620
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

When a clothing store opened in Cedar Glen, Calif., in the summer of 2021, the owner hung a Pride flag at the entrance, her friends recalled. Whenever someone would tear down the flag, owner Laura Carleton would raise another one.

But after someone complained about the flag on Friday, the encounter turned deadly.

A man arrived at the store, Mag.pi, around 5 p.m. and criticized Carleton’s Pride flag before he shot her, according to the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department. Carleton, 66, was pronounced dead at the scene.

The shooter, whom authorities have not publicly identified, died following “a lethal force encounter” with deputies after the shooting, the sheriff’s department said in a statement.

Community members have since rallied around Carleton’s store, placing Pride flags, flowers, candles and photos of Carleton in front of it. Matthew Clevenger of Lake Arrowhead LGBTQ+ said Carleton was a strong ally of the LGBTQ+ community.

“She was a fierce protector of everybody being who they wanted to be,” Clevenger told The Washington Post.

Carleton, who went by Lauri, began working in fashion as a teenager at her family’s business, Fred Segal in Los Angeles, according to Mag.pi’s website. After graduating from the ArtCenter College of Design in Pasadena, Calif., Carleton worked at a retail store before joining Kenneth Cole in the 1980s. Carleton worked for the fashion company for more than 15 years as an executive.

In 2013, Carleton founded her clothing store, Mag.pi, on Ventura Boulevard in Studio City, Calif. She added a second store in Cedar Glen in 2021. While she built her career, Carleton married her husband and took pride in their blended family of nine children, her store’s website says.

Carleton was one of the largest donors to Lake Arrowhead LGBTQ+ and attended the organization’s Pride boat parade in June, Clevenger said. A section of Mag.pi was dedicated to rainbow-colored products, and she displayed rainbow candles by the cash register, he said.

Carleton helped create a culture in which the LGBTQ+ community felt accepted, Clevenger said. But some community members were still resistant, he added, and took down Mag.pi’s Pride flag multiple times.

After making “disparaging remarks” about the Pride flag on Friday, a man shot Carleton before fleeing, according to the sheriff’s department. He was holding a handgun when deputies found him on a nearby road, where he later died, officials said.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 7 points 1 year ago

So what? You become a one party nation? How about maybe, now this will sound crazy, but fixing the validity of 3rd party parties might help.

[-] PunnyName@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

First Past the Post voting is an issue that could help make 3rd parties valid.(edit: if we got rid of it)

Until then, a 3rd party is literally fantasy.

[-] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 7 points 1 year ago

Just go to proportional representation, FPTP is crap in otherways. Actually everyone would be chuffed if the electoral collage just went away, the bar is not that high.

[-] PunnyName@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yeah, I meant that we need to get rid of FPTP.

And I agree, nuke the fucking electoral college.

[-] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

I did not think what you had could be called FPTP though? Other countries have more then 2 parties and FPTP but between the collage and borked rules in the US basically make them impossible.

[-] PunnyName@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

What the US has is FPTP. We need ranked choice or something else that permits 3rd parties to be viable.

As well as eradicating the electoral college.

[-] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

It was news to me, we where always taught the US had the electoral collage system.

[-] blackbelt352@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

So First Past the Post and the electoral college aren't mutually exclusive.

The electoral college is voting logistics, a relic of a time when sending paper ballots in a sealed box from Vermont or Georgia to Washington was a months long horseback ride through dangerous territories. It was a clever solution to solve the logistics of running a democracy on the technology they had at the time.

First Past the Post is a simple voting system where each persong gets one vote with one name on it. Whichever candidate gets the most votes wins. The problem with it is it tends toward 2 parties through the spoiler effect. If there are 2 parties that run similar enough platforms, that splits the voting base, because either party will satisfy those issue needs, but the opposition to those issues would be one big voting bloc. Thus the 2 losing parties will siphon off voters from the other losing party until eventually one party remains.

It's why the Dems in this country range from vaguely progressive corporate neoliberals (think Biden or Pelosi) or to highly progressive further left wing* people (think Bernie or AOC. And Republicans range from conservative corporate neolibs (think Romney or McCain) to reactionaries and outright fascists (think Boebert and Marjorie Green).

