Awwww did poow wittle cosmos get his feewings huwt by my nasty wanguage? Awwwwww pooow baby.
You posted bullshit, you got called on it, you couldn’t back up your bullshit. And then you went and ranted because you were mad that your bullshit got called bullshit.
And now I’ll call you on even more bullshit: In both threads you keep saying you’re done, but you keep coming back and posting. You appear to be so full of bullshit that you can’t keep it from overflowing it’s bounds. Boundless bullshit, that’s you.
You called me ignorant, but I posted after researching and finding nothing. That’s not ignorant, that’s going by the facts as I know them. And even now, your bullshit is still bullshit.
Okay. However your unwillingness to provide the most basic of cites, and your insistence that your seemingly absurd anecdote is useful information regardless of it’s truth or falsity, is going to leave me thinking you’re gullible and fuzzy brained.
I suspect I’m not the only one who will be left with that impression.
However I’m sure I won’t be thinking about it in a few weeks. Everybody plays the fool sometimes. Today is your turn, and you’re getting your money’s worth.
Once more, I really don’t understand why people think a story about an extraordinary situation should comply with their particular view if what makes sense to them.
Why would they come to HoJos with automatic weapons? To rob the place and because those are the weapons they had? Maybe they even intended all along to capture an employee or two and maybe rape was already on their minds. We don’t know, but we are talking about armed criminals so it’s not really beyond the realm of plausibility is it? Armed robbery and rape shouldn’t be expected to follow the average persons take on what is sensible should they?
Why didn’t they come in through the front door? They were trying to sneak in without being seen perhaps? It was after hours.
Why not shoot the girls? They’re less fun to rape when they’re dead? They didn’t want the sound of gunfire at that point?
What would possess someone to bring a gun to work? Because there was crime in that neighborhood? The fact that seems so hard for you to imagine demonstrates you are probably can’t really judge this.
Why didn’t the robber escape rather than stay to attack the girls? He was wounded and disoriented. He wound up going back the way he’d come but couldn’t leave in the same way. Then he’s cornered and in desperation he decides to hold the girls hostage rather than surrender. Doesn’t make sense you say? Would you expect the actions of a wounded criminal to be completely rational and well thought out?
How can a wounded guy rape someone? How badly was he wounded?
Under the category of of civilians shooting at criminals you might expect a few outrageous things to happen. Things that wouldn’t make sense to the average person who hasn’t been involved in that type of event. Talk to a cop who deals with violent crime and see if he can tell you some things that seem hard to believe. I don’t expect people to believe automatically. I don’t understand the complete and in some cases nasty dismissal while expecting something that unusual to follow their own sense of logic.
So you’re an expert then? Deal with violent gun related crime a lot? Would it surprise you to discover that in gun related crimes a lot of things happen that are hard for the average person to understand? I can’t understand rape or cold blooded murder because they are so far from my psyche. I still know they do happen.
Maybe maybe not. Have you done the search? I put in Howard Johnson shooting rape and got a lot of pages. Didn’t look at every one of them. the fact it isn;t there is something to be considered but hardly conclusive.
Or ANY detail of that story. Not one bit of your story can be confirmed. What exactly is the value of it then? This is the point where a rational person would just admit he is wrong and the shut the fuck up.
The fact that the USA and the USSR sent dogs and chimps into orbit doesn’t add any credibility to a story that I can tell you about a cow jumping over the moon.
Thanks Miller. As I’ve said repeatedly. I understand healthy skepticism and am not the least bit offended or concerned about people doubting the story. What bugged me was the eagerness at dismissing it completely and the smug use of faulty logic to do so.
As ** curlcoat** just pointed out. violent crimes with extraordinary details happen on a fairly regular basis in most major cities. So they hear about one that can’t be verified and rather than being aware that extraordinary things do happen and it may or may not be true with the possibility of some embellishment the choice is to piss all over it and assume that violent gunplay should follow their personal sense of logic. {Shrug}
My understanding of it was that after being wounded in the hip the remaining criminal wound up, perhaps by accident of simply seeking some way out and making a mistake, or disorientation, back upstairs where the girls were. Maybe he thought threatening them was a way to save himself form another bullet. I don’t know. I didn’t get the impression he purposely went there rather than escaping.
why a wounded man would rape those girls I don’t know. Maybe that is embellishment but I really wouldn’t expect a wounded recently armed criminal to behave according to my sense of what’s reasonable. so even though it’s hard for me to understand I don’t dismiss it as illogical. I don’t expect logic from that person in that situation and think it’s a little unreasonable to do so.
Like you, since violent gun related crimes tend to contain outrageous unlikely events I don’t find this one to be incredibly implausible in that category.
Started to vent frustration as I said. Continued in the evidently vain hope that someone will grasp the points I keep asserting about logic and the lack of it in extraordinary situations.
Wow what are you 5 or 6? You don’t have the ability to hurt my feelings. You were annoying and being a dick so I told you so.
I posted a anecdotal story without cites that was threatening to hijack a thread so I brought my frustrations here. It’s the right place to call you a dick since I can’t do it there.
I repeat. I’m not offended by people not believing the story. I was annoyed by folks like you being a prick about expressing it and thinking your bullshit was logical. I’m now convinced you won’t get it. You’re too invested in trying to be right even when you’re not. I’ve called you on several serious errors and this crap is your response.
Ignorant is thinking you have a factual conclusion when you clearly don’t have enough information to form one. Actual reason would have told you that.
Then my not valuing your opinion is the correct course. I asked my friend for more details but he declined to try and satisfy discussion board skeptics. I understand that and won’t be asking him again. Having people believe that story was never the point of the other thread or this one.
The simple point there was that a wounded criminal can still hurt others. That seems simple and obvious to me. Even if the story was hypothetical the point still stands as simple and obvious. I was surprised and sorry that whether my story was true sidetracked the point.
After that it became about snap judgments based on inadequate data and the rather odd phenomenon of thinking an extraordinary event in a category about extraordinary events should be reasonable and rational. It was and is IMO an unreasonable conclusion concerning what is reasonable. I guess it drew me in. I get that way sometimes.
I’ve stated my points several times. For those who can’t seem to get it I won’t be worrying about what impression you have. I’ve vented a bit but I’ve also explained in specific detail what I find unreasonable about the skeptics flawed thinking. The focus for me isn’t if the story is true or not. That’s an irrelevant point. People who can’t see that or think I’m attached to the truthfulness of the story have missed it.
IYHO
I guess I am being foolish to think explaining myself repeatedly will eventually make a dent in the flawed logic. I don’t mind taking my turn every now and then.
Did you swallow a whole jar of stupid? Or are you just naturally this way?
Perhaps you should return from the cosmos. It’s clear to everyone but you that your brains have died from lack of oxygen or something. Maybe if you were groundedinrealitydan you’d have something worth listening to, but right now you got nothing. Still got nothing.
FFS, you can’t even stay away from things you said you were done with. You’re like a demented Energizer bunny: you just keep going and going and going.
Except that, if the details are sufficiently inaccurate, it stops being relevant to the thread topic. For example, if my hypothetical origin for your story is accurate, then your story no longer supports the idea that it’s better to finish off a wounded criminal than let him escape.
Sorry, I guess I wasn’t clear: I do think that the story, as you presented it, is incredibly implausible. Not impossible, but I don’t think any reasonable person should accept it at face value. Particularly since you’ve added the detail that the rapist had been shot in the hip. Criminals do all sorts of stupid and illogical things, sure, but raping someone with a bullet in your pelvis violates a pretty simple reptile-brain aversion to pain, which makes me very skeptical about either your source, or your own recollection of the story you were told.
The purpose of my theoretical original story is to demonstrate how an actual, believable event might have led to the ridiculous story you offered here without anyone purposefully lying along the way. I did not intend it as a defense for offering ridiculous, unsubstantiated stories as datapoints in a legitimate debate, which is a practice I strongly oppose.
Aha! But there’s quite a plausible explanation to your counter, Miller. And that is that the wounded perp had HoJo’s infamous emergency hip replacement surgery (normally performed at the buffet table next to the rare roast beef option) prior to committing the rapes.
Disclaimer: I normally admire your level-headed posting, Miller. Even more when you’re giving the person that’s being piled-on a semblance of an out under almost insurmountable odds that render him/her, at best, unreasonable, and at worst, a complete imbecile. Which I’ve seen you do before even if it goes against your own core beliefs/rights. Noble, no doubt. And I do mean that sincerely.
Having said that, with all due, I think your efforts are clearly being wasted here. Strange as it is, because even if I’ve had little to no interaction with cosmodan in the past, the posts that I’ve read from him in the past never revealed he could be this fuckin’ dense.
Seriously, this whole thread reads like an attempt at pseudo-intellectual counter sarcasm. I mean the whole Applying Occums [sic] razor bit would be simply brilliant if that was the case.
–People can’t tell enough from the pharmacy video to know if the robber on the floor was a threat.
–You told a story to illustrate that it’s very difficult to accurately judge threats.
–You believe the story but it’s truth is irrelevant to it’s usefulness.
Is that a mostly accurate summary?
My positions:
–If someone after watching the video has enough sympathy for the pharmacist to defend his actions --beyond simply noting that there may be extenuating circumstances-- that person has very questionable judgement. (And recent evidence indicates the pharmacist has a fanatic personality.)
–Anecdotal evidence is mostly worthless, because counter-anecdotes can be easily supplied.
–Fictitious anecdotes are completely worthless, because counter-fictitious-anecdotes can be endlessly supplied.
–Presenting apparently absurd anecdotes as relevant factual evidence is worse than completely worthless. It actively damages your position by (again) showing very questionable judgement.
–Your continued insistence that an apparently absurd anecdote is in any way supportive of your case is your primary foolishness in the discussion threads. That is what you are being a fool about.
You are in your store minding your own business, probably wondering if the economy will pick up enough keep you in business when two criminals come into your store to rob you at gunpoint. You think they are going to kill and you attempt to defend yourself as your heart is racing at unbelievable speeds and adrenaline is pumping through your system. You are probably freaked beyond belief and not in your right mind at any point during the next minute, which is about all the time it takes to totally destroy your world. Yeah, I guess I should have more sympathy for those that started these chain of events, but then I guess I have questionable judgement, too. Frankly, it is unbelievable that you don’t have sympathy for the person who didn’t ask for any of this to happen to him.
Okay, let’s totally leave aside the issue of whether the story is true or not, and simply deal with your assertion that “a wounded criminal can still hurt others”.
This is, of course, unarguable. A statement of absolute fact.
Unfortunately, it’s utterly meaningless. So what if he can “still hurt others”? That means you’d better finish him off quick? Where do you draw the line, though? How long are you allowed to kill him for? Just until the police arrive? Until he’s arraigned? Convicted?
By your logic, you’d better be outside the jail waiting for him to be released, because once’s he’s out of prison he can still hurt others.
If you don’t have any self-control, don’t buy a gun. I have absolute sympathy for the pharmacist for what he went through. I have no sympathy for what he did.
What are you talking about? You originally said that it didn’t matter if it was true or not. Now it’s just the details that are in question? Two entirely different positions.
But just for shits and grins, if occurrences very much like this happen so frequently, surely it would be child’s play for you to cite a couple, yes?