• Flying Squid
    link
    110 months ago

    Would you have been happier if it had said, “Nance’s prior arrest records indicated that he was previously arrested for aggravated discharge of a weapon involving a person?” Because that sounds awkward to me.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      510 months ago

      Aggravated discharge implies involving another person so that wouldn’t be said. It feels like something is being hinted at - likely domestic violence - without being explicitly said for some reason. I think that’s the weirdness being commented on. If it was domestic violence why not say that? But if not that what is being hinted at?

      It’s probably overthinking, but this is the internet.

    • TheFlopster
      link
      210 months ago

      Why not just end the sentence with the word “weapon”? That’s the important part.

      • Flying Squid
        link
        710 months ago

        Because shooting a gun in your front yard at nobody in particular because you’re a crazy fucker is different than firing a gun in a way as to threaten a person or persons.

        • Nougat
          link
          fedilink
          2
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          That’s what the “aggravated” part is for. You don’t get “aggravated” tacked on if another person is not involved.

          • Flying Squid
            link
            310 months ago

            Do you think most people understand that?

    • sphericth0r
      link
      fedilink
      210 months ago

      I think that they’re saying that the person is implied, aggravated discharge of a weapon with no person involved is just target practice.

      • Flying Squid
        link
        210 months ago

        I don’t think it is implied. You can do that in your back yard towards a group of neighbors in the next yard who are pissing you off with a party.

        Doing it with a single other person involved is a specific situation and specifying the gender just makes the copy easier to scan.

        • sphericth0r
          link
          fedilink
          2
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          You’re right about the backyard but that would involve a person or people. If the discharge is aggravated, by definition it implies that people are involved. Adding the gender of the person that is implied is done for an emotional response from certain groups by not providing context that is useful. We fill in the blank with our biases.

          • Flying Squid
            link
            110 months ago

            Yes. Either a person or multiple people. This shows that it was just one person. And the gender is just for easier-to-read copy.

            • sphericth0r
              link
              fedilink
              210 months ago

              I’m not sure why you take issue with the facts that the word aggravated in this context means that the people are implied, or that adding words is not easier to read. It’s okay that you didn’t know what aggravated means, but it still doesn’t change the fact that this is redundant information. Redundant information is harder to read, and the specific gender of the victim does not add anything to the context for the headline, a de facto harder to read title. It’s possible that this was done on purpose, or that the author was also unaware that aggravated means people are involved and felt they needed to add words.