Veterans far more likely to be mass shooters than transgenders

[Anti Federalist]

You're calling me a goofball?

I could call you worse.

 

[acptulsa]

I could call you worse.

I'm sure you have. Thank you for not typing it.

 

[jmdrake]

What a shitty topic to argue over.

This wouldn't even BE a topic to argue over if the Trump administration wasn't serious about infringing on the 2nd amendment under the guise of making the America safe from transgenderism. The point if that if you're going to go the route of restricting gun rights based on group membership you need to be certain that your preferred groups don't end up under the same microscope.

What do you propose to do in order to sort out who is committing these crimes and how to intervene to prevent them, while at the same time not infringing on critical, protected rights of the individuals?

That's a good question.

Treatment, commitment (voluntary or mandatory), punishment, intervention...no one size fits all. These things for a veteran will not be the same for a trans.

And for the record, I don't disagree with @jmdrake on this. A significant number of these shooters are veterans.

If you believe the official story, Timothy McVeigh was a highly decorated combat veteran.

While not related to this thread, the man who stabbed the Ukranian woman on the train had previously bitten his sister and his mother had tried to have him committed. (Part of the reason I don't think that was racially motivated unless his sister was white). Bottom line, if someone has acted violent or has credibly threatened violence something should be done. Absent that we're in "minority report" territory.

Call me a goofball, but we could stop propping up the petrodollar with military force, and stop butchering tomboys.

I agree. But we're addicted to making money off our military as much as a dope fiend is to heroine. And yeah, far too many adolescents were being shepherded into medical transitioning as shown by the 1 in 10 detransitioners from Britain's Tavistock clinic.

Perhaps the problem is not one of there having been too little intervention, such that the solution must be more intervention.

Also, when your starting point is to identify some group of people who are more likely to commit crimes in the future with the hopes that having now identified these future likely criminals you should now intervene to prevent their future crimes, it seems unlikely that your intention is really not to infringe on the rights of individuals.

^This.