[W:3]Austin citizen who defended himself released

[Elmo]

Hey, let's hear your ideas. That's what I'm talking about. I have no idea, so I'd love to hear your proposal. A "cosmetic" assault weapons ban, such as the current legislation, is not the answer, IMO.

I don't believe modest reductions in the numbers of firearms will do anything but increase the price of firearms, but let's hear your idea.

Well like I said, it's not really my issue. I would agree that a lot of "assault weapons bans" are silly from a technology perspective, and amount to little more than a PR campaign for politicians. For regulations, I would go for MORE (compared to current) mandatory safety training. Additional sessions for every single gun you buy (for the hoarders out there), renewed annually. At the gun owner's expense. Maybe the first handgun is exempt from the most arduous requirements, for people who really care about self defense. I'm just spitballing.

Almost all regulation, including the above, can be summarized as "increase the price of firearms" in money and time. Higher price WILL reduce the number of gun owners running around. The point is that if firearms are a vital part of your identity and you give them the life-and-death respect they deserve, you can get them. But the idiot who thinks they look cool and likes to display his machismo to everyone around would not be willing to jump through the hoops.

 

[smallvoice]

If girls were being raped at Frat parties night after night, week after week, month after month, we can be assured these loons would defend the parties claiming it is a just few bad apples, the parting must go on.

Off the rails, are you?

 

[smallvoice]

I said they were racists, not violent.

Bad deflection.

No, yours is. We were talking about rioters, and like the good liberal you really are, you jumped straight to "racist".

Was that in the DNC fax for the day?

 

[Rawley]

Off the rails, are you?

Tired of the loons claiming it's not protestors it's "rioters." Well stop giving the "rioters" cover every night, night after night.

 

[SkyFox76]

Like you know what an AK-47 sounds like...lol

Well we can pretty much deduct that you sure don't given the fact you're doubling down that Foster was the first to open fire.

Absolutely no one, including the driver of the vehicle or the police chief says that Foster fired his weapon. The audio also doesn't back it because you've got 5 rounds fired, a pause of about 3-4 seconds and then 3 shots. So who's shots did we miss? The drivers or the random protestor? How about none? First 5 shots, the driver, second round of 3 is the other protestor as the driver takes off.

But I'd really like to know why you think the police and the driver are covering for Foster. :doh

 

[Elmo]

Thank you for a rational response. Swing_voter may not have come right out and said it, but the message he wants to support is a total gun ban, a topic that I could support if there was a way to assure that no criminal ever gets to touch another gun, a prospect that is never going to happen. Your stricter regulation is most likely unconstitutional, but enforcing the current laws is a good first step. Liberals are so anti-law, that they won't even support the immigration laws we already have, so why would anyone think they will enforce the gun laws?

I agree that enforcement of current gun laws is lax. I think that you shouldn't worry so much about a total gun ban. It will never happen.

I don't want to get into a huge conversation about illegal immigration in this thread since it's off topic, but... If you care about efficient enforcement, all the resources should go towards cracking down on employers. It is simply a waste of resources, and often inhumane, to track down and deport millions of illegal immigrants. Shut down the employers who break the rules, and many of the immigrants will leave on their own.

 

[SkyFox76]

I agree that enforcement of current gun laws is lax. I think that you shouldn't worry so much about a total gun ban. It will never happen.

I don't want to get into a huge conversation about illegal immigration in this thread since it's off topic, but... If you care about efficient enforcement, all the resources should go towards cracking down on employers. It is simply a waste of resources, and often inhumane, to track down and deport millions of illegal immigrants. Shut down the employers who break the rules, and many of the immigrants will leave on their own.

Agreed. I have about as much fear on my guns being taken as I do that people of the future will be living in caves.

 

[dixon01767]

It will not be time to chill until meaningful steps have been made to reform the police. This is a failure of leadership. If you think it's been going on too long, blame your representatives.

The Austin Police department administration and the Austin Government is dominated by liberal democrats for a long time. And the police need to reform their use of force standards which will do nothin to reduce the overrepresentation of blacks as victims of that force. That is due to their overrepresentation among those who commit violent crime. These protesters want the police departments abolished so they can riot all they like.

 

[americanwoman]

Damn near 70 days into the ****storm that has been fanned by liberals across the country...and NOW people need to chill out. NOW...after cities have been burned, people shot and killed, businesses destroyed, families destroyed...NOW its time to chill out.

Has it been worth the few percentage points in the upcoming election?

Better late than never? :2razz:

 

[Elmo]

The Austin Police department administration and the Austin Government is dominated by liberal democrats for a long time. And the police need to reform their use of force standards which will do nothin to reduce the overrepresentation of blacks as victims of that force. That is due to their overrepresentation among those who commit violent crime. These protesters want the police departments abolished so they can riot all they like.

I'm surprised you need the bolded explained. Yes, democrats are capable of failing in leadership positions too. The rest is right wing nonsense and conspiracy theory, not worth my time.

 

[truthatallcost]

Foster says, "the people who disagree with what we're doing are ******s and won't do anything about it". :lamo
Besides that, the guy looks like the Gingers Have Souls guy. :lamo

 

[ttwtt78640]

Foster says, "the people who disagree with what we're doing are ******s and won't do anything about it". :lamo
Besides that, the guy looks like the Gingers Have Souls guy. :lamo

Yep, his grave marker should read "Beware - some ******s shoot back."

 

[SkyFox76]

Yep, his grave marker should read "Beware - some ******s shoot back."

Who did he shoot at?

