Charlie Kirk shot!

[Chrissy1979]

1 minute ago, gatomontes99 said:

How weak is your ideology when it can't shed the fringe for fear of losing power?

Exactly. You guys can’t even disavow Fuentes for getting Kirk shot. You have to make up stories to compensate.

[CouchPotato]

36 minutes ago, SkyHigh said:

Except the right to operate a motor vehicle you must first take classes to learn how, then you are tested to make sure you have the mental and physical abilities to conduct yourself safely on the road and even minor infractions can result in fines, the loss of the privilege and even incarceration.

Oh ya, that and the primary use of automobiles is not to kill things 

 

I have already acknowledged that there are many difference between the two. The point is that with any freedom there are going to be risks, even some deaths that could be mitigated by restricting that freedom. You may not think the risks are worth it with regard to the second amendment. Charlie did. I don't think he put it well in that moment. But what he said was not heartless.

39 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

It’s well known Kirk and Fuentes were publicly fighting so, yeah, it makes sense.

I suppose it's possible, Chrissy. But that is one hell of a leap. Are podcasters turning into to Biggie and Tupac now? What's next... is Mr. Beast going to put out a hit on Cenk Uygur?

Edited September 13, 2025 by CouchPotato

[Chrissy1979]

12 minutes ago, CouchPotato said:

 

I suppose it's possible, Chrissy. But that is one hell of a leap. Are podcasters turning into to Biggie and Tupac now? What's next... is Mr. Beast going to put out a hit on Cenk Uygur?

Much, much less of a leap than claiming he was a trans activist. 

[Fluffypants]

39 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

A former high school classmate said, “When I knew him and his family, they were like diehard Trump,” recalling Robinson’s conservative stance in 2020 at Desert Hills High School in St. George, Utah. “When this happened, I was like… I don’t know what changed.”

https://localstories247.com/charlie-kirk-shooter-tyler-robinson-was-a-diehard-trump-supporter-report/

 

Shit my entire family are NY Giants fans except for my sister who loves the cowboys (i think it was to tick off my mother). Hell my entire family is conservative except my super liberal brother.

Edited September 13, 2025 by Fluffypants

[gatomontes99]

16 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

Exactly. You guys can’t even disavow Fuentes for getting Kirk shot. You have to make up stories to compensate.

Check again sweetums. Fuentes tends to vote democrat. Every conservative has shuned the guy. We have no need or want for him. 

You, on the other hand, have to lie about this evil a-hole in Utah. You have to try to make him right by association. 

Here is reality:

*************

https://people.com/tyler-robinson-had-talked-to-family-about-charlie-kirk-before-assassination-says-governor-11808767

 Cox relayed the account of a family member, who said that during a family dinner prior to the shooting, Robinson had mentioned that Kirk was coming to Utah Valley University.

"They talked about why they didn’t like him and the viewpoints that he had,” the governor said, adding that the suspect said that "Kirk was full of hate and spreading hate."

*************

You are trying to tell us he killed Charlie because he didn't hate certain groups while at the same time he was telling his family that Charlie Kirk was full of hate. 

Your fantasy is just a fantasy. The kid was radicalized left. But you can't say "that fringe nut job has no place in our ideology" because you would alienated thousands, if not hundreds of thousands like him.

I have looked into what Fuentes says he believes. I find it vile and I have no problem saying that. I have no problem alienating his followers. Neither does any politician in DC. But Illhan Omar was on a podcast espousing the same hate filled rhetoric that the evil a-hole said about Charlie. 

You guys can't alienate the fringe because the fringe is the base. 

[User]

32 minutes ago, SkyHigh said:

Of course not dîpshit, I was being facetious to show how ridiculous your analogy was.

Again the intended purpose of swimming pools is not to kill things, it is with guns

Again, the point was that people die from swimming pools either way... so, I guess you accept that it is OK that people drown?

Again, killing people is not bad when it is done in self-defense or to protect people or your nation from those who wish to conquer you. 

33 minutes ago, SkyHigh said:

Add to that the fact that there are regulations governing pools, you must have a fence around the pool to prevent people from accidentally fall in and in some cases you're required to have a cover for the pool. Not to mention most kids take swimming lessons and any responsible pool owner would make sure anyone using their pool had the requisite swimming ability and if they didn't there are flotation devices to ensure safety.

There are regulations governing guns... 

34 minutes ago, SkyHigh said:

46'000 gun deaths vs. 350 pool drownings, not to mention it's the leading cause of child deaths 

So again a ridiculous analogy 

Except... guns didn't just magically kill people, most of those deaths are suicides. So, now you find it acceptable as long as people kill themselves with rope, prescription drugs, or jumping off bridges?

Again, you continue to ignore the point of the analogy. 

 

[User]

1 hour ago, Chrissy1979 said:

Right. You’ll just pretend it’s all a lie and you’re being tricked by the much smarter leftists. Like usual.

No, I clearly pointed out your lies yesterday and you ignored that. 

I am not pretending anything. 

 

35 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

Exactly. You guys can’t even disavow Fuentes for getting Kirk shot. You have to make up stories to compensate.

Where do you get that Fuentes got Kirk shot?

You are the one making up crap. 

 

[User]

1 hour ago, SkyHigh said:

Except the right to operate a motor vehicle you must first take classes to learn how, then you are tested to make sure you have the mental and physical abilities to conduct yourself safely on the road and even minor infractions can result in fines, the loss of the privilege and even incarceration.

Oh ya, that and the primary use of automobiles is not to kill things 

 

Speaking of stupid comparisons... you don't need a license to drive a motor vehicle on your own property. These things apply to PUBLIC roadways. 

And yet... automobiles still kill some 40,000 people a year. Do you "accept" those deaths as OK?

 

[SkyHigh]

1 hour ago, User said:

Then you go off saying his assassination was God ordained? You are off the rails man. 

Nope, I don't think there are any God given rights. Im an atheist , also I don't think anyone outside of properly trained peace officers, hunters and farmers that may need to protect their livelyhood from wild animals (Im sure there are other isolated instances im ignorant to as well) should be allowed to be in possession of a fire arm unless at a designated, regulated shooting range 

That was Mr. Kirks opinion and if you follow his logic it would go something like this 

I want to take a moment here to reiterate, that though I didn't agree with most of what he said, any expression of violence towards someone expressing his views has no place in society and should be an issue that rises and lives above any form of partisanship, it was a tragedy period. 

I think it's also important to reflect on what may perpetuate such incidents and Mr. Kirk willingly fan flames. AGAIN he didn't deserve any harm no less death, but HIS words on the matter do seem relevant

Premise 1: God has ordained all things according to his will

Premise 2: GODs will granted Americans  the right to own guns 

Premise 2: Many people die needlessly and violently because of that right 

Premise 3: Those deaths are "worth it" to uphold that right 

Premise 4: Everything is part of God's Plan *we are of course speaking about the tri-omni Christian god as defined by Mr.Kirk himself 

Conclusion : GOD has ordained that people will die needlessly 

Unfortunately in this case it was Mr. Kirk. I don't think it's worth it . GOD apparently does. Do you?

[User]

10 minutes ago, SkyHigh said:

Nope, I don't think there are any God given rights. Im an atheist

God-given or not, the founding of our Constitution and the entire concept of a Bill of Rights are that these things are rights men have by the fact they are men at all, not given by government. 

You don't have to believe in God to grasp the concept of inherent rights. 

12 minutes ago, SkyHigh said:

I don't think anyone outside of properly trained peace officers, hunters and farmers that may need to protect their livelyhood from wild animals (Im sure there are other isolated instances im ignorant to as well) should be allowed to be in possession of a fire arm unless at a designated, regulated shooting range 

Yeah, I got that. In the meantime, we have a 2nd Amendment and gun ownership in this nation. 

13 minutes ago, SkyHigh said:

That was Mr. Kirks opinion and if you follow his logic it would go something like this 

I didn't follow Kirk enough to know his doctrinal positions on faith, but it appears you are making a general case about Calvinism, in that God preordains all things, and if that is your point... OK. To that point though, Kirks death was no more or less ordained by God than your posting here on this forum was. 

