Charlie Kirk shot at Utah Valley University

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This isn't gun violence; this was a targeted assassination of a major leader because of political views. If guns were outlawed, they would have poisoned him, run him over, killed him with a knife, bomb, etc

Oh please. In first world countries where guns are more tightly regulated, there are FAR FEWER political assassinations (or none at all). Why? Because it's HARD to kill someone without a gun.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This isn't gun violence; this was a targeted assassination of a major leader because of political views. If guns were outlawed, they would have poisoned him, run him over, killed him with a knife, bomb, etc

Yes, this was a targeted assasination, but you don't know why exactly. And the shooting sends a clearer message (whatever it is) than the other means of execution, which are not so targeted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wall Street Journal confirms a leaked document from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) reveals that the weapon found near the site of Charlie Kirk’s assassination was equipped with cartridges engraved with symbols and phrases tied to transgender and Antifa ideology.

If true, who's to say this isn't a false flag?

You’re totally right because the trans community doesn’t have any recent history of violence and shooting people……

Yeah but who'd be dumb enough to mark their rifle with identifying symbols, and then leave it to be found? And what a convenient "leak".

Also, trans community violence is dwarfed in comparison to right wing extremist violence.

On a per capita basis? Are you serious?

It's a little too convenient that this "leak" happens right after DOJ is trying to ban trans people from owning guns.

And that Charlie was speaking about trans violence when he was shot.

Professional hit by Russia. Russia's goal is to sow division.

This is plausible. They have to sow further division after Poland.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn't gun violence; this was a targeted assassination of a major leader because of political views. If guns were outlawed, they would have poisoned him, run him over, killed him with a knife, bomb, etc

They killed him with a a gun. It’s gun violence. Don’t be a child.

Okay. And are you proposing we arrest everyone with a hunting rifle? What’s your point?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This isn't gun violence; this was a targeted assassination of a major leader because of political views. If guns were outlawed, they would have poisoned him, run him over, killed him with a knife, bomb, etc

Funny because in my neighborhood nobody is talking about this assassination since nobody knows who he was and he didn't hold public office. Of course, it is sad when anybody is killed, especially a parent of young children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
How quickly everyone forgets the victims of this type of horrific violence who are from BOTH sides of the aisle. This type of violence doesn't discriminate and it is perpetrated by deranged individuals regardless of their political affiliation; lunatics who should have had NO access to firearms.

Anyone remember Gabby Giffords? She was shot in an attempted assassination and permanently disabled. And that's just one victim in a long list of past and recent victims (recent, like MN Rep Hortman and MN Sen Hoffman).

I've been assured that conservatives are just as radicalized as the left because a homeless person attacked Paul Pelosi with a hammer and a democrat in Minnesota shot some other democrats.

Want other examples? Buffalo grocery shooter. Guy who fired 200 rounds at CDC, killing security officer. Arson at PA governor home. Jan 6, beating up cops, guy who parked a truck of homemade explosives and other weapons at Capitol building. Guy who drove car into No Kings protesters in Culpepper, VA.

Stop pretending it is one side. Horrible people exist, period.

Or the ADL . . . ."All extremist-related murders in 2024 were committed by right-wing extremists.""

https://www.adl.org/resources/press-release/adl-data-shows-extremist-related-murders-set-increase-2025-despite-third

If you include some killings motivated by hate and don't include others motivated by hate you get interesting results.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wall Street Journal confirms a leaked document from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) reveals that the weapon found near the site of Charlie Kirk’s assassination was equipped with cartridges engraved with symbols and phrases tied to transgender and Antifa ideology.

If true, who's to say this isn't a false flag?

You’re totally right because the trans community doesn’t have any recent history of violence and shooting people……

Yeah but who'd be dumb enough to mark their rifle with identifying symbols, and then leave it to be found? And what a convenient "leak".

Also, trans community violence is dwarfed in comparison to right wing extremist violence.

On a per capita basis? Are you serious?

It's a little too convenient that this "leak" happens right after DOJ is trying to ban trans people from owning guns.

Exactly. Which is why I think it’s our Reichstag fire. They will start with trans and they will use this as an excuse to shred more of our constitution and our rights and grab more power

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This isn't gun violence; this was a targeted assassination of a major leader because of political views. If guns were outlawed, they would have poisoned him, run him over, killed him with a knife, bomb, etc

He was not a leader. He was a podcaster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn't gun violence; this was a targeted assassination of a major leader because of political views. If guns were outlawed, they would have poisoned him, run him over, killed him with a knife, bomb, etc

He was not a leader. He was a podcaster.

I think thats where everyone is not understanding the impact he was a major leader and voice

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn't gun violence; this was a targeted assassination of a major leader because of political views. If guns were outlawed, they would have poisoned him, run him over, killed him with a knife, bomb, etc

It was with a bolt action hunting rifle, which is why these calls to link this with gun control are absurd. No one is banning bolt action hunting rifles. Even the most radical anti-gun posters would think that’d be impossible to do.

This is gross. So it’s okay if people murder with a bolt action hunting rifle? No need to do anything?!

[Anonymous]

https://www.businessinsider.com/fbi-white-supremacists-pose-the-primary-threat-of-domestic-terror-2022-11?op=1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question for those who say Charlie Lirk was a great person, nothing but respectful, only trying to do good in the world…

Do you think it’s a good thing that his organization (Turning Point USA) maintained a “Professor Watch List”? That list has led to people getting death threats and needing security to do their jobs. Would you want to be on such a list? Would that make you feel safe? Do you think putting people on a public list that results in them being targeted by unstable
individuals is a Christian thing to do?

I am really trying to understand how people can sort of paper over documented harmful actions like this. And I don’t wish to hear a whataboutism type argument about something a liberal did because that’s not the question at hand. It just seems to me that people are cherry picking certain actions and words to only paint CK in a good light simply because CK was on “their team”.

Oh and to be clear I am in no way trying to suggest that CK deserved what happened. There is no justification for murder. I am specifically trying to understand the current effort to paint an image that is not the full picture of what CK did and stood for.

When people die, humans have a custom of saying nice things about them rather than listing their shortcomings.

Sure, for people you know personally. But why go out of your way to practically canonize a public figure you have never met in a social media post, when there are documented things that person did which are not Christian?

I don’t think it helps anyone to act like someone never did a single harmful thing in their life and use that to paint one side as all good and one side as all evil.

Well sure. I’m not canonizing the guy, but I understand why people who admired him are. Not sure I understand the purpose of feigning confusion about this.

The only reason to say bad things about him at this point is to justify, excuse, or diminish his murder.

That said, I certainly agree that the current trend of painting the sides (whichever side you may be on) as good/evil is inaccurate and damaging.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump's personality is the root cause of the recent increase in political violence. He sews division and brings out the worst in people.

Right, so Charlie Kirk getting executed in cold blood during a college debate would be Trump’s fault—because his personality rubs people the wrong way?

DP. I think a lot of the blame lies with Republicans who for decades have stymied sensible gun control. Trump, in particular, quietly rolled back an Obama-era regulation that made it harder for people with mental illness to buy guns in 2017.

He’s also weaponizing Kirk’s death before his bumbling FBI has solved the case. Not to mention talking about Democrats as enemies of America.

While they are not to blame, they are not blameless.

Republicans pass HJRes 40
Also see Garland v Carhill
And recreational firearms use protection act that passed in 1994 (bush) expired in 2004

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn't gun violence; this was a targeted assassination of a major leader because of political views. If guns were outlawed, they would have poisoned him, run him over, killed him with a knife, bomb, etc

It was with a bolt action hunting rifle, which is why these calls to link this with gun control are absurd. No one is banning bolt action hunting rifles. Even the most radical anti-gun posters would think that’d be impossible to do.

But it's true that most mass shootings occur with weapons that should be banned. I blame the state of Utah and that campus specifically for being lax on security on this instance. There were fewer than 10 officers monitoring this event, and apparently... there wasn't even an ambulance, which protocol dictates should always be on hand for a large group event. This isn't an American thing. Every country that has ambulances knows you put an ambulance at a gathering. It comes automatically when you request a permit for your event.

Now of course none of these things might have saved Kirk, since he was shot directly in the jugular. That was a total fluke shot! But the odds are in favor of survival when police is more numerous and an ambulance is on site.

In short, much of what happened that day was entirely abnormal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn't gun violence; this was a targeted assassination of a major leader because of political views. If guns were outlawed, they would have poisoned him, run him over, killed him with a knife, bomb, etc

Funny because in my neighborhood nobody is talking about this assassination since nobody knows who he was and he didn't hold public office. Of course, it is sad when anybody is killed, especially a parent of young children.

Are you in an assisted living community? Funny that an entire neighborhood can be so clueless and uninformed.