
North Texas man overcomes adversity to become community pillar but struggles to obtain pardon for second chance
A North Texas man has overcome pain, loss, jail and drug addiction to become a business owner and a decorated first responder in his community.
But there's one thing he desperately wants and has struggled to achieve despite help from two dozen state lawmakers.
"I was 19, I was a widower facing eviction, living on the streets and I really didn't have a good place to turn," said David Hart.
Hart turned to drugs when his wife and his father both died within months of each other in 2003.
"I questioned my existence of why I was spared and I am here, what's the point," Hart said.
Now 22 years later, the 41-year-old, long recovered from his brief addiction, has become a pillar of the Parker County community he grew up in.
Hart now owns a successful heating and air conditioning business with more than 40 employees. He also just bought a malt shop in town and previously served as a firefighter.
With a family that includes 6 children, Hart's dark past seems like a distant memory. But it only seems that way.
"Not everyone deserves to carry that weight forever," he said.
Hart spoke last week to state lawmakers in Austin in support of a bill that would make it easier for people with drug offenses to get their records expunged.
In his case, he's seeking a pardon from Gov. Greg Abbott, who he met with last year, so he can hopefully become a reserve police officer.
"One of the things that I've tried so hard to do is to serve in kind of a different capacity because I believe, given that position, maybe I have a chance to save somebody else's life," Hart said.
Hart has signed letters from 25 current and former legislators backing his request, including former Parker County State Senator Drew Springer.
"I met him because of his fantastic work on behalf of the citizens of Parker County," said Springer. "And he deserves a second chance. I think that's the Christian way of life and I think David's story as much anybody empowers that."
Despite all of his support, Hart has been unable to get the pardon he believes people like him deserve.
"It's not going quite the way I thought it would," Hart said.
Hart believes if Texas made it easier for those with drug offenses to wipe away their past, it would encourage more people to do what he's done with his life.
"It seems to be a one-and-done type deal in Texas for some reason," said Hart. "It's a scarlet letter you can't get rid of. No, you can't get rid of it."

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Rep. Mary Miller's complaints about a Sikh guest chaplain reveal a startling ignorance
Republican Rep. Mary Miller of Illinois has an unfortunate track record when it comes to respect for minority communities. At a rally for Donald Trump in 2020, for example, the GOP congresswoman credited the president for the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade, calling it a 'victory for white life.' Her team insisted that she'd simply misread a prepared text — Miller apparently meant to say 'right to life' instead of 'white life' — though the same Illinois Republican, a year later, was forced to apologize for approvingly quoting Adolf Hitler. Last week, the congresswoman added to her list of ugly and offensive comments. The Hill reported: Rep. Mary Miller (R-Ill.) said it was 'deeply disturbing' that a Sikh delivered a prayer in the House chamber on Friday — after apparently mistaking him for a Muslim man. The since-deleted post Friday morning sparked immediate bipartisan criticism. The trouble apparently began when Miller saw Giani Surinder Singh of the Gurdwara South Jersey Sikh Society serve as a guest chaplain on the U.S. House floor and deliver an invocation. For those unfamiliar with Capitol Hill, this is quite common: Faith leaders from different religious backgrounds and different parts of the country are routinely welcomed to serve as guest chaplains. Miller, however, apparently wasn't pleased. 'It's deeply troubling that a Muslim was allowed to lead prayer in the House of Representatives this morning. This should never have been allowed to happen,' the three-term GOP lawmaker wrote online. 'America was founded as a Christian nation, and I believe our government should reflect that truth, not drift further from it. May God have mercy!' It's not easy for a politician to squeeze so much ignorance into a single tweet, but Miller managed to pull it off. She then proceeded to delete her missive, not because it was offensive, but because she got the chaplain's faith tradition wrong. Miller then republished the same tweet, repeating the same complaint, this time swapping out the word 'Muslim' for 'Sikh.' When this generated bipartisan criticisms, she deleted the second tweet, too. At this point, I could spend several paragraphs explaining the differences between Muslims and Sikhs, followed by a few more paragraphs about how absurd it is to think that the secular U.S. Constitution, which guarantees religious freedom for all, created 'a Christian nation.' But as important as those details are, I was also struck