I've heard so many contradictory accounts and accusations regarding the death of Garrett Foster at the hands of Daniel Perry.
I've seen posts claiming each of them was acting within his rights. Well, someone was.
I wasn't there. I don't exactly trust witnesses in cases like this. Witnesses are unreliable and sometimes lie to advocate their preferred narrative, especially if they perceive one of the parties as being on their team.
The accused person, of course, will also lie to try to get out of trouble.
And then, in the heat of the moment, perception isn't the most reliable thing, either.
It all comes down to whether Foster pointed his gun at Perry when he approached Perry's car.
If he did, the shooting was completely justified since there was a credible threat.
If he didn't, it was not justified since there's no threat inherent in simply carrying a rifle.
Again, I've heard biased people make both claims.
Nothing else is relevant. Not the past or biases of either of them. Not whether either or both had a right to be where they were, doing what they were doing before their fatal encounter. Not whether or not they were good people. Not even whether Foster was libertarian.
Yes, I realize Perry was driving through a crowd of protesters who were trying to block the road. If you find yourself in such a situation, you probably should not stop moving no matter what. We've all seen what can happen if you do stop.
You're not likely to see me protesting, counter-protesting, or in an area where I'm aware a protest might be happening.
Whenever I've seen someone commenting on this incident, they've come down firmly on one side or the other. I don't. And you might as well know why I don't. I simply can't know for sure who was the aggressor. You might think you do, and that's fine. I don't.
I suspect, as in so many cases, I wouldn't personally like either of them. I could be wrong. As it is, I have no knowledge of who was in the right and no opinion as to who was in the wrong.
You might wonder why, in light of such an admission, I bothered to comment. Because I couldn't think of anything else to write about after getting home from my slightly upsetting* doctor's appointment. I saw something about the case somewhere and it was on my mind.
-
*"Slightly upsetting" because the urologist wants to see me again in 3 months because he's still concerned that my Frankenstein urethra will swell shut with new scar tissue after being so aggravated by the catheterization.
Thank you!