DesideriScuri
Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MercTech
I ran across a radical difference in how an incident was being reported. One makes the subject sound like a rabid dog that needs to be caged and the other a true victim. See what you think about the totally different reports of the same incident.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/26/marissa-alexander-new-trial_n_3995869.html
http://abcnews.go.com/US/florida-woman-sentenced-20-years-firing-warning-shot/story?id=20859087
Here are two passages, describing the same event, that are wildly different....
HuffPo:quote:
An argument ensued, and Alexander said she feared for her life when she went out to her vehicle to get the gun she legally owned. She came back inside and ended up firing a shot into the wall, which ricocheted into the ceiling.
ABC:quote:
She said she ran to the garage and tried to leave but was unable to open the garage door, so she retrieved a gun, which she legally owned.
Now, technically, if her car was in the garage, and the door down, both are accurate, even though they are written with what seems to be differing intents. HuffPo seems to be writing it as her intention was to get the gun, while ABC's take is that she was attempting to get away, couldn't, so she got the gun for protection (that is, it was not her first option, and was only chosen because her first option wasn't possible.
After reading both articles, I have to wonder what the truth actually is.
_____________________________
What I support:
- A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
- Personal Responsibility
- Help for the truly needy
- Limited Government
- Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
|
Difference in point of view... - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread