seb146 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

Where is the hate filled rhetoric against heterosexuals? The calls by liberal talking heads that heterosexuals are grooming children and forcing children to be heterosexual? Where are the lawmakers demanding CPS be called when children are being read to by heterosexuals?

Well, he also threatened to kill his mother, so where does that fit in to your tidy little worldview?
This situation is a perfect example of people trying to politicize everything. Some people point to his grandfather being a GOP politician so inferring that he must've been a hateful conservative. Then his lawyers say he was "nonbinary", which would make him a "self loathing" gay person. It might be one, it might be the other, or it could be "neither".

We are just now, after he shot up an LGBTQ night club, learning he claims to be nonbinary. Convenient. That might get the hate crimes charges dropped. Until they see his social media posts. He didn't have a huge online presence, which is consistent with right wingers. A history of violence has nothing to do with anything. But, that he continued his violent ways is very telling.

The lengths you are going through to try and make this fit the narrative you want it to is amazing.

So now when someone doesn't have a huge online presence it makes them a right winger?

And if he says he's non-binary, who are you to question it? Gender is fluid, it can change at any time, correct? Anyone is free to identify as what they wish, correct? If you believe the above, is it not bigoted of you to suggest that he isn't truly what he says he is?

seb146 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

Where is the hate filled rhetoric against heterosexuals? The calls by liberal talking heads that heterosexuals are grooming children and forcing children to be heterosexual? Where are the lawmakers demanding CPS be called when children are being read to by heterosexuals?

Well, he also threatened to kill his mother, so where does that fit in to your tidy little worldview?
This situation is a perfect example of people trying to politicize everything. Some people point to his grandfather being a GOP politician so inferring that he must've been a hateful conservative. Then his lawyers say he was "nonbinary", which would make him a "self loathing" gay person. It might be one, it might be the other, or it could be "neither".

We are just now, after he shot up an LGBTQ night club, learning he claims to be nonbinary. Convenient. That might get the hate crimes charges dropped. Until they see his social media posts. He didn't have a huge online presence, which is consistent with right wingers. A history of violence has nothing to do with anything. But, that he continued his violent ways is very telling.

His history is relevant. It shows that all his violence wasn't just directed at alternative lifestyle people. Your "right wingers don't use social media" stereotype is just that, a stereotype.

Just noticed - there were 2 mass killing in US threads one above the other before I wrote this!

Time to revive the all-encompassing 'mass killings in US' thread posted a few months ago?

art wrote:

Just noticed - there were 2 mass killing in US threads one above the other before I wrote this!

Time to revive the all-encompassing 'mass killings in US' thread posted a few months ago?

Might as well. So common that it makes sense to tidy up and keep things neat and ordered. Important that we have a platform from which we can dispense our thoughts and prayers.

Sad to see such homophobia in the U.S.

If you ever want to see the aftermath of stilletto heels to face looks like...

https://mobile.twitter.com/CSPDPIO/stat ... 64/photo/1

BN747

Pi7472000 wrote:

Sad to see such homophobia in the U.S.

That hasn't been proven, in this case.

BN747 wrote:

If you ever want to see the aftermath of stilletto heels to face looks like...

https://mobile.twitter.com/CSPDPIO/stat ... 64/photo/1

BN747

There's an interview with his dad below the mugshot. Dad is a Mormon Republican who doesn't "do gays"

Nutters - the pair of them.

SoCalPilot wrote:

seb146 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

Well, he also threatened to kill his mother, so where does that fit in to your tidy little worldview?
This situation is a perfect example of people trying to politicize everything. Some people point to his grandfather being a GOP politician so inferring that he must've been a hateful conservative. Then his lawyers say he was "nonbinary", which would make him a "self loathing" gay person. It might be one, it might be the other, or it could be "neither".

We are just now, after he shot up an LGBTQ night club, learning he claims to be nonbinary. Convenient. That might get the hate crimes charges dropped. Until they see his social media posts. He didn't have a huge online presence, which is consistent with right wingers. A history of violence has nothing to do with anything. But, that he continued his violent ways is very telling.

The lengths you are going through to try and make this fit the narrative you want it to is amazing.

So now when someone doesn't have a huge online presence it makes them a right winger?

And if he says he's non-binary, who are you to question it? Gender is fluid, it can change at any time, correct? Anyone is free to identify as what they wish, correct? If you believe the above, is it not bigoted of you to suggest that he isn't truly what he says he is?

In this case, his gender identity didn't change until after he gunned down a nightclub and murdered five people. Generally, LGBTQ people have a social media presence and don't walk into the only LGBTQ nightclub in down and shoot the place up.

It seems MAGAs are fighting hard to get the narrative they want. Again. Another domestic terrorist taking his cue from right wing media, but we can't have that. Just a lone wolf attack. We should just ignore Tucker Carlson and Ron DeSantis and Greg Abbott and checking children's genitals before they use the bathroom or play sports.

I have also heard there was an all-ages drag show just before the terror attack. Again, the MAGA narrative comes into play here with them telling people to call Child Protective Services if parents take their children to drag shows.

Chaostheory wrote:

BN747 wrote:

If you ever want to see the aftermath of stilletto heels to face looks like...

https://mobile.twitter.com/CSPDPIO/stat ... 64/photo/1

BN747

There's an interview with his dad below the mugshot. Dad is a Mormon Republican who doesn't "do gays"

But he does [appear to] do meth!

That interview was crazy though - told that his son shot up a gay bar and his reaction was to be relieved to find out that his son wasn't gay.

johns624 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

Well, he also threatened to kill his mother, so where does that fit in to your tidy little worldview?
This situation is a perfect example of people trying to politicize everything. Some people point to his grandfather being a GOP politician so inferring that he must've been a hateful conservative. Then his lawyers say he was "nonbinary", which would make him a "self loathing" gay person. It might be one, it might be the other, or it could be "neither".

We are just now, after he shot up an LGBTQ night club, learning he claims to be nonbinary. Convenient. That might get the hate crimes charges dropped. Until they see his social media posts. He didn't have a huge online presence, which is consistent with right wingers. A history of violence has nothing to do with anything. But, that he continued his violent ways is very telling.

His history is relevant. It shows that all his violence wasn't just directed at alternative lifestyle people. Your "right wingers don't use social media" stereotype is just that, a stereotype.

The only "social media" right wingers use, if any, is Fox, 8Chan, Parler, and Truth Social. And, now, Twitter. That's it, it seems. Any other social media outlet does not fit their narrative. They have to navigate the horrors of other people living. Like women and Blacks and trans people and Muslims.

Regarding these terror attacks, I think Thom Hartmann is on to something with this:

The man who shot up Club Q in Colorado Springs has been called “deranged” in media headlines featuring his “troubled past.” He wasn’t deranged: he was a terrorist. So were the men who murdered Jews at the Tree of Life Synagogue and Black people at a Buffalo supermarket.

All had the mental competence to identify their victims, acquire their weapons, and execute their crimes. They may not live or think exactly like you and me, they may have had tough childhoods, but they’re not mentally ill: they’re terrorists.

seb146 wrote:

SoCalPilot wrote:

seb146 wrote:

We are just now, after he shot up an LGBTQ night club, learning he claims to be nonbinary. Convenient. That might get the hate crimes charges dropped. Until they see his social media posts. He didn't have a huge online presence, which is consistent with right wingers. A history of violence has nothing to do with anything. But, that he continued his violent ways is very telling.

The lengths you are going through to try and make this fit the narrative you want it to is amazing.

So now when someone doesn't have a huge online presence it makes them a right winger?

And if he says he's non-binary, who are you to question it? Gender is fluid, it can change at any time, correct? Anyone is free to identify as what they wish, correct? If you believe the above, is it not bigoted of you to suggest that he isn't truly what he says he is?

In this case, his gender identity didn't change until after he gunned down a nightclub and murdered five people. Generally, LGBTQ people have a social media presence and don't walk into the only LGBTQ nightclub in down and shoot the place up.

It seems MAGAs are fighting hard to get the narrative they want. Again. Another domestic terrorist taking his cue from right wing media, but we can't have that. Just a lone wolf attack. We should just ignore Tucker Carlson and Ron DeSantis and Greg Abbott and checking children's genitals before they use the bathroom or play sports.

I have also heard there was an all-ages drag show just before the terror attack. Again, the MAGA narrative comes into play here with them telling people to call Child Protective Services if parents take their children to drag shows.

I'm not MAGA and never have been but I guess you have to continue your long-time pattern of everyone either being black and white with no shades between the extremes.

zkojq wrote:

Chaostheory wrote:

BN747 wrote:

If you ever want to see the aftermath of stilletto heels to face looks like...

https://mobile.twitter.com/CSPDPIO/stat ... 64/photo/1

BN747

There's an interview with his dad below the mugshot. Dad is a Mormon Republican who doesn't "do gays"

But he does [appear to] do meth!

That interview was crazy though - told that his son shot up a gay bar and his reaction was to be relieved to find out that his son wasn't gay.

His dad is apparently, aside from fake WWF nonsense was also the ex-E-level porn actor 'Dick Delaware'...not one to knock the porn sex industry as they provide far more temperament containing contributions to society
than all other contenders....to a sexually primitive America (thanks Puritans to MAGA minds).
But just like society, many of are mentality of balance because of public scorn of the trade with endless smiles behind closed doors.

But just like parents of the kid Ethan Crumbley, who threw their kid to the wolves (you're on your own junior)...walking proof that having a child should require at a minimum, the same scrutiny as LA pet adoption requirements ..or greater. Delaware or Brink, abandoning his kid in infancy is the typical scumbag of men, leaving a woman to do the heavy lifting.

Piss poor parenting - gun violence...? A link...quite possible.

BN747

It didn't take long

https://twitter.com/andrewkimmel/status ... 38G9w&s=19

This lady with almost a million Twitter followers is more concerned about the lifestyle of the victims (eternal damnation) than the fact that they were gunned down.

JJJ wrote:

It didn't take long

https://twitter.com/andrewkimmel/status ... 38G9w&s=19

This lady with almost a million Twitter followers is more concerned about the lifestyle of the victims (eternal damnation) than the fact that they were gunned down.

If you substitute Mohammed for Christ, you could apply this to 9/11. You would expect better logic from a lawyer, although having been Donald Trump's lawyer, probably par for the course.

Another response to "why are you libs politicizing this shooting":

If he were simply an angry man going for body count because the world done him wrong, he had every opportunity to stop anywhere else. All the grocery stores, department stores, the mall, the parks, other night clubs and bars. And, yet, he chose to go to the only LGBTQ nightclub in Colorado Springs and open fire. He politicized it. Just like the shooting at the El Paso Wal-Mart was political, the Tree Of Life shooting was political, Buffalo was political. This was political.

johns624 wrote:

People shoot up heterosexual nightclubs and bars, too. Does that mean that they hate heterosexuals? Just playing devil's advocate here...
Terrorism charges would make sense if no one was killed, since the sentence would probably be stiffer. With murder charges already on the table, adding more charges are just to make some feel good and special.

There isn't a drum beat of content coming from anywhere calling heterosexuals groomers and pedophiles 24/7, encouraging violence against them.

Redd wrote:

Aldrich identifies as non-binary and uses they/them pronouns, according to their attorney.

It'll be interesting to see if this is genuine.

https://www.axios.com/2022/11/23/colora ... orneys-say

"According to their attorney"...just not according to his mother, himself, or anyone that knows him.

JJJ wrote:

It didn't take long

https://twitter.com/andrewkimmel/status ... 38G9w&s=19

This lady with almost a million Twitter followers is more concerned about the lifestyle of the victims (eternal damnation) than the fact that they were gunned down.

This woman was quite literally farted on by Giuliani while trying to overturn an election, and that will be the apogee of her career. The whole episode is a montage of conservatism in 2022.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqXtiQ20BLw

Chaostheory wrote:

BN747 wrote:

If you ever want to see the aftermath of stilletto heels to face looks like...

https://mobile.twitter.com/CSPDPIO/stat ... 64/photo/1

BN747

There's an interview with his dad below the mugshot. Dad is a Mormon Republican who doesn't "do gays"

Nutters - the pair of them.

And a porn star and maybe probably a meth head

BN747 wrote:

If you ever want to see the aftermath of stilletto heels to face looks like...

https://mobile.twitter.com/CSPDPIO/stat ... 64/photo/1

BN747

What a pity it did not penetrate his skull

seb146 wrote:

Regarding these terror attacks, I think Thom Hartmann is on to something with this:
The man who shot up Club Q in Colorado Springs has been called “deranged” in media headlines featuring his “troubled past.” He wasn’t deranged: he was a terrorist. So were the men who murdered Jews at the Tree of Life Synagogue and Black people at a Buffalo supermarket.
All had the mental competence to identify their victims, acquire their weapons, and execute their crimes. They may not live or think exactly like you and me, they may have had tough childhoods, but they’re not mentally ill: they’re terrorists.

JJJ wrote:

It didn't take long https://twitter.com/andrewkimmel/status ... 38G9w&s=19
This lady with almost a million Twitter followers is more concerned about the lifestyle of the victims (eternal damnation) than the fact that they were gunned down.

You use the term "lady" very loosely...

SoCalPilot wrote:

seb146 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

Well, he also threatened to kill his mother, so where does that fit in to your tidy little worldview?
This situation is a perfect example of people trying to politicize everything. Some people point to his grandfather being a GOP politician so inferring that he must've been a hateful conservative. Then his lawyers say he was "nonbinary", which would make him a "self loathing" gay person. It might be one, it might be the other, or it could be "neither".

We are just now, after he shot up an LGBTQ night club, learning he claims to be nonbinary. Convenient. That might get the hate crimes charges dropped. Until they see his social media posts. He didn't have a huge online presence, which is consistent with right wingers. A history of violence has nothing to do with anything. But, that he continued his violent ways is very telling.

The lengths you are going through to try and make this fit the narrative you want it to is amazing.

So now when someone doesn't have a huge online presence it makes them a right winger?

And if he says he's non-binary, who are you to question it? Gender is fluid, it can change at any time, correct? Anyone is free to identify as what they wish, correct? If you believe the above, is it not bigoted of you to suggest that he isn't truly what he says he is?

Yes, I think at dinner tables across America (including mine), we have been talking about that.

Yes, (in polite circles), anytime a person declares they are a man/woman/nonbinary, that is exactly what they are. And yes, their gender designation can change at any time. And no, people cannot criticize that.

An interesting consequence is that the words "man" or "woman" no longer have any identifiable characteristics, or difference between them. So personally, I don't see why the words need to be used anymore. It's just people, now.

LCDFlight wrote:

SoCalPilot wrote:

seb146 wrote:

We are just now, after he shot up an LGBTQ night club, learning he claims to be nonbinary. Convenient. That might get the hate crimes charges dropped. Until they see his social media posts. He didn't have a huge online presence, which is consistent with right wingers. A history of violence has nothing to do with anything. But, that he continued his violent ways is very telling.

The lengths you are going through to try and make this fit the narrative you want it to is amazing.

So now when someone doesn't have a huge online presence it makes them a right winger?

And if he says he's non-binary, who are you to question it? Gender is fluid, it can change at any time, correct? Anyone is free to identify as what they wish, correct? If you believe the above, is it not bigoted of you to suggest that he isn't truly what he says he is?

Yes, I think at dinner tables across America (including mine), we have been talking about that.

Yes, (in polite circles), anytime a person declares they are a man/woman/nonbinary, that is exactly what they are. And yes, their gender designation can change at any time. And no, people cannot criticize that.

An interesting consequence is that the words "man" or "woman" no longer have any identifiable characteristics, or difference between them. So personally, I don't see why the words need to be used anymore. It's just people, now.

So if I shot someone who is Gay, it is/or can be a hate crime.

But if I then say that actually I am LGBTQ (when in custody) it ceases to be a hate crime.

bennett123 wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

SoCalPilot wrote:

The lengths you are going through to try and make this fit the narrative you want it to is amazing.

So now when someone doesn't have a huge online presence it makes them a right winger?

And if he says he's non-binary, who are you to question it? Gender is fluid, it can change at any time, correct? Anyone is free to identify as what they wish, correct? If you believe the above, is it not bigoted of you to suggest that he isn't truly what he says he is?

Yes, I think at dinner tables across America (including mine), we have been talking about that.

Yes, (in polite circles), anytime a person declares they are a man/woman/nonbinary, that is exactly what they are. And yes, their gender designation can change at any time. And no, people cannot criticize that.

An interesting consequence is that the words "man" or "woman" no longer have any identifiable characteristics, or difference between them. So personally, I don't see why the words need to be used anymore. It's just people, now.

So if I shot someone who is Gay, it is/or can be a hate crime.

But if I then say that actually I am LGBTQ (when in custody) it ceases to be a hate crime.

Good question, because there is a time element. I don’t know if that has ever been tested in court. But yes, there isn’t supposed to be a panel of experts deciding what your gender identity or sexual preferences are. That is in the past now. AFAIK.

Who radicalized him? Why aren't others like him saying anything? I thought Christianity was a "religion of peace?"

seb146 wrote:

Another response to "why are you libs politicizing this shooting":

If he were simply an angry man going for body count because the world done him wrong, he had every opportunity to stop anywhere else. All the grocery stores, department stores, the mall, the parks, other night clubs and bars. And, yet, he chose to go to the only LGBTQ nightclub in Colorado Springs and open fire. He politicized it. Just like the shooting at the El Paso Wal-Mart was political, the Tree Of Life shooting was political, Buffalo was political. This was political.

Bingo!

LCDFlight wrote:

SoCalPilot wrote:

seb146 wrote:

We are just now, after he shot up an LGBTQ night club, learning he claims to be nonbinary. Convenient. That might get the hate crimes charges dropped. Until they see his social media posts. He didn't have a huge online presence, which is consistent with right wingers. A history of violence has nothing to do with anything. But, that he continued his violent ways is very telling.

The lengths you are going through to try and make this fit the narrative you want it to is amazing.

So now when someone doesn't have a huge online presence it makes them a right winger?

And if he says he's non-binary, who are you to question it? Gender is fluid, it can change at any time, correct? Anyone is free to identify as what they wish, correct? If you believe the above, is it not bigoted of you to suggest that he isn't truly what he says he is?

Yes, I think at dinner tables across America (including mine), we have been talking about that.

Yes, (in polite circles), anytime a person declares they are a man/woman/nonbinary, that is exactly what they are. And yes, their gender designation can change at any time. And no, people cannot criticize that.

An interesting consequence is that the words "man" or "woman" no longer have any identifiable characteristics, or difference between them. So personally, I don't see why the words need to be used anymore. It's just people, now.

A lot of people are having an issue with the shooter only saying he is non-binary AFTER he murdered people at an LGBTQ nightclub. If there was some evidence he were non-binary before the shooting, I would say the hate crime charges might be dropped. But, through his attorney, he announced he is non-binary. Not before the shooting. There are plenty of non-binary people who are trying to be visible, not only the LGBTQ community but their own community in general. I work with a non-binary person and it was challenging for me, at first, to remember they/them when referring to them. Now, it is second nature. Not once did they threaten violence when someone used the wrong pronoun. I have known plenty of trans people and not once have they threatened violence when we used the wrong pronoun or dead name.

The shooter is simply trying to get federal charges dropped by saying he is non-binary. It is just that simple.

BN747 wrote:

I'm sure this 300+ lb Incel (super closeted gay reject I'm sure) was most likely a religious MAGA nut to boot.

Our species will be better off the sooner we recognize that a percentage of us are just detractors of the betterment of the human condition.

This angry clown, took five lives - shattering five families directly (for life) as well as other members, as well as permanently damaging the 25+ injured
and their futures.

The pain inflicted is grossly out-weighed by the pain of loss over this turd's swift trial and execution.

It's long past time to adjust the value of (viable spare me abortion cry unless you're a woman) human life and harm done to it by others.
If their loss measures greater than what they've caused...X them, they've nothing good remaining to contribute positively to society.

BN747

Exquisitely said. It's time we forego with the usual trial/incarceration of people like this. It's obvious the guy did it, he'll never walk free again, who gives a rats behind about his upbringing etc. The guy murdered 5 people in cold blood, wounded others and altered the lives of far more people than care about his sorry ass. March him into the room, strap him down and shove a needle in his arm, game over, next.

seb146 wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

SoCalPilot wrote:

The lengths you are going through to try and make this fit the narrative you want it to is amazing.

So now when someone doesn't have a huge online presence it makes them a right winger?

And if he says he's non-binary, who are you to question it? Gender is fluid, it can change at any time, correct? Anyone is free to identify as what they wish, correct? If you believe the above, is it not bigoted of you to suggest that he isn't truly what he says he is?

Yes, I think at dinner tables across America (including mine), we have been talking about that.

Yes, (in polite circles), anytime a person declares they are a man/woman/nonbinary, that is exactly what they are. And yes, their gender designation can change at any time. And no, people cannot criticize that.

An interesting consequence is that the words "man" or "woman" no longer have any identifiable characteristics, or difference between them. So personally, I don't see why the words need to be used anymore. It's just people, now.

A lot of people are having an issue with the shooter only saying he is non-binary AFTER he murdered people at an LGBTQ nightclub. If there was some evidence he were non-binary before the shooting, I would say the hate crime charges might be dropped. But, through his attorney, he announced he is non-binary. Not before the shooting. There are plenty of non-binary people who are trying to be visible, not only the LGBTQ community but their own community in general. I work with a non-binary person and it was challenging for me, at first, to remember they/them when referring to them. Now, it is second nature. Not once did they threaten violence when someone used the wrong pronoun. I have known plenty of trans people and not once have they threatened violence when we used the wrong pronoun or dead name.

The shooter is simply trying to get federal charges dropped by saying he is non-binary. It is just that simple.

If the shooter says they are non-binary, they are nonbinary. There is no other definition. But were they nonbinary at the time of the shooting? I don’t think this time-shift question has ever been asked in court (but I am not a lawyer so please don’t read much into that).

But if we now define man and woman as purely abstract identifications, then it has some consequences. It will mean a lot of the protections given to people based on gender will not be as useful anymore.

LCDFlight wrote:

seb146 wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

Yes, I think at dinner tables across America (including mine), we have been talking about that.

Yes, (in polite circles), anytime a person declares they are a man/woman/nonbinary, that is exactly what they are. And yes, their gender designation can change at any time. And no, people cannot criticize that.

An interesting consequence is that the words "man" or "woman" no longer have any identifiable characteristics, or difference between them. So personally, I don't see why the words need to be used anymore. It's just people, now.

A lot of people are having an issue with the shooter only saying he is non-binary AFTER he murdered people at an LGBTQ nightclub. If there was some evidence he were non-binary before the shooting, I would say the hate crime charges might be dropped. But, through his attorney, he announced he is non-binary. Not before the shooting. There are plenty of non-binary people who are trying to be visible, not only the LGBTQ community but their own community in general. I work with a non-binary person and it was challenging for me, at first, to remember they/them when referring to them. Now, it is second nature. Not once did they threaten violence when someone used the wrong pronoun. I have known plenty of trans people and not once have they threatened violence when we used the wrong pronoun or dead name.

The shooter is simply trying to get federal charges dropped by saying he is non-binary. It is just that simple.

If the shooter says they are non-binary, they are nonbinary. There is no other definition. But were they nonbinary at the time of the shooting? I don’t think this time-shift question has ever been asked in court (but I am not a lawyer so please don’t read much into that).

But if we now define man and woman as purely abstract identifications, then it has some consequences. It will mean a lot of the protections given to people based on gender will not be as useful anymore.

I don't think there has ever been a murder case where the accused "comes out" after the crime has been committed. I am not hearing anything from anyone who knew him before the shooting say he was non-binary. I am still waiting on that. I am not talking just one person he was around most of the time but co-workers or classmates who had a casual relationship with him. The only time I interact with my non-binary coworker is at work. But, I know they are non-binary.

I disagree with your second statement. If a corporation can be a person and be granted personhood protections, then someone who identifies outside male or female has the exact same protections and rights.

seb146 wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

seb146 wrote:

A lot of people are having an issue with the shooter only saying he is non-binary AFTER he murdered people at an LGBTQ nightclub. If there was some evidence he were non-binary before the shooting, I would say the hate crime charges might be dropped. But, through his attorney, he announced he is non-binary. Not before the shooting. There are plenty of non-binary people who are trying to be visible, not only the LGBTQ community but their own community in general. I work with a non-binary person and it was challenging for me, at first, to remember they/them when referring to them. Now, it is second nature. Not once did they threaten violence when someone used the wrong pronoun. I have known plenty of trans people and not once have they threatened violence when we used the wrong pronoun or dead name.

The shooter is simply trying to get federal charges dropped by saying he is non-binary. It is just that simple.

If the shooter says they are non-binary, they are nonbinary. There is no other definition. But were they nonbinary at the time of the shooting? I don’t think this time-shift question has ever been asked in court (but I am not a lawyer so please don’t read much into that).

But if we now define man and woman as purely abstract identifications, then it has some consequences. It will mean a lot of the protections given to people based on gender will not be as useful anymore.

I don't think there has ever been a murder case where the accused "comes out" after the crime has been committed. I am not hearing anything from anyone who knew him before the shooting say he was non-binary. I am still waiting on that. I am not talking just one person he was around most of the time but co-workers or classmates who had a casual relationship with him. The only time I interact with my non-binary coworker is at work. But, I know they are non-binary.

I disagree with your second statement. If a corporation can be a person and be granted personhood protections, then someone who identifies outside male or female has the exact same protections and rights.

Aaron Hernandez is such a case.

LCDFlight wrote:

seb146 wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

If the shooter says they are non-binary, they are nonbinary. There is no other definition. But were they nonbinary at the time of the shooting? I don’t think this time-shift question has ever been asked in court (but I am not a lawyer so please don’t read much into that).

But if we now define man and woman as purely abstract identifications, then it has some consequences. It will mean a lot of the protections given to people based on gender will not be as useful anymore.

I don't think there has ever been a murder case where the accused "comes out" after the crime has been committed. I am not hearing anything from anyone who knew him before the shooting say he was non-binary. I am still waiting on that. I am not talking just one person he was around most of the time but co-workers or classmates who had a casual relationship with him. The only time I interact with my non-binary coworker is at work. But, I know they are non-binary.

I disagree with your second statement. If a corporation can be a person and be granted personhood protections, then someone who identifies outside male or female has the exact same protections and rights.

Aaron Hernandez is such a case.

Touche'.

bennett123 wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

SoCalPilot wrote:

The lengths you are going through to try and make this fit the narrative you want it to is amazing.

So now when someone doesn't have a huge online presence it makes them a right winger?

And if he says he's non-binary, who are you to question it? Gender is fluid, it can change at any time, correct? Anyone is free to identify as what they wish, correct? If you believe the above, is it not bigoted of you to suggest that he isn't truly what he says he is?

Yes, I think at dinner tables across America (including mine), we have been talking about that.

Yes, (in polite circles), anytime a person declares they are a man/woman/nonbinary, that is exactly what they are. And yes, their gender designation can change at any time. And no, people cannot criticize that.

An interesting consequence is that the words "man" or "woman" no longer have any identifiable characteristics, or difference between them. So personally, I don't see why the words need to be used anymore. It's just people, now.

So if I shot someone who is Gay, it is/or can be a hate crime.

But if I then say that actually I am LGBTQ (when in custody) it ceases to be a hate crime.

Umm... not quite.

If a closeted gay guy beats an openly gay man to death in the parking lot of a gay bar, is that a hate crime? Of course it is, context matters.

If a gay man kills another gay man in the home they share together during a fight, is that a hate crime? Of course not.

The UN definition is the broadest definition possible to account for every possible set of circumstances, from genocide to targeted killings to systemized discrimination. This is why we have a legal system to determine the nuance of the offense committed.

And this one? If you've never been to Colorado Springs, it's a dense little downtown with a lot of bars in a compact area, but this one isn't anywhere nearby - it's on the outskirts of town. If he really was just some deranged shooter trying to kill as many people as possible (which I guess would be the excuse if you're trying to avoid the hate crime statute, but woof that's not a good defense), he would have shot up any number of other larger, busier venues downtown. By nature of that, I think you probably have enough to go on to figure that this is a hate crime.

johns624 wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

seb146 wrote:

I don't think there has ever been a murder case where the accused "comes out" after the crime has been committed. I am not hearing anything from anyone who knew him before the shooting say he was non-binary. I am still waiting on that. I am not talking just one person he was around most of the time but co-workers or classmates who had a casual relationship with him. The only time I interact with my non-binary coworker is at work. But, I know they are non-binary.

I disagree with your second statement. If a corporation can be a person and be granted personhood protections, then someone who identifies outside male or female has the exact same protections and rights.

Aaron Hernandez is such a case.

Touche'.

:Hernandez, it has been shown, suffered from traumatic brain injury.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6964160/
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way ... severe-cte

The Colorado Springs terrorist looks like he was in no shape to play sports. So, reason and logic dictates he was not suffering from any traumatic brain injury. People are trying so hard to defend the terrorist and it just shows who they are.

I had someone call me stupid in another thread with zero context so I am allowed this. Don't get mad. Prove me wrong. With clinical data. Outside the MAGA echo chamber.

seb146 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

Aaron Hernandez is such a case.

