The woman shooter
may have been an Olympic-class pistol shooter in the 1950s or '60s (odds are excellent that she
wasn't, but it
is still a possibility), which has nothing to do with today. What SB reportedly saw was a somewhat physically challenged, older lady shooting a pistol with - I
assume - adequate effectiveness. What was wrong with thinking he should have given her kudos of some kind, as a means of encouragement to continue enjoying recreational shooting? If "the guy with Glock was quite impressive", he probably didn't need any encouragement (but a "Well done!" probably wouldn't have hurt his feelings).
I understand your point to be, "Why one and not the other?" It's a matter of
perception within the surrounding environment and personal choice. Selective actions may single some out and ignore others completely, which is okay. It only becomes
not okay if you are an official judging a competitive event. Then one should try to recognize everyone's efforts - even those with "bad luck" and the abject failures (but, you don't
publicly proclaim to John, Mary and Erasmus, "You three
really sucked today!"). Common sense should be the guiding factor in how we pass out praise, as well as how we address the shortcomings of the less-than-praiseworthy.
Pax...