crossmr

Read the whole message which is quoted above. I clearly identified that scenario as an example to make a point to you. Good lord.

I'm aware they're different.

Are you capable or parsing what you actually read?

Let's try another example since you clearly have a bee in your bonnet over gun rights,

Person A mouths off at Person B who then punches Person A in the face.

You come in carrying on about freedom of speech

This is called an example because you're clearly too wound up over gun rights, I thought I'd give you another example of a similar situation to see if you'd be capable of taking a step back and looking at something objectively. Thanks for answering that question though.

Now that’s just a lie. This is all that I said in regards to the U.S. Constitution:

You've repeatedly posted the 'it's totally legal' claim.

She was inside her home. The gun was her property. She had it legally

she did something that, again, was 100% legal,

she was holding her legal property inside her own home (posted that one twice)

Your words.

That's how we're playing this game isn't it?

You have a choice. You can be right and dead. Or you can be alive and sort it out later.

I never said that she deserved to be shot or that the cops were justified. I only explained why they shot her and why they're likely not to face any consequences for this. I gave no personal judgement. Here is the problem with people like you, you have absolutely no ability for nuance. Anyone who doesn't immediately cheerlead everything you say 100% must mean that they're 100% against you and should be attacked.

it's funny because your behaviour embodies what you claim you're raging against.

The same window the victim could have looked out? The cops clearly identified themselves on the video.

I'm not your educator, nor am I under any obligation to answer questions that fundamentally bad. Entitlement doesn't stop bullets.