15 minutes ago, SkyHigh said:

Unfortunately in this case it was Mr. Kirk. I don't think it's worth it . GOD apparently does. Do you?

Worth it how? Is driving a car worth the 40,000 dead every year? Is modern medicine worth the 200,000 malpractice deaths every year? Is having a swimming pool worth the drownings every year?

 

[robosmith]

2 hours ago, Shady said:

Start your own business.  You can work whatever hours you like.  We have a universal wait list, that can’t be reformed because of Liberals.  

You really don't know how the world works Shoddy and you didn't answer the question.

2 hours ago, Shady said:

Libtards are the worst.  Guy has a trans partner as well.  But libtards want us to believe that the guy was maga, but killed Kirk, who was also maga.  Makes absolutely no sense.  All to cover for their mental illness.

lDIOTS like you and your ad hominems are the worst. Go fck yourself.

[CdnFox]

6 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

It must be hell to live with that much hate in your heart. 

 It gets easier with no brain in her head. 

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Chrissy1979 said:

Much, much less of a leap than claiming he was a trans activist. 

He wrote pro trans stuff on his weapon and bullets  LOLOL

Proving you're a liar is about as hard as proving the sun comes up in the east   

[Nationalist]

@Libbies - You maybe thought the temperature might lower as a result of this?

 

Yet you bstards just can't help but be social refuse.

Ya gits wut ya pays fer.

This POS certainly did.

Edited September 13, 2025 by Nationalist

[Chrissy1979]

19 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

He wrote pro trans stuff on his weapon and bullets  LOLOL

Proving you're a liar is about as hard as proving the sun comes up in the east   

What pro trans stuff did he write? 
 

I’ll wait if you need time.

[User]

13 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

What pro trans stuff did he write? 
 

I’ll wait if you need time.

You ever going to own up to this lie of yours?
 

 

[Hodad]

6 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

I would posit that fighting back isn't the answer. When a faction starts behaving like a 2 year old and tries to enforce their will through violence, they should be ignored because their behavior is unacceptable to a civilized society. 

If only this post were from January 7, 2021, someone might be able to take it seriously. 

Or maybe if these posts were coming from people who haven't been defending and cheering excusing and laughing about political violence for years. 

Or from people who didn't vote back into office the man who sicced the violent mob on the legislature--and then watched the spectacle on TV.

Or if that man hadn't pardoned his violent mob and put them back on the streets. 

 

But with all that history it's pretty hard to take seriously MAGA America's "sudden awakening" to the idea that political violence is unacceptable. 

But better late than never, I guess. Welcome to the impeachment movement!

 

Edited September 13, 2025 by Hodad

[Chrissy1979]

29 minutes ago, User said:

You ever going to own up to this lie of yours?
 

 

I already said that was based on false information. Just waiting for Cdnfox to verify his assertion. Might take a long time, but I’m sure you’ll hold his feet to the fire like when he was lying to defend an allegation that Trump is a paedo.

[BeaverFever]

On 9/12/2025 at 11:15 AM, User said:

Another outright lie, my examples were recent to the last decade and I clearly showed how they were associated to the left. 

But this is the dishonest practice you engage in. You run away from those discussions like the cowardly liar you are and then lie about them again later. 

The weather underground is one example you mentioned and is not recent to the last decade. You mentioned the few examples that are recent and most were from decades past. And even then some have only limited connection to “the left”. Most of the people rioting over George Floyd and similar killings were not politically left or political at all they were protesting that one specific issue. 
 

On 9/12/2025 at 11:15 AM, User said:

I don't have to prove what else he was saying to point out the context here and show you what he has not said. 

So you admit you can’t even fathom any alternative meaning for what he said but we should assume he meant something different than what he actually said. That’s hilarious. 

[BeaverFever]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

@Libbies - You maybe thought the temperature might lower as a result of this?

 

Yet you bstards just can't help but be social refuse.

Ya gits wut ya pays fer.

This POS certainly did.

Thank you for the example of more right wing violent mobs attacking people who say things they don’t like. 

