• Frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    ATTENDEE: Do you know how many transgender Americans have been mass shooters over the last 10 years?

    KIRK: Too many. [Applause]

    ATTENDEE: In America, it’s five. Now, five is a lot, right, I’m going to give you — I’m going to give you some credit. Do you know how many mass shooters there have been in America over the last 10 years?

    KIRK: Counting or not counting gang violence?

    If this had gone on, the next question should be “does gang violence only count as three-fifths of a violence to you?”

    • pulsewidth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      But also - even if you add gang violence to the figures, all it would do is dilute the number of trans shooters further, if taken as a genuine premise, he devastates his own argument.

      Of course it’s not a genuine question though as he’s not attempting to have an honest discussion, he’s just trying to throw in a racist whataboutism to distract (and hopefully derail) the initial discussion. Standard right-wing chud ‘debate’ behaviour.

      • OccamsRazer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        No the reason he asked that question about gang violence is because gang violence numbers are a huge percentage of mass shooting numbers, so if you take them out of the calculation then the percentage of trans shooters is much higher and it is a debate about trans shooters. On the other hand, if you include those numbers then it is a debate about guns in general and ideologies or mental health issues get lost in the noise. I would guess he mostly wanted to make a point that the definition of mass shooting is not really in line with how people think of them.