Charlie Kirk shot at Utah Valley University

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the result when a wacko lib can’t win an argument

Don't forget about 2A. This is the result of that as well.

2A is the right to own a gun, not the right to kill people you don’t agree with.

Guns kill.

Lotta things kill people.

Yes, they do. The 2A got Kirk, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the result when a wacko lib can’t win an argument

Don't forget about 2A. This is the result of that as well.

2A is the right to own a gun, not the right to kill people you don’t agree with.

Guns kill.

Lotta things kill people.

Tell me what else an assassin 200 yards away could have used to murder Charlie Kirk.

[Anonymous]

Disturbing video of another angle of the assassination of Kirk.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the result when a wacko lib can’t win an argument

Don't forget about 2A. This is the result of that as well.

2A is the right to own a gun, not the right to kill people you don’t agree with.

Guns kill.

Lotta things kill people.

Yes, they do. The 2A got Kirk, though.

No. A deranged hateful maniac got Kirk. That, or someone who was paid a lot of money.

[Anonymous]

Yes the right will absolutely make things safe by providing more troops. Can you explain how that would help in this situation tho?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let this be a step towards gun reform.

I pray for an end to political violence in our nation.

That would be sad if the murdering of 25 5/6 yr olds didn't move the needle on gun control but the death of a man who accepted that deaths were inevitable for owning guns spurs gun control.

But, if it does, I'm all for it. But, I highly doubt it. Kirk didn't want more gun control. This would be spitting in his face, so to speak.

Well, he's gone now. Let's make the world better for his kids, regardless of his position.

I would be happy about that, but do you think his wife would support that knowing her husband's stance on guns?

I’m sure she’s aware on his stance about communication. He was very clear that communicating with those who hold other beliefs is important. He said that’s what keeps us from civil war.

I’m with the PP. Wouldn’t it be nice if we could actually speak with one another instead of flinging hate around? And that goes for both political parties.

PP who suggested we should make the world better for his children (and for ours): I’m in agreement.

-moderate

That doesn't answer what I asked.

Do you think she would support tighter gun control knowing Kirk's stancew on it?

What makes you think she isn’t aware of his stance on gun control? I suspect they’ve had that talk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the result when a wacko lib can’t win an argument

Don't forget about 2A. This is the result of that as well.

2A is the right to own a gun, not the right to kill people you don’t agree with.

Guns kill.

Lotta things kill people.

Tell me what else an assassin 200 yards away could have used to murder Charlie Kirk.

Yes, I think this goes beyond gun rights. He was silenced. I hope we find out who gave the order.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the result when a wacko lib can’t win an argument

Don't forget about 2A. This is the result of that as well.

2A is the right to own a gun, not the right to kill people you don’t agree with.

Guns kill.

Lotta things kill people.

Yes, they do. The 2A got Kirk, though.

No. A deranged hateful maniac got Kirk. That, or someone who was paid a lot of money.

we get it. you don't understand the concerns the vast majority of americans have about guns. jog on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the result when a wacko lib can’t win an argument

Don't forget about 2A. This is the result of that as well.

2A is the right to own a gun, not the right to kill people you don’t agree with.

Guns kill.

Lotta things kill people.

Yes, they do. The 2A got Kirk, though.

No. A deranged hateful maniac got Kirk. That, or someone who was paid a lot of money.

With a gun.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the result when a wacko lib can’t win an argument

Don't forget about 2A. This is the result of that as well.

2A is the right to own a gun, not the right to kill people you don’t agree with.

Guns kill.

Lotta things kill people.

Yes, they do. The 2A got Kirk, though.

No. A deranged hateful maniac got Kirk. That, or someone who was paid a lot of money.

Sure, sure

I'm sure someone could have payed a lot of money to hire a circus knife thower to take out Kirk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let this be a step towards gun reform.

I pray for an end to political violence in our nation.

That would be sad if the murdering of 25 5/6 yr olds didn't move the needle on gun control but the death of a man who accepted that deaths were inevitable for owning guns spurs gun control.

But, if it does, I'm all for it. But, I highly doubt it. Kirk didn't want more gun control. This would be spitting in his face, so to speak.

Well, he's gone now. Let's make the world better for his kids, regardless of his position.

I would be happy about that, but do you think his wife would support that knowing her husband's stance on guns?

I’m sure she’s aware on his stance about communication. He was very clear that communicating with those who hold other beliefs is important. He said that’s what keeps us from civil war.

I’m with the PP. Wouldn’t it be nice if we could actually speak with one another instead of flinging hate around? And that goes for both political parties.

PP who suggested we should make the world better for his children (and for ours): I’m in agreement.

-moderate

That doesn't answer what I asked.

Do you think she would support tighter gun control knowing Kirk's stancew on it?

What makes you think she isn’t aware of his stance on gun control? I suspect they’ve had that talk.

Right, so why would you think she would want tighter gun control after this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the result when a wacko lib can’t win an argument

Don't forget about 2A. This is the result of that as well.

2A is the right to own a gun, not the right to kill people you don’t agree with.

Guns kill.

Lotta things kill people.

Tell me what else an assassin 200 yards away could have used to murder Charlie Kirk.

Yes, I think this goes beyond gun rights. He was silenced. I hope we find out who gave the order.

Clearly, we need to find out what happened. Probably an online radicalized lone shooter, just like most of the shooters are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did Trump lower the flag when democratic lawmakers were shot and killed recently?

I said that up thread.. Of course he didn't. He's very partisan and divisive and this is what MAGA supports.

But, somehow, Dems, who also support tighter gun control and help for the mentally ill, are the ones who are evil.

MAGA are truly sick.

He did lower the flag for the MN lawmakers. Why are you lying?

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/08/honoring-the-victims-of-the-tragedy-in-minneapolis-minnesota/

That was the school shooting. The assassinations were in June.

Thank you!!!

Here's Trump's response to the MN Dem senator shooting

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-call-walz-after-minnesota-shootings-calls-grossly/story?id=122870353

"I think the governor of Minnesota is so whacked out. I'm not calling him," Trump said. "Why would I call him? I could call and say, 'Hi, how you doing?' Uh, the guy doesn't have a clue. He's a mess. I could be nice and call, but why waste time?"

Walz’s team responded later Tuesday to Trump’s comments on Air Force One.

“Gov. Walz wishes that President Trump would be a President for all Americans, but this tragedy isn’t about Trump or Walz. It’s about the Hortman family, the Hoffman family, and the State of Minnesota, and the Governor remains focused on helping all three heal,” said Teddy Tschann, a spokesperson for the Governor.

No, that was his response when asked if he would be calling the governor of MN. His response regarding the shooting was more appropriate and direct:

“‘Such horrific violence will not be tolerated in the United States of America,’ President Trump wrote in a Truth Social post. ‘God Bless the great people of Minnesota, a truly great place!’ he added.”

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/5350808-trump-lawmakers-react-to-horrific-shooting-of-minnesota-legislators/

[Anonymous]

Rest peacefully, CK.