2SLGBTQQIA+

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
118,174
14,478
113
Low Earth Orbit
Dystopian fiction often brushes over the most chilling part of the road to madness, which is the road itself. Authors hint at some great calamity or war that sets things in motion, and describe in vivid detail the hulking bureaucracies that grind all courage or curiosity from human beings. But rarely do they place readers in the pot with the frog, watching freedoms dissolve one by one.

This week, Graham Linehan, the creator of Father Ted and the IT Crowd, found himself in just such a pot. As he stepped off a plane from Arizona to Heathrow, five armed police officers greeted him on the tarmac. “When I first saw the cops, I actually laughed,” he later wrote on Substack. “I couldn’t help myself. ‘Don’t tell me! You’ve been sent by trans activists.’”

The officers didn’t laugh. The comedy writer was arrested for three tweets which might have offended some trans people. His belongings were confiscated and he was taken to a cell with a steel toilet and concave mirror. His reflection in that mirror — “presumably there,” he wrote, “to make you reflect on your life choices” — should prompt us in Britain to take stock, too.

(Thank God he didn’t mention Bacon)
View attachment 30936
Sometimes it takes an ocean of distance to appreciate such a profound moral upheaval. As chance would have it, the day after Linehan’s arrest, Nigel Farage, the leader of Britain’s right-leaning Reform party, testified before the U.S. House of Representative’s Judiciary Committee on threats to free speech in Europe.

“At what point did we become North Korea?” he asked U.S. lawmakers. “Well, I think the Irish comedy writer found that out two days ago at Heathrow Airport.”

It was an exaggeration but the sentiment is well-placed. The right to free expression is unequivocal: you either have it, or you are somewhere on a sliding scale towards authoritarianism.

Linehan’s arrest, for the following tweets, suggests we are sliding rather fast. In one, Linehan joked: “If a trans-identified male is in a female-only space he is committing a violent, abusive act. Make a scene, call the cops and if all else fails, punch him in the balls.”

Another mocked a trans protest as a “photo you can smell,” followed by: “I hate them. Misogynists and homophobes. F–k em.”

These remarks may not be to everyone’s taste. Linehan himself later admitted the first was “not one of my best.” But that is besides the point. In a free society he should be at liberty to hold such views openly and without fear of arrest.

That society, however, has not existed for some time. The British police now make around 30 arrests per day for offensive posts on social media. Each year, thousands of people are detained and questioned for messages that could conceivably cause “inconvenience,” “anxiety,” or “annoyance” to others.
In arresting Linehan, the police may have overplayed their hand. Even the prime minister, Sir Keir Starmer, himself skeptical of free expression, admonished them for pursuing tweets over serious crimes.

One hopes the arrest of a comedy writer for jokes, a sign of tyranny that is almost a cliché, proves the wake-up call the country so badly needs.
Funny thing? I don't know any Muzzies who don't eat pork.
 

Serryah

Hall of Fame Member
Dec 3, 2008
10,931
2,767
113
New Brunswick

So... trans people are committing that much mass shootings that they need to be denied their guns.

Yet non-trans people (who are REALLY the worst perpetrators of mass shootings)... aren't?

I guess the 2nd IS conditional then and CAN be infringed upon.


https://ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/ap...us-no-incredible-rise-in-transgender-shooters <--- this was from 2023. How many trans people have done mass shootings since then? One.

https://www.reuters.com/article/fac...ansgender-or-non-binary-people-idUSL1N363273/ <--- Another 2023 article.

Now there's a lot of ASSUMPTIONS made about mass shooters of course - either they're trans (the new scape goat) or they're Muslims, for example - but it's just an assumption in that first day. Later it comes out that yeah, not so much.

But here's some facts on mass shootings.




So I guess, maybe then if guns can be taken from trans people, they should REALLY be taken from non-trans people too, ESPECIALLY white men.

Agreed?
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
118,174
14,478
113
Low Earth Orbit

So... trans people are committing that much mass shootings that they need to be denied their guns.

Yet non-trans people (who are REALLY the worst perpetrators of mass shootings)... aren't?

I guess the 2nd IS conditional then and CAN be infringed upon.


https://ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/ap...us-no-incredible-rise-in-transgender-shooters <--- this was from 2023. How many trans people have done mass shootings since then? One.

https://www.reuters.com/article/fac...ansgender-or-non-binary-people-idUSL1N363273/ <--- Another 2023 article.

