Because he was a human being with a wife and two young children, we are human or we are inhuman and the minute we point to individuals or groups and see them as inhuman they are simply meat and deserve whatever punishment we can dole out to them. I am a human and despite whatever you believe, no matter how much it offends or disgusts me, you are a human too and deserve mercy.
A building being set on fire is exactly the same as a man being shot dead in front of his wife and kids
Sad for his family but if you actively promote guns in society it’s a possible consequence. What’s your view on the fire or is that ok as it’s a Labour politician who could have been possibly inside with her family?
I didn’t know about it until I seen your post. I’m glad nobody was hurt because I’m not a hate filled ****, like yourself. Why hasn’t nobody mentioning his comment on guns put up the full speech? Context is everything.
You have a lot of class. I’m not calling people a **** because they disagree with me. is yours caring politics? Kirks shooting is appalling but if you peddle guns this is a sad consequence. No condemnation of the arson attack surprisingly? Perhaps someone could be seen as a hate filled ****?
I'm not getting into the politics of it all, ie left and right, but I was on lates last night, by the time I got home, fed and watered it was off to Bedfordshire. Fast forward to this morning and I checked youtube and seen "Charlie Kirk shot", I'm aware of his content and of who he is. Now, I'm a bloke of the world and know it isn't all "sunshine and rainbows" as Rocky once said, but I wish I hadn't clicked on the video as i thought it was a news report, Charlie sat in the chair, answered a question on mass shootings, moves the mic away from his mouth then his f**kin neck explodes, dead before he hit the ground, his security caught him,multiple angles of the same thing. It sickened me seeing it and I wish I hadn't. Been on my mind all day. Wife and two children there to see it all happening. Now I'm not a snowflake before anyone says, but once in a while you see something that turns your stomach.
I'm not going to get drawn too far into this, as experience has taught me the best, most guaranteed way to fall out with people is to argue over politics or religion. So, as dispassionately as I can, here's my views. Charlie Kirk was a vile, divisive personality. He hid behind his "approachable" and "open for debate" image to play to his base audience, videos edited to make him seem better. He never wanted someone to "change his mind", his views were fixed and it was about him being made to look reasonable and prepared to talk to the opposite side, even if in truth he didn't care what they had to say. His views on race, abortion, gun ownership, conspiracy theories amongst other were foul and promoted hate. He was a Christian Nationalist with all that that promoted including restrictions on individual rights and government via religious interpretation of laws. But he didn't deserve to be murdered. Sadly though, that's the situation America is in right now, political violence has become to be normalised and accepted. It's like an onion, layer upon layer and as you peel one away, you deal with another. America has a huge mental health crisis, funding for mental health support and help has been cut back since Reagan. Not just the street loonies, but early intervention and support for those with borderline issues. The next layer is the easy availability of guns, for every 100 Americans there are 120 guns. Not much in the way of background checks or restrictions other than you have to be 18 to buy a gun. But once bought from a licenced gun seller there's no restrictions on who you can sell to. The next layer is the removal of the "fairness doctrine" by Reagan that allows outlets to broadcast selective and biased "news" without a rebuttal from the opposite side. This created echo chambers, like Fox news, that only aimed at one section of American society. The next layer is social media and the lack of oversight on that preventing lies and disinformation being spread, creating more echo chambers. The first amendment has become twisted by this by allowing anything to be said (online) as the "right to free speech" (the same thing is happening here). Yes, you have the right to free speech, but with that comes the responsibility to not deliberately spread malicious falsehoods and you are responsible for the outcomes of your actions. If you say something that causes harm or encourages harm to someone, it's on your head. You can't just claim it's your right to free speech and that can say whatever you want. But now in America it's become that way, making opposite views "the other" and demonising them (and it's happening here now, trawl Facebook or twitter and you'll see it in no time). It was said that the Republican campaign in 2011 against Gabby Giffords featuring her head in a target inspired the assassination attempt on her, even though her attacker wasn't politically affiliated and had a deep hatred of her. Add in the rampant conspiracy theories propagated on social media and it's easy to see how some can make the next step towards violence against the "other". The next layer is Trump himself. He stirred up the January 6th attack on the Capitol building and later pardoned the rioters. Remember, these people stormed the Capitol and were preparing to lynch the Speaker, Nancy Pelosi and Trump's own Vice President. Charlie Kirk was involved himself then as an organiser bussing rioters in. Once you put those layers together it's made political violence acceptable to some and Newtonian physics tells us that for every action there is a reaction. It's only a few weeks ago that a Democratic state Congress woman was murdered by a MAGA nutter. A reaction from a left wing nutter was always likely because "if they can use violence and murder their political opposition, why can't we/I do the same"? With the extremes on both sides being whipped into a frenzy, there'll be plenty out there on either side who will take the chance if they get it. Charlie Kirk, through his podcasts and activities helped shape the mess America is in now and as the sayings go you reap what you sow and if you live by the sword you risk dying by the sword. I won't shed a tear for him personally, but I will for American democracy. No matter how unpleasant he was, he didn't deserve to die for his political opinion. Condolences to his family, but I don't see this getting better for anyone any time soon.
