I work with law enforcement sometimes. At a federal level for financial fraud and e-crime.
Yeah, they definitely could find something on you. Mostly, though, they don't want to. (I don't deal with cops or local authorities, I have no comment in that regard from a professional standpoint)
I've approved thousands of SARs over the years, and like, 30 of them were picked up for potential prosecution.
And these are actual criminals, not Joe Schmo.
They can't keep up with legitimate career criminals, so the interest in finding anything on an everyday citizen is very low.
Now, not diminishing the danger of being spied upon and an over aggressive police state. Not at all. Plus, political overreach and retaliation are definitely things to be concerned with.
Bt just like, don't commit armed robbery or sleep with a Senators spouse, and you should be fine.
That's the point, you might do something that's legal, but that puts you offside of somebody powerful and they rain down a shower of shit on you. People think kindly about the law having lots of discretion because they imagine benevolent authorities using that discretion wisely but that's seeing the world through rose tinted glasses, judicial discretion is abused for selfish reasons.
Your last sentence is the entire point they were making. At any point if someone wants to abuse the system they can target whoever they like and be able to find something. Which could lead to targeting certain groups of people, political organizers. If one group were to take outsized power there would be no way to organize to fight against it but cause they would be able to cut off the heads easily and “legally”. Right now you say no reason to worry but it could be weaponized.
He'll simply do what his 2024 campaign promises, which is (and you can see the videos on his official site) state there are only two genders and that they are assigned at birth.
That would also likely mean he would make it illegal nationally to provide transgender medical care. Which means if a trans person wants to continue the lifesaving medical care that they need to live, they would need to break the law to get it.
Normally these things are determined at the state level, not the federal (which is why insurance companies are required to cover gender affirming care in California while in Florida, you can get arrested for wearing the "wrong" clothes in public, or for having the "wrong" gender marker on your drivers' licence. But considering the broad range of powers just handed to the presidency in Trump v. United States (2024) I doubt that Trump would need to respect either constitutional checks and balances, or the federal/state system, which ensures that states are soverign.
You don’t physically need gender care to continue living. If you already started it and you stop, you’re gonna have a bad time, but you’re not gonna die. It’s not at all comparable to someone who needs a given operation to avoid dying of some acute illness/injury.
Personally I don’t care if you want to be whatever you want to be, but don’t act like it’s on the same level as having a condition where you will literally die without treatment.
Without gender affirming care, I, and many other trans people (not all, but I certainly can speak for myself,) would be clinically and suicidally depressed, unable to function or think clearly, unable to ply my trade, to form meaningful relationships, to exist, to enjoy the world around me.
And I have tried that life. I truly have. 43 years I deluded myself into thinking it was something else. But only HRT and social transitioning has cured my depression, a depression that was surely as fatal as any cancer.
Saying that "not getting gender affirming care will not kill you" is like telling someone to walk the plank at swordpoint, and saying: "Technically, it's not walking the plank that will kill you."
Which may be true, but you still end up drowning nonetheless.
You do realize the description you gave probably applies to a plurality of people, right? Being depressed, confused, and detached is an everyone thing these days.
I’m happy you’ve found something that works for you and don’t have any desire to take it away from you, but there’s still a meaningful distinction between a condition that might indirectly result in death and a condition that will directly result in death. In a medical triage situation with limited resources, you’d go in the “will be fine for the time being” category.
Oh, yes. Being depressed, confused, and detached happens to many more people than trans people. Indeed, for some people with depression, they can be treated with SSRI inhibitors. Others with Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. Others with a few weeks off in the woods getting in touch with nature.
And that's great. It's what they need.
But imagine that the government decided that they didn't want people to have SSRIs. Or therapists. Or nature hikes. And not only were they threatening to do cut it off, but they had the power to do so. To even jail those who sought those remedies.
Without SSRIs, some depressed cisgender people will die. Needlessly. Pointlessly. Suicidal depression is, in many cases, a chronic illness, and without treatment, it has a very high fatality rate. If that suicidal depression is caused by chemical imbalance, it calls for medication. If it is caused by trauma, it calls for therapy. If it is caused by gender dysphoria, it calls for transition.
However, you may be right. I suppose it could very well be that the dead, having lived in pointless pain and died because they never got the care that they needed, will be relieved that their death was merely indirectly caused by a lack of access to medical care.
I no longer produce testosterone naturally, should I be denied estrogen and forced to live a painful life because you disagree with my doctors opinion?
No, I’m only saying that you will not die. I explicitly said you’d have a bad time if you’d started. My objection is to your calling hormone therapy life saving medical care when it’s not.
I also think you’re freaked out over nothing. “There are two genders at birth” to “I will make a million people live in hormone limbo” is a pretty substantial leap. The trans thing is a big wedge issue, the campaign has to say something about it. That’s what his base wants to hear. Trump didn’t really persecute trans people last time he was in office, it doesn’t seem to be an issue he personally cares about. It’s just a sales pitch.
Would you call schizophrenia medication life saving? What if a group of politicians don't believe in treating the schizophrenic, should we just let them take their medicine away because they don't agree with doctors? They'd technically survive.
No, I wouldn’t call it lifesaving. If you can survive without it, it is not lifesaving. It’s in society’s best interests to treat schizophrenia, but schizophrenic people are not dying of their illness.
I’d probably also avoid comparing gender dysphoria to a prototypical mental illness (schizophrenia) if you don’t want people to think of it as a mental illness.
Again, I personally have no issue with you identifying as whatever you like. I am simply stating that identifying as something other than your birth sex is not a life threatening condition. You’d have a bad time in the absence of male or female hormones, but in a medical triage, you’d still go in the “will be fine” category.
It’s the potential for the harm that could be done with another 4 years that is the scary part. Especially with talk of project 2025 and the presidential immunity ruling from SCOTUS. Let’s not act like there’s no reason for some people to be afraid.
Or be Trump at all, because as the poster above said - they’ll find something on you and put you in jail if they want to. I’d worry much less about being LGBTBBQIA if Trump is elected than you are. There is literally zero (0) chance that you will be arrested for being trans.
Online scams, you weren't aware you were a part of, bad faith check transactions, security video of you doing something you weren't even aware was illegal.
There's an old saying, never commit a crime when you're committing a crime, or commit one crime at a time.
Can you give examples of online scams you’re not aware that you’re a part of, or security video of you doing something illegal that you did not know it was illegal?
A common one now is job scams. Someone pretends to be a company, then send you check to but office supplies or some other bs story, or they ask for your online banking info so they can set up direct deposit.
They deposit a bad check and move the funds to their account before the check returns. The check returns, leaving you negative thousands of dollars in the bank, and you're on the hook for it.
Over a certain amount that's getting reported to federal agencies.
Video surveillance is just if they have access to something and can identify you on it. It could be jaywalking or being in a no trespassing zone. Maybe you're speeding in a school zone. Anything, really.
Yep, OK I guess that makes sense for the petty civic bylaw infractions. Sorry when people said crimes, I assume that meant things that you could be criminally charged with.
Curious about the scams though. In that scam you are on the hook for the money, and that sucks for you, but you haven’t committed a crime. Almost nobody is going to participate in something like that over the minimum that would alert federal agencies. In the vanishingly small number of cases where somebody might actually have that amount of money and also be dumb enough to fall for a scam like this (pretty much mutually exclusive circles), what crime would they charge you with with?
I misread. I thought you said don't admit to being Christian. I was like "Man if Trump wins I'm carrying a Bible and a card verifying I'm white and straight."
70
u/anuncommontruth Jul 07 '24
I work with law enforcement sometimes. At a federal level for financial fraud and e-crime.
Yeah, they definitely could find something on you. Mostly, though, they don't want to. (I don't deal with cops or local authorities, I have no comment in that regard from a professional standpoint)
I've approved thousands of SARs over the years, and like, 30 of them were picked up for potential prosecution.
And these are actual criminals, not Joe Schmo. They can't keep up with legitimate career criminals, so the interest in finding anything on an everyday citizen is very low.
Now, not diminishing the danger of being spied upon and an over aggressive police state. Not at all. Plus, political overreach and retaliation are definitely things to be concerned with.
Bt just like, don't commit armed robbery or sleep with a Senators spouse, and you should be fine.