Pointing out that gangs do a lot of violence is an attempt to shift blame onto the demographic groups which are overrepresented in gangs due to socioeconomic reasons (systemic racism).
Comment on Posting for the "Now guys he was MURDERED! Don't celebrate!" Crowd
jimmux@programming.dev 14 hours agoI would actually like to know what he was leading to with that question. Is the implication that gangs have an overrepresentation of trans people? Or that gang violence doesn’t count for some reason?
I guess we’ll never know.
Deme@sopuli.xyz 14 hours ago
abir_v@lemmy.world 14 hours ago
Given who he was, probably the latter as a to-him socially acceptable racist dog whistle.
outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 hours ago
acceptable
I bdt he was pretty piseed he had to dog-whistle it.
ceenote@lemmy.world 14 hours ago
Using one minority as a scapegoat for gun violence wasn’t working, so he was switching to a different minority.
BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 13 hours ago
It’s a deflection technique. The intention was to not answer or address the question at all, but to shift to another topic he could more easily use to manipulate his audience. If you’ve ever watched him “debate” he was a master of deflection.
pivot_root@lemmy.world 12 hours ago
he was a master of deflection.
With words, maybe. With lead, evidently not.
jimmux@programming.dev 10 hours ago
Now that you mention it, this seems most likely.
chatokun@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 hours ago
As others mentioned, “gang violence” is generally a euphemism for non white, especially poor, people. I used to listen to Knowledge Fight(stopped after election not because of the boys, but didn’t want to hear Jones gloat) and during several shootings that involved black victims Jones dismissed it as gang violence.
One case I recall was a shooting in a school in GA that he was spinning some other way, until he found out the school was primarily black and the victim (who survived iirc) was black. He then just stated the kid was in a gang with no proof and dismissed the story.
ryedaft@sh.itjust.works 7 hours ago
He was obviously arguing that skin colour minorities were doing any shooting that trans Americans weren’t. Because his goal in life was to make people feel like they belonged - by vilifying out groups. And then monetize that shit.
slaacaa@lemmy.world 8 hours ago
Just some good old racism
WoodScientist@lemmy.world 9 hours ago
It was more anti-trans hate mongering. 2 or 3 trans shooters out of 5700 is nothing. If you can whittle down the number of “mass shootings” to just a handful of incidents, can make it seem like trans people are vastly over-represented among school shooters.
_druid@sh.itjust.works 8 hours ago
The number of trans shooters versus non-trans shooters probably has trans shooters falling comfortably into a margin of error. I can’t do the math, though, I’m no numbersmith.
WoodScientist@lemmy.world 15 minutes ago
Sure. Even if the raw numbers said that say, trans people are 1% of the population, and 1.5% of shooters, that would still be a meaningless figure. The sample size is too low to make any meaningful conclusion.
But the point is even if you don’t apply statistics, even using the sample we have, trans people are vastly under-represented among shooters. We represent about 1% of the population and 0.1% of shooters. You don’t even need to apply statistics. The numbers on their face show that there is zero evidence that trans people are over-represented.
Now, statistically, I would say that there is insufficient evidence to suggest that the rate of trans shooters is any different from the overall population, higher or lower. But there is less than zero evidence that trans people are over-represented.
The trans shooter myth is simply blood libel.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 8 hours ago
our gangs of forcefemme communists are very trans and very violent, yes
bigfondue@lemmy.world 14 hours ago
It’s a common talking point among the right that there aren’t really that many mass shootings in America if you exclude gang violence. Y’know, which is done by and only effects those people