270
No evidence of rising LGBTQ+ violent extremism or 'trans terrorism'
(www.politifact.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Feb 2024
270 points (96.9% liked)
politics
18906 readers
3840 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Since I see "marginalized groups should buy guns" comments constantly on Lemmy, please remember that gun sales bankroll the $18 million per year in "donations" that the gun lobby makes to the very worst Republicans.
They'll also use that gun as an excuse to kill you. That's why they're pushing the idea of "LGBT extremists" in the first place. It gives far-right fuckstains a chance to claim "I saw a pride pin and a holstered gun and thought they were going to do a mass shooting so I executed them on the street before they could".
it's real interesting that you said "you" not "us" at the start of your second paragraph. really good preface to the rest of your argument.
what the fuck industry lobby doesn't bankroll republicans?
if they're gonna kill us anyways, I see no reason not to go down fighting.
Something that doesn't seem to worry you when a poster is simping for the gun lobby.
But this isn't some 'gotcha' moment. I'm not trans and won't use a sock puppet to pretend otherwise.
Exclusively Republicans and nearly exclusively far-right ones? Very few. There's no need to be rhetorical about it since it's easy to look up.
You'll likely be dead before you even know the fight started because guns favor the aggressor.
If you do manage to shoot your way out of it, you'll be labelled as one of the "LGBT extremists" they're desperately trying to create and hunted for the rest of your life, endangering the entire trans community in the proccess.
Fox News isn't telling their far-right viewers how dangerous you are to protect you.
They're already doing that. Might as well be armed if they're saying we're armed.
Sure, do exactly what the far-right want you to do. No doubt the groups who spend all day theorycrafting ways to kill undesirables and manipulate public opinion have accidentally let this one trick slip out.
Kindly fuck off, please
Not while you endanger my friends and family with your bullshit pro-gun rhetoric. You've had 50 years to prove it and fucked if I'm giving you more.
I disagree with this actually. Minorities should be arming up imo, and if you're worried about putting money in Republican pockets, buy privately instead.
If that worked, America would be the safest country in the world for minorities (and by a huge margin). Instead, every few months a far-right extremist uses their legally purchased gun to kill as many minorities as they can.
I'd like to see sources that prove that it's currently happening every few months.
According to the ADL, there were 40 acts of terrorism attributed to the far-right in 2020-2022. So "every few months" was actually an understatement, but I doubt that's what you objected to.
You can follow the link to learn more about who America's gun laws actually arm. Anyone who supports those laws staying unchanged (or made more permissive) inherently supports selling guns to those people since identifying and disarming extremists is a form of gun control.
So if you actually read the link you sent me, you'd see that:
So again, I'd like to see a source with proof that firearms are being used in acts of terrorism to kill specifically minorities at a rate of every few months.
And FWIW, I'm not trying to defend or downplay any terrorist acts by anyone, Republican or not and with a firearm or not. I just don't think it's an argument to be used against arming yourself.
Making them the most commonly used weapon by a significant margin, with arson coming in at only 25%
Are you sure that's what you want? Because it looks to me like you're pretty eager to hold casual speech to rigorous statistical standards (which is textbook sealioning).
You also fixated on it rather than address "if arming minorities worked, why are they no safer in America than Canada, Australia or the UK?", a concept you clearly haven't applied demanded the same standard of proof for.
You'd think guns failing to deliver on their promise to save minorities for 50 years would be all the argument you'd need but if you'd prefer to get in an arms race with the far-right, you do you.