 

[ttwtt78640]

Who did he shoot at?

The driver who shot and killed him. Accounts seem to vary as to the order of shots fired, but audio seemed to indicate rifle fire preceding the pistol shots.

Garrett Foster Brought His Gun to Austin Protests. Then He Was Shot Dead. - The New York Times

Austin police release man who says he fatally shot protester | Fox News

 

[SkyFox76]

The driver who shot and killed him.

There is zero evidence that Foster fired his weapon. Not from police, not from the driver and not by the audio we can hear. Total of 5 shots, followed by a pause and three more.

Police chief:

He said the driver reported that Foster pointed the weapon at him. The driver then pointed his handgun outside the window, fired multiple shots and drove away, Manley said.

Someone else in the crowd opened fire on the car as it drove off, Manley said.

Garrett Foster, Austin protest shooting victim, devoted to fiancee

This could come down to whether Foster was actually pointing the weapon or approaching a vehicle that had just made a direct decision to drive head on into protestors, including his quadruple-amputee fiancee’s wheelchair.

 

[ttwtt78640]

There is zero evidence that Foster fired his weapon. Not from police, not from the driver and not by the audio we can hear. Total of 5 shots, followed by a pause and three more.

Police chief:




Garrett Foster, Austin protest shooting victim, devoted to fiancee

This could come down to whether Foster was actually pointing the weapon or approaching a vehicle that had just made a direct decision to drive head on into protestors, including his quadruple-amputee fiancee’s wheelchair.

That seems to be how it happened - but you can't expect someone (even a police officer) not to shoot an approaching armed suspect while others are pounding on their vehicle. Only an armed fool would wait to get shot before shooting an approaching armed suspect. If Foster was carrying a gun only for show while trying to join in the ongoing attack on the driver's vehicle then he was still the armed aggressor (and the only person shot). The shooter was wise to have called police to report the shooting and has been released.

 

[SkyFox76]

That seems to be how it happened - but you can't expect someone (even a police officer) not to shoot an approaching armed suspect while others are pounding on their vehicle. Only an armed fool would wait to get shot before shooting an approaching armed suspect. If Foster was carrying a gun only for show while trying to join in the ongoing attack on the driver's vehicle then he was still the armed aggressor (and the only person shot). The shooter was wise to have called police to report the shooting and has been released.

I think a cop might also shoot a driver who makes a conscious decision to drive directly toward him though.

I agree he was smart to call 911 but he was beyond stupid to turn a corner into an obvious wall of protestors and start honking.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I think a cop might also shoot a driver who makes a conscious decision to drive directly toward him though.

I agree he was smart to call 911 but he was beyond stupid to turn a corner into an obvious wall of protestors and start honking.

He may have been stupid, but he is alive unlike the stupid guy thinking that everyone else was too much of a ***** to dare mess with someone with an AK-47. Out of all those protestors, only he ended up dead.

 

[SkyFox76]

He may have been stupid, but he is alive unlike the stupid guy thinking that everyone else was too much of a ***** to dare mess with someone with an AK-47. Out of all those protestors, only he ended up dead.

Problem is the investigation isn't over so if something emerges that shows different than the driver claims, he could end up charged. Do you think if he felt threatened by the vehicle, he had a right to defend himself and his gf? It's not like this driver was just going about his business and here comes Foster waving his gun around in a threatening manner. He was clearly reacting to the actions of the driver. Driver says Foster pointed the weapon, witnesses say he didn't. They both legally had weapons, but only one chose to fire theirs.

Sad all the way around but how devastating for his fiance. He sounds like he was beyond dedicated to her needs and care.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Problem is the investigation isn't over so if something emerges that shows different than the driver claims, he could end up charged. Do you think if he felt threatened by the vehicle, he had a right to defend himself and his gf? It's not like this driver was just going about his business and here comes Foster waving his gun around in a threatening manner. He was clearly reacting to the actions of the driver. Driver says Foster pointed the weapon, witnesses say he didn't. They both legally had weapons, but only one chose to fire theirs.

Sad all the way around but how devastating for his fiance. He sounds like he was beyond dedicated to her needs and care.

That (bolded above) will likely be the most important testimony the jury has to consider. Of course, the jury should take into account that Foster was a regular on the protest scene and thus his fellow protestors may be biased in their testimony.

 

[dixon01767]

I think a cop might also shoot a driver who makes a conscious decision to drive directly toward him though. .

The car was stopped and the protesters surrounded him. He was in a line of traffic at a stop light and the protesters walked up from behind.

 

[dixon01767]

Problem is the investigation isn't over so if something emerges that shows different than the driver claims, he could end up charged. Do you think if he felt threatened by the vehicle, he had a right to defend himself and his gf? It's not like this driver was just going about his business and here comes Foster waving his gun around in a threatening manner. He was clearly reacting to the actions of the driver. Driver says Foster pointed the weapon, witnesses say he didn't. .

Multiple witnesses say he did.

 

[Deuce]

Like you know what an AK-47 sounds like...lol

The police agree with me. Your own source says the driver fired first.

 

[apdst]

The police agree with me. Your own source says the driver fired first.

We'll see if that story sticks.

 

[SkyFox76]

The car was stopped and the protesters surrounded him. He was in a line of traffic at a stop light and the protesters walked up from behind.

The car in question was not stopped as it enters the video. It goes around the corner (on the red light) and directly into the crowd of people. It's kind of odd with all the other cars at that intersection this one was the only one protestors paid attention to. Idk, maybe that's because none of the others decided to drive directly into the group? :shrug: