General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: No, the shootings are in no way excusable [View all]Tommy_Carcetti
(43,235 posts)A woman who wears a short skirt doesn't wear a short skirt because she wants to be raped. She wears it because she thinks she looks good in it. No one wants to be raped. The very definition of rape precludes a victim wanting to be raped.
Here, you have a person who intentionally set up a scenario where she either knew or should have known could have ended violently. And perhaps if the danger was only to the willing participants in the contest and the general public was shielded from any harm, fine. But you had an innocent third party injured. You could have had innocent bystanders injured. And for what? So that Pam Geller could gleefully go on Fox News and compare herself to Rosa Parks and claim she's doing it all for the First Amendment.
Ask yourself this: A victim needs to have lost something. What exactly has Pam Geller lost? Nothing. She got exactly the result she set out to get. And she got lots and lots of media attention for her cause.
Please explain to me in what universe that qualifies her as a "victim".