Submitted by Usedtoknowsomeone46 t3_z2ieje in Connecticut
Comments
QuestorPS7 t1_ixi1f3s wrote
I hate to say it, but the policy of flying just the state, federal, and town flags is probably the safest and most equitable from a liability standpoint.
pyspark2020 t1_ixl00yn wrote
Why you hate to say it? I think this policy makes sense. if you support something then put a flag on your house/car
Pertinax126 t1_ixhi0w7 wrote
The Republicans on this town committee sound pretty tone deaf and dismissive. And to a large extent are mischaracterizing the debate.
And now the part that is going to get me down-voted: flags are political speech. ALL flags are political speech, regardless of the message they convey.
That's not my opinion. That's the opinion and ruling by the Supreme Court across multiple cases (Texas v Johnson, US v O'Brien, Tinker v Des Moines Independent School District, Stromberg v California, etc.)
The board took the correct action if it wants to avoid a terrible choice: allow politically horrible causes to fly their flags too or face serious legal ramifications.
ovrhere_ t1_ixhmb4k wrote
"If we represent the oppressed then it's only fair we represent the oppressors too" is an absurd cop out. As a queer person i don't particularly care whether a a pride flag flies at town hall or not because it's a performative measure that makes no material difference and isn't an indicator of actual representation. But, if they claim the reason they won't fly it is because they're not capable of making informed decisions about any other flag going forward, then they're not competent representatives.
You're completely correct about all flags being political.
Usedtoknowsomeone46 OP t1_ixgj3a6 wrote
Also if any of you have Republican family members that watch Fox News, this is where we are at
Im not religious but I pray for all the LGBTQ members of connecticut to stay safe.
ovrhere_ t1_ixh4mpk wrote
The intention is nice but prayers aren't gonna help us. Unequivocal and persistent condemnation of Walsh, Libs of Tiktok, Carlson, etc; straight/cis people learning the actual social science related to gender (and perhaps even exploring their own) and not just relying on what they think they remember from grade school biology, and of course; help your queer and especially trans friends get armed and learn how to defend themselves correctly. We're being murdered for existing, act accordingly.
Spooky2000 t1_ixhdnsi wrote
So the shooter coming out as non binary fits into this how?
ovrhere_ t1_ixhe2yi wrote
I'm not sure what their gender has to do with us defending ourselves. They attacked a queer space. It was an intentional attack on queer people, regardless of the identity of the shooter.
Spooky2000 t1_ixhgs1n wrote
>I'm not sure what their gender has to do with us defending ourselves. They attacked a queer space.
If what he says is true, it was a queer person shooting other queer people. How the fuck do you blame conservatives and FOX news for that?
ovrhere_ t1_ixhkcjv wrote
Oh i see, you're arguing with op, this has nothing to do with me.
Spooky2000 t1_ixhwm5e wrote
You literally said the consistent condemnation from the right is killing the LGBT community. How does what you said have nothing to do with this persons gender? Somehow an LGBT person shoots up other LGBT persons and it is still the fault of FOX news and conservative rhetoric
ovrhere_ t1_ixihomy wrote
I literally did not, please reread the comment. But since you brought it up, the people i mentioned are all scare mongering about grooming to incite gay panic. I didn't specifically call them out for being on the right but point to someone on the left making the same claims and my accusations can be leveled at them just as well.
Pruedrive t1_ixhg06v wrote
This is the dumbest shit, seriously where do you even come up with this shit, then think it’s worth posting?
Spooky2000 t1_ixhgk2s wrote
Ah, most news outlets reporting it.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/23/us/colorado-springs-club-q-shooting-wednesday/index.html
Pruedrive t1_ixhgqbd wrote
Their gender identity is irrelevant to what the person you are commenting on, and what their intentions behind that statement were.
Spooky2000 t1_ixhh77j wrote
Their gender identity is the focus of what we are talking about. Or are you going to claim that lots of non binary people get their hate from FOX news and conservatives?
>We're being murdered for existing, act accordingly.
How does that fit in with a non binary person killing other lgbtq people?
Pruedrive t1_ixhjqh1 wrote
Because it doesn’t negate the original posters statement the world is a dangerous place for LGBTQA people, this is a irrefutable fact, the gender identity of this one attacker doesn’t negate, or cast an doubt on this. LGBTQA folks should take their self defense deathly serious in this country, and just because this one attack was perpetrated by someone who (may) be of that group, is still outweighed by thousands of right wing extremists who would love to do the same.
Realistically, I don’t even understand the nature or even the point of your argument here.
Spooky2000 t1_ixhx90f wrote
>original posters statement
Was literally blaming FOX news for this.
>Realistically, I don’t even understand the nature or even the point of your argument here.
You guys are just blaming this entire thing on FOX and conservatives even when it is the fault of another LGBT person.
And I do hope more LGBT people step up and protect themselves. Everyone that want's to should have and use that right.
