't like any protest that turns violent. BLM is not unique in the area of violent protests. I'm looking at the facts of what actually happened during this interaction. It's not a difficult thing to do.

You're looking at facts? Just ignoring the ones you don't like, such as Perry stating he wanted to kill protester and he needed them to react in a certain way to justify him killing them? Ignoring Perrys responsibility as a driver. Ignore everything about Perry really it's pretty pathetic you want to talk about the victims actions while ignoring Perry and everything he did and said leading up to the shooting.

You see how lazy you're being by repeating this? Foster brandished the weapon at Perry. That's not simply "open carry,"

At no point have you or the defense team for Perry shown that the weapon was anymore "brandished" at Perry. The only thing you can even say is Foster was open carrying his rifle legally so he was a threat, but rights don't end because someone else creates a situation.

 

[LMP]

BLM had no direction and crappy leadership an got hijacked by fucking idiots.


Understanding why they were upset is not hard to calculate. Do support them? No, do i understand? Yes....
Our laws need a serious rework, not on a police level, but on a higher leadship level.

It's funny because people are quick to jump down BLM throats but not the riot in Washington an the proud girls, MAGA fucktards who have the education of a caveman...

Grifters are everywhere looking to score those fat checks. They are always drawn to the easy money.

 

[LMP]

They're more upset with Colin Kaepernick's knee than Derek Chauvin's.

Thin blue line as long as the violence is aimed at people they don't like. Just like this shooting. It's why they are celebrating this pardon. They want their political opponents to fear violence from their "side".

 

[Limbo Pete]

Grifters are everywhere looking to score those fat checks. They are always drawn to the easy money.

That shit got particularly ugly here in Portland

 

[Confucamus]

Foster was open carrying, which was legal, in your mind that means everything was his fault. You literally keep saying so yourself. Foster never lost his rights and you nor anyone else including the defense can show that the riffle was ever pointed at Foster. However, Perry who stated that he wanted to kill protesters then did it is innocent?

You don't get to deny that Foster approached Perry's car with his weapon at the ready. There's pictures/videos.

Perry doesn't have a responsibility to watch where he is driving? It's the pedestrians responsibility to watch what Perry is doing? You don't have a right to drive period. You have to follow the laws. Using your vehicle as a way to intimate and illicit a reaction is illegal and puts fault on Perry regardless of the protesters marching in the street.

He was watching where he was driving. He stopped and didn't run anybody over. It's at this point that the protestors need to get the hell out of his way.

The officer said he had SEEN other officers warn Foster. Officer Cleveland had never spoken to Foster. Third hand testimony an a very interesting Interesting defense strategy here. Where have I stated that any protester is righteous? You are the one between the two of us stating one way or another what the Protesters are. I believe you said they are "assholes" and "violent" for using their first ammendment rights. Let me clear this up for you, rioting is not part of the first ammendment, you don't get to destroy property. Anyone who does that should be punished regardless of their politics. You have gone out of your way to mischaracterize this protest in order to justify a murder. Let that sink in before you start crying again.

No, they're assholes because that whole movement was stupid to begin with. Never said they don't have first amendment rights.

You're looking at facts? Just ignoring the ones you don't like, such as Perry stating he wanted to kill protester and he needed them to react in a certain way to justify him killing them? Ignoring Perrys responsibility as a driver. Ignore everything about Perry really it's pretty pathetic you want to talk about the victims actions while ignoring Perry and everything he did and said leading up to the shooting.

So Perry being an asshole makes it okay for protestors to surround his vehicle and brandish weapons at him?

At no point have you or the defense team for Perry shown that the weapon was anymore "brandished" at Perry. The only thing you can even say is Foster was open carrying his rifle legally so he was a threat, but rights don't end because someone else creates a situation.

His rights didn't end. You're embarrassing yourself now by repeating this. Foster approached the car with his rifle at the ready. Your opinion is irrelevant. There are pictures of this. Your emotions don't trump that. Do a better job of explaining why Perry's life wasn't in immediate danger.

 

[spamking]

Yea you can't block/prevent people from travel on a side walk or entering a business with a protest either. If the path is blocked you don't get to force your way through. Here's a post acknowledging that blocking a path way is illegal and that Protester are not suppose to block people from traveling.

I'm confused. You seemed to support people blocking a roadway earlier didn't you?

 

[LMP]

You don't get to deny that Foster approached Perry's car with his weapon at the ready. There's pictures/videos.

Perry's own statement to police says that Foster didnt point the gun at him and Perry wasn't going to give him a chance. Apparently in your mind open carry means weapon at the ready. Foster's gun was found with the safety on and no rounds in the chamber.

He was watching where he was driving. He stopped and didn't run anybody over. It's at this point that the protestors need to get the hell out of his way

His lawyer claimed Perry was using the phone that is why he ran the red light and didn't see protesters. Another of your arguments that's simply made up not supported by Perrys own legal team. I've never said he ran anyone over. That doesn't change Perry using his vehicle as a way to incite a reactions. Perrys friend testified that Perry had talk to him multiple times about his plan. His friend even told him that he reminded Perrt that they went through the same CCW class and Perry knew that he couldn't claim self defense if he incited a reaction.

No, they're assholes because that whole movement was stupid to begin with. Never said they don't have first amendment rights.

Just that cars have rights to drive into them?

So Perry being an asshole makes it okay for protestors to surround his vehicle and brandish weapons at him?

Perry had stated multiple times he wanted to kill protesters. He googled where the protests where happening as part of his plan. You don't get to plan an event then carry out the plan and claim self defense.

His rights didn't end. You're embarrassing yourself now by repeating this. Foster approached the car with his rifle at the ready. Your opinion is irrelevant. There are pictures of this. Your emotions don't trump that. Do a better job of explaining why Perry's life wasn't in immediate danger.

Perrys own word say that Foster never presented himself as a threat by pointing the firearm at him. Unlike the police offers that you claimed prove Foster deserved to die there were eye witnesses that say Foster told Perry to stay in his car and moved on. It's almost like there is so much evidence that a jury would find Perry guilty of murder....

Wonder why you keep trying to defend Perry and this pardon when there is so much evidence that supports his intentions to create an event and kill protesters.