No Stupid Questions
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
view the rest of the comments
Never found a motive? Are you joking? We've got tons of info on the psycho who did it. He was a distraught aging white male with a history of depression, gambling, and firearms who wanted to hurt the world and kill himself.
Sad losers are a dime a dozen but at least most of them aren't as stupid as that guy. There is no reason to discuss this outside of proposed changes to our society as a whole to better prevent these stains on history.
Racist.
Explain how.
There's no need to mention their race right? Unless it was a racially motivated attack, which I don't remember coming up.
Because of statistics which indicate aging white males are more likely to:
Own a gun SOURCE
Have mental health concerns SOURCE
Harm themselves SOURCE
Harm others SOURCE
Sorry to tell you, but demographics play a part in societal ails.
In an alternate universe...
It's the inclusion of 'aging white male' listed with the other negatives, so it could be viewed as ageist, sexist, and racist.
Yes, yes, let your feelings guide the mouse to the downvote button
White men are the most dangerous segment of the population, which is clearly shown by violent crime statistics. There is a reason that rural census tracts (which are overwhelmingly white) are the most dangerous places to live.
? The fuck? The statistics don't show anything like that and it's not polite to discuss what they really show.
That is not what I said, nor is it true. While males are 97.7% of the NIJ's Index of Mass Shooters, only about 50% were white which is lower than their proportion of the total population. However, depression amongst that demographic is higher and growing, and mental illnesses correlate highly with those who harm others and themselves, so I'm just saying the Vegas Shooter ticked every box on the proverbial check list.
~30% of the US population are white men but according to that link 52% of mass shootings are perpetrated by white men. That is a ~22% increase over what you would expect if the US didn’t raise its white conservative men to be violent and hateful and specifically teach them they are the only types of people who are allowed to be violent or threaten the possibility of violence in public spaces.
How is this not evidence that white men are the most dangerous people in the US? Not in terms of being likely to commit a crime of desperation but rather to be an utter loser and decide to shoot a bunch of random people out of pure hate? White men might not be the most likely to hurt you in the US, but they are BY FAR the most likely to hurt you for no reason other than you who happen to be and what you happen to represent to them.
71% of the USA is white. You're just being a disingenuous piece of shit, fuck off mate.
What?
Statistics are hard to understand huh?
I believe you may be misinformed. Surely not blatantly making things up to fit your narrative?
...
Arrests and convictions are not a valid proxy for violent acts or crimes committed. If you knew absolutely anything about this area of study you’d be aware of that. Have fun with your willful ignorance.
So the victims say the perpetrator is a white man; police arrest black male. I'll wait for you to link to the 4 times that's happened as if it's a checkmate.
I'm sure you have the added statistics for convictions and they fully support what you're saying. Pray tell, because your urban vs. rural assumptions on violence is clearly not supported by the evidence.
Convictions show the same? Curious about your reasoning for that, that doesn't sound wildly racist.
If we're not going off of facts (statics of arrests and convictions) then what are we going off of? Feelings? I'm more than willing to have my mind changed if you can provide an argument that rural white men are the most dangerous group, as long as it's based on more than feelings and hearsay. A black man in urban attire walking into a sunset town of 100 people has the same result as a white man in a suit walking down a dangerous inner-city street. Same cause of effect: human nature.
At the risk of sounding racist, I think it's quite obvious that when you buy a foreign people from their homeland as a commodity (sold largely in part by warlords and warring tribes of the same race, by the way), treat them as chattle (literally) and forbid any written or oral history of their culture or familial past, while raping the women and killing the babies or selling them off, creating extreme intergenerational trauma, hatred, and injustice, and then continue treating them like shit even after the law says you can no longer treat them as less than human...
You may have a societal problem on your hands that doesn't resolve itself in a measly few generations. A societal problem that results in higher rates of violence.
We need better support in this country in so many aspects. For women and men of all races and creeds. But until we break away from being an overly materialistic consumerist society, that won't change. What we don't need is a distortion of reality to fit a false narrative.
Crime victimization survey is, and can be used in conjunction with crime justice system statistics.
Thanks for being reasonably-minded.
If nothing else, I'm finding discussions like these helpful in curating my Lemmy experience. If someone is spreading misinformation, ignoring evidence to the contrary, and refuses to provide an argument as to why they feel the way to do, even if it's only a rationalization, then it's clear they're not (yet) capable of debate with critical thought and without emotions and social conditioning blinding them. I've never been one to block people but Lemmy is infested with groupthink in a way I'd never thought possible, it's beyond reddit.
Also any snark is highly frowned upon, unless it's in favor of the groupthink, so that's my own fault.
Yeah, this place can be kind of particular. I tend to stay quiet on shit I don't align with 100%. This is just something that's well studied with good data. If people refuse to accept reality we can't really fix shit.