Ftheyankeei t1_ixigd2c wrote
Gonna just point out the dichotomy of recent events here.
A man breaks into Nancy Pelosi's house with the intent of assassinating her; beats her husband nearly to death with a hammer; tells police he did so because he believed right-wing political theory; right wing media makes up a story where the assaulter was a gay man in a tryst with Paul Pelosi, despite official police reports telling a completely different story that is damning to right-wing ideals.
A man whose neighbors reported he frequently used homophobic slurs and who threatened to kill his mother in a bomb threat in 2021 that led to a police standoff, whose family then pays lawyers to bury the charges, goes to a gay bar a year later, kills 5, injures 25; His defense lawyers tell the police and leak to the media the shooter claims he is non-binary (most likely a defense strategy to avoid hate crime charges in addition to murder charges, and with no further proof to back it up, given that the night of the shooting, his loving mother referred to him as her son and used he/him pronouns to identify him) and the right wing immediately parrots the narrative because it allows them to downplay a mass shooting against the LGBTQ+ community.
It is obvious that facts do not matter to Republicans any more as long as they bray loudly enough to shout down opposing narratives. After a year of increasingly heated anti-LGBTQ rhetoric coming from the right wing, making blanket accusations up to and including that all queer people are pedophiles, that has led to murders in places like Portland, Oregon (where an alt-right furry, of all people, killed four people), and has led to at least three bomb threats against children's hospitals (and counting), once a mass shooting happens at a gay bar in a region known for heated anti-gay rhetoric including from elected officials, they pivot to, what else?, blaming the LGBTQ community for its own murder.
Don't bother responding to this, I already know you're either going to try to focus on one point I made that wasn't completely airtight or you're going to spin/whatabout this bullshit.
Pruedrive t1_ixkc3o5 wrote
> The far-right is eating this tidbit up and using this to simultaneously deflect blame of incitement from themselves while reinforcing their anti-LGBTQ+ vilification campaign. But here’s the problem: what we already know about Anderson Lee Aldrich contradicts this new non-binary claim. There is absolutely no documented history of Aldrich’s gender identity being non-binary or Aldrich’s preferred pronouns being they/them. What we do know about Anderson Lee Aldrich suggests that Aldrich identifies as a male, uses he/him pronouns, and is a vicious homophobe that uses the anti-gay slur “fggot” constantly. The far-right is eating this tidbit up and using this to simultaneously deflect blame of incitement from themselves while reinforcing their anti-LGBTQ+ vilification campaign. But here’s the problem: what we already know about Anderson Lee Aldrich contradicts this new non-binary claim. There is absolutely no documented history of Aldrich’s gender identity being non-binary or Aldrich’s preferred pronouns being they/them. What we do know about Anderson Lee Aldrich suggests that Aldrich identifies as a male, uses he/him pronouns, and is a vicious homophobe that uses the anti-gay slur “fggot” constantly.
[deleted] t1_ixhy2dm wrote
On display: gun owners and the desire to kill as usual. Wish you’d all leave this country.
Sweaty_Conclusion_80 t1_ixi2jdn wrote
Most gun owners would say this is an example of how guns can be used to protect yourself.
[deleted] t1_ixi2tdi wrote
All gun owners are psychopaths in training
Sweaty_Conclusion_80 t1_ixi3008 wrote
And how do you square that opinion with the fact that gun ownership has never been higher yet violent crime is near historical lows?
[deleted] t1_ixi44os wrote
Ah, the old “statistics can never be manipulated to make the exact point I need them to” while simultaneously employing the “just state shit and don’t source it” strategy. That’s a double whammy from the idiot gun owner folks!
Sweaty_Conclusion_80 t1_ixi5l7f wrote
Gun sales in 2016 were hitting highs, we’re a few years past that now so the numbers today are higher: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/01/05/gun-sales-hit-new-record-ahead-of-new-obama-gun-restrictions/
Violent crime including murder today overall is lower now than in the past 30-50 years: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/10/31/violent-crime-is-a-key-midterm-voting-issue-but-what-does-the-data-say/
[deleted] t1_ixi6amd wrote
When gun deaths hit zero, you’ll have made a point I care about
Sweaty_Conclusion_80 t1_ixi6dlp wrote
😂 you can just say you’re wrong, it’s ok.
[deleted] t1_ixiocws wrote
Look up world murder rates as they correlate to gun laws, I’m done talking to future murderers for the day.
Sweaty_Conclusion_80 t1_ixipvn7 wrote
I mean, you made a ridiculous claim, I refuted it, you demanded sources, I provided them, you changed your argument…and I’m the irrational one??
At least I know you’re never coming to take my guns because, ya know, you don’t have any! 😂
[deleted] t1_ixit82g wrote
Sweaty_Conclusion_80 t1_ixivpqh wrote
Nice straw man attempt. You’re refuting an argument I didn’t make.
