Charlie Kirk shot at Utah Valley University

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The shooter was a highly experienced sniper/marksman. One shot yet so precise from far away. The average person wouldn’t be able to do that. The shooter has some sort of military/government background for sure.I find it hard to believe some hare brained transgender kid was behind this.

Exactly. Military man...100%

There are thousands and thousands of young men in Utah and the Mountain West generally who grew up hunting and shooting. It's not Bethesda out there. Most people know how to handle a gun. Besides, it wasn't a perfect shot. No one aims for the neck. He either went for a head shot and hit low. Or a chest shot and hit high. There is nothing remarkable about the shot or the distance itself in the context of Utah.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s the video of the man in the white hat and guy next to him making signs that someone posted yesterday. This is a close up of the men and there’s nothing violent, fyi.

https://www.threads.com/@ryshead/post/DOcwTuVjho6?xmt=AQF0ih4JsFf6dVqShr8GxnF6EGvccRtPDuPhq7JPMcHQUA&slof=1

Just stop. The man with the white hat is part of Kirk’s group.

Then why are they making those gestures right as he got shot? Genuinely curious. Were they signaling to move onto the next question? Seems odd, no.

[Anonymous]

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?

Yes. Stochastic terrorism. He knows what he's doing--or at least he did before he his dementia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This sounds so fake. A transgender person running away from an assassination in Utah would stick out like a giraffe at a dog park.

They didn’t say a transgender person. It was someone that supported anti fa and trans ideology.

This person was smart enough to execute an assassination of a celebrity speaker so I would assume he would be smart enough to blend in.

And I would assume he'd be smart enough not to leave behind a rifle with identifying symbols on it. Unless he wanted to throw people off his trail.

Bingo.

NOT “bingo,” grandma. The NYC gunman left behind similar shell casings he hand-inscribed with similar anti-capitalist writings on them.

And that guy went to an Ivy. Your theory is dumb.

And the Annunciation school shooter, who was an actual transgender person, did not leave any shell casings with messages written on them. So what's your point?

Yes they did!

My bad, they did. But the messages were not trans or antifa symbols, or anything like that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The shooter was a highly experienced sniper/marksman. One shot yet so precise from far away. The average person wouldn’t be able to do that. The shooter has some sort of military/government background for sure.I find it hard to believe some hare brained transgender kid was behind this.

Exactly. Military man...100%

Why wouldn’t a real expert get a clesn head shot?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven't read all of the preceding 104 pages but it se me to me that the person responsible for the most hateful and dangerous talk is none other than Donald J. Trump. Without any evidence he blamed the left.

+1
Every accusation is a confession. Blaming an entire side of the political spectrum for this killing is preposterous and a blatant effort to justify retaliatory violence.

+1

When he started to accuse the other side without proof is when I started to think he was projecting...He projects a lot and accuses others of what he himself has done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The shooter was a highly experienced sniper/marksman. One shot yet so precise from far away. The average person wouldn’t be able to do that. The shooter has some sort of military/government background for sure.I find it hard to believe some hare brained transgender kid was behind this.

Exactly. Military man...100%

Lol. Anyone with an hour of training could make that shot. You obviously know absolutely nothing about guns

Oy vey. Comparing weekend warrior deer hunting and target practice to a public assassination from a freakin’ rooftop reveals your lack of brainpower. I guess you’re also choosing to overlook the man who seemed to serve as a distraction so the assassin could flee the scene?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Actually, the only reason not to list all the horrible things he’s done is because jeff asks people to wait 48 hours.

People can peruse his X feed and form their own opinions. I don't understand why people need to be told how to think. Read and form your own opinions.

The problem is that people don’t read or do any research. They go on social media, see posts that do not tell all sides of a story, and become outraged accordingly. Maybe some people who admired this guy would feel a little differently if they were fully aware of all of his actions and not just curated social media clips from events.

And I disagree that to point anything like this out is to justify or diminish what happened. We have a real problem in this country. We’re social media is used to distort or misrepresent the truth or hide certain pieces of information in order to get people all spun up. And I would be saying the same thing if we were talking about say a killing of a black person by the police. It’s a problem if people run to social media and only talk about how that person was a saint when maybe there is more to the story. People are forming opinions without having all of the facts and no one wants to put in any effort beyond scrolling their feeds, which only give them things that reinforce their existing beliefs.

I agree with you that people never go to the source.

But here the source, ie his actual words, and in favor of accepting a few deaths to safeguard the Second Amendment. You can say he's polite and courteous all you want, but that's lipstick on a pig. He espoused views that were extremely discriminatory, against various minority groups and women, and glorified gun violence.

Surely we can separate the content from the delivery? A smooth talker isn't automatically an angel.

Posts containing his direct quotes are being deleted from this thread almost instantly. That should tell you something.

It tells me that per site rules, we will be free to discuss the drawbacks of this deceased person 48 hours after he died.

Despite the fact that several other commenters have done so?

[Anonymous]

If only the Republicans were able to pass that law banning transgender from having guns. The timing and transgender “ Evidence” is in no way related.

After all we have professional running the FBI and ATF who would never plant “evidence” to support Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The shooter was a highly experienced sniper/marksman. One shot yet so precise from far away. The average person wouldn’t be able to do that. The shooter has some sort of military/government background for sure.I find it hard to believe some hare brained transgender kid was behind this.

and somebody said something about a 12 yr old doing it. However, CK's body guard was feet away and the shot was over many people's heads with cell phones held up. It's not the shot, it's the hit and that it didn't miss. That's why we know it was a pro and the bullet thing is a red herring.

Your claim is laughable.

Millions of Americans could easily have made that shot.

Drop your ignorant conspiracy theory and try doing an iota of research.

Yep. The shot was high and really not a good shot. Most hunters or military trained would have hit the chest. It was not a hard shot. A shot grouping at that range for an average shooter 3-4” inches and a good shooter is 2-3”. So this translates to an average shooter firing three shot which would all hit within a 3-4” circle at 200 yard.

I read one interview with an ex-sniper (miltary) and he seemed to believe the bullet was aimed at his chest but was deflected by Kirk's body armor under his shirt (you can see it more clearly when the bullet hits - the outline of the armor jumps out). With the deflection it went straight up into his neck. An already deformed bullet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

He had the ear of the POTUS. Stop trying to minimize his importance.

Random podcasters don’t get assassinated for political reasons.

Well, he DID just break from his talking points and demand the release of the Epstein files. That could have upset some powerful people. Especially Trump.

How long ago did he demand them? This could be a reason. Laura Loomer herself, good buddy to Trump, was calling Ck out for his comments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Charlie deserves the Presidential Medal of Freedom. He is a national hero.

Why do you think he's a hero? Can you explain your dramatically watered-down version of what a hero is?

Heroes are people who weren’t captured.

[Anonymous]

This news article says

https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/charlie-kirk-shot

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The shooter was a highly experienced sniper/marksman. One shot yet so precise from far away. The average person wouldn’t be able to do that. The shooter has some sort of military/government background for sure.I find it hard to believe some hare brained transgender kid was behind this.

Exactly. Military man...100%

Why wouldn’t a real expert get a clesn head shot?

These people claiming the shot required expertise are wrong, and are only doing so to push their conspiracy theories. The shooter was not a trained assassin. No one aims for head or neck shots. The shot did not require a high degree of skill and almost certainly missed high (they were aiming for the body).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This sounds so fake. A transgender person running away from an assassination in Utah would stick out like a giraffe at a dog park.

This transgender thread sure keeps everyone not noticing how much money TPUSA "earned" and how CK made his money...