Stop playing the victim, it doesn’t suit you. You asked (insulted) me by asking me if I thought the fire was okay because it may have killed a woman and her family. I responded to that by calling you a **** for it. I’m fine with that. I think you deserved it.
"The next layer is Trump himself. He stirred up the January 6th attack on the Capitol building and later pardoned the rioters. Remember, these people stormed the Capitol and were preparing to lynch the Speaker, Nancy Pelosi and Trump's own Vice President. Charlie Kirk was involved himself then as an organiser bussing rioters in." That was the moment I knew there was no longer any hope.
Great post. He didn't deserve to die, but now it's happened he also doesn't deserve any sympathy or mourning, imo. End of the day, the world is a better place without him in it
Rachel Stewart @stew_rachel · 18h "So the Greens and Labour have blocked a motion in Parliament to pay respect to Charlie Kirk. That tells you everything you need to know about the modern left."
Proves my point about social media. No oversight, twisted facts, someone from New Zealand commenting on UK politics, aimed to be picked up and retweeted by others of the same political viewpoint hoping to stir up more anger to people of the opposite view. Why should the UK parliament pay respects to a private American citizen? Can I demand that the US congress pay respect to Bradley Lowery? Or Connor Bradley?
Should we have black armbands and a minute's silence at Palace on Saturday, should we take the knee, should we pay a percentage of the ticket price to an Albanian donkey sanctuary ... ... no, of course we shouldn't. Trump had already been voted on, elected and given a mandate to govern for a few years as is democracy. Why did Charlie Kirk need to be on a campaign trail at all ... I've no idea tbh.
Said it for a long time. Too many idiots with guns been led by social media idiots who literally put the bullets in the gun. The world is full of apologists and extremists who like to be offended on behalf of someone else. Wish the whole lot would just grow the **** up and let people live their lives. There are potheads smack heads and degenerates profligating on the rules of society, be it on issues of tax or migrants or any other armchair topic. We have the loosely termed educated politicians who (apart from a few) seem morally and socially corrupt feeding the media machine lie after lie. I have seen a few Charlie Kirk videos and whilst I do not fully agree with all his standpoints he was good at framing his point of view. This whole debacle whilst upsetting is not surprising, as people today think they have the right to act in a holier than thou manner and dispense any kind of sentence they deem acceptable. ****wits the lot of them! Rant owa!
You are a vile hate filled person but sadly not alone in this country. We are in sad times. Kirk peddled hate and division and sadly for him a gun culture. Thousands of innocent kids have been killed in the US whilst him and his ilk have actively encouraged gun ownership. Sadly for him someone had a big gun that blatantly he shouldn’t have had to do what he did. When it comes to guns it shouldn’t be a political debate but right or wrong. However given the Republican Party are in hoc and receive significant funding from with the gun industry sadly it is political and many more innocent people are going to loose their lives through people like Kirk. As I have said it’s sad for Kirk’s family but if you live and actively promote gun culture you can’t have many complaints when someone who shouldn’t have had a gun shoots you.
There is. When something awful happens don't go looking for it. The so called social media algorithm will bombard you with filth you wished you hadn't seen.
Thats the thing though, I clicked a news link when the story broke and x has decided that my feed can now be full of videos etc of it. Should have stuck to the BBC website
Exactly. But what is important to understand is that it is both sides of the argument doing this, and driving this polarisation. It has to stop. This tribalism in politics is completely contrary to the purpose. I was half watching a piece about the Labour deputy leadership election on Sky News last night. Whoever was being interviewed started talking about doing "what is best for the Labour Party". No, they should be doing what is best for the country or for the people they are there to represent. The party, whichever one it is, should never come first. And neither should ideology.
