• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Charlie Kirk shot at (shot?) in Utah

Patel is such a clown. He's is talking here about the guy that was later released.

 
Well having read up on him it's clear he was a massive scumbag. I don't approve of murder but I think the world will be better off without him.

The hard part will be listing to all kinds of scumbags saying good things about this scumbag.
I spent all afternoon in my online game watching people argue over whether it's OK to be happy he isn't spreading his particularly Nazi-esque brand of hate anymore.

It seems everyone with a vested interest in condemning people for celebrating the death of a "man with a wife and children" are the same folks who secretly celebrate the furthering of Kirk's agenda, omitting the propaganda against others' existence (and against the gun control laws that could have saved him).
 
This is the kind of shit that has emboldened conservatives-turned-full blown fascist.
Really?
Where was this outrage and conciliatory respect from the right when Gretchen Whitmer was the target of a plot to kidnap, rape and murder her? Where was this sympathy when John Hoffman was murdered? What about Melissa and Mark Hortman?
That was wrong too, but two wrongs don't make a right.
Oh poor Charlie. Poor, poor, Charlie. Children murdered in schools are worth keeping military grade rifles available to the public.
Military-grade rifles are not available to the public. For regular school shootings, and other indoor shootings, handguns are preferable anyway. And for long distance there are hunting rifles with more firepower than an AR15 - for example 308 Winchesters.
Mental health facilities cost too much-----you know the ones that might've prevented some school shootings. It's alllllll good until it happens to poor motherfuckin' Charlie.
This is bipartisan. Conservatives because of the cost, but progressives did not like people getting involuntarily committed.
Liberals are afraid of the backlash? I've elucidated many times over why we're perceived as weak and easy to oppress, so I won't go through it again. Suffice it to say the backlash wouldn't be such a grave concern if the fascists had cause to be concerned.
I do not think violence it justified by speech you or I disagree with.
 
Detractors once smeared Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr. as “scumbags.”
Well, Malcolm Little (aka the 10th) was a racist scumbag. Doesn't justify him getting killed of course.

Note that Mr. Little was gunned down by some of his own, and TV&CC thinks that's the case with Kirk too. We shall see. Hopefully they catch the perp soon.
 
If Kirk was the intended target, that’s pretty good shooting - a kill at 200 yards.
Not an unusual skill in still air, depending on the weapon. The way it blew his neck open looked like a high velocity round. 200 yards with a .scoped .223 isn’t exactly a gimme, but close to it for a good shooter.
The longest confirmed sniper kill was reportedly by an anonymous Ukrainian sniper on August 14, 2025, at a distance of over 4,000 meters (approximately 2.5 miles), using a Snipex Alligator rifle to eliminate two Russian soldiers.
Was Charlie’s killing from 500+ feet a record distance for an American political killing?
(Assuming it wasn’t a jealous boyfriend of some chick who had a crush on Charlie)

This is all another baby step down the road to authoritarian global government. Sad to witness.
 
Well having read up on him it's clear he was a massive scumbag. I don't approve of murder but I think the world will be better off without him.
I’m not.sure the world will be better without ol’ Charlie. It would have been better if he had been struck down by a bolt of lightning, making it clear that god thought he was a scumbag too.
But ideally I hope my first conspiracy theory guess was correct - that explanation might produce the least harmful outcome.
 
Hey, it's what happens when you wear a tan suit and put dijon mustard on a hamburger. The fallout from that kind of reckless bullshit lasts years.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
One of things that keeps coming to mind is that yet another American school / college has become scarred with murder. The US is so scarred with school/campus murders, we are starting to look like a freak.
It wasn’t the only school shooting today.
Correct. We held our own little school shooting here in Colorado today. I’m glad our shooter died, and didn’t have to suffer the humiliation of knowing he wasn’t even going to make the front page.
Ours had more mayhem though, with multiple people shot. But the body count was the same, and nobody famous got hurt or killed, so we’ll have to try harder if we want any attention.
 
