Charlie Kirk, Turning Point USA founder, dead at 31 after Utah campus shooting

[Mayhem]

I’m referring to the political or belief leaning of the people who have carried out the political incidents. They’ve all been right wing voters or members. The two Trump attempters were both registered Republicans.

There’s been five recent school shootings attributed to trans shooters. That’s still less than 0.5% of the total school shootings carried out in the last 20 years! I mean, you’d agree surely, the problem is better looked at examining the other 99.5%? And what do we see? Vast majority are white male cisgender.

As for Tyler, I’d heard mention in the discourse about him earlier today that he was possibly a groyper, partly because of some of the memes and stuff carved on the bullets. Don’t know what that is? Here’s a decent explanation for you. But the group were actively anti Charlie Kirk, so it could be quite likely this was simply a personal grudge with no political ideology.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DOhFc...ducW82NG9lMQ==

[Andrew NDB]

It's looking like the guy was basically raised a conservative then at some point post-COVID became a radicalized leftie when he "suddenly became a lot more political." He was telling his friends that, "Charlie Kirk has a lot of hate in his heart" and didn't like Charlie's "viewpoints."

What viewpoints of Charlie's could possibly be worth killing him over that wouldn't be because they were the opposite of leftist viewpoints?

[FredWolfLeonardo]

The shooter was anti-Facist and Groypers are Pro-Facist. There is no way he was part of Nick Fuentes' Groypers especially when considering that Nick repeatedly disavows political violence.

[The Deadman]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

It's looking like the guy was basically raised a conservative then at some point post-COVID became a radicalized leftie when he "suddenly became a lot more political." He was telling his friends that, "Charlie Kirk has a lot of hate in his heart" and didn't like Charlie's "viewpoints."

What viewpoints of Charlie's could possibly be worth killing him over that wouldn't be because they were the opposite of leftist viewpoints?

Kirk is apparently highly religious and didn't support gay marriage but didn't want them dead, either.

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by Daytona

There is nothing right-wing about the trump assassination attempts, bc no evidence outweighs the action of attempting to blow someone’s head off. If that’s right-wing then right wing is no longer MAGA and the current leading party. Perhaps that’s a relevant point of discussion.

The right has been separate between MAGA and non-MAGA for a while now. I've seen some conservatives call Kirk a fake because apparently he's been trying to bring gays into conservative spaces and you know they just can't have that....

[ToTheNines]

That’s if the gun wasn’t planted by the FBI. Or he might be groyper and wrote all that **** to shift blame on the left.

I’m seeing both sides trying to pawn him off on the other. Gotta let the dust settle.

[Mayhem]

Originally Posted by FredWolfLeonardo

The shooter was anti-Facist and Groypers are Pro-Facist. There is no way he was part of Nick Fuentes' Groypers especially when considering that Nick repeatedly disavows political violence.

If you’re saying he was anti fascist off the back of the “hey fascist, catch!” inscription, it’s another quote from Helldivers 2, like the arrows command mentioned for summoning the largest bomb in the game. HD2, popular game in the groypers circle.

As said, I think it’s increasingly likely this was a personal grudge killing. Albeit apparently the groypers targeted Kirk because he toned down some of his messaging and was not longer considered right wing enough.

[ToTheNines]

Originally Posted by Mayhem

The stats show right wing violence over the last 25 years is 3-4 times more prevalent than left. And all the major political related incidents of the last ten years (including both Trump shootings) have been right. Until this one which we don’t know yet.

WRONG!

Crooks was essentially a ghost. No clue on his motive.

The second one might have been an even bigger liberal dunce than you.

Spoiler:

[Galactus]

Several members of the killer's family have spoken out and confirmed he was conservative and a big Donald Trump supporter that had been radicalised recently. They have not (to my knowledge) confirmed which way. If he was a big Nick Fuentes fanboy that assassinated Kirk for not being far right enough that would certainly fit a lot of the evidence that's is in the public domain.

I think a lot of the right is reluctantly coming around. The social media narrative on the right has gone from "trans shooter CIVIL WAR NOW!" to "antifa brainwashed by 1 semester of college" to "poor mentally ill young man. His motives don't matter. Do we have to politicize everything. We should pray for this lost soul."

