So you do react more positively to a stuation where honest citizens fear to open their doors than to one where a violent criminal is shot? People living in fear is not a negative thing? I finf your willingness for all to live in fear so that the criminal element may operate in greater safety puzzling.
So I guess you don’t really care to understand my point of view as you keep spewing the same talking points as though I’m the one gleefully cackling at violence throughout this thread.
Let’s try this … if I’m in a car accident where I almost die but just lose my legs instead … is that a Positive Car Story because it could have been much worse?
Or this … we’re you happy that Jihadi John was killed? Me too, but I consider that a positive story as it relates to justice not a Positive Drone Story. I mean where are the Positive Golf Club Story threads? Or the Positive Baseball Bat Story threads? It’s almost like this thread exists for the sole purpose of worshipping guns.
I would like to understand your point of view, but you aren’t making it clear. “No one gets shot” doesn’t strike me as a universal, unconditional good.
It’s almost like you haven’t read anything else I wrote since that post that you keep quoting as though I’ve embroidered it on my family crest. If I were a cynical sort I would suspect you of willingly ignoring my point. Good thing I’m such a sunny presence in this world or I’d begin to get a little perturbed.
I have read everything you’ve written in this thread. After screening out all the anger and sarcasm, there isn’t much left. Certainly nothing that clarifies what your point of view actually is. Let’s try this: Summarize your point as briefly and simply as possible in neutral language.
Speaking for myself, a story like this is about as positive as it gets:
What does, then? Explain.
Sorry Scumpup. I’ve been as clear as I need to be. You’re just ignoring the points I’m making (which go beyond “guns bad,” to your chagrin, apparently).
Anybody else digging my jive or do I really have continue this foolishness?
Whatever. If you can’t make your point clear, you don’t really have a point beyond being angry.
It’s not my fault your critical thinking skills are lacking. I guess I’ll join you in that cup of whatever and just look forward to the next celebratory story of someone bleeding out I suppose.
Yes, I’m always very sad when no one gets shot. Ruins my day. Not good at all.
As one of my university professors once noted, it is the responsibility of the speaker to make himself clear. If the audience comes away not getting the speaker’s point, the fault is in the speaker rather than the audience. Note I said getting, not agreeing with. Your anger and sarcasm, in and of themselves, tell me nothing but that you are an angry and sarcastic person no matter how much you think they clarify what you want to say. You think I have poor critical thinking skills. I am certain you communicate poorly. That, I think, is where things will stay.
First – this isn’t a celebration of someone getting shot – it’s a recognition of the existence of incidents of self defense with a firearm. Second, if you think what you are reading is ghoulish and you want to avoid ghoulishness, then perhaps this is the wrong thread for you since it’s kind of in the thread title. Just saying.
If you want to start a thread about positive stories in other areas, drones, golf clubs, baseball, or even abortion as you mentioned previously, no one is stopping you if that’s your area of interest. Do you think the fact that these other threads don’t exist, or that you haven’t started them, is in some way informative?
I take it you do not subscribe to Jack Batty’s position that no one getting shot is always preferable to someone getting shot? I’m glad this incident didn’t result in additional injuries, and I’m not going to fret about people engaging in criminal behavior getting hurt in their endeavors. But unless you’re rooting for people getting hurt then I wouldn’t see how this is positive gun news. No gun was used in a positive way. Are you rooting for people to get hurt?
In other news, Robbery suspect enters business, leaves after victim wields gun: LMPD
Another DGU with no shots fired.
Why yes; yes I am. So long as it is an asshole gun owner getting blowed up real good, that is real good news. Kind of like high-fiving when a castle-dweller exercises his second amendment prerogative and sends the minority of the week over Rainbow Bridge.
Where are the negative drone stories, the negative golf club stories, the negative baseball bat stories? Where are all the efforts, media wise, Congress wise and presidential wise, to lobby against them, turn public opinion against them, attempt over and over to restrict (and let’s be honest, eventually eliminate) them?
It seems to me this thread is simply a counterpoint to all the negative gun stories the media loves to publicize and Democrat politicians love to use to push for gun control/elimination. Surely if there can be negative gun news then there can be positive gun news.
So the positive aspects of this thread are the opposite of those in the negative threads and in the news. Instead of bad guys shooting innocent people (negative gun news) we have innocent people shooting bad guys (positive gun news).
A second aspect to the thread is that similar to your sense of justice having been done when Jihadi John was killed, these of us on the positive gun news side are pleased when justice is done and those who threaten the lives of innocent people get what’s coming to them too. What you are doing is conflating these two different aspects into one and thinking we on the pro gun side are simply happy that someone, anyone, is getting shot, and that’s ridiculous. What we are, is happy on the one hand that gun ownership is allowing innocent people to defend themselves against people who would do them terrible harm (or who at least threaten to do so), and on the other hand we’re happy when bad guys get what’s coming to them. They are really two separate issues even though they’re arrived at the same way.
And frankly, yet another element to the glee you perceive when a bad guy gets shot is that it’s a poke in the eye to those who would take away our ability to use guns to defend ourselves. People like Fear Itself, for example, who evidently considers everyone who owns a gun to be an asshole whose murder at the hands of killers is something to be celebrated. You can hardly blame us for the joy and satisfaction we get from frustrating and thwarting the likes of him.
I’d really like to a address Bone’s and Starv’s points but according to Scumpup ’ college professor they really have no idea what I’m trying to say.
I celebrate when the fraction of gun owners who try to intimidate people to compensate for their own social inferiority blow themselves away. So stop deliberately misquoting me.
Do you really think you are being perfectly clear and it is everybody else’s fault for not understanding you? I have another data point to support that you are angry and sarcastic, but I am still no closer to understanding your POV. If you can’t, or won’t, clarify what it is that you have to say, why do you even participate? This isn’t The Pit where anger and sarcasm can serve as goals in themelves. I, for one, would genuinely like to know what your point is. The same professor taught me that I should be able to clearly and accurately state an opponent’s position in any discussion. 1982 was a long time ago, but I think his advice still valid. Right now, I can’t state your position because I don’t understand what you are trying to say. Further, I don’t think you could accurately state my position either.
Horse, water.
Successful communication requires a receptive audience.
Scumpup … both Bone and Starv managed to rebut me with halfway cogent points that I’m willing to let stand on their own merits. If you can’t do the same then that’s on you, not me or your old professors.