Quote Originally Posted by Aloha_Shooter View Post
What I'm saying is the inverse. The others are already abusing the courts so why hamstring the officer in this case? At least his lawsuit may result in a overall positive by restraining some of the knee-jerk anti-gun reaction already out there.
It's not the inverse, it's a different point of view of the same fact. You find it unacceptable that others do it, but find it acceptable here because the plaintiff is LEO, with your reasoning being non LEO have done it previously. I cannot connect in any way how his EIED suit would have any bearing on public anti-gun reaction either, or to the extent it would have any fraction of a minute difference, it would seem to give them ammunition more than anything... (e.g. non LEO can't be trusted with a gun, and they hurt LEO by emotionally damaging them). But really, it's not going to have any bearing as there are no middle-fences in that debate.

At any rate, there's really nothing for me to debate here either.... https://www.fallacyfiles.org/twowrong.html