Of course it would be fair to wonder that.
But it would not be fair (nor good work) for a reporter to report the Iowa angle without evidence of relevance. Reporters aren’t suppose to “wonder”.
Mass shooting at Club Q in Colorado Springs
- Thread starter gohawks50
- Start date
Of course it would be fair to wonder that.
But it would not be fair (nor good work) for a reporter to report the Iowa angle without evidence of relevance. Reporters aren’t suppose to “wonder”.
No one knows you here and another conservative poster has mentioned having a trans kid, what sort of persecution are you expecting and who are you expecting it from?
Your argument is silly from the get go. If it was a notorious cop bar that got shot up that would absolutely be reported and no one would have a problem with it. It's information the investigators would be interested in, so why wouldn't a reporter be interested?
There are people on this board who know my screen name, though all great people I trust impeccably.
But you never know how a series of seemingly innocent connections can lead to an LGBTQ hater, who then goes after not me but my loved one.
Not expecting trouble but always on the lookout for it.
As I said, you are a clown with a really bad take. One that you are too insecure to admit is horseshit.
The description is accurate. Just as the address is. It gives the reader important context. JFC.
1. Cops are not a long-persecuted group historically pushed to the fringes of society.
2. The reporter should be interested, and go dig for possible motive/intent. The issue is the reporting of it without evidence of relevance,
1. So even more relevant to this story. Great.
2. The issue is you not understanding what circumstantial evidence is or what reporters report.
Again, it's YOU who are treating LGBTQ differently.
Do any of your "gay friends" have an issue with the reports identifying it as a gay bar? Hint: they don't. You're simply showing your true colors behind a thin veil of "acceptance". It's sickening.
There is some reason he’s pushing this angle but it makes no sense.
If an initial report left that fact out, as Mark suggests was the right thing for the reporter to do, I would be wondering why they excluded it. Forget about speculation on motive, it’s a very important piece of the story for the reader.
The who, what, when, where, why, and how. The only gay club in Colorado Springs isn't something that fits
.
As best as I can find with a quick Google search, circumstantial evidence is a legal term/concept. not a journalistic one. Do you believe journalists are taught that it is okay to report circumstantial evidence?
In this case, I understand what a reporter reported. I just don't think it was right.
In this environment I’d argue it’s absolutely an important fact to report.
If you think my true colors are anti-LGBTQ bigotry, I can only say you are completely wrong. There is no way for me to prove this too you, though.
You could start by not espousing views that only those who are anti-gay would hold.
It's certainly a reportable fact but it shouldn't automatically qualify as the dominant theme,.. What if it was your typical breeder type bar?,.. Would that be a very important element of that story?,.. No, it would simply be a bar.
Oh man, I can't resist. What, pray tell, is a "typical breeder" bar? Please share specific examples.
I believe you mark. I've seen your posts in some of the recent trans threads and you have defended their rights. I think the argument you are having in this thread is silly, but I think your point is that LGBTQ people are just that, people. If I'm correct you feel labeling the bar as gay is a way of "othering" them. Is that correct?
Rifler won't respond so I'll ask you to define what a "typical breeder type bar" is with specific examples.
You could have said that and saved 8 pages. It's still a bad take but at least we'd have understood where you were trying to go.
I was agreeing only with the part that a bar not branded as LGBTQ would never be cited as such. I don’t like the derisive “breeder” term.
I think that was the other guy's silly way of saying hetero bar....nothing more. e.g. no news outlet would have said straight bar. However, that goes with anything thing that is normal. The NFL would say white head coach, but they'd say black head coach since white head coaches are the norm.
Yet you didn't provide that distinction until now. SMFH.
You get caught stepping on your dick a lot.
I am confident Rifler did not mean hetero bar with his "groomer" description.
Sorry, must have missed the groomer remark. ...I just assumed "typical breeder" simply meant man with penis seeks woman with vagina.
Maybe you have no one to blame for yourself since at the same time you alluded to that you posted "They may or may not have been. Maybe the church shooter just likes killing people, or his cheating wife there. Need motive evidence."
I'll bet you if he doesn't threaten Mike with an email using his real name, it won't happen. But you didn't want to share that side of the story. Dick.