[sdp]

The social media mental gymnastics have not let down. Both sides are showing what a bunch of clowns they are. It's really gratifying to see how they cope to fit their own narrative

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Galactus

Several members of the killer's family have spoken out and confirmed he was conservative and a big Donald Trump supporter that had been radicalised recently. They have not (to my knowledge) confirmed which way.

Conservative through COVID (because his whole family brought him up to be)... Trump gets reelected, suddenly he's willing to trade his life to kill... Charlie Kirk? I can't fathom how it can be a question of which way he radicalized into. Maybe he was still a republican but really didn't like Kirk's tax ideas? Is that it?

[Barkworm]

Are you guys intentionally leaving out the fact that Kirk said that MLK was "awful" and that the passing of the Civil Rights Act was a "huge mistake"? The guy was a lunatic.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Barkworm

Are you guys intentionally leaving out the fact that Kirk said that MLK was "awful" and that the passing of the Civil Rights Act was a "huge mistake"? The guy was a lunatic.

Cherry-picked stuff. Just like he "doesn't believe in empathy" but they always leave out the rest of what he said there. I'm not saying I agreed with him on everything (or really anything anytime he veered into "God's plan," etc.) but what the left is most maddest about from him is all B.S..

[FredWolfLeonardo]

The death of Charlie Kirk should not be reason to silence criticism of his views or the views of the Trump Administration.

I feel like the foundations of a crackdown are already being put in place, so that any criticism of Kirk, whether it be from the Left or the Far-Right Groypers, will be interpreted as complicity in his killing.

[Mayhem]

Sometimes I do know what I’m talking about

(partly because I am in a couple of highly dedicated videogame playing friend circles)

[Barkworm]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Cherry-picked stuff. Just like he "doesn't believe in empathy" but they always leave out the rest of what he said there. I'm not saying I agreed with him on everything (or really anything anytime he veered into "God's plan," etc.) but what the left is most maddest about from him is all B.S..

In other words: In your world, people can say the most racist things as long as their other opinions are overall okay with yours. But it probably just means that you are just as okay with the racist stuff. Yeah, I know you don't see race, blabla.

[Daytona]

Originally Posted by FredWolfLeonardo

The death of Charlie Kirk should not be reason to silence criticism of his views or the views of the Trump Administration.

I feel like the foundations of a crackdown are already being put in place, so that any criticism of Kirk, whether it be from the Left or the Far-Right Groypers, will be interpreted as complicity in his killing.

Oh no, you’re confused. See there’s a huge difference between criticism and dancing on someone’s fresh grave for having a different opinion.

No one is being told that they can’t criticize him. No one.

[Daytona]

Originally Posted by Barkworm

In other words: In your world, people can say the most racist things as long as their other opinions are overall okay with yours. But it probably just means that you are just as okay with the racist stuff. Yeah, I know you don't see race, blabla.

He didn’t say anything racist. Any example of that has been cherry picked in the same fashion as the “fine people on both
Sides…………………..” hoax.

[FredWolfLeonardo]

Originally Posted by Daytona

Oh no, you’re confused. See there’s a huge difference between criticism and dancing on someone’s fresh grave for having a different opinion.

I've already condemned the mocking of his death so I guess we're on the same page here. I just think alot of legitimate criticism will be shut down because said criticism will be seen as what led to his death in the first place, or 'dancing on his fresh grave' as you put it.

Originally Posted by Daytona

No one is being told that they can’t criticize him. No one.

Of course no one is gonna tell anyone directly to their face that they are not allowed to criticise Charlie Kirk, that would be too obvious. What will happen is that if someone openly criticises Charlie Kirk, they will be called things like a Radical Left Lunatic with the implicit connotation that they have blood on their hands and must be prosecuted.

[Daytona]

No I don’t see that happening at all. And it’s an odd place to put your concern imho.

It’s jumping ahead several steps. The takeaway is a man was murdered and an alarmingly large number of the left is dancing on his grave and have embraced an ideology of killing their political opponents and gloating about it. That’s what we are witnessing.

To see that and draw concern that you won’t be able to even criticize the man’s perspective in the future, just seems so beyond the pale. There’s really no evidence of that and we are seeing one side be punished simply for their political opinions and it’s not the left - it’s the guy who just got killed.