And now we have arrived at this: Gov. Greg Abbott announces he will push to pardon Daniel Perry who was convicted of murder
Put a pile of broken cinder blocks at the bottom of a hill, and shove him down from the top. Your country clan never escape the embarrassing hicks who are, I’m sorry, your mascots.
Maybe it's just me, but if an angry crowd has surrounded your car, beating on it, and someone in that crowd points an AK 47 at you, perhaps you should be allowed to defend yourself against the guy actively pointing a gun at you.
He texted that he was wanting to, going to, go out and kill people. And he did. This isn’t a Rittenhouse thing at all, fuck him. Tokens c are supporting him because he wears an army uniform, the lamest fucking take their is. He was serving Uber, not the goddamn army.
Now, man, he didn't even fire his AK-47 while blocking the street. You gotta wait until he shoots, then if he misses, you can shoot at him.
So if someone points a gun at you and no reports seeing it, they didn't point a gun at you? Then take into account that probably every witness was part of the angry crowd and of course, no one saw him point the AK 47 he was carrying it the middle of a riot at anyone. He was just peacefully protesting (With an AK 47) and some lunatic up and shot him for absolutely no reason.
Self-defense is an affirmative defense. "There's no video of him threatening me, and multiple witnesses testified he did not threaten me, and I know I discussed concocting exactly this pretext for murder in text messages with my buddy a few weeks ago but like... trust me" is not a compelling affirmative defense.
Why did he take the AK-47 to the riot if he wasn't going to point it at anyone? He could have taken a balloon.
Are you saying his plan was to drive into an angry crowd, have them attack his vehicle, and then wait for someone to point a gun at him so he could shoot them? That's a pretty risky plan. Not to mention a very stupid plan.
You tell me. I'm the one who keeps saying we shouldn't be introducing guns into tense situations, but this is Texas and open carry is expressly legal there. He had far more right to that weapon than Rittenhouse did his. Also it wasn't a riot, it was just people marching in the street.
And Foster's plan was what? Bring an AK to a protest, wait for a car to drive into the crowd, and then level the rifle at the driver and not shoot? I think it far more likely that neither had explicit plans, they just had predilections.
Quite honestly, yes, I would very much believe that was his plan. There are an amazing number of people out there that believe a gun is something to intimidate others with, that simply pointing it at them will fix any situation and your opponent will slink away in shame. That plan falls apart when you're opponent is also armed and his plan isn't just to intimidate you.
This is where you might stop to ask yourself who started this whole thing of open carrying long guns to protests on the street.
Gun nuts did. Those people, and their guns are the problem in your country. the guns are why you have mass shooting and other don’t. It’s the reason your murder rate is so high compared to others, an existing culture that will now live forever. And it’s all collateral damage to those same people, because it doesn’t happen to them.
The British? Quite honestly, it's an incredibly stupid thing to do and this whole situation just drives that point home. Who started it has zero bearing on what transpired in Austin.
Nashville is old news, we're on to Louisville. Kentucky Governor announced that he was personal friends with two of the deceased, and one more of the injured. I doubt even that will lead to any meaningful change.
I have no idea what you guys are talking about. I’ve just been following the story about the Dalai Lama apologizing for asking a young boy to suck on his tongue.