Club Q shooter: non-binary
-
https://www.axios.com/2022/11/23/colorado-club-shooting-suspect-non-binary-attorneys-say
Shooter uses they/them/Mx.
Under Woke rules: MSNBC, CNN etc. been doing violence all this time by misgendering them.
-
I just saw that in my Twitter feed.
-
@raphjd Speaking of which: twitter libs saying, the shooter changed gender merely for advantage.
Not seeing how that view gives away the game. How it sums up the entire Thing, of unstable privileged males claiming to be oppressed females then cleaning up on even more privilege, all sorts of awards or special treatment.
-
CNN Trans guest says that the shooter just can't be Trans - and says it in a brutally prejudiced, anti-Trans way.
Referring to a male-appearing photo of the shooter, the guest says "That's not a non-binary person because in no way, shape, or form could they appear as a woman the next day."
Thus, CNN Trans guest reduces the shooter to their mere appearance - in a photo. Denying that the shooter could ever feel differently from their appearance, or clean up & vary it the next day, or have self-determination, or take hormones.
To be clear: The shooting is a horrible tragic crime, I totally condemn it, put all blame on the shooter & hope for a death penalty.
The side issue, for here, is the "black hole" down which logic & reason have vanished.
-
Imagine if we started talking about their appearance, we'd be called every IST and Phobe imaginable.
I've seen plenty of these people that could never, ever be thought of as a woman.
-
-
This is from his video doorbell after the 3+ hour standoff last year when he made the bomb threat and threatened to kill his mother.
For whatever reason, the DA dropped the charges in the case. Apparently, under Colorado law, that automatically gets the entire case sealed. This is how he was legally able to buy both guns in the shooting.
-
@raphjd To look BEYOND the beard & bruises, here what I see in the photos. The shooter has:
- had a hard life
- feminized face structure
- proverbial "soy boy" or "low T"
- incel
- yes, could clean up the next day & wear make-up, seem female
Shooter still needs death penalty for the wanton murders, of course.
-
Of course, the shooter is ultimately responsible for his actions.
If the DA would have prosecuted him last year, he would have been banned from buying the guns.
-
@blablarg18 This could just be the evil Canadian in me, but I think that the death penalty lets the person off too easily. There are much more unpleasant things that I can assure you would be much worse than death that could be done and dragged out for the rest of his life.
I know that line of thinking is just slightly sadist, but a part of me would be rather delighted to see him suffer insufferable pain for the rest of his life rather than getting his suffering over with in a relatively short order by comparison where he can move onto other things.
The only difference between martyrdom and suicide is press coverage! -
I'm against the death penalty, generally, because there have been many, many wrongful convictions, where innocent people were sentenced to death.
In Illinois, the Innocence Project found that over 1/3rd of the people on death row were actually innocent of the crimes they were accused of.
GWB, as Governor of Texas, refused to delay an execution for 30 days so there could be a DNA test. The guy was executed and about a week later the DNA test came back and proved he was innocent. GWB still claims that he never, ever executed an innocent person because everyone he executed was guilty at the time of their executions.
The movie Let Him Have It is the story of Derreck Bennet, in the UK, who was executed for a murder committed by a criminal friend. Derreck had the mental age of a 7yo but was 18. The actual murderer was 15, so below the age which he could be executed. Anyway, the law at the time was that the UK didn't take mental age into consideration until after the sentence. The Home Secretary was supposed to commute the death sentence because of Derreck's mental age, but he refused to do it because someone had to pay for the murder of a cop. This was the final nail in the coffin for the death penalty in the UK.
-
@MrMazda I very much agree with you on this one.
@raphjd Off with the death penalty too. Able bodies can be put into better use but might be considered slavery by someI am also against prison sentence where prisoners just spend their time in prison doing nothing. Prisons like this only consume upkeep resources.
What could be a better solution for you guys?
-
Replace the death penalty with life without parole.
No one should be able to just lounge around, while in prison. They should either work or be in education (see next bit).
People who will never get out of prison, should not be able to get educated at taxpayer expense.
-
@MrMazda I like your realism & sense of justice. But I'm fine with letting this shooter off "easy" (ie. with execution).
True justice is a gift that keeps on giving. In this case, death penalty is deserved & everyone would win.
-
shooter wins because they were prob seeking death on some level, and def wanted to show off their power/importance, which death penalty would acknowledge
-
victim families "win", not really of course, but partial redress is better than none
-
society wins because shooter really is a threat and keeping them in prison for life really would take a lot of effort (& cost)
Should we execute people hardly ever, since mistakes happen? Of course.