Now there's a lot of ASSUMPTIONS made about mass shooters of course - either they're trans (the new scape goat) or they're Muslims, for example - but it's just an assumption in that first day. Later it comes out that yeah, not so much.

But here's some facts on mass shootings.




So I guess, maybe then if guns can be taken from trans people, they should REALLY be taken from non-trans people too, ESPECIALLY white men.

Agreed?
Its a tricky one and Im not on a "side".

They're going after a technicality and it's a double edged sword.

To qualify for transition a diagnosis of Gender Dysphoria is needed which in the DSM-5 is a mental health disorder. Correct?

Under current US Federal Law we have:

  • Prohibited Individuals:
  • Federal law bans individuals who have been "adjudicated as a mental defective" or involuntarily committed to a mental institution from owning or purchasing firearms.

  • Background Checks:
  • Licensed gun dealers are required to conduct background checks through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) for potential firearm purchases.

  • Record Reporting:
  • The law relies on state and federal programs to report mental health adjudications and commitments to the NICS database, but the comprehensiveness and enforcement of these reports vary significantly, creating loopholes.
I think we all agree with the above.

State laws go beyond that and this is where it gets complex.

Blue States, forget it, a Trans won't get a gun but in a Red State, far far more likely to qualify.

This poses a question of motives.

Are Trans being targeted by the Feds or are they being used as a vehicle to force repealling laws in Blue States?
 

Serryah

Hall of Fame Member
Dec 3, 2008
10,931
2,767
113
New Brunswick
Its a tricky one and Im not on a "side".

They're going after a technicality and it's a double edged sword.

On that I'll agree.

To qualify for transition a diagnosis of Gender Dysphoria is needed which in the DSM-5 is a mental health disorder. Correct?

It is, technically, yes.

But when you look at the list of mental health disorders, how many of them are considered actually 'dangerous'?


I mean, according to the DSM, Sleep Apnea is a "Disorder". Stuttering is a disorder, Tourettes, Dyslexia (under Specific Learning disorders). So should anyone with those conditions not be allowed guns too?

People tend to go to the DSM and claim ANYONE diagnosed with ANYTHING tied to it, is "Crazy" or "mentally ill" when that's not all the book is about.

Under current US Federal Law we have:

  • Prohibited Individuals:
  • Federal law bans individuals who have been "adjudicated as a mental defective" or involuntarily committed to a mental institution from owning or purchasing firearms.

  • Background Checks:
  • Licensed gun dealers are required to conduct background checks through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) for potential firearm purchases.

  • Record Reporting:
  • The law relies on state and federal programs to report mental health adjudications and commitments to the NICS database, but the comprehensiveness and enforcement of these reports vary significantly, creating loopholes.
I think we all agree with the above.

We do... sort of.

I have asked people continually when it comes to the 'mentally ill' what happens if they want to own guns but never once got answers, especially from the super Pro gun people, so...

State laws go beyond that and this is where it gets complex.

Which is what the current Government wanted.

Blue States, forget it, a Trans won't get a gun but in a Red State, far far more likely to qualify.

Why wouldn't a trans person be able to get a gun in a blue state? Provided they pass all the checks, there'd be no reason why not.

In a red state - I actually am not sure if they would get a gun or not; if the Federal Government - the current one - denied it, I'd be 50-50 on them agreeing.

This poses a question of motives.

It does.

Are Trans being targeted by the Feds

Yes. That's actually very obvious.

or are they being used as a vehicle to force repealling laws in Blue States?

I won't deny that could be possible too, but again, there's no reason to BAN trans people from getting guns in the first place.

Here's the rub - if you start denying Trans people, how long before it DOES shift to the rest of those covered in the DSM 5 (if that's the excuse they use for it). So anyone with Sleep Apnea, Touretts and other tic based problems, Dyslexia and other learning problems, anyone on the Autistic spectrum, anyone ADHD and similar...

That's now gone from a very, very small part of the population, to a HUGE part of the population, and suddenly millions are denied it.

And then how long will it be before black and brown people are denied?

When will white people be denied?

That's the road this is headed down.

The shock for me right now is the NRA said that they DON'T agree with this idea the Feds are going with even if it's about Trans people. So does the GOA.

 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
28,610
8,171
113
B.C.
I have a good friend who happens to be Muslim, who has never eaten pork, nor has his family, to my knowledge, and we've been friends since we were eight.
Regardless it was known that pork had parasites that kill . Modern technology freezes those parasites, all MeditranEan peoples shunned pork , they have evolved .