Charlie Kirk shot at Utah Valley University

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s a two minute video of Charlie Kirk being racist:

Thanks for posting this, PP.

I still don't like him, but great to see that he was complex like many humans often are.

Is the idea that because he had polite conversations with a couple of black guys, he wasn't racist? Why do white people act like the only racism that exists is people Klan robes screaming the N word? Charlie Kirk was a white nationalist and a racist. That he could carry on a polite conversation with someone of a different race does not change that fact, and it doesn’t add to his "complexity."

He made racism palatable for the masses who want affirmation they’re not bad for having these thoughts. He rationalizes hatred under the guise of academic debate and with the veneer of Christianity. So if you call CK a racist then you’re calling his supporters racist. And they don’t want to believe that narrative. Hence lashing out at the “lunatic leftists” who are calling them on their BS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who pronounced Charlie dead?

And why have no photos of his body been released?

He’s dead, right? That’s what they claim. So there’s no HIPPA laws that apply. If he’s dead, we should have photos of the autopsy or evidence.

Things that make you go hmmmmmm.

Wtf? Why on earth would they need an autopsy? The world saw how he got killed. He was already in an open casket getting kissed by his wife the day after the shooting. Why would he need to be in the morgue on ice for two weeks?

Because they can do a ballistics investigation. Doesn’t the FBI want to know where the bullet came from to use in a murder investigation and trial?

No just shut up, he was shot by Tyler Robinson because Tyler has a trans girlfriend. There’s no evidence of Tyler holding a gun, no witnesses to Tyler shooting the gun, there are believable texts of Tyler confession, no EMT/ED/medical records or autopsy. Just accept it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So he bled out all over the SUV?

They likely had a BleedStop or other gunshot wound control patch kit.

No, all they had was a dirty sock tourniquet and hope.

Did you make that up? What would you apply a tourniquet to when the victim’s carotid artery has been destroyed?

In such a situation, you grab the first thing available and apply it as a tourniquet hoping it will hopefully stop or at least delay the bleeding long enough to get the victim to the hospital or ambulance for a blood transfusion and more effective means to stop the bleeding.

I doubt there was someone nearby who looked at Charlie’s wound and declared, “Artery destroyed, no hope. Don’t try to save him. ”

I wasn’t sure YOU knew what a tourniquet is and how it works. I guess the “dirty sock tourniquet” comment was just a very awkward way of saying they didn’t have anything useful at their disposal, certainly nothing that could save Charlie.

Clearly you don’t understand his injury, what a tourniquet is, or how it is used

Having an EMT assessment/report would have been nice.

Nice for whom?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So he bled out all over the SUV?

They likely had a BleedStop or other gunshot wound control patch kit.

No, all they had was a dirty sock tourniquet and hope.

Did you make that up? What would you apply a tourniquet to when the victim’s carotid artery has been destroyed?

In such a situation, you grab the first thing available and apply it as a tourniquet hoping it will hopefully stop or at least delay the bleeding long enough to get the victim to the hospital or ambulance for a blood transfusion and more effective means to stop the bleeding.

I doubt there was someone nearby who looked at Charlie’s wound and declared, “Artery destroyed, no hope. Don’t try to save him. ”

I wasn’t sure YOU knew what a tourniquet is and how it works. I guess the “dirty sock tourniquet” comment was just a very awkward way of saying they didn’t have anything useful at their disposal, certainly nothing that could save Charlie.

Clearly you don’t understand his injury, what a tourniquet is, or how it is used

Having an EMT assessment/report would have been nice.

Nice for whom?

Nice to have a thorough medical report.

[Anonymous]

Are we just going to gloss over the fact that those videos include Kirk saying that a person’s skin color doesn’t matter, but whether they’re Christian does?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here’s a two minute video of Charlie Kirk being racist:

Wait. We can’t quote Charlie Kirk or the MAGAs will try to cancel us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who pronounced Charlie dead?

And why have no photos of his body been released?

He’s dead, right? That’s what they claim. So there’s no HIPPA laws that apply. If he’s dead, we should have photos of the autopsy or evidence.

Things that make you go hmmmmmm.

Wtf? Why on earth would they need an autopsy? The world saw how he got killed. He was already in an open casket getting kissed by his wife the day after the shooting. Why would he need to be in the morgue on ice for two weeks?

Because they can do a ballistics investigation. Doesn’t the FBI want to know where the bullet came from to use in a murder investigation and trial?

Yeah, I think it's pretty standard to do ballistics and forensics analysis in a case like this. Are they just assuming the shooter shot from that roof because they have him on video? What if they did an analysis of the entrance and exit wounds and determined the bullet was shot from somewhere else. And did they find the bullet? You would think that would be reported -- i.e., the bullet exited Charlie and was found embedded in grass nearby, or whatever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are we just going to gloss over the fact that those videos include Kirk saying that a person’s skin color doesn’t matter, but whether they’re Christian does?

All religions are cults.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who pronounced Charlie dead?

And why have no photos of his body been released?

He’s dead, right? That’s what they claim. So there’s no HIPPA laws that apply. If he’s dead, we should have photos of the autopsy or evidence.

Things that make you go hmmmmmm.

Wtf? Why on earth would they need an autopsy? The world saw how he got killed. He was already in an open casket getting kissed by his wife the day after the shooting. Why would he need to be in the morgue on ice for two weeks?

Because they can do a ballistics investigation. Doesn’t the FBI want to know where the bullet came from to use in a murder investigation and trial?

Yeah, I think it's pretty standard to do ballistics and forensics analysis in a case like this. Are they just assuming the shooter shot from that roof because they have him on video? What if they did an analysis of the entrance and exit wounds and determined the bullet was shot from somewhere else. And did they find the bullet? You would think that would be reported -- i.e., the bullet exited Charlie and was found embedded in grass nearby, or whatever.

No one saw anyone shoot from the roof.

[Anonymous]

They’re not doing an autopsy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who pronounced Charlie dead?

And why have no photos of his body been released?

He’s dead, right? That’s what they claim. So there’s no HIPPA laws that apply. If he’s dead, we should have photos of the autopsy or evidence.

Things that make you go hmmmmmm.

Wtf? Why on earth would they need an autopsy? The world saw how he got killed. He was already in an open casket getting kissed by his wife the day after the shooting. Why would he need to be in the morgue on ice for two weeks?

Because they can do a ballistics investigation. Doesn’t the FBI want to know where the bullet came from to use in a murder investigation and trial?

Yeah, I think it's pretty standard to do ballistics and forensics analysis in a case like this. Are they just assuming the shooter shot from that roof because they have him on video? What if they did an analysis of the entrance and exit wounds and determined the bullet was shot from somewhere else. And did they find the bullet? You would think that would be reported -- i.e., the bullet exited Charlie and was found embedded in grass nearby, or whatever.

No one saw anyone shoot from the roof.

OMG! You have cracked this wide open!

[Anonymous]

Has anyone checked the footage from the grassy knoll yet?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No paramedics.
No doctor press conference.
No Medical examiner report.

Is no one else questioning this?

Why would doctors need to have a press conference? He was undoubtedly DOA at the hospital.

Do you know anything about basic human anatomy? When the carotid artery is blown out, that is an UNSURVIVABLE injury. Full stop. He undoubtedly exsanguinated within 1-2 minutes, his heart pumping the volume of his blood out of the 30.06 crater in his neck while his brain quickly died from lack of O2.

The medical examiner report will be in the custody of the Utah County Attorney's office shortly, if not already. Sorry it doesn't get uploaded to the interwebs the day after somebody dies. All you folks are demonstrating is a total ignorance of the reality of what happens in law enforcement, because you think it's like CSI or NCIS where these things are done before the next commercial break.

They truly have no damn clue

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So he bled out all over the SUV?

They likely had a BleedStop or other gunshot wound control patch kit.

No, all they had was a dirty sock tourniquet and hope.

Did you make that up? What would you apply a tourniquet to when the victim’s carotid artery has been destroyed?

In such a situation, you grab the first thing available and apply it as a tourniquet hoping it will hopefully stop or at least delay the bleeding long enough to get the victim to the hospital or ambulance for a blood transfusion and more effective means to stop the bleeding.

I doubt there was someone nearby who looked at Charlie’s wound and declared, “Artery destroyed, no hope. Don’t try to save him. ”

Shouldn't there be a medical expert at every large event just in case we need this kind of ruling?

There was discussion at the beginning of this thread that an event of 3000 people should have an ambulance and more than six police officers present, yes.

So, isn't it suspicious that this event didn't have that? Who paid off the university officials to ignore basic safety concerns?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They’re not doing an autopsy?

I’m not aware of an announcement one way or the other.