Charlie Kirk shot dead at Utah university

[BlueNomad]

As much as I feel sorry for his kids, there's a benefit to his supporters getting an unflinching look at what gun violence actually looks like.

It's not something that only happens in bad neighbourhoods or a number on a spreadsheet or a reporter stood outside a school retelling events whilst sparing details.

It's a person who is going about their business one second and the next he's got a massive fucking hole in his neck pissing out blood in front of countless helpless onlookers all panicking and wondering if they're next.

This is the reality for countless Americans and it is absurd that so many of those sheltered from directly witnessing the brutality of it will fight tooth and nail to maintain the circumstances that facilitate these events.

Although I feel like his absence from the planet will be a net positive, his vile words and actions are now frozen in time. Would have been nice to hear if he thinks all of this was still "worth it."

If you want omelettes, you gotta break eggs!

You want 2A, you gotta accept a few gun deaths!

At least, THAT is what he said when innocent children were slaughtered at school…so I guess he donated himself to the cause by dying by gun, at a school!

Btw, can anyone name a single child who was slaughtered at Sandy Hook? NO, I’m sure not, but the Right wants us to lionize the death of this Right Wing bigot?

FUCK THAT!

 

[happy_blue_apple]

I'm not sure righteousness even comes into it. The primary thought is "This will REALLY piss the other side off, let's do it!" If it doesn't meet that bar, they're not interested.

You're quite right, there's that too

I find this extremely partisan society extremely tiresome actually, for that example you gave.

I consider myself pretty liberal, although I have a conservative view on a few subjects that I wouldn't even consider conservative, the far left would, I consider them common sense.

Anybody who subscribes to a single school of thought on everything , whether it be extremely one way or the other with absolutely no grey area, probably aren't thinking for themselves.

 

[Blue Maverick]

I’d doubt this kid is a “professional marksman,” but rather an enthusiast.

I only mentioned the red dot, as it is a relatively inexpensive way to improve one’s accuracy from a reasonable range, and is all the rage with enthusiasts today.

Of course, any professional marksman or sniper would have commensurate equipment. I’m doubting he was either.

As a Glock owner, I’m actually looking at the Meta Tactical MX-1 Conversion Kit for them. Handy bit of kit for very little money. The rail is also quite suitable for a red dot sight and has been used for target accuracy reaching 200 yards…WITH A HANDGUN!!

That’s all to express how easy (sub $300) it is to turn a handgun into a distinctly more stable platform for longer distance shooting, all within the law, and hide it in a backpack. In fact, there are tons of what are known as “truck guns” that are small, expandable weapons that fold out into a more operationally efficient package, and they can all be hidden in a backpack just the like one on the guy being flagged as the POI.

Genuine question, handy in what means, do you think it will help you kill quicker, I think shooting someone with a Glock from 25 metres is quite easy your turning it into similar to an MP5, who you coming up against Al Qaeda? This is not a go at you I’m just interested why?

 

[mexico1970]

I don't know what you're aiming to say here. He's recorded at attacking his own sister, so his family that have been asking for him to get help for his severe schizophrenia means they're "covering for his cuntishness"?

I respect genuine dialogue, but your insistence that he needs jailing instead of the help he should have been getting is veering into divisive terrority, when this unfortunate tragedy could and should have been avoided by the Gov funding the needs for these individuals.

I wonder what it will take for you to understand that funding the police and expanding more prisons over tackling the homelessness crisis and offering mental health treatment does not make the US a safer place.

Now what did I say about liberals again?

The **** is a career criminal, mental illness does not totally absolve him of what he has done and did, that's an insult to every mentally ill person out there.

Sergei awaits him.

 

[Bigga]

Those who have the real power want a world where no human has a sense of cultural, national, theological, or civic self.

I'm going to assume you mean we, the people?

We, the divided people.

Because the US set the tone that corporation are equal to people, so have the same voting influence as people. Lobbying politicians for their own agenda and searching for corrupt politicians seduced by wealth. Those politicians vote for the corporation agenda of of wealth, weaponry resource capture and regime change.

Those corps have you fighting amongst yourselves funding talking points, creating fervor so that you don't look at what they're doing.

Under Trump this is more transparent than it's ever been with the likes of Stephen Miller in the government close to Trump's ear. You'll hear that in certain speeches made.

I don't know how much you know about anything that goes on in the US, but their current behaviour is affecting everyone on the planet.

 

[The blue phantom]

If you want omelettes, you gotta break eggs!

You want 2A, you gotta accept a few gun deaths!

At least, THAT is what he said when innocent children were slaughtered at school…so I guess he donated himself to the cause by dying by gun, at a school!

Btw, can anyone name a single child who was slaughtered at Sandy Hook? NO, I’m sure not, but the Right wants us to lionize the death of this Right Wing bigot?

FUCK THAT!

Don't forget this is the guy too that wanted to raise money and get the guy out on bail who left Nancy Pelosis husband for death after a vicious Hammer attack. Something the Republicans were mocking.

 

[Bigga]

There is no effective infact no even a token mental health service in most of the world.

Are you saying offer nothing or that there's not enough of these services?

Your comment is ambiguous.

 

[mattcity5]

The wider point mate is that if you murder someone for their political views you're a **** and if you support that murder you're a ****.

From Lincoln to MLK to this young lad if you support any one of those murders you're an unfit human being.

I know in a lot of ways this is difficult to answer, because it'd be a sliding doors moment, but how would you feel if someone had murdered Hitler in 1932 or so? Or maybe that would be too soon as we wouldn't see the damage that he would cause, maybe 1940 would be better for that?

I do agree with your general point though.

 

[Bigga]

Now what did I say about liberals again?

The **** is a career criminal, mental illness does not totally absolve him of what he has done and did, that's an insult to every mentally ill person out there.

Sergei awaits him.

Okay, I get it. You think I'm making 'liberal' commentary.

You don't think early intervention into his schizophrenia would have changed anything.

That's an insult to mental health treatment. I say this because I have family that had care under mental health for this and don't have the irrational, uncontrollable impulses they once had. They still have some issues, but the severity has been diminished greatly and I regard that as a success story.

According to your statement, my family should have gone to prison to deal with their crisis alone.

Well, we'll not agree here.

 

[VOOMER]

I don't know what you're implying.

I said what I said on Kirk.

You can scroll above to see that.

Just the hysteria around Martin Luther King was supposedly from bigoted KKK type knuckle draggers.
He was a strong advocate of married couples raising their children together as was Kirk.
Parents usually care a lot more about their children's welfare than say Sony, or Adidas.
Two parents who both care about rather than abuse their kids will influence the kids in a positive way.
As you wrote its all about division.

 

[mexico1970]

I know in a lot of ways this is difficult to answer, because it'd be a sliding doors moment, but how would you feel if someone had murdered Hitler in 1932 or so? Or maybe that would be too soon as we wouldn't see the damage that he would cause, maybe 1940 would be better for that?

I do agree with your general point though.

I can't even say I would agree with that either, maybe I would go back in time and KNOWING the threat I would implement or try to implement obstacles to prevent him getting to power.

Offer the little bastard an art scholarship in Prague or something.

Even your genuine honest question brings to mind that question "Who is evil?" we always say Hitler and he was but nobody seems to put Stalin and his tubby custard moustache in the same bracket.

Assassinating someone you don't agree with politically is and should be abhorrent IMHO full stop, this murder will give politicians on both sides of the aisle free reign to implement stuff they could never have gotten away with before.

 

[Blue Mist]

Until he was shot dead I hadn't heard of him.
I've just read some of his disgusting racist comments and as a result I won't be offering 'thoughts and prayers'
He is no loss to society.

 

[VOOMER]

Are you saying offer nothing or that there's not enough of these services?

Your comment is ambiguous.

I'm stating a fact, we have don't care in the community here. What chance do the the 6 billion who live in abject have of receiving even rudimentary mental support have?

 

[mexico1970]

According to your statement, my family should have gone to prison to deal with their crisis alone.

I am all for mental health intervention, but not excuses.

Was Fred West mentally ill? Was Rose West? What about Brady or Hindley or the Yorkshire Ripper?You could argue that most violent murdering bastards have a mental condition no?

There's a line you don't cross and this is very much that line.

 

[Blue and true]

I don't think he has ever said deaths are a good thing.

I just don't think expressing any opinion should endanger his or anybody's life. We need some boundaries somewhere. We can't justify death just because someone occasionally said something stupid or irresponsible. We all did. If a woman walks home at night in a miniskirt through a dark alley, it's putting her at risk, but it doesn't mean it's her fault if she gets raped. We can't allow victim blaming.

People will believe what they want to believe. That's okay. Some believe City are scum, some believe United are Scum, some believe Liverpool are scum, and some believe we are all scum. I naively believed that this will be some common ground like let's all condemn violence and say this is a despicable crime. For me, murder is always wrong. We shouldn't be debating whether it's justified. For me, that's horrible.

Charlie Kirk in 2023: "It's worth it to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year, so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights...That is a prudent deal."

Semantically you can twist it whichever way, but that's him saying gun deaths are worth it to keep 2A. So I'll ask you again, how are people taking that repulsive quote out of context?

I haven't justified his death; so a total non-point I needn't address. But it's interesting you've attempted an analogy of rape; are you aware this guy also compared abortion to the Holocaust, and that any female that is raped, even were they ten years old, should be forced to give birth?

When public figures die, their legacy is illuminated for all to see, especially for those who were unacquainted with their legacy. So, now that his colourful legacy and worldview is illuminated, don't be surprised that the forum hasn't been inundated with RIP.

 

[mattcity5]

I can't even say I would agree with that either, maybe I would go back in time and KNOWING the threat I would implement or try to implement obstacles to prevent him getting to power.

Offer the little bastard an art scholarship in Prague or something.

Even your genuine honest question brings to mind that question "Who is evil?" we always say Hitler and he was but nobody seems to put Stalin and his tubby custard moustache in the same bracket.

Assassinating someone you don't agree with politically is and should be abhorrent IMHO full stop, this murder will give politicians on both sides of the aisle free reign to implement stuff they could never have gotten away with before.

Fair response. I could have said many leaders, Hitler is the easy go to for 'evil' though. But I'd also suggest that leaders shouldn't implement plans that make millions suffer. That's what led to the French Revolution.

Youre right about the political response though. I see Trump has already blamed the left despite not have a clue who's done it. Whether he's actually wanted to jump the gun (bad choice of words perhaps) and enjoy the division it brings is another question. There are multiple possible sides who could have wanted to do this, to create this exact response from Trump.

 

[VOOMER]

I'm going to assume you mean we, the people?

We, the divided people.

Because the US set the tone that corporation are equal to people, so have the same voting influence as people. Lobbying politicians for their own agenda and searching for corrupt politicians seduced by wealth. Those politicians vote for the corporation agenda of of wealth, weaponry resource capture and regime change.

Those corps have you fighting amongst yourselves funding talking points, creating fervor so that you don't look at what they're doing.

Under Trump this is more transparent than it's ever been with the likes of Stephen Miller in the government close to Trump's ear. You'll hear that in certain speeches made.

I don't know how much you know about anything that goes on in the US, but their current behaviour is affecting everyone on the planet.

I worked for 3 months for a subsidiary of Zurich in 2002 in New York, but lived in New Paltz.
I don't think there is a typical American. But aside from regular trips to see and stay with friends in Long Island and Red Bank NJ I'm not exposed to daily life.
My friends are more concerned with tax and paying for their children's education. They okay whoever is in charge.
I think China and India's behaviour has way more of an impact on the world at the moment.
The USA is run by a conglomerate of Corporations, but they are global in nature and will utilise the tax and legal code of which ever suites their needs.
The Corporation the documentary is an interesting watch

The Corporation (2003 film) - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[VOOMER]

Fair response. I could have said many leaders, Hitler is the easy go to for 'evil' though. But I'd also suggest that leaders shouldn't implement plans that make millions suffer. That's what led to the French Revolution.

Youre right about the political response though. I see Trump has already blamed the left despite not have a clue who's done it. Whether he's actually wanted to jump the gun (bad choice of words perhaps) and enjoy the division it brings is another question. There are multiple possible sides who could have wanted to do this, to create this exact response from Trump.

There isn't a position where he can blame the entire left wing for this.

Bernie Sanders posted this.

 

[VOOMER]

Okay, I get it. You think I'm making 'liberal' commentary.

You don't think early intervention into his schizophrenia would have changed anything.

That's an insult to mental health treatment. I say this because I have family that had care under mental health for this and don't have the irrational, uncontrollable impulses they once had. They still have some issues, but the severity has been diminished greatly and I regard that as a success story.

According to your statement, my family should have gone to prison to deal with their crisis alone.

Well, we'll not agree here.

It doesn't matter if you are, or aren't.
You have a right to an opinion, which is what Kirk had been an advocate for 15 years..

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Charlie Kirk in 2023: "It's worth it to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year, so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights...That is a prudent deal."
*
I've not seen what responses were offered directly to Kirk, but in general demagogues work by constructing their own argument, and counter-argument involves being able to identify any logical fallacies in the foundations of that argument.

Presumably if this line is used again, the counter question should be "what if the gun death is you, or close family, or at your kids' school? When it's close to home and not a faceless crime to the person making the claim. Is that still an acceptable cost?"

It is really easy to make unpleasant measures seem reasonable by taking them as a broad picture. Going the other way and picking the detail is also important to consider.

Also "what are these god-given rights that you need guns to protect? are you telling me that there are no other alternatives, and why they are (if they are) needing protection. It is not a 'this is the only answer' scenario."