- A gunman (claimed by Hamas) killed 6 at a bus stop in Jerusalem.
- Netanyahu pledged retaliation against Gaza for this because...whatever else has happened in Gaza should not be considered retaliatory enough as it is?? Or because Gaza isn't suppose to retaliate?? Or some other reasoning I don't understand... I mean, they also killed the shooter, so...I dunno.
- Also Israel bombed a residential area in Doha, targeting—and killing—5 Hamas leaders, and 1 security guard (so, like, wasn't that retaliation?...I guess I don't understand the word very well).
- Russia continues to bomb Ukraine, the bullies.
- Russia also has sent drones into Polish airspace, setting a large portion of Europe on edge.
- NEPAL, friends. What? They overthrew their government, burnt down their parliament building. Props—you do you, boo. But then they also, like, burned the ex-first lady alive and did a bunch of super violent stuff? Less cool—exceedingly uncool.
- There was a school shooting in Colorado. Nice. Neat. Great. Seems we can't get enough of those. Hope and prayers. Pop some popcorn.
- There was a shooting at UVU, targeting and killing Charlie Kirk, a political activist
who—honestly?—gives me the ick.whose platform—honestly?—I often disagree with. But, that doesn't change my mind about gun violence. Let's use our words, friends. No one deserves to be hunted down and murdered for something they said, whether they're a democrat (and democrats have died this year from targeted assassinations as well, let's remember) or republicans. Let's use our words where possible (incidentally, this is most places). I can't imagine how devastated his family is right now. Unconscionable.* - UVU is just down the road from BYU. I attended both UVU and BYU. Rachel is at BYU. My sister was right by UVU when it happened, saw the emergency vehicles. Our good friend has an office right behind where it happened. I know multiple young adults attending UVU. It's a lot.
- And last week UGA sent out a notification about an active shooter on campus (which ended up being a hoax, but it was still unsettling).
- The president of the United States posted an AI image of himself in front of the burning Chicago skyline with the words "Chipocalypse Now!" scrawled on the side. He remarked that Chicago was about to experience war. How in the world is any of this normal? Besides the fact that "Chipocalypse" offends me as a linguist because it simply fails as a portmanteau (everybody is going to read that as "chip-ocalypse now," not "shipocalypse now," which is how it would be pronounced if we were trying to say Chicago (ʃɪˈkɑ.ɡoʊ). No one says (tʃɪˈkɑ.ɡoʊ) with a hard /ch/...unless they're speaking a foreign language, at least from my experience). But also it offends me as a human and as an American. We don't pick cities to wage war against. Ludicrous.
And we're all expected to go about our merry ways. And I guess that's all we can do.
I'm sure someone is itching to suggest that I simply not watch the news. And I suppose that's an option.
But my friend Amy recently posted a clip from The Sound of Music where Max and Captain von Trapp are debating the political climate in Austria in the 1930s (spoiler: things, uh, didn't turn out great):
Uncle Max: What's going to happen's going to happen. Just make sure it doesn't happen to you.
Captain von Trapp: Max. Don't you *ever* say that again.
Uncle Max: You know I have no political convictions. Can I help it if other people do?
Captain von Trapp: Oh yes, you can help it. You must help it.
If you can afford to stick your head in the sand, it probably means the status quo is working in your favour...for now. But there's the whole "first they came" principle at play here as well, so the sand isn't my first choice.
Plus, my husband is, like, a political scientist of sorts...we don't not do the news at our house.
* I was coming to my blog this morning to soften my language here, but I'll keep up my original wording for the sake of good ol' anonymous down there who notes that:
You are always very one sided in your way of thinking. And you only search out facts that support your point of view. Yes we all know your version of... everything. Sorry Charlie Kirk gave you an 'ick' factor feeling. He was very calm, intelligent, and believed in communication and conversations with those who believed differently than he. He loved Jesus first, family second and country third. Even liberals who debated with him at his University talks often thanked him for being kind and listening to them even though they were on opposites sides of the fence. The gunmen and killers (of churches, schools, innocent men who believe differently than them) have pretty much all been liberals, and many mentally ill trans on top of it. But please, realize the only people that usually comment on your blog are your mother, and a couple friends who "nod" and smile at you but don't point out that perhaps your view might be... well, not completely researched or correct.
You are always very one sided in your way of thinking. And you only search out facts that support your point of view. Yes we all know your version of... everything. Sorry Charlie Kirk gave you an 'ick' factor feeling. He was very calm, intelligent, and believed in communication and conversations with those who believed differently than he. He loved Jesus first, family second and country third. Even liberals who debated with him at his University talks often thanked him for being kind and listening to them even though they were on opposites sides of the fence. The gunmen and killers (of churches, schools, innocent men who believe differently than them) have pretty much all been liberals, and many mentally ill trans on top of it. But please, realize the only people that usually comment on your blog are your mother, and a couple friends who "nod" and smile at you but don't point out that perhaps your view might be... well, not completely researched or correct.
I won't take the time to point out the banalities of these remarks ('twould be pointless since YOU ALL KNOW MY VERSION OF EVERYTHING), but like WEIRD to take the time to berate me when I ultimately expressed sympathy for his family and condemned the violent act that ended his life.
