so in your own little closed minded way you stated you feel no sympathy for the passing of paul walker in an automobile accident since his movies glorified and promoted reckless driving that could have endangered innocent people. ie = he deserved it.
you were brutally attacked by a dog. it caused you severe emotional and mental distress and physical pain. you have stated that all dogs should be banned.
it you were to become attacked again, mauled and horribly disfigured, would it be fair of me to say 'you deserved it' because your way of thinking?
This is an illogical post.
No, it wouldn't be fair.
E-Kul's contention is that PW is not a victim. He contends that PW is a perpetrator who suffered at the hands of evil which he has helped to flourish.
No matter how you screw your mind around it, E-Kul suffering a second dog attack would at no point make him a perpetrator.
It would only be a logical transference if E-Kul was a pitbull breeder, who suffered an attack.
It also wouldn't be fair because you do not agree with his point of view, therefore you consider his point of view unfair. Allowing yourself to have his point of view isn't fair - it's you being a dick, like he is
