Mass Shooting in Tumbler Ridge Canada

[fromorbit]

Looks like it was a man in a dress. Another tragedy. More lives lost. Boys with violent tendencies cannot be told they are actually girls. The violent background of trans activism is a problem.

REDUXX
https://x.com/reduxx/status/2021483339719311435

BREAKING

The identity of the Tumbler Ridge shooter can now be confirmed as Jesse “Jess” Strang.

Strang is a biological male who started to “identify” as a "girl" around 2023.

Strang was raised in a family that valued hunting, and began learning how to shoot rifles when he was just a child. Many guns were kept in the family's residence.

Facebook posts from his mother indicate he may have struggled with behavioral issues, including violent tendencies, from a very young age.

Strang fatally shot 10 people prior to taking his own life.

In 2021, Strang launched a YouTube channel that was promoted by his mother on her Facebook. The channel was dedicated to "hunting, self-reliance, guns" and his other interests. At some point, Strang deleted the content on the channel and changed his handle from "Jesse Boy" to "JessJessUwU." The only remaining post on the channel was made 6 months ago and reads "I've been pretty, um, aimless."

Totally agree. Most of the Canadians I have ever met will go out of their way to make sure you know they are Canadian, not American.

I think this was the very earliest description the police used. Who knows what information they had at the time, it might have been information that was just called in.

But the complicating factor there would be that they are probably mandated legally to call people by their "chosen gender."

The Telegraph had 'female in a dress' as the headline this morning. They must have changed it - a lot of the most upvoted comments are criticism of the way it was initially reported.

I knew instantly that something was odd about it. A female shooter would be very unusual, and her wearing a dress wouldn't have been the focal point of the reporting. I go to KF and there they have the name and photos of the male in a dress responsible.

These are not our crimes.

@TheGoddessAthena yes! I've lived in Canada. The people I knew there would have cut off their own arms rather than pledge allegiance to another country's flag, they are very patriotic people in my experience. Their society has lost their way on the trans issue, but in general, if you are Canadian, I cannot see why on earth you would want to be anything else? Not sure what that poster was trying to say and why?

Well exactly. It is absolutely possible to report this factually.

I'm with you @Catiette

And that's how you do it.

Shame on the BBC.

It's a Greek tragedy in action - the fatal flaw of a stupidly narrow interpretation of "inclusion" slowly killing off the faith in public institutions that's necessary to a genuinely "inclusive" (as far as that absurd word's ever really possible) democracy. We can see the horrors this kind of approach contributed to over the pond (see Kara Dansky on the subject) - yet still we don't learn.

I hope Red doesn't mind me repeating what she says here, as it's so true and important, and she puts it better than me. I don't think it can be said often enough, and just wish some thinking person with influence at these MSM groups would read it.

...a sense of total betrayal and complicity by the authorities that comes across.

The theme that runs through this is loss of trust. That's a theme across politics generally anyway.

My point being this loss of trust in institutions is compounded by this sense. And actually harms transpeople way more than just reporting 'someone who identifies as trans' has done x, y or z because people associate the issues over trust AS WELL AS the actual crime so it becomes a double whammy of outrage.

I mean obviously the problem here is Canadian 'authorities' being willing to lie about sex even in a case as tragic and awful as this without obviously considering the impact of this lie on safety or the feelings of the victims' and their families.

Nevertheless, Al Jazeera has managed to be accurate and informative, subtly pointing out that sex is relevant in crimes such as these and sex has not been confirmed something the BBC has failed to do.

I’m really confused because the BBC’s reporting sounds almost identical to this?

Isn't that basically what the BBC did? They said it was reported as a "female in a dress" but then went on to say authorities haven't confirmed details including gender of the shooter.

There are multiple threads running on this and each one focuses somewhat on this. The description was issued as a ‘shelter in place’ order from the police while the event was ongoing. What do posters want here, an immediate description of the perpetrators actual appearance so that the public know what to look out for, or a delayed order while they piss about trying to decide whether or not the perpetrator is male or female, and risk other people being shot ? If that’s all the information the police had at the time, then they acted on what they had at the time. Everything else will be straightened out in the aftermath.

