>I was not trying to state any of the scenarios I presented as facts.
Oh, I'm sorry. I must have gotten confused when you said "Notice I did not accuse her of anything, simply stating two facts."; I took that to mean that you were simply stating two facts, and in fact you were trying to say literally the exact opposite of what you said. You should maybe work on saying things which are not one hundred percent false.
OK, so buy me a beer I will explain in person. Much simpler. I stand by my original comment, but this was never meant to be 'backed up' by any facts. Somewhere along this thread people are talking about conceal carry weapons, this is off topic. At least my comment had the merit of considering the topic at hand with a hypothetical scenario that got waaaay to much attention. I am always surprised by some reactions on HN, it makes for interesting discussions.
What? Why would I buy you a beer? You've done nothing but lie to me and skate around your words in what can only be either an attempt to spread doubt on the validity of a horrifying situation, or a manifestation of an appalling lack of self awareness.
How are you standing by your original comment?
edit: What I'm really looking for is any evidence at all that you're trying to debate in good faith. All of you've done is present a bullshit hypothetical that's entirely unrelated, try to claim that you're "just presenting some facts", write off everybody who disagrees with you as "emotional", and then handwave it away when somebody actually calls you on your crap.
Oh, I'm sorry. I must have gotten confused when you said "Notice I did not accuse her of anything, simply stating two facts."; I took that to mean that you were simply stating two facts, and in fact you were trying to say literally the exact opposite of what you said. You should maybe work on saying things which are not one hundred percent false.