Also, this discussion is moot because Colorado abolished death penalty in 2020, sigh.
@raphjd Did you know that in 2020, covid was used (by what type of people? guess) as an excuse to release tons of prisoners, way earlier than the most lenient rules allowed?
I'm not sure if death row / lifers were among those released. But if yes, it wouldn't surprise me, remember my jaw dropping at the time.
Point is, in Clown World 2022 a life sentence might not be all that you think it is.
-
-
@blablarg18 I would agree on death penalty as long as it can be perfected out who really did the crime. A quick process can also help in population control.
-
@blablarg18 I understand where you're coming from, but I respectfully must disagree. IMHO, the death penalty is too easy of an out for the person. I personally would much rather see them have to suffer under insufferable circumstances for the remainder of their natural life, which would be much longer, and could be dragged on and carried out in such a way as to make the person wish that they were to be executed for a very long time.
Granted, I think that many of the things that come to my mind to make the suffering drag on would be considered cruel and unusual punishment (at least under Canadian law where I am), however the whole point of it is to make the person endure more suffering for the rest of their natural life than the suffering that they brought onto their victims and their families. After all, for many of the families of the victims, the suffering will stay with them for the rest of their natural life, so to me it only seems fair to make the punishment of eternal suffering match the permanent suffering that the families of the victims must endure.
I will concede though that keeping inmates in any form of prison or confinement does take up resources, which in all fairness could be spent on more useful and/or productive things. My only trouble with this in general is that as @raphjd mentioned, there are far too many cases of innocent people being executed, only to find out later through undeniable evidence such as a DNA test that they were actually innocent, but were executed for anyway. With the death penalty, there is no way to come back from that in cases where that happens. With the option of life without parole, at least the innocent person can eventually be released, compensated for their wrongful imprisonment, granted a new identity, and able to live out the rest of their life.
Having been wrongfully convicted and jailed myself for a crime I did not commit, I can sympathize with these cases, as I know first hand just how bad things can get over a crime you didn't commit. While MOST of the people who are executed are indeed guilty, IMHO I stand with @raphjd that too many of them aren't in fact guilty of the crimes for which they have been accused.
It should also be noted that in my case, there was undeniable evidence that I did not commit the crime that I was accused of, wrongfully convicted of, and jailed for, but that didn't stop it all from happening anyway. Now here we are some 12 years later, and I am still suffering consequences for a crime I did not commit, trying valiantly to clear my name so that I can get back into good standing with the legal system and move forward from the whole thing. That is to say that to this very day, I still pay a heavy price for a crime I did not commit, which really makes my heart go out to those people who are indeed wrongfully convicted. I know first hand how hard it can be to come back and recover from such a thing.
-
@blablarg18 I don't know about in other countries, but in Canada, many inmates were released either on a parole type basis, or on more of a compassion basis due to the pandemic.
Within Canada, the inmates that were released early were limited to either people who stand convicted of a non violent offence or to people who were particularly vulnerable and therefore more likely to suffer severe consequences should they contract COVID who are at a very low risk of re-offending.
In Canada, anyone who stood convicted of a violent offence, were too high of a risk to re-offend, or who would otherwise be likely to pose an immediate danger to public safety were all overlooked for this early release. Many of the people who were released early in Canada were convicted of more petty charges like theft under $5000, possession of a controlled substance (but not ones who had intent to sell), or were convicted of an offence that does not necessarily carry a risk to public safety. I cannot speak for other countries though, as I only know the circumstances of the early release of prisoners within Canada where I am located.
The only difference between martyrdom and suicide is press coverage! -
@MrMazda Well that was the marketing - "compassionate early parole for the non-violent".
I am no expert on this but when I say it made my jaw drop, mean that 1) reality is usually diff from marketing and 2) I was seeing reports that many violent had been released, some even terrorizing their previous victims.
But time is limited and I don't care to research it RN so won't provide more. You can win this "point" if you want.
I do want to challenge your sig, about the difference between suicide & martyrdom being just publicity. If we're talking criminals like suicide bombers or the Club Q shooter here, who prob did their crimes for a sense of power & fame (plus the self-destruction), OK fair enough.
But some martyrs are the real deal. That is: some people get tortured or murdered, quite against their wishes & deservings, because some other (evil) people couldn't tolerate their existence.
So the quote only works when you're talking criminals.
-
Referenced by B blablarg18