Incidentally, I'd totally recommend watching international news channels. They all come with their individual biases but it's especially useful when the powers that be in the UK want to cover something up/ spin something a particular way.

Was watching Indian news on Rupert Lowe's grooming gang inquiry and the reporting did not pull any punches. Shameful that they're reporting on it more than the BBC.

BBC should have said sex of the shooter, not gender, which is a meaningless term.

BBC should not be deliberately misleading as they are. They don't need to report this person described as a "female in a dress". They can simply say details have yet to be released.

That’s very interesting and as you say, shameful.

The one I saw said this:
Details of the suspect's identity are yet to be shared by authorities.

Which I took to mean name and sex. I didnt see them use gender.

But if you're told the shooter is a female in a dress and you see a male in a dress approaching you, you might well think 'well, thank goodness, it can't be him because it's a female'.

So lying is unsafe.

And then again, these lies undermine the ability to trust whatever the authorities are telling you, so 'shelter in place' when lying about the other bit might not be seen as truly the best advice, so people may be inclined to not shelter in place but actually run away.

I think not.

Their wording is, from a certain perspective, fairly cynical. On one level, it gives gender identity primacy - while also allowing the multitude of people who still understand the word "gender" to be a polite synonym for biological sex the impression that this may be their meaning. They know it's an ambiguous word, and, to my mind, are likely exploiting its scope for meaning different things in different contexts to different people to fence-sit and avoid challenge/condemnation.

And that right there means that their reporting is more focussed more on politics than accuracy.

I think their point is that, depending on what people calling the police saw, they may well have assessed the shooter at first as appearing to be a female in a dress. The police have that information to issue. Press reporting and accuracy comes later and has been quoting this initial police alert.

They pledge allegiance to the American flag

Are you on glue?

@HolyGround13 I was just going by what people here were saying the BBC said, I haven't read all their reporting myself...

I personally am at the point where I don't trust that whatever instruction I receive from authorities is in my best interests. In THEIR best interests sure, but I'm fairly unlikely at this point to blindly follow orders like 'shelter in place'. I will do whatever my personal risk assessment says is best taking into account the utter duplicity and mendaciousness of the police, the government etc.

I think the BBC have probably gone with what they have been given and this is more on the Canadian authorities for not revealing an identity that seems to have been circulating publicly for hours overnight their time.

the BBC are still saying ‘We have not yet received confirmation of the suspect's gender or identity’’ because that way they can’t get into consequent legal trouble with misgendering, if identity and age and therefore legal sex is still officially unconfirmed, as seems to be stil the case

Today programme on BBC radio 4 interviewed a dad from this devastated tiny community this morning, whose wife was a teacher there (and has survived). This dad wouldn’t say anything at all about what was known of the killer. It must be unbearable to have to give so much consideration to how the truth will be received such that you can’t even speak it, in a context of violent murder of children. I wonder if mainstream Canada will start to think that this is no longer an acceptable social norm.

Until official confirmation I guess the BBC continues on with mentioning a ‘female in a dress’ which is a direct quote and is so overly specific a description to be made in news speak, that it immediately sets off ‘not actually female but description is unconfirmed for now’ in the news audience’s minds.

Yes it’s awful that all the attention goes on this question, and not on the victims or the community and not the severe mental health problems that will have presumably gone along with the perpetrator’s change of personal identity.

In this instance it might have been best to check the sources yourself. People do clearly have a strong distrust in media here, and arguing about wording without seeing the posts yourself might be adding to the confusion.

So you would have preferred them to wait until they hade identified the shooters’ sex before issuing the shelter in place order, risking people’s lives ? They issued a description. If you see someone coming towards you fitting that description and carrying a gun, you’re not going to wait around to check whether they’re a man or a woman, you’re going to run. Had the police waited until everything had been fact checked and more people had died as a result, they would have been criticised for not acting on the initial information. Lose Lose.