You Can't Smoke Here - - Bang Bang You're Dead

[Canary42]

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/waffle-house-waitress-shot-dead-over-cigarette-143600902.html#1MV1mN

Of course had the waitress been armed, this wouln't have happened (so the NRA thinking goes)

[Svejk]

I checked. The English chap was shot.

[andy-hughes]

Gromit - //In tragedy there is often comedy. //

Really? Where would that be on this thread then?

[Baldric]

Someone mentioned the ///violent drunken man behind the trigger.///

Having read quite a number of reports on the incident more than one of them mentioned that he had suffered a traumatic brain injury 12-13 years ago, not one of them mentioned drink.

[-Talbot-]

I wonder if Gromit will pop back and explain?

[andy-hughes]

divebuddy - //I expect Gromit meant...... //............. the Waffle House family,she said. //

Come on, it must be hard to say that and keep a straight face. //

Personally, I wouldn't have a problem, but then, I don't find a lot of levity in someone I worked with being shot dead.

[andy-hughes]

divebuddy - //Andy. Yes, I can appreciate that you would fit right in with the Waffle House. //

More 'humour'?

If it wasn't appropriate to be joking when Gromit did it, what makes you think it is appropriate now?

[naomi24]

andy-hughes, no one is laughing because someone's been shot. Do get a grip!

[andy-hughes]

Naomi - Apart from the fact that you are not qualified to analyse the humour stimulus of anyone except yourself - I have not suggested that anyone is laughing because anyone has been shot.

While I get busy getting a grip, how about you read posts closely?

[naomi24]

andy-hughes, //Apart from the fact that you are not qualified to analyse the humour stimulus of anyone except yourself //

And you are I presume. How does that work then?

[andy-hughes]

Naomi - //andy-hughes, //Apart from the fact that you are not qualified to analyse the humour stimulus of anyone except yourself //

And you are I presume. How does that work then? //

I commented on what I read - you assumed that you knew the motivation behind it - that is the difference.

I am not qualified to judge, or explain what people find funny - neither are you, nor any of us.

But we are entitled to comment - and I did - you appear to be simply disagreeing with my view - which is fine.

[naomi24]

andy-hughes, ps

// I have not suggested that anyone is laughing because anyone has been shot.//

You have.

//I don't find a lot of levity in someone I worked with being shot dead.//

[andy-hughes]

divebuddy - //// you are not qualified to analyse the humour stimulus of anyone except yourself //.

Could you be any more pompous if you tried. //

Naomi and I disagree on an almost daily basis, and that's fine, we have differeing views, and we express them, and exchange them.

There is not need for you to butt in and be offensive.

If you want to argue the OP - or Naomi's and my difference on my obersvations, that's welcome, but being rude to an AB'er is not.

[naomi24]

andy-hughes, // I commented on what I read …//

So did I.

// you assumed that you knew the motivation behind it //

So did you.

//- that is the difference.//

What is the difference?

//I am not qualified to judge, or explain what people find funny - neither are you, nor any of us.//

Well stop telling other people what is appropriate and what isn’t then.

[andy-hughes]

Naomi - //Well stop telling other people what is appropriate and what isn’t then. //

I think 'telling' is a bit strong - it was just a comment, nothing more than that.

[naomi24]

andy-hughes, //I think 'telling' is a bit strong //

You do? I don't. Again we disagree.

[andy-hughes]

Fair enough.

In case I have given others the wrong impression, I was intending merely to make a comment, I did not intend to occupy the moral high ground - apologies if I have worded my posts poorly.