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."

'Mistrust based on previous misreporting and blatant evidenced bias is entirely rational in my view.'

Yep.

The victims are the entire point of this. They’ve been badly let down by a system that enables and affirms mental health issues, encouraging men to ‘aspire’ to a state of being they can never reach, and thus become even more paranoid, frustrated and aggressive than they normally are, all while hopped up on experimental drugs.

The ‘trans’ part isn’t a minor detail we are preoccupied with, the stats would suggest it is very significant. We have a duty to focus on this to find out how to prevent the next ‘lady’ from carrying out a similar shooting.

They have painted themselves into a corner. How will they eventually report it?

They can only say he is female. And everyone knows he is not.

Maybe there would have been fewer victims if the RCMP had told people to look out for a man in a dress, not a woman in a dress. Just a thought.

Yeah this is a totally fair point. I could’ve phrased my post better. I was trying to say that I agree there has previously been misreporting (more that I had seen before the Supreme Court clarification) but I hadn’t seen evidence of it today. I did not see the use of the word gender, but it’s more than possible I missed it.

It is Canadian law that has painted them into a corner.

That was given on all the news bulletins on Radio 4 today, and I thought exactly the same. How many teenage girls wear dresses...
[Edited to say: I'm bit late to the thread, I see this has been much discussed]

The BBC are a state funded broadcaster and they should not be misleading the public. If they have doubts about the veracity of the reports they should say so rather than just parroting what they’ve been told. They are still reporting that this person is female so people reading will assume this person is a woman.

As soon as I heard them say it was done by a woman I thought “nope, it’s going to be a bloke in a dress”.

You are right that the victims and their families should be remembered.
However, as a mum to a gender dysphoria young person, I can also see that the shooter is also a victim. He was 17 years of age. And sadly, society has lost its way in helping lost adolescents.
He was not a man as some upthread are posting. He was a boy.
Mark Carney, rightly and unsurprisingly, showed considerable emotion in his statement. Perhaps this is because he too has a trans child, albeit non-binary. You can’t really understand this unless you have a trans child. One can only hope that this will lead the government to a more thoughtful approach

When my child came out as trans and asked our lifelong friends to call him, “she” and a female name, it brought to mind the fable, the emperor‘s new clothes. it was then that I decided that if I, his mother, could not tell him the truth then who could
But you are right, today is a day to remember the victims. May they rest in peace

This is what is currently on the BBC website:

'There's still a lot we don't know, however. Including...

The name of the suspected attacker. Police say they know their identity and a shelter-in-place alert earlier described them as a "female in a dress with brown hair"'

So now no indication that we don't know the 'gender' of the suspect, just that we don't know their name and repeating the reference to 'female in a dress'.

The BBC shouldn’t report things that haven’t been independently verified. It’s not misleading the public to quote an initial report and then say the suspect’s identity hasn’t yet been verified by police. It’s not misleading the public to use quotation marks.

See my post above. It absolutely is misleading.

I do not see that as misleading. I see them repeating the quote that’s been referenced all day, say the police know the identity, and then they haven’t used any pronouns. Misleading to me, would be saying “they know her identity” or “described her”.
They don’t have a universal policy on reporting with people’s “preferred pronouns” but they do tend to do that. I see them conspicuously not doing that here, because they don’t have the corroboration from the police of the person’s sex.
I read that and think I most likely know this was a man. The BBC have to wait for the police to release the name and sex.

This and also

Maybe there would have been fewer victims if the RCMP had told people to look out for a man in a dress, not a woman in a dress. Just a thought.

The lying about sex as we've been saying for years on here is a MASSIVE SAFEGUARDING FAILURE.

The victims have been failed. Putting children on experimental drugs that could make them angrier and more mentally unwell isn't going to reduce these crimes. Neither is telling children they can expect the whole world to deny reality for them all the time and they have every right to get angry if people slip up and 'misgender' them.

And finally, victims deserve the truth. I bet those victims saw a deranged male and not a female. Why does their perception not matter?

I've literally just come off the phone to a celebrant who recently conducted a funeral for a 30 year old trans man who ended his own life.
It's doing these people a massive disservice to play into their delusions.

R4 PM news on " what do we know" about the incident.

Reporter saying to Evan Davies it's a school for 12 to 18 yr olds. Canadian authorities know the identity of the shooter but aren't saying.

Also it's very remote so even Canadian news outlets aren't there yet. Nothing else who n the perp

So:

• some people died
• it's all very sad

So if the BBC reported...

'There's still a lot we don't know, however. Including...

The name of the suspected attacker. Police say they know their identity and a shelter-in-place alert earlier described them as a "male in a boiler suit with brown hair"'

...you wouldn't think the suspect was a man?

have any reputable news sources reported this person to be a suspect ? All the news sources naming Jesse Strang look a bit dodgy

Al Jazera said literally word for word the same as the BBC.

Are they reporting that the shooter is female?

BBC 24 news at 18.00 are saying that the police have not confirmed 'the name or the gender' of the gunman - or 'shooter', as they say over there, which conveniently is gender neutral.

I have in the past found the coverage of school shootings on TV news channels excessive - first item on the bulletin, showing again and again video frightened children running out of the building, replaying audio of shots being fired.

I found the BBC 24 report appropriate in length and tone.

A fair comparison would be if early police chatter described the suspect as an “Arab man” and the BBC repeated it, despite being aware that credible sources had already reported otherwise and not mentioning that.

Early reports are notoriously unreliable. In the middle of a chaotic incident, witnesses get things wrong all the time. There’s no obligation to amplify claims that are likely inaccurate, especially when there’s reason to believe they are.

In the confusion, people can easily misidentify someone entirely innocent such as someone trying to escape. Repeating that kind of unverified detail doesn’t inform the public; it just spreads confusion and potentially fuels harm.

Yes exactly. The media literacy exhibited here today has been disturbing.

It is a total misunderstanding of what constitutes responsible reporting.

If Al Jazeera used the word sex and the BBC used the word gender, that’s literally not true.