[deleted] t1_ixk38b5 wrote
Because I’m not fucking impressed that violent crime is down from “absurdly fucking high” to “less absurdly fucking high”, and the point is more guns equal more murder overall. Trending down is cute, but you people still keep killing at an obscene rate and sane people wish people like you would stop with all the killing.
Sweaty_Conclusion_80 t1_ixk4fom wrote
Sane people also recognize that we’ll never have zero homicides and that trending downwards in violent crime/homicides over decades is a positive thing. It also hurts your argument that “guns are the problem” when that downward trend is accompanied by the opposite trend in gun ownership. Clearly the guns themselves are not the issue or you’d them move in parallel, not opposites.
[deleted] t1_ixk8pm1 wrote
Guns are a major problem and not the only problem. Nowhere did I say they were the only problem
[deleted] t1_ixk9clm wrote
Also, from your own Washington Post article: “In 2013, for instance, calculations suggest there were about eight guns in the typical gun-owning household. That's double the number in 1994.”
So yeah, gun sales being up doesn’t have anything to do with the murder rate. It just means the average murderer has more weapons at their disposal. So find a different cause for your tiny tick in violent crime reduction.
Sweaty_Conclusion_80 t1_ixkr7kl wrote
Feel free to Google how many firearms permits were issued/applied for in 2020. Record numbers.
[deleted] t1_ixkry54 wrote
Population growth coupled with political extremists having a louder voice, turning more people into cowards with deadly firearms. COVID is suggested to have helped bring crime down as well. So I guess you’re pro-pandemic too now?
Sweaty_Conclusion_80 t1_ixksus6 wrote
You mean the “pandemic” with an over 99% survival rate? And population growth is your answer to more gun permits?? Ok, I’m done with you, your statements lack the ability to search even the most basic facts. I’m wasting brain cells responding to you.
[deleted] t1_ixkx9ev wrote
What does the survival rate of COVID have to do with anything? People were home, thus, less crime. Your inability to see that obvious correlation is your fault. I’d love it if you did stop trying to discuss this, as less guns totaling less homicide has already been proven. Bye now.
Sweaty_Conclusion_80 t1_ixl3sid wrote
😂 again, you don’t even bother doing the most basic of searches: crime went up in 2020 and 2021. Try using facts and not emotions next time.
[deleted] t1_ixlaemb wrote
Homicide isn’t the only crime. You’re no longer even attempting to make a cohesive argument. Just trying to prove me wrong to jerk yourself off. You can’t do it. You’ll never be right about this. Hopefully through time people like you will dwindle in numbers over time so this country can be a safer place. Don’t bother trying to reply anymore.
TreeEleben t1_ixj9c2q wrote
How does that logic work when gun ownership among minorities and the LGBTQ community is growing very rapidly. Those groups who have been oppressed are realizing that they need to be able to defend themselves against the fascists that hate them.
Sweaty_Conclusion_80 t1_ixj9oe2 wrote
This person is immune to facts, don’t bother.
[deleted] t1_ixk3pdn wrote
Say whatever you want, at least I’m non-violent.
Sweaty_Conclusion_80 t1_ixk4j2k wrote
Non violent doesn’t mean rational.
[deleted] t1_ixk8i7e wrote
Less guns, less death is very rational actually.
Sweaty_Conclusion_80 t1_ixkr24h wrote
And yet no guns doesn’t equal no homicides/crime. 🤔
[deleted] t1_ixkrp8p wrote
Is that your final argument?
Sweaty_Conclusion_80 t1_ixkswpo wrote
See my other response.
[deleted] t1_ixk3l3n wrote
Yes unfortunately gun ownership is a pandemic that threatens everyone apparently. I’ll continue my attempts to stand strong from such brainwashing.
ovrhere_ t1_ixijooh wrote
Did you miss where we're being murdered with guns? What would you have us do?
Spooky2000 t1_ixhdidx wrote
>The suspect in the shooting at Club Q, a Colorado Springs LGBTQ nightclub, is now identifying as non-binary, according to court filings filed Tuesday.
"Anderson Aldrich is non-binary. They use they/them pronouns, and for the purposes of all formal filings, will be addressed as Mx. Aldrich," a footnote in a court filing rea
I'm sure all the non binary kids get their views from FOX news...
Usedtoknowsomeone46 OP t1_ixiqs8y wrote
Per his lawyer. No evidence he was nonbinary before the shooting.
Spooky2000 t1_ixjl0tp wrote
Also no evidence he was a right wing extremist, but you will throw that out there instantly..
1234nameuser t1_ixh5tqh wrote
"“It’s just weak to pass the buck and have a total ban,” said Burke. “It eliminates the conversation forever.”"
Thank god, no disrespect to anyone, but a flag pole should not be a "conversation piece".
Cities should be focused on protecting themselves from liability / nuisances and instituting inclusive policies where they're actually needed.