Five family members, including three kids, were found dead in an Ohio home Thursday evening in what police are calling a “domestic dispute that turned deadly,” according to a news release.

The incident is being investigated as a quadruple murder-suicide, police said.

  • DessertStorms@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    25
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    If you can’t see the connection between gendered violence and what happened here, it’s because you don’t want to.

    (also gun safety, which I literally started my previous reply saying I agree with, had nothing to do with this case, you are just derailing the conversation from the real issue - an epidemic of deadly misogyny. It wasn’t the gun being there that made him kill them)

    • gregorum@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Insinuating gender issues into this when there no evidence of that as a motivation (no suicide note, no knowledge of the motivations) is simply you projecting an agenda.

      As a matter of gun safety, it’s obvious: the best way to keep a home safe from gun violence is to not have a gun in the home.

    • Nougat@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      ~~Oh no. ~~

      The article is short. It names all the members of the family. Based on the names, there appear to be:

      * One adult male
      * One adult female
      * Two teen females (yeah, I’m calling 12 a teen)
      * One male child

      There is no information in the article about which one of the above was the shooter, and all of them are old enough to be able to handle a firearm (although it’s less likely that the male child, aged 9, would have been the shooter).

      Your comments refer to “him” and “this man,” so you must be referring to the adult male. Unless you have some information about this incident that is not stated in the article, you are assuming that you know who the shooter was, where there is no information to support that claim.

      It seems that you want to believe that it must have been the man, because you believe that men are intrinsically violent. Is it more statistically likely, based on past history? Sure. But you cannot apply statistics that way to come to a correct conclusion about an individual incident.

      • gregorum@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        If you bother to watch the video, it states several times that the father was the shooter. How else would he have shot everyone else than himself otherwise?

        I’m operating based on the facts given, not some social agenda or implicit biases. Get your facts straight.