Is this how this is gonna play out? You’re going to ignore what I said and just expect me to trip up with your transparent baiting?
You need to start paying more attention. I didn’t say no doub, I said belief. You’ve never held a belief? Would you say you have no doubts whatsoever about everything you believe? Do you believe your neighbors to maintain proper bodily hygene? And you have NO DOUBT about that?
He’s manifesto his rambling in parts, cogent in others. Like the part where it covers abuse of power and the blue wall in the LAPD.
Yes this act does make me question his sanity. If you want to go there it could make for an interesting topic of conversation. I’m not an expert in mental health by the way. It should provide plenty of fodder to try to twist everything I say into murder apology.
To be clear, I questioned his sanity and came to the tentative conclusion that he is sane. That’s called forming an opinion. Or unsubstanciated excuses, in your lexicon.
You’re it. And I didn’t need to say anything else. You owned up to what I said about that post and then immediately did the same thing again with that ‘I’m not saying what side of the debate I would be on’ thing. It takes very few words to say that his killing spree was unnecessary. Most people wouldn’t hesitate to do so. In fact most people would never suggest it might possibly have been necessary because he’s murdered two innocent people and one cop who was doing his job. The fact that you keep dithering about this simple point speaks volumes.
Dude, you’re just becoming sad and pathetic now and it’s killing my buzz, because I feel like I’m kicking a disabled person here and that sucks. Here’s what I said:
I think we would get fairly frequent exposure to usage of the word if the board had somewhat less stringent rules against insulting other posters outside the Pit.
Are you saying the debate isn’t necessary or that taking a side isn’t necessary? I thought you were saying taking a side isn’t necessary because you’ve used this “I’m not saying … but I’m just saying!” tactic over and over. Are you saying there’s no need to have this debate because it’s obvious that this murder spree wasn’t a necessary response to Dorner losing his job with the LAPD?
I was saying “Hint: I don’t think a killing spree was necessary for Dorner”, hence I would be on everyone else’s side of the “debate” on the necessity of murder to solve work related issues. Then we could have one of those good old wank fests you enjoy so much instead of discussing your stupid fucking accusations.
What I’m getting out of this is Pedro thinks Dorner was wrongfully discharged from the LAPD. This, and this alone, justifies him going crazy, but does not justify the murders he’s committed.
Basically, LAPD is to blame, but not for the murders. Am I correct on this, P? I’ve read every post in this thread. You seem just as apologetic in this thread as you do in the MPISMs thread.
Since the case on Dorner’s termination is reopened, I’m sure we’ll find out plenty of other info that led to his termination well before his whistle blowing. I’m also sure that you will say this additional info isn’t true because it came from LAPD, who caused Dorner going crazy.
I’m on the line that Dorner SHOULD NOT have ever been considered to be a police officer. If you’re going to blame the LAPD for anything, blame them for not having a good enough system in their psych profiling upon hiring potential officers.
I didn’t fail to say no, I interjected a polite question to you before I was able to answer. You jumped at that to see a some kind of failure on my part. Stay a loser dude.