*compared to the rest of our representatives in America

[-] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

Well yes, but way back many years ago in school the two systems where treated as not the same type. My country has FPTP but we don't consider the US to use it (at least years ago in school). This could be because of how like many countries with FPTP ours does have more then 2 parties win seats in every election where in the US it is though legal means almost impossible (I know they exist but I don't think any have won a seat). This also could have been some weird pride thing as well, as learning world political systems in public education always seemed to have a bit of the propaganda to it.

In any case it is interesting and neat to learn you guys use FPTP also.

[-] jhymesba@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

The Electoral College is just to elect our President. It has no other purpose than that.

As an American, you vote for four people who represent you directly in the government: your Representative in our House of Representatives, two Senators in our Senate, and the President. The Senators are a relatively recent addition as for a long time, Senators were appointed rather than directly elected, and some people are talking about going back to that system. But for now, that's 4 people you vote for.

Representatives are voted for by their voters in their individual districts. This is like a MP. In some districts, such as those in Maine, we use Ranked Choice Voting. In others, we have a sort of runoff election if nobody wins a majority. However, in most, we vote FPTP, and the guy with the largest share of the votes wins.

Senators are state-wide votes. We'll only vote for one at a time, and over 6 years, we'll have one election for one seat, another election for the other seat, and a 'bye-year' where we don't vote for Senators at all. Like the House, this is rarely RCV or Runoff, but is frequently FPTP.

POTUS votes are run nation-wide, but they really are state-wide in all states except Maine and Nebraska, where they are hybrid Congressional District-wide and State-Wide. This is where the Electoral College comes in, and trying to RCV this could well challenge constitutional crises because if no one candidate gets more than half of the EVs, the race is thrown to the House, which is an anti-democratic thing.

[-] PunnyName@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

We also have that.

[-] TinyPizza@kbin.social -2 points 1 year ago

I say fuck representative government. We as people, all of us, are flawed. And no matter who we elect, they will at some point, use the power or voice we've entrusted them with to their own ends and for their own means. We need Digital Direct Democracy. It's time to end the notion that society needs elected representation to act as wranglers and moderate our opinion. The technology is here and honestly I think it's a system that the founders would have been behind.

[-] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 2 points 1 year ago

Sure, I mean that would be great but looking at where the US is right this min maybe the focus should be just a touch lower.

[-] TinyPizza@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

there's at least 5-7 states where you could pass it as a constitutional referendum. The only hang up is that we are baked in as representative governments on a state level due to agreements made to the federal government constitutionally when we joined the union. You'd have to find a way to make a representative system function like a delegate system, but not under the eyes of the law. It seems like a real moonshot, but where I'm at all it would take is the courts to approve the language and around 50,000 signatures to get it on the ballot. 50%+ of the vote and it's enacted.

[-] PunnyName@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The reason we got fucked over is a LACK of representation. We started a fucking revolution because we were so heavily taxed by a foreign power.

Maybe you want to move into a different direction where all are somehow involved in lawakong, but that'd be a huge clusterfuck.

Imagine 330,000,000+ individual policies...

[-] TinyPizza@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

Technology could largely streamline that and condense things in plain language for people to understand. Research councils and individual polling could help to dictate ballot composition. I've seen it proposed that you could enact whats known as liquid voting, where by you could entrust a like minded friend you consider more knowledgeable to vote for you. Outside of that, so much of that individual policy is performative and redundant. We can change how the system works incrementally and work toward greater levels of involvement and knowledge will become more common the more people have a taste for it. We can incentivize participation by linking it to civil duty and a lessening of your personal taxes.

[-] LinkOpensChest_wav@lemmy.one 0 points 1 year ago

You need things spelled out for you? We could form a leftist party since we currently don't have one, ya dingus.

[-] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 4 points 1 year ago

Yes, that would be a 3rd party.

this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2023
620 points (96.4% liked)

politics

19145 readers
2528 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS