- Joined
- Jan 6, 2014
- Messages
- 3,579
- Reaction score
- 590
- Location
- Washington State
- Website
- shaunhorton.blogspot.com
By your own admission you don't know what I'm "trying to accomplish with this" but you do know "arguing what protections Rice should have had is irrelevant?" That kind of makes any attempt of explaining to you "what I'm trying to accomplish with this" really irrelevant.
So I won't waste the time trying.
Sorry for your family troubles. Don't think I needed the info, but if you choose to share it...
As often as you refuse to explain your stances given the excuse "You wouldn't understand it anyway" I'm starting more and more to think you just feel that way and don't have any good reasons for it. Or you're afraid your reasons aren't as good as you like to imagine them to be.
I don't know what you're trying to accomplish with this argument. That still stands. Actually, now even more so. My comment about arguing what protections Rice should have had is irrelevant at this point. The point that the state is open-carry is just ONE MORE reason he shouldn't have been gunned down within seconds of the police arriving, with no warning whatsoever.
We already have over a dozen reasons this shouldn't have happened. We know it shouldn't have happened. It's criminal what those officers got away with.
I'm asking what specifically you're trying to accomplish jumping up and down while adding just one more thing to the pile? Hoping each little piece you add might finally be the straw that broke the camel's back?