PossiblyCreepy605

PossiblyCreepy605 t1_j2zflh3 wrote

Reply to comment by Clinically-Inane in AG: Police shot and killed teenager allegedly armed with knife in Gilford | New Hampshire Public Radio by ACOdysseybeatsRDR2

Wow you're really doubling down on that emotionally charged language, and reeeeeeally leaning into strawmans.

I understand it's difficult for some to understand how loaded language can be used to subconsciously imply bias or propaganda for various purposes.

Let's try this: These two statements are factually the same event but give two different views of an event:

>4 children slaughtered in streets after school by illegal assault rifles

>4 gang members dead following release from prison for rape and sex tracking, get into shootout over drug dealing territory one evening.

I know you "can't picture" things, but do these resonate differently with you?

2

PossiblyCreepy605 t1_j2z5e66 wrote

Reply to comment by Clinically-Inane in AG: Police shot and killed teenager allegedly armed with knife in Gilford | New Hampshire Public Radio by ACOdysseybeatsRDR2

>Nothing; I can’t “picture” things. I’d hear the word “child” and know it meant someone who is under 18,

Oh come on now. You're clearly being disingenuous and you aren't even trying to hide it. Stop that.

If you ask anyone not trying to be obtuse for fake Internet points, they would answer probably a boy or girl under the age of 10. Preteens are between 11-13, teenagers 14-17 give or take a year. Using that basic common sense, you hear some person online screeching about police killing a child, their thought immediately goes to someone under 10. Not a 17 year old who is capable of serving in a literal combat role in the military and has the size and strength to physically harm members of our community.

You are purposely trying to mislead people by using emotionally charged language that doesn't paint an accurate picture. And you know it.

2