2 ms·
The problem is that it sounds less threatening, more sophisticated. It's meant to obscure the crimes that were happening.
by tomp 11y ago
The problem is that it sounds less threatening, more sophisticated. It's meant to obscure the crimes that were happening.
- mikestew 11y agoIt's meant to obscure the crimes that were happening. I no more know what the author's intent was than you do, but I'm going to go with a more charitable interpretation: it's meant to clarify the means by which the robbery took place. In other words, the exact opposite of "obscure". But if you have a narrative, by all means stick to it.
- AnimalMuppet 11y agoLet me reverse what you said: "Rob" sounds more threatening. And, in fact, it is more threatening - I lose my money either way, but "rob" means I'm more likely to also be injured or killed.