I blame Big Brother. After all, he's the one who has taught us that we're all not only created equal, but we should all forever remain equal. And that we should never ever say or do anything that might offend any other equal. And that anything that doesn't completely agree with everything another equal thinks/feels/believes is offensive.
It might appear a cut and dried case of pre-meditated murder when equal A threatens to kill equal B... then equal A goes home, gets a gun, comes back and shoots and kills equal B. But NO! As equal A's mother-in-law now informs us, equal A is a good person and there is 'more to the story'. It has been alleged that equal A was 'bullied and teased' by her equal co-workers. (I, for one, am curious to know how equal A defines bullying and teasing. They asked her to do her job, perhaps?) Equal B reminded equal A that working off the clock is a no-no at Publix and suggested she stop doing same. Equal A, apparently, ignored equal B's advice. Equal B later reported equal A for said violation. Equal A was offended by this and threatened to kill equal B. Equal A was fired for said threat. Poor, poor, misunderstood equal A. Can we really blame her for taking the time to go home and get her gun? Should we really believe that, given the time it took her to go home, get a gun and come back, she should have had time to cool down? And that having had this cooling off period, then walking up to the man and shooting him anyhow, she is actually guilty of first degree/premeditated murder?
Honestly, if I went postal every time somebody disagreed with me or hurt my feelings, the gene pool would be a lot cleaner by now. I don't care how good a person she was, or how mean she thought her co-workers were, you don't go around shooting people. It boggles my mind that anyone would actually try to defend her.
On another note: grief counseling. Don't even get me started!
The end is near
1 day ago