Amusing != laughing, apparently you need to update your dictionary.I don't really think 13 dead and 30 injured is a laughing matter, no.
Really ? No, really ? I would understand that if you hold a number of people at gunpoint that not many would actually risk attacking, but he was (supposedly) shooting everyone in sight. One guy was herding a whole base of armed people and unarmed but still trained people. With a pistol.Hey douche, when somebody has a gun and you don't, it isn't that easy to win.
Anyway, those dead and wounded were trained killers who were about to go kill some more, so sorry if i dont shed a tear for them.
Last edited by Cubit; 11-08-2009 at 06:48 AM.
I love when people think that talking like a kid in middle school will show how serious they are about politics.
I'm sorry, but this is one of the most disgusting statements I've ever read on these boards. I may hate the fact that these soldiers have to go fight a war in countries where they shouldn't be, sent there by a president I consider to be a traitor to this country, but this thing shouldn't have happened to them.
Welcome to ignore, dickweed.
Last edited by Athryn; 11-08-2009 at 09:04 AM.
Are you from NeoGAF? Be honest.
Had this guy been shooting these people for the sake of a free Iraq/Afghanistan/whatever then his victims would be legitimate targets.
Which is why I separated politics from it. Last time I checked you can't just leave the army because you don't like the war that a president and his neocon buddies decided to start.
Yup, another one to add to ignore. I wonder if he is aware that career soldiers actually post on these boards?
Either way, if you join an army getting shot at if you go to war is one of the risks you take on.
Sure, I understand what you're saying, and can't really disagree, but his comment was more a lack of sympathy for civilian families and a blanket condemnation of armed forces everywhere.
Sansker has definitely delivered in this thread. The 3 pizzas he ordered for dinner will undoubtedly be next.
But there is an immense gap between knowing that a solider risks his life and reveling or being discompassionate to that sacrifice as McKertis was. It doesn't have to be completely black or white. You can disagree with the war but still honor and respect the soldiers that serve in it.
If you dont understand that it is fundamentally wrong for an American to grab a gun and start shooting his fellow soldiers and civilians because he disagrees with a war then I really don't know where to start to convince you otherwise. Suggesting that the soldiers should understand that risk is like suggesting that pretty girls should understand the risk of being raped when it happens.
If the shooter was just someone who snapped and went crazy, then the victims are just as innocent the victims in any other mass shooting. In that case, they deserve just as much sympathy as any other victim.
If, on the other hand, the shooter was sane and thought of himself as an enemy combatant, Kalles' point still doesn't apply. Striding into a medical clinic and opening fire on unarmed people who wear the same uniform you do isn't an act of war; it's the act of a cowardly traitor. Getting shot by a traitor while you sit in a medical waiting room should still earn you plenty of sympathy. Only witless sociopaths (or trolls pretending to be witless sociopaths) could find the situation amusing, rather than tragic.
For such a decent sketch of Candy's face, the artist really has no idea how to draw a hand.
If he considered himself to be an enemy combatant at the time, or fighting for the freedom of muslims or what have you, then they weren't his fellow soldiers and civilians, they were his enemies.Originally Posted by Kael
There is nothing amusing about it, that much is true.Getting shot by a traitor while you sit in a medical waiting room should still earn you plenty of sympathy. Only witless sociopaths (or trolls pretending to be witless sociopaths) could find the situation amusing, rather than tragic.
This is the same argument that murders use when they target american muslims in "retribution" attacks. They claim that the american muslims are enemies and that they are patriots. Neither side is right when they make these claims.
The word "traitor" exists in the English language. It is a real word, and it has real meaning. So do the words "lunatic" and "enemy combatant". You can't just redefine those meanings because you find them inconvenient, or because you don't like the current U.S. wars.
Might be best to keep quiet from here on out.