Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Trans Woman School shooting TN

Options
1679111219

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,666 ✭✭✭charlie_says


    Logically any unsolved shooting could be trans too - anyway aren't they supposed to be the same as everyone? Isn't that the whole point?

    The mind boggles.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,956 ✭✭✭✭yourdeadwright


    Wow ....your logic is broken

    He claimed 4 people where in involved in 2000 shootings , hence the 0.2 % but if where 4 people where involved in just 240 shooting guess what happens ,



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 6,126 ✭✭✭...Ghost...


    Surprising that the media got this one right.....for a change.

    Stay Free



  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,961 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    You'd need to do 30 or 40 of them. If you just do the federal one, any laws passed will be unlikely to have teeth if nobody's going to enforce them.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 55,154 CMod ✭✭✭✭Retr0gamer


    You've a **** understanding of antidepressants and antipsychotics. Instead of pulling figures out of your ass maybe think for a second, that people given these drugs are at risk of suicide and given these drugs to prevent it which might also be why there's a high degree of suicide in people that take them.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,277 ✭✭✭growleaves


    Trials of SSRIs have shown *increased risk* of suicide, mania and aggression.

    I'm not stigmatising people who take them btw.

    They have also helped improve the conditions of a lot of people.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,956 ✭✭✭✭yourdeadwright


    Logically & statistically its far far less likely ,



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,951 ✭✭✭✭o1s1n
    Master of the Universe


    Why do we get to cast aside the vast majority of shootings just to make your statistics look better?

    The issue is 'gun crime in the us' - you dont get to move the goalposts just to increase trans involvement percentages.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,321 ✭✭✭Sudden Valley


    Are we now describing everyone who commits a crime as suffering with their mental health? A lot of these perpetators seem to be depressed but that wouldnt explain why they want to shoot as many people dead as possible before they are killed or captured. This seems to be a nationwide problem in america so wont be solved by trying to just focus on and solve problems in the trans, black, white male or hispanic communities.



  • Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,951 ✭✭✭✭o1s1n
    Master of the Universe


    I think that's the 4th or 5th time you've mentioned 'domestic terrorism' in this thread without giving any context.

    I'll bite - wtf are you on about?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 378 ✭✭PaoloGotti


    Well what is the definition of misgenderimg?

    If it is incorrectly starting the gender that a person feels at a moment in time, and that person has proven to be willing to change their feeling of gender, isn’t it quite possible that we are always at a risk of “misgendering”? Therefore it is a useless accusation or criticism.



  • Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    Have a think about it. Why are politicians (usually Republicans) refusing to do anything to address the large amounts of gun violence, especially in schools?

    And the answer is not the second amendment. Politicians have no problem imposing restrictions on Constitutional rights when it suits them.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,861 ✭✭✭mikethecop


    Point proven as usual , just cant help it can ya

    🤮🤮🤮

    just as well they weren't black or latino , you might have exploded with glee



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,281 ✭✭✭✭Sand


    Exactly. The intense focus on banning guns is essentially dodging the issue that there is something deeply wrong in American - and by extension western - society that produces people with severe mental health issues and murderous rage against even small children. Decades ago school children in the US used to bring guns to their schools - and nothing happened. Gun control has increased, but the problem is so bad now that school shooters are almost accepted.

    The primary cause is the what society is doing to its people. There ought to be an investigation into how this person was radicalised, what ideology did they consume and who mentored them. That will never happen of course. There is massive defensiveness about the topic.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,072 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    As I've suggested before when the issue of this really being a societal problem or mental health problem arises:

    If there there is something inherent in US society, in their social fabric, in their way of perceiving the world, in their psyche, whatever, that makes them more likely to be predisposed to mass shootings than people from other cultures...then surely that's a massive argument in favour of gun control.

    Just as we would restrict access to items that could be used for violence or suicide away from people on certain hospital wards.

    Yes, it's important to understand, treat, and hopefully resolve the underlying causes, but now, right now, it also seems sensible to limit access to the weapons through which the underlying causes manifest themselves.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,439 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    Because Americans, both Democrat AND Republican, and all flavours in between, value their freedom to defend themselves and their property, and there will never be any serious move towards giving up that freedom. Americans like their guns, it’s that simple. They like their guns more than they like the idea of being unable to protect themselves in a country where they’re pretty sure everyone else is armed to the teeth.