Touche'.

:Hernandez, it has been shown, suffered from traumatic brain injury.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6964160/
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way ... severe-cte

The Colorado Springs terrorist looks like he was in no shape to play sports. So, reason and logic dictates he was not suffering from any traumatic brain injury. People are trying so hard to defend the terrorist and it just shows who they are.

I had someone call me stupid in another thread with zero context so I am allowed this. Don't get mad. Prove me wrong. With clinical data. Outside the MAGA echo chamber.

Why does not playing sport preclude traumatic brain injury?.

bennett123 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

Touche'.

:Hernandez, it has been shown, suffered from traumatic brain injury.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6964160/
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way ... severe-cte

The Colorado Springs terrorist looks like he was in no shape to play sports. So, reason and logic dictates he was not suffering from any traumatic brain injury. People are trying so hard to defend the terrorist and it just shows who they are.

I had someone call me stupid in another thread with zero context so I am allowed this. Don't get mad. Prove me wrong. With clinical data. Outside the MAGA echo chamber.

Why does not playing sport preclude traumatic brain injury?.

You're really trying to bend over backwards to defend the anti-gay terrorist here. Whataboutism has been all that you've posted.

It's a pretty bad look.

seb146 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

Aaron Hernandez is such a case.

Touche'.

:Hernandez, it has been shown, suffered from traumatic brain injury.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6964160/
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way ... severe-cte

The Colorado Springs terrorist looks like he was in no shape to play sports. So, reason and logic dictates he was not suffering from any traumatic brain injury. People are trying so hard to defend the terrorist and it just shows who they are.

I had someone call me stupid in another thread with zero context so I am allowed this. Don't get mad. Prove me wrong. With clinical data. Outside the MAGA echo chamber.

Please follow along. You said that no one has come out as gay after murdering someone. Aaron Hernandez did. It had nothing to do with a traumatic brain injury.
https://nypost.com/2020/01/29/aaron-her ... ther-says/

johns624 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

Touche'.

:Hernandez, it has been shown, suffered from traumatic brain injury.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6964160/
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way ... severe-cte

The Colorado Springs terrorist looks like he was in no shape to play sports. So, reason and logic dictates he was not suffering from any traumatic brain injury. People are trying so hard to defend the terrorist and it just shows who they are.

I had someone call me stupid in another thread with zero context so I am allowed this. Don't get mad. Prove me wrong. With clinical data. Outside the MAGA echo chamber.

Please follow along. You said that no one has come out as gay after murdering someone. Aaron Hernandez did. It had nothing to do with a traumatic brain injury.
https://nypost.com/2020/01/29/aaron-her ... ther-says/

Second hand information. Hernandez brother told an interviewer that Aaron had come out just before he killed himself. Could it be that, on the advice of his attorney, he decided he was gay? Or, could it be that it was Stockholm syndrome and he had grown close with his cell mate? Or, yes, he could have always been gay but, because of sports culture, didn't feel safe coming out?

No matter what, you are saying anyone who targets LGBTQ gatherings then decides to come out should be given a pass.

seb146 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

:Hernandez, it has been shown, suffered from traumatic brain injury.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6964160/
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way ... severe-cte

The Colorado Springs terrorist looks like he was in no shape to play sports. So, reason and logic dictates he was not suffering from any traumatic brain injury. People are trying so hard to defend the terrorist and it just shows who they are.

I had someone call me stupid in another thread with zero context so I am allowed this. Don't get mad. Prove me wrong. With clinical data. Outside the MAGA echo chamber.

Please follow along. You said that no one has come out as gay after murdering someone. Aaron Hernandez did. It had nothing to do with a traumatic brain injury.
https://nypost.com/2020/01/29/aaron-her ... ther-says/

Second hand information. Hernandez brother told an interviewer that Aaron had come out just before he killed himself. Could it be that, on the advice of his attorney, he decided he was gay? Or, could it be that it was Stockholm syndrome and he had grown close with his cell mate? Or, yes, he could have always been gay but, because of sports culture, didn't feel safe coming out?

No matter what, you are saying anyone who targets LGBTQ gatherings then decides to come out should be given a pass.

No, we're saying that it has to be considered and investigated. You're the one who used the absolute term "never". You're also one of the few who gets away with making absurd statements without any citations.

CaptHadley wrote:

BN747 wrote:

I'm sure this 300+ lb Incel (super closeted gay reject I'm sure) was most likely a religious MAGA nut to boot.

Our species will be better off the sooner we recognize that a percentage of us are just detractors of the betterment of the human condition.

This angry clown, took five lives - shattering five families directly (for life) as well as other members, as well as permanently damaging the 25+ injured
and their futures.

The pain inflicted is grossly out-weighed by the pain of loss over this turd's swift trial and execution.

It's long past time to adjust the value of (viable spare me abortion cry unless you're a woman) human life and harm done to it by others.
If their loss measures greater than what they've caused...X them, they've nothing good remaining to contribute positively to society.

