Can we talk about Nex Benedict?

mundus

Duke status
Feb 26, 2018
38,635
17,336
113
If counting gang shootings is dishonest, that means we actually have about 5% of the mass shootings that are counted as such

good to know
The unprovoked politically/racially motivated ones are all you Proud Boi
 

kidfury

Duke status
Oct 14, 2017
25,144
10,848
113
If counting gang shootings is dishonest, that means we actually have about 5% of the mass shootings that are counted as such

good to know
 

kidfury

Duke status
Oct 14, 2017
25,144
10,848
113
If counting gang shootings is dishonest, that means we actually have about 5% of the mass shootings that are counted as such.
You're wrong. You're very often wrong. I am quite certain you're trying to be wrong.

Your self appointed job here is to be wrong. You and your fellow DIPSHITS.

Carry on with your successful mission.
 

grapedrink

Duke status
May 21, 2011
26,733
15,726
113
A Beach
You're wrong. You're very often wrong. I am quite certain you're trying to be wrong.

Your self appointed job here is to be wrong. You and your fellow DIPSHITS.

Carry on with your successful mission.
You can’t compare someone walking into a school or shopping mall to shoot up random people with gang shootings. The life situations, circumstances and motivating factors that led to those crimes are not even in the same universe.

The tin foil hat theory is that big pharma pushed for conflating the 2 to distract from the prevalence of psychiatric meds used by school/public shooters.
 
  • Love
Reactions: Ifallalot

kidfury

Duke status
Oct 14, 2017
25,144
10,848
113
You can’t compare someone walking into a school or shopping mall to shoot up random people with gang shootings. The life situations, circumstances and motivating factors that led to those crimes are not even in the same universe.

The tin foil hat theory is that big pharma pushed for conflating the 2 to distract from the prevalence of psychiatric meds used by school/public shooters.
DIPSHIT status confirmed.
 

Mike_Jones

Tom Curren status
Mar 5, 2009
11,722
2,514
113
.....What we know for certain is that she should not have been elevated as a symbol for a social justice movement, utilizing her name and image to fuel political outrage and push for policy changes. Likewise, the girls she had a conflict with did not merit being subjected to online hatred and malicious allegations from the media. Even the President's statement directly linking them to a hate crime was unwarranted.

This never should have happened. Her death should have remained a private matter for her family, allowing them the space to mourn in peace, especially after all they had endured. But no, the media chose to exploit a deeply traumatized young girl for their own political gain, shamelessly lying, fabricating, and twisting the story into a narrative they could wield to further their agenda. It's infuriating how they exploited her suffering for their selfish purposes.

As for the Washington Post’s reportage on Dagney’s suicide, in what can only be described as journalistic malpractice: instead of telling the truth, WaPo has decided that the final blame rests with Chaya Raichik and Libs of TikTok.

I will say this again: we accept no blame for Dagney Benedict, or even the next Dagney Benedict, or even the next. This is stochastic terrorism by gender jihadists high on their own supply, for it is they who hype the suicide threats that create actual suicidal people.

Chaya Raichik needs to make an example out of the Washington Post.

.....Just like the creep who started this thread.
.