[BeaverFever]

From US DOJ:

 

What NIJ Research Tells Us About Domestic Terrorism

Militant, nationalistic, white supremacist violent extremism has increased in the United States. In fact, the number of far-right attacks continues to outpace all other types of terrorism and domestic violent extremism. Since 1990, far-right extremists have committed far more ideologically motivated homicides than far-left or radical Islamist extremists, including 227 events that took more than 520 lives.[1] In this same period, far-left extremists committed 42 ideologically motivated attacks that took 78 lives.[2]

 

https://web.archive.org/web/20250911012550/https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/what-nij-research-tells-us-about-domestic-terrorism

[gatomontes99]

48 minutes ago, Hodad said:

If only this post were from January 7, 2021, someone might be able to take it seriously. 

Or maybe if these posts were coming from people who haven't been defending and cheering excusing and laughing about political violence for years. 

Or from people who didn't vote back into office the man who sicced the violent mob on the legislature--and then watched the spectacle on TV.

Or if that man hadn't pardoned his violent mob and put them back on the streets. 

 

But with all that history it's pretty hard to take seriously MAGA America's "sudden awakening" to the idea that political violence is unacceptable. 

But better late than never, I guess. Welcome to the impeachment movement!

 

I really have a hard time refuting fantasy land. If you want ti talk about reality, I am all for it. 

For one, I wasn't in here for J6, so you have no idea what my stance was. It was, and will always be, those that committed violence should be prosecuted. That woman that died did a stupid thing. But the government wasn't innocent. They fired canisters into the crowd. They had undercover agents in the crowd. They had CIs in the crowd. What role(s) did these people play? It was wrong to prosecute people that never entered the Capitol building. It was wrong to suggest that some broke in when they Capitol police escorted them around. It was a lie to say Pelosi did not turn down Trump's offer of NG troops. It was a lie to say Trump intentionally incited those people. 

So when you want to talk reality  I am here. But if you want to stay in your lala fantasy land, just move on.

 

[User]

28 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

The weather underground is one example you mentioned and is not recent to the last decade. You mentioned the few examples that are recent and most were from decades past. And even then some have only limited connection to “the left”. Most of the people rioting over George Floyd and similar killings were not politically left or political at all they were protesting that one specific issue. 

Again, this is an outright lie. You are nothing but a sad pathetic cowardly liar.

My list, the one you have repeatedly run away from and lied about:

Here is a list for you:

-2020 BLM Vioence
-Support for violence against ICE now
-Firebombing PA Gov Home
-Congressional Baseball shooting 2017
-Attempted murder of Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh
-The something like 100 pro-life preganancy centers that have been attacked since Roe v Wade was overturned
-The Catholic churches attacked since Roe V Wade was overturned
-The targetting of Teslas and Tesla dealerships
-The various mass shootings by Transgender folks
 

 

46 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

So you admit you can’t even fathom any alternative meaning for what he said but we should assume he meant something different than what he actually said. That’s hilarious. 

What is hilarious is how you ignored my whole comment. You run away like the coward you are. 

 

[User]

1 hour ago, Chrissy1979 said:

I already said that was based on false information. Just waiting for Cdnfox to verify his assertion. Might take a long time, but I’m sure you’ll hold his feet to the fire like when he was lying to defend an allegation that Trump is a paedo.

You never admitted it was based on false information. Are you lying again?

If you want to claim this BS now, then show us what false information you were using at the time. Lets see it. 

 

[User]

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

If only this post were from January 7, 2021, someone might be able to take it seriously. 

Or maybe if these posts were coming from people who haven't been defending and cheering excusing and laughing about political violence for years. 

Or from people who didn't vote back into office the man who sicced the violent mob on the legislature--and then watched the spectacle on TV.

Or if that man hadn't pardoned his violent mob and put them back on the streets. 

 

But with all that history it's pretty hard to take seriously MAGA America's "sudden awakening" to the idea that political violence is unacceptable. 

But better late than never, I guess. Welcome to the impeachment movement!

 

You can't actually engage with what people have actually said here, so you make up this crap to argue against instead.