This is the kind of shit that has emboldened conservatives-turned-full blown fascist.
Really?
Where was this outrage and conciliatory respect from the right when Gretchen Whitmer was the target of a plot to kidnap, rape and murder her? Where was this sympathy when John Hoffman was murdered? What about Melissa and Mark Hortman?
That was wrong too, but two wrongs don't make a right.
Oh poor Charlie. Poor, poor, Charlie. Children murdered in schools are worth keeping military grade rifles available to the public.
Military-grade rifles are not available to the public. For regular school shootings, and other indoor shootings, handguns are preferable anyway. And for long distance there are hunting rifles with more firepower than an AR15 - for example 308 Winchesters.
Mental health facilities cost too much-----you know the ones that might've prevented some school shootings. It's alllllll good until it happens to poor motherfuckin' Charlie.
This is bipartisan. Conservatives because of the cost, but progressives did not like people getting involuntarily committed.
Liberals are afraid of the backlash? I've elucidated many times over why we're perceived as weak and easy to oppress, so I won't go through it again. Suffice it to say the backlash wouldn't be such a grave concern if the fascists had cause to be concerned.
I do not think violence it justified by speech you or I disagree with.
Don't even play the gun game with me. You're in over your head, you just don't know it.

Anyway, "two wrongs don't make a right?"

1. Okay mom.

2. Two wrongs in a certain context can make an important point.

So at what point should speech foment a violent reaction?

Is it when rights are lost?

Is it when people on the other side of the political system are murdered or are attempted to be murdered?

Is it when federal troops are stationed in cities that didn't vote for a grease-painted, monkey-brained sack of shit in an ill-fitting suit?

Is it when said monkey-brained fuck's supporters (see Charlie Kirk) espouse the same authoritarian bullshit?

Just sit back liberals, relax. It hurts less and won't take as long if you don't put up a fight.
 
Not an unusual skill in still air, depending on the weapon. The way it blew his neck open looked like a high velocity round. 200 yards with a .scoped .223 isn’t exactly a gimme, but close to it for a good shooter.
It's well within its effective range, but a bigger caliber would make it easier.
The longest confirmed sniper kill was reportedly by an anonymous Ukrainian sniper on August 14, 2025, at a distance of over 4,000 meters (approximately 2.5 miles),
That's an impressive shot, but it also required the target to be stationary for several seconds it takes for the bullet to travel.
using a Snipex Alligator rifle to eliminate two Russian soldiers.
Now that's a BFG! It fires a 14.5×114mm. That's even bigger than a .50 BMG.
This is all another baby step down the road to authoritarian global government. Sad to witness.
It is certainly not good, for all the mirth some people derive from it.
 
Don't even play the gun game with me. You're in over your head, you just don't know it.
You already made a mistake with "military grade" BS.
Anyway, "two wrongs don't make a right?"
Yes. However, three lefts do.
brian-baumgartner-badumtss.gif

1. Okay mom.
Cheap insult.
2. Two wrongs in a certain context can make an important point.
The only point they are making is that they are both wrong.
So at what point should speech foment a violent reaction?
None of it.
Is it when rights are lost?
Charlie Kirk's speech was responsible for you losing rights? And killing him will restore them?
Is it when people on the other side of the political system are murdered or are attempted to be murdered?
Happens on both sides of the political spectrum, and it is wrong in each case.
Is it when federal troops are stationed in cities that didn't vote for a grease-painted, monkey-brained sack of shit in an ill-fitting suit?
How does that justify murder of a commentator you disagree with?
And national guard has been deployed in DC, which has a special status as a federal district.
Is it when said monkey-brained fuck's supporters (see Charlie Kirk) espouse the same authoritarian bullshit?
Again, disagreeing with somebody does not give anybody the right to murder him or her.
Just sit back liberals, relax. It hurts less and won't take as long if you don't put up a fight.
There is nothing liberal about murdering people you disagree with. There is nothing remotely liberal about murdering somebody because he made controversial statements about matters political. In fact, being able to discuss these matters freely is at the basis of a liberal society. Take that away, and it crumbles, no matter what you call yourself (modern American liberals are often "liberal" in name only).
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom