@DavidEDaveWall1 Aw, Dave. You wandered in on this one.
@DavidEDaveWall1 So, my least favorite response to tragedy and tales of people being hurt (intentionally or unintentionally) is the person who steps in, and with the pale of authority, says "Well, if I had been there, I'd have done things quite differently, and not made such a mistake."
@DavidEDaveWall1 Because I don't know - maybe when one stands over a tragic car accident, one's first thought shouldn't be "Well, *I* for one would have worn a seat belt." and then walk away from the carnage.
@DavidEDaveWall1 Would have could have. If only. My point is not that the case against my friend was valid, or that her response was the best one. It's that she was essentially threatened with her livelihood and family and the nebulous warning hit its mark with her - she was afraid.
@DavidEDaveWall1 And in that moment, she chose, as she thought she had to, family over logic and a sense one needed to get into a fight and double down. She didn't tut-tut the missive and consider she'd call Sally at the law office that Monday; she burned what she saw as the source of the threat.
@DavidEDaveWall1 My point, which continues to be my point, is that when more and more draconian laws are passed, the Davids don't get hurt (and certainly not the Jasons!), it's people who are suddenly thrust into a situation where they think they have no time, no choice, and no escape.
@DavidEDaveWall1 It functions as a weapon on a belt that the person being threatened isn't sure is real, is loaded, or will hurt them, and they're responding appropriately for the situation. Cases where I see greater threats (the CASE act kangaroo court, streaming felony legislation) adds to it.
@DavidEDaveWall1 So yeah, thanks for stopping by, David, and I'm glad we all got to enjoy the movie in your head where you would have done better. Drive through, come again.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