And I quote: "No one deserves to be hunted down and murdered for something they said, whether they're a democrat...or republicans" [sic]. Let's use our words where possible (incidentally, this is most places). I can't imagine how devastated his family is right now. Unconscionable.
And I quote: "No one deserves to be hunted down and murdered for something they said, whether they're a democrat...or republicans" [sic]. Let's use our words where possible (incidentally, this is most places). I can't imagine how devastated his family is right now. Unconscionable.
Weird, weird, weird. To lecture me. For calling Kirk's death unconscionable. WEIRD.
Wait.
Perhaps it WAS conscionable? Is this one of those things that I'm supposed to think about from multiple sides?
What a quandary...
Wait.
Perhaps it WAS conscionable? Is this one of those things that I'm supposed to think about from multiple sides?
What a quandary...
You are always very one sided in your way of thinking. And you only search out facts that support your point of view. Yes we all know your version of... everything. Sorry Charlie Kirk gave you an 'ick' factor feeling. He was very calm, intelligent, and believed in communication and conversations with those who believed differently than he. He loved Jesus first, family second and country third. Even liberals who debated with him at his University talks often thanked him for being kind and listening to them even though they were on opposites sides of the fence. The gunmen and killers (of churches, schools, innocent men who believe differently than them) have pretty much all been liberals, and many mentally ill trans on top of it. But please, realize the only people that usually comment on your blog are your mother, and a couple friends who "nod" and smile at you but don't point out that perhaps your view might be... well, not completely researched or correct.
ReplyDeleteThank you, Anonymous, for expanding my horizons. I have never before encountered anyone who disagreed with me so this was enlightening. I mean the very idea that something *I* said could be *gasp* disagreed with. I mean, I am shook. SHOOK, I say!
DeleteI...don't know...everything? *gasp* What a revelation!
But seriously, how does anyone "completely" research anything? How does anyone approach anything—let alone everything—"correctly"?
Please enlighten me further, O Wise Anonymous One.
AI overview of the question "Are gunmen more likely to be liberals?"
ReplyDeletePolitical affiliation is not a meaningful predictor of whether a person will be a "gunman," and there is no evidence to suggest liberals are more likely to be perpetrators. Most research shows that extremist violence in the U.S. comes from the political right. Demographics of gunmen and individuals who commit mass shootings are varied, but most are male and white.
Instead of focusing on a single political or demographic profile, research highlights a combination of other factors that are often present in the backgrounds of individuals who carry out mass shootings: ...and a lot more...
AI overview of the question "Are gunmen more likely to be trans individuals?
ReplyDeleteNo, data does not show that transgender individuals are more likely to be gunmen. In fact, research indicates that the vast majority of mass shootings are carried out by cisgender men, and trans people are significantly more likely to be victims of violence rather than perpetrators.
Key statistics
Trans individuals are underrepresented as shooters. An analysis of data from the Williams Institute and the Gun Violence Archive shows that while transgender people make up about 1% of the U.S. population, they account for less than 0.17% of mass shooters. This indicates they are underrepresented in this group.
Mass shootings are predominantly committed by cisgender men. According to the Rockefeller Institute of Government, 94.6% of mass shootings are perpetrated by solo males, the vast majority of whom are cisgender. The Violence Project's database found that 98% of mass shooting perpetrators between 1966 and 2021 identified as male.
Trans people are more likely to be victims of violence. Data from the UCLA Williams Institute shows that transgender people are more than four times more likely to be victims of violent crime than cisgender people. An analysis by Everytown Research found that 70% of homicides against transgender people involve a firearm.
Thanks for sharing this. I didn't know about Nepal, but heard about most of the rest of this. I had heard of Charlie Kirk, but didn't follow him. But, man, a lot of my Facebook friends and family sure were fans so... I've seen a lot of tributes during the last week. Sorry it was so near where Rachel and your sister are, and, yes, I feel sorry for his family.
ReplyDeleteHope Rachel is doing well and enjoying college life!
And the news just keeps getting worse. I am in between. I read the news but am then choosing to only comment on medical stuff since that is where I am knowledgeable (although I agree with you on all the other things). People are just so volatile and I am quite shocked at some opinions. I was reading about the congregation in Michigan raising money for the shooters family (wife and child). Most of the comments were nice but then some were just horrific. I would like to believe that if we talked face to face people wouldn't be so cruel but I am not so sure any more! My daughters elementary school was locked down during the UVU shooting so that was cool....maybe it is time to homeschool again!
ReplyDeleteThe news has been SO overwhelming the past couple of weeks. Last week was particularly rough—but I did like seeing the many positive comments (mixed in with some vitriol) and appreciate the care being given to the shooter's family.
DeleteI'm so sorry your daughter's school had to go on lock down during the UVU shooting—that's so scary! I was overwhelmed from here just thinking about everyone I know who was either THERE or who lived around there or...whatever. It was heavy.
I think when we talk face to face we at least remember there's a person on the other end?
I was talking to my PhD advisor the other day, who pointed out that while there are a lot of people willing to talk about their experiences (through FB reels and TikToks and things), that doesn't mean that we have DIALOGUE about these things. And I think that's the part that we're missing out on, very often. It's a sad state...