58
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 167:
Line 167: +
Talk:Young mass murderers (view source)
Revision as of 16:19, February 16, 2010
, 16:19, February 16, 2010→Page move
::::More generally, your objection is nit-picky to the point of the absurd. Diluting the entire entry is not the way to handle one caveat. Please open your mind for the important information conveyed by the entry: what kids are taught, and what they believe, ''does'' matter.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:07, 16 February 2010 (EST)
::::More generally, your objection is nit-picky to the point of the absurd. Diluting the entire entry is not the way to handle one caveat. Please open your mind for the important information conveyed by the entry: what kids are taught, and what they believe, ''does'' matter.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:07, 16 February 2010 (EST)
:::::A wise man once said, "I don't want to perpetuate this debate, but I don't want a lack of response to be misinterpreted". Bishop was not 19 when her brother was killed. Bishop has not been convicted of that murder and you know that you don't know if it was in fact murder. You have seemingly ignored yet endorsed my point that what people are taught is what matters, which is why the article would undoubtedly be more accurate if it were "publicly schooled mass murderers". Can you deny this? You can name call it nitpicking, I call it what it is: factual accuracy. [[User:JeffT|JeffT]] 11:19, 16 February 2010 (EST)