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.
Yes, they’re certainly experts. They get payed good money for work in highly competitive positions. They have specialized educations focused on this issue, plus tens of thousands of hours working on it professionally.
I don’t really know why you’ve decided that social media accounts are your ultimate measuring stick for how trustworthy someone is. Seems pretty fucking stupid, like you
Of those, “the number of known suspects in mass shootings which are trans is under 10 for the last decade,” which translated to “1:880 [or 0.11%] of the 4,400 shootings” they recorded, he said.
Most citations show about .3-.6 for the transgender community. The most recent article I read showed about 4 out of 300 for mass shootings. The problem is how they define it but even at the number, it shows a trans person is more likely to be a mass shooter as a percentage of the population.
If you only look at raw numbers, yes, white males are more likely in volume to commit mass shootings but they are one of the single largest groups. That is a no brainer.
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.
And why should I care what some government jerkoffs decide the narrative is?
Because they’re experts instead of anonymous social media accounts.
Oh wow, they’re expert jerkoffs.
Yes, they’re certainly experts. They get payed good money for work in highly competitive positions. They have specialized educations focused on this issue, plus tens of thousands of hours working on it professionally.
Vs anonymous social media accounts.
I don’t really know why you’ve decided that social media accounts are your ultimate measuring stick for how trustworthy someone is. Seems pretty fucking stupid, like you
Seems to me like awwwyisssss considers the experts to be the yardstick here.
Then why does he insist on comparing everything to social media accounts?
Because that’s you. Some anonymous asshole on social media saying you know better than experts.
My comments aren’t for you, they’re for other people reading this deciding what to believe. Random anonymous asshole or highly qualified experts.
It isn’t rare at when you look look at the percentage of the population. Trans people are more likely to go on A mass shooting.
According to another users comment below:
For the US, “About 1.03% of the nation’s adult population identifies as transgender, according to the Household Pulse Survey.”
So it seems people who aren’t trans are approximately ten times more likely to go on a mass shooting. Am I missing something?
Yes. Since they are less than 1% of the population. We should rarely if even see a trans person in a mass shooting. Yet that isn’t the case.
Did you read my comment? Are you an LLM?
I did. Yes, you are missing something.
A brain, seemingly
Most citations show about .3-.6 for the transgender community. The most recent article I read showed about 4 out of 300 for mass shootings. The problem is how they define it but even at the number, it shows a trans person is more likely to be a mass shooter as a percentage of the population.
If you only look at raw numbers, yes, white males are more likely in volume to commit mass shootings but they are one of the single largest groups. That is a no brainer.