3 ms·

The fact that you compare having a drink thrown on you or getting hit with a sprinkler to this attack shows how little you understand the situation. The water i

The fact that you compare having a drink thrown on you or getting hit with a sprinkler to this attack shows how little you understand the situation. The water is not the issue. The issue is that this man treated a vulnerable woman with absolute contempt and set out to hurt her. Maybe you don't have enough empathy to understand how that feels, but the rest of us do.

everforward 4y ago
Did you not read the top level comment on this? The guy called social services and the cops a dozen times over two weeks. He tried to get her the help that he's not qualified to provide, and when that failed, he tried to solve his own problem. He did not set out to hurt her. He probably passed by a dozen objects far more capable of causing harm than a hose. Pens, staplers, frames for art, a statue, hell even his fists are all more harmful. I struggle to think of something that causes less harm than tap-pressure water. I would say he explicitly set out trying not to cause any harm, or he would've reached for a more obvious and harmful option. Neither of us knows what his state of mind was, but I don't see anything outright implying contempt. Doing something bad to someone doesn't require contempt, it can be a practical means to an end. Based on him calling social services, I would say he didn't have contempt, he just realized the government wasn't going to help and took it into his owns. Similar to managers when they have to fire someone; doing so doesn't imply or require contempt, it's just a means to an end.
- ashwagary 4y ago
  > He did not set out to hurt her. Well he did, it's the only reason he was arrested.