Look, only God know what was in that man’s head.

he was dragged by another car earlier.

everyone trying to treat this as a clear cut this or that case should be sitting at the kids table and not contributing to the discussion.

She created a messy situation, and he responded to the messy situation.

That’s what being in the arena is about. laws are written for the man in the arena. if he clearly walked up to her and blasted when she wasn’t spinning her tires out, then yes, it’s clear and cut.

but it wasn’t .

it’s a mess.

i don’t like that it happened

i would not like a world where we hold men in the messy arena to a sterile standard.

in fact, if you try enforcing impossible standards, that just incentivizes people to abandon civilization and return to the law of the jungle

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

It seems to me like you are implying that not shooting a civilian in the head 3 times - two of them from the side of her vehicle when in zero danger - is an "impossible standard". I think it's a pretty basic standard, along with not calling citizens "fucking bitch" after you killed them. Along with allowing medics to provide aid to the person you just shot. And not leaving the scene immediately with your firearm. Along with the entire Federal government not dragging her name through the mud and calling her a terrorist before an investigation even began.

I think these should be considered bottom of the fucking barrel standards. And neither the agent nor the Federal government lived to to these basic standards. It's not just about the (senseless and evil) shooting, it's the entire shit sandwich.

I will agree with this take a bit more than the nym you are responding to's take.

Think more, emote less.

Until then, just 🤫

Get fucked.

😂

The only emotion I have emoted is vast amusement.

How about you just hush yourself if you have nothing either amusing or interesting to say. heh

I understand why this is difficult for you: you don’t understand the difference between rhetoric and dialectic, passion and principle, thinking and feeling.

Read Aristotle’s “Rhetoric”

You will find it a most helpful first step to treat your state of ignorance.

good news, it’s curable!

Your aloofness is laughable.

I have rather fun with my ignorance, you arrogant twit.

Go find another classician to pick the bones of the long dead with.

Or do I need to say that in Latin for you to figure out that I actually might know about all that but don't choose to bother with it.

You speak incoherently.

Out both sides of your mouth.

The load bearing joists of society aren’t something to “have rather fun with.”

Stick to your lane.

If he was, in fact, dragged by another car earlier, then he is, in fact a really bad kinda retard for getting in front of another vehicle. That is a hugely stupid thing to do and one of the most basic faux pas anyone in a stupid, tense, angry situation can make. Geez.

It isn't super clear cut, but I am not going to give him that much benefit of the doubt.

I hope if you ever have to respond to an absolutely absurd situation, the standard you advocate holding him to is not applied to you.

It’s an odd type of hypocrisy you are displaying.