    Btw I looked up that term ‘domestic terrorism’. It’s bullshìt rhetoric designed to promote paranoia and fear, and that never leads anywhere positive -

    Domestic terrorism or homegrown terrorism is a form of terrorism in which victims "within a country are targeted by a perpetrator with the same citizenship" as the victims. There are many definitions of terrorism, and none of them are universally accepted. The United States Department of State defined terrorism in 2003 as "premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience."However, the U.S. government cannot charge someone with domestic terrorism because no such criminal law exists.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_terrorism



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,951 ✭✭✭✭o1s1n
    Master of the Universe


    Care to expand on your hypothesis?

    The second amendment is hugely important to millions of Americans, many of whom are willing to use their arms to defend the right to have them.

    There is absolutely no way American politicians could ever impose a restriction on that particular right without there being huge bloodshed.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,853 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    the American gov, media, education is damaging the mental health of their people so the solution is taking the guns off people, not going to fly

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,956 ✭✭✭✭yourdeadwright




  • Advertisement
  • Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    And yet you have an organisation that campaigns against any form of restrictions on gun ownership and the ability of people to access firearms (especially military grade assault rifles).

    Giving ordinary citizens access to firearms of this nature and having such a strong lobby that you can buy off politicians to ensure school shootings can still happen is domestic terrorism.

    The National Rifle Association are happy for children to be slaughtered as long as no control measures against their precious guns are brought in. They will use every fearmongering tactic in the book to ensure that happens. That is terrorism against your own people. They lobby their own members to send their children off to school to be slaughtered and it’s always someone else’s fault when the next shooting at a school happens.

    Really disappointing that someone with a level head such as yourself is going out to bat for the NRA, when they are responsible for the deaths of hundreds, if not thousands, of children when they are supposed to be getting an education.

    They are an evil, murderous organisation and every politician that accepts their donations has the blood of innocent children all over their hands.

    How the NRA always seems to be immune from any criticism is beyond me. Horrible bastards.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,683 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    You spent the last 2 days of the thread winking and nudging at the NRA and the first person to bite on your opinion (rife with semantic difficulties) you bit the head off of them and accused them of essentially being a defender of domestic terrorism and implied linking them to countless deaths. Isn’t that domestic terrorism as well? /s

    The NRA is a scummy but dwindling group and calling their lobbying domestic terrorism is hardly accurate or constructive, hell it just invites people to have to correct the stretch of rhetoric.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,951 ✭✭✭✭o1s1n
    Master of the Universe


    You are 100% correct - and you can also bend statistics to suit an agenda, which is what you are doing.

    'Oh I don't like how the statistics about gun crime are saying X, so I'll remove the largest part of the gun crime to suit the agenda I am trying to push'



  • Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    They are far from ‘dwindling’. It is one of the most powerful lobbies in the US and no matter how many children are killed, they funnel millions into the coffers of politicians to ensure nothing changes.

    You might not think it’s domestic terrorism, but any organisation that has an influence in ensuring nothing changes after children are continuously shot dead in what is supposed to be the safety of their own classroom is exactly that, in my book.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 44,337 ✭✭✭✭Boggles




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,951 ✭✭✭✭o1s1n
    Master of the Universe


    It's not really though, is it?

    Sure, it's definitely something, and something not good.

    But domestic terrorism?

    Domestic terrorism is the Oklahoma City bombing, the bombing at the Boston Marathon - actually there's a great Wiki page listing events here:

    A lobby group ensuring their interests stay the way they are is not 'terrorism' and it's fairly out there to suggest it is.



  • Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    A lobby group which wants guns of all types (including military grade assault weapons) to be readily accessible to everyone no matter how many children are slaughtered.

    Except at their own events that is. They constantly say that guns don’t kill, it’s people who kill. If guns don’t kill then why are they banned from the NRA’s own events and not the people?

    They put in millions to ensure that children will continue to be killed in schools. That’s domestic terrorism.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,683 ✭✭✭✭Overheal




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,951 ✭✭✭✭o1s1n
    Master of the Universe


    The NRA wanting guns available to all is their agenda, children being slaughtered is not.

    One thing may come from the other, but it's not what the NRA 'want'.

    Therefore you cannot consider them 'domestic terrorists' as their agenda is not one of terrorism.



  • Advertisement
  • Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    When their agenda (and the millions of dollars into politicians pockets) consistently leads to children being killed in schools, then yes it absolutely is.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement
Advertisement