by Miller's unexpected candor. Sometimes, conservatives suggest their religion should get preferential treatment over other faith traditions, First Amendment be damned. But Miller didn't bother with hints: She came right out and made this point explicitly. If Miller wants to argue that Congress shouldn't bring any religious leaders in for these official ceremonies, there would at least be room for that conversation as it relates to the separation of church and state. But that's clearly not what she argued in her since-deleted items: The Illinois Republican is fine with congressional invocations, so long religions she likes are favored over religions she dislikes. It is as antithetical to the principles of religious liberty in the United States as anything any member of Congress has said in quite a while. This article was originally published on

Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Its Your Call for June 9
Hypocrite Sam Graves touts his support of rural hospitals when he votes for Trump's bill, that is going to destroy Medicaid, Medicare and our rural hospitals. Some difference President Trump sent U.S. troops to back up LA police against protesters, just like he didn't send troops to protect capital police against the mob he himself incited and then pardoned many of those who attacked the capital police. Some difference. He's out of his mind Trump first turned his ICE department into the Gestapo. And now he's wanting to turn the National Guard loose on demonstrators. This is the first step of a dictator wanting to take complete military control of the government or a police state. He won't stop there. The man's out of control and he's out of his mind. Absolutely horrible Anyone who calls themselves a Christian, knowing what's going on with the way people are being treated by ICE. It's just absolutely horrible. They're not Christians, I guess Christian nationalists need to be identified separately and so-called churches need to be taxed. These people are driving so many people away from religion. If what they claim to believe were true, they would be damned for sure. But they don't believe it.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
School loses Supreme Court bid over Christian staff member sacked for LGBT posts
A school in a years-long legal battle involving a staff member who was sacked after sharing social media posts about LGBT+ relationships teaching cannot take the case to the Supreme Court, justices have ruled. Kristie Higgs, a Christian mother of two, was sacked from her role at Farmor's School in Fairford, Gloucestershire, in 2019 for sharing Facebook posts criticising teaching about LGBT+ relationships in schools. In February, she won a Court of Appeal battle related to her dismissal, with three senior judges finding that the decision to sack her for gross misconduct was 'unlawfully discriminatory' and 'unquestionably a disproportionate response'. The school sought to appeal against the ruling at the Supreme Court in March, but three justices refused to give the school the green light to challenge the decision in the UK's highest court. In a decision on Thursday, which was published on Monday, Lord Reed, Lord Hamblen, and Lady Simler said that the school had asked for the go-ahead to appeal against the ruling on four grounds. But they said that the Supreme Court 'does not have jurisdiction' to hear three of the grounds, and the fourth 'does not raise an arguable question of law'. In response to the decision, Mrs Higgs said: 'I am relieved and grateful to the Supreme Court for this common-sense decision. 'Christians have the right to express their beliefs on social media and at other non-work-related settings without fear of being punished by their employer.' Mrs Higgs, who worked as a pastoral administrator and work experience manager at the school, shared two posts on a private page under her maiden name in October 2018 to about 100 friends, which raised concerns about relationship education at her son's Church of England primary school. She either copied and pasted from another source or reposted the content, adding her own reference in one post to 'brainwashing our children'. Pupils were to learn about the No Outsiders In Our School programme, a series of books that teach the Equality Act in primary schools. An employment tribunal found in 2020 that while Mrs Higgs' religion was a protected characteristic, her dismissal was lawful, but this decision was overturned by an Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) in 2023. But the EAT ruled the case should be sent back to an employment tribunal for a fresh decision, which Mrs Higgs' lawyers challenged in the Court of Appeal as 'unnecessary'. In a judgment, Lord Justice Underhill, sitting with Lord Justice Bean and Lady Justice Falk, ruled in Mrs Higgs' favour in February, stating: 'The dismissal of an employee merely because they have expressed a religious or other protected belief to which the employer, or a third party with whom it wishes to protect its reputation, objects will constitute unlawful direct discrimination within the meaning of the Equality Act.'