Genesse Ivonne Moreno has been identified as the female shooter who opened fire on Sunday at Joel Osteen's Lakewood Church in Houston, Texas.
  • Neuromancer@lemm.eeM
    0·
    5 months ago

    The shooter may not be trans. It appears the shooter sometimes used a male name but identified as female and was born a female.

    This is such an odd case.

  • PizzaMan@lemm.ee
    0·
    5 months ago

    Crazy how you guys only care about gun violence when someone other than your own side does it. Especially given that most political violence is right wing violence.

    Announcing the shooter as trans front and center in the headline only serves to portray trans people as violent and dangerous, because where would fox news be if not for its continual perpetuation of bigotry against already vulnerable minorities?

    Most shooters are straight, cis, white males. Yet you’ll never see fox news with a headline going “X shooting suspect identified as a straight, cis, white male with ‘kill all blacks’ written on gun”.

    Meanwhile your alternative article you linked shows what better journalism looks like:

    “Female suspect fatally shot after shooting at Joel Osteen’s Lakewood Church”

    And here is an actually good source:

    https://apnews.com/article/church-shooting-joel-osteen-texas-ea557401f2eef247020e34297159536a

    • awwwyissss@lemm.ee
      0·
      5 months ago

      I think noting a shooter is trans is noteworthy because it’s very rare and may be related to their motive.

      But otherwise I generally agree with your statement. Worth nothing that the US Department of Homeland Security has considered right wing extremists the biggest terrorist threat to the US for many years.

    • Menteros@lemm.ee
      0·
      5 months ago

      Most shooters are straight, cis, white males.

      You only think so because the media memory holes any shooting by a trans activist.

      Why do we not have the covenant shooters full manifesto? Why was it hidden for so long? Because it said things like this -

      Wanna kill all you little c*******," one page from the manifesto reads. “Bunch of little f****** w/ your white privlages f*** you f******.”

      But shills don’t care about facts, only the narrative.

    • Throwaway@lemm.eeM
      0·
      5 months ago

      Ive said it time and time again, conservatives are not a monolith. Please stop acting like it.

      • awwwyissss@lemm.ee
        0·
        5 months ago

        More people should hear and understand this on both extreme ends of the political spectrum.

        Don’t listen to people who broadly mock an ideology with straw man arguments and broad generalizations. That shit is for children.

        If someone says “conservatives always…”/“liberals only think…” or any variation just ignore them.

        • Throwaway@lemm.eeM
          0·
          5 months ago

          You know what? Fuck it.

          Crazy how you guys only care about gun violence when someone other than your own side does it. Especially given that most political violence is right wing violence.

          Saying “Gun violence” instead of “Violence” is dog whistling that you care more about disarming people than saving lives.

          That aside, yes, most political violence world wide is right wing violence. This is mainly due to Islamic terrorism, which is right wing. Note that is not American right wing.

          Most shooters are straight, cis, white males.

          Define shootings. Because with one definition, you can have 300+ shootings every year, but that counts gang violence, and suddenly white men aren’t the biggest contributors to the stat anymore. I’ll let you guess which demographic would, since you brought it up.

          Alternatively, excluding gang violence, you can have under a dozen every year, and white men are the biggest contributors. Not per capita, but still in absolute numbers.

          Yet you’ll never see fox news with a headline going “X shooting suspect identified as a straight, cis, white male with ‘kill all blacks’ written on gun”.

          Guess what? They have a right wing bias. They generally don’t report shootings because there’s no angle. Left wing sites do report on them because they want to push an anti-gun narrative, that and ratings.

          And here is an actually good source:

          Don’t think I didn’t notice just how light on details that AP is. They talk a bunch about the victims and Joel osteen, but they barely give you her name. They are pushing an angle by omission. Same as fox, same as cbs, same as every news site.

          • PizzaMan@lemm.ee
            0·
            5 months ago

            Saying “Gun violence” instead of “Violence” is dog whistling that you care more about disarming people than saving lives.

            I’m saying gun violence because that’s the topic. Getting upset over this wording is like getting upset somebody calls a ride on a plane “air travel” instead of “travel”. That’s the category of the subject being discussed.

            That aside, yes, most political violence world wide is right wing violence. This is mainly due to Islamic terrorism, which is right wing. Note that is not American right wing.

            Even if you’re just limiting to domestic terrorism, right wing terrorism is the majority of said terrorism.

            Define shootings

            I thought it was pretty clear that I was talking about politically motivated attacks when I was talking about the straight white shooters thing. Gang violence isn’t really politically motivated.

            And your numbers are way off:

            https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41488081

            https://www.statista.com/statistics/476456/mass-shootings-in-the-us-by-shooter-s-race/

            https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL1N363273/

            Guess what? They have a right wing bias. They generally don’t report shootings because there’s no angle. Left wing sites do report on them because they want to push an anti-gun narrative, that and ratings.

            So when left wing sources push an angle, it’s to reduce deaths. When right wing sources push an angle, it’s to demonize minorities who are already at risk for violence.

            And you think the chosen angle for this particular case makes you look good?

            Don’t think I didn’t notice just how light on details that AP is. They talk a bunch about the victims and Joel osteen, but they barely give you her name.

            Glorifying shooters only makes copy cats more likely. The AP is being responsible.

            • jimbolauski@lemm.ee
              0·
              5 months ago

              Per the Reuters article from 2016 - 2020, trans people accounted for 2.3% of mass shootings but per 2020 census data only account for 0.6% of the population. They are 4x more likely to commit a mass shooting then the rest of the population.

              See I can cherry pick stats to make them say what I want to too.

              • PizzaMan@lemm.ee
                0·
                5 months ago

                Wow you straight up admitted you were cherypicking. You have no argument so I’ll move on.

                • jimbolauski@lemm.ee
                  0·
                  5 months ago

                  The difference between you and I is that I’m honest enough to admit when I’m using cherry picked stats.

            • Throwaway@lemm.eeM
              0·
              5 months ago

              I’m saying gun violence because that’s the topic. Getting upset over this wording is like getting upset somebody calls a ride on a plane “air travel” instead of “travel”. That’s the category of the subject being discussed.

              We’ve been over this so many times, it’s not worth typing it up anymore. But for our audience, gun violence is a propaganda term. It’s basically, take all violence, and throw out anything that doesn’t help with disarming the people. If pizza here actually cared about saving lives, he would actually look at violence itself. Remember, violence is a symptom. Disarming the people will not solve social-economic problems.

              So when left wing sources push an angle, it’s to reduce deaths. When right wing sources push an angle, it’s to demonize minorities who are already at risk for violence.

              You’re being intentionally obtuse. left wing sources want to disarm the people, not to save lives.

              Glorifying shooters only makes copy cats more likely. The AP is being responsible.

              We’re well past the point of worrying about copy cats.

              • PizzaMan@lemm.ee
                0·
                5 months ago

                We’ve been over this so many times, it’s not worth typing it up anymore. But for our audience, gun violence is a propaganda term. It’s basically, take all violence, and throw out anything that doesn’t help with disarming the people.

                Just because you say something doesn’t mean it’s true. I’m telling you my intention is to reduce harm. You can make up whatever bullshit you want to convince yourself that my intentions are elsewhere. You can lie to yourself all you want.

                But I know my intentions, and they aren’t “hur dur take da gunz”.

                If pizza here actually cared about saving lives, he would actually look at violence itself.

                But that’s not the topic. This is a post about a shooting, a specific event, not violence as a whole.

                Remember, violence is a symptom.

                I am aware. That doesn’t change the fact that what I said is true.

                Disarming the people will not solve social-economic problems.

                I never said otherwise. You completely missed the point of what I am saying.

                You’re being intentionally obtuse. left wing sources want to disarm the people, not to save lives.

                Prove it. Prove that their intentions are this hidden mischievous conspiracy.

                We’re well past the point of worrying about copy cats.

                For those such as yourself that don’t care about people dying, sure. But for the rest of us it is still a concern.

        • PizzaMan@lemm.ee
          0·
          5 months ago

          Even if I get banned, someone else will carry the torch for me and will bring reason to this place.

            • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
              0·
              5 months ago

              I mean if he does, it’s just further proof of how full of shit he is, since even in this thread he’s peddling the same gun violence bs that’s been disproven to him numerous times. He doesn’t care about reason, he cares about advancing his lies

              • PizzaMan@lemm.ee
                0·
                5 months ago

                I mean if he does, it’s just further proof of how full of shit he is

                Then there is no answer you guys would possibly accept. If I say yes, it’s proof of my guilt. If I say no, it’s proof of my guilt.

                Honesty is a trait that escapes you thoroughly.

              • Throwaway@lemm.eeM
                0·
                5 months ago

                Being real, hes done a lot to my mental state. On reddit, I would have similar arguments, usually about guns. I thought I was educating people, or at least getting them to actually think critically about their positions.

                Nope, I waant educating or doing anything good, turns out I was just wasting my time.

                Its not just him either, theres a few lefties that I’ve noticed that do the exact same shit.

      • PizzaMan@lemm.ee
        0·
        5 months ago

        Also it’s odd that you’re complaining that I’m grouping republicans together (for a post/article you guys agree with and support), but when someone comes along and says “dEMocRatS aRe VIoLenT” you’re silent. What a double standard.