BN747

Exquisitely said. It's time we forego with the usual trial/incarceration of people like this. It's obvious the guy did it, he'll never walk free again, who gives a rats behind about his upbringing etc. The guy murdered 5 people in cold blood, wounded others and altered the lives of far more people than care about his sorry ass. March him into the room, strap him down and shove a needle in his arm, game over, next.

It really is past that time. Way past it!

BN747

johns624 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

Please follow along. You said that no one has come out as gay after murdering someone. Aaron Hernandez did. It had nothing to do with a traumatic brain injury.
https://nypost.com/2020/01/29/aaron-her ... ther-says/

Second hand information. Hernandez brother told an interviewer that Aaron had come out just before he killed himself. Could it be that, on the advice of his attorney, he decided he was gay? Or, could it be that it was Stockholm syndrome and he had grown close with his cell mate? Or, yes, he could have always been gay but, because of sports culture, didn't feel safe coming out?

No matter what, you are saying anyone who targets LGBTQ gatherings then decides to come out should be given a pass.

No, we're saying that it has to be considered and investigated. You're the one who used the absolute term "never". You're also one of the few who gets away with making absurd statements without any citations.

Again: he went to the only LGBTQ night club in Colorado Springs on Drag Night. You know full well the hate against drag and the LGBTQ community by MAGA mouth pieces. The shooter could have gone to the supermarket on the corner from his home or the tavern on the corner or any other place but he chose the only LGBTQ night club. THAT needs to be considered, instead of twisting words all out of context and defending the murderer.

I don't know if the perp is truly non-binary or if they are using this as a way to try to get a hate crime charge dropped by identifying as part of the LGBTQ community after the fact. That being said, this changes nothing, and if this were a hate crime it should also change nothing. The perp straight up killed a bunch of people in cold blood. They belong in jail and hopefully they are convicted and spend the rest of their life behind bars.

I have actually never understood the point of hate crime legislation myself. Yes hate is a motive. But there are plenty of other motives. If a woman kills her husband for the insurance money, why is that crime less serious than if a KKK member goes and takes out a black man? In both cases, one person kills another person, and in both cases someone ends up dead. Why is one treated more serious than the other? Just something I have never understood. (I am not condoning hate, but it just seems like that this is something that is a feel good measure that really accomplishes nothing.)

apodino wrote:

I don't know if the perp is truly non-binary or if they are using this as a way to try to get a hate crime charge dropped by identifying as part of the LGBTQ community after the fact. That being said, this changes nothing, and if this were a hate crime it should also change nothing. The perp straight up killed a bunch of people in cold blood. They belong in jail and hopefully they are convicted and spend the rest of their life behind bars.

I have actually never understood the point of hate crime legislation myself. Yes hate is a motive. But there are plenty of other motives. If a woman kills her husband for the insurance money, why is that crime less serious than if a KKK member goes and takes out a black man? In both cases, one person kills another person, and in both cases someone ends up dead. Why is one treated more serious than the other? Just something I have never understood. (I am not condoning hate, but it just seems like that this is something that is a feel good measure that really accomplishes nothing.)

I get what you are saying: every life is precious and all that. And, people should be prosecuted with only that in mind. I think it comes down to an argument that had been made across the country "the law says nothing about this group of people so I can go after them" and "the law says 'all Americans' so that is enough and we don't need to muddy the waters with extra words". It clearly is not.

This country (all countries, really, but let's just stick to the United States) has a long history of discrimination against non-white, non-Christian, non-heterosexual people. Congress and individual states have been trying to right this wrong for decades. Protecting all Americans without question. This leads to a certain group complaining about all these other groups being given "special rights". Yes, it is a "feel good" step but it could also be that these hate crime laws are on the books as a way of telling all Americans that all lives matter and all Americans are equal under the law. That skin color, religion, sexual identity are not valid reasons to target people.

I think, until the "all lives matter" crowd actually believes that all lives truly do matter, we need to keep these hate crime laws on the books.

Nice to see heroism rewarded.

https://gazette.com/special-coverage/co ... 4ab09.html

It appears he is just trolling

https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-new ... -rcna60188
https://www.yahoo.com/video/f-b-asking- ... 07294.html
https://www.denverpost.com/2022/12/07/c ... o-springs/

And he was known to FBI agents

https://apnews.com/article/shootings-co ... 2a67f05ae0

bluecrew wrote:

Nice to see heroism rewarded.

https://gazette.com/special-coverage/co ... 4ab09.html

Did they reward the trans woman who stomped the terrorist into submission too?

seb146 wrote:

And he was known to FBI agents

https://apnews.com/article/shootings-co ... 2a67f05ae0

I've read that the reason that he wasn't charged was because his Mommy and Gramps and Granny hid out so that they couldn't be served subpoenas. I would've thought the police would have enough evidence to proceed without their cooperation. Maybe they should be given arrest warrants now as accessories because they could've kept this shooting from happening.
https://news.yahoo.com/subpoena-often-p ... 00223.html