Charlie Kirk shot at (shot?) in Utah

[laughing dog]

We don't know anything about how the hat wearer and the hat displacer came to be within arms' reach of each other. Which one approached the other? Was the approach casual, inadvertent, intentional, aggressive, or something else? Was one of them stalking the other, or trying to impede their free association and travel, or to intimidate them?

There’s plenty footage of the interaction. She’s an obnoxious pos.

It would be very helpful if you provided links to the footage.

If things were different, then things would be different.

If the only things different are race/ethnicity/sex/religion of those involved, then that should not affect how the incident is handled.
Of course, to the far left, such identity markers are of paramount importance, but that is the problem with modern, identity politics left.

We don't know anything about the alleged taunt. Was it inflammatory mockery?

There are videos. So we do know what she said.

Please post links to the videos.

We don't all utilize the same news feeds. There's no reason to assume everyone here has seen the same reports.

I found a video that I guess is what TSwizzle and Derec were talking about.

Texas Tech student expelled...

Her knocking the guy's hat askew was deliberate. She should be fined for that. Fifty dollars should do it.

Mostly the encounter was just arguing and being loud. IOW an exercise in Free Speech.

I weep from any country where knocking a hat askew is considered assault and battery.

 

[blastula]

Hat man didn't even want to press charges. The arrest was stupid.

 

[blastula]

When a character last seen in the first season shows up in the finale,

 

[crazyfingers]

When a character last seen in the first season shows up in the finale,

Interesting. I was thinking about them for the first time in years yesterday when I was thinking about all the right-wingers who do hate speech and don't get threatened with criminal charges by the Turd.

 

[Emily Lake]

And yet you're still criticizing me for NOT being on board for a civil war

If you are an absolute pacifist, I can dig it. So was I at your age, I suspect.

I've never been a pacifist. I think pacifism is stupid and tantamount to suicide. I am, however, very staunchly non-aggressionist. I strongly oppose starting shit, but I have no problem ending shit.

Lessons learned- don’t lie down for fascists, or incalculable suffering will result. Not “maybe”, certainly.

I think I'm perhaps a little less expansive and figurative about what the term "fascist" actually means, and to whom I would apply such a term.

You probably support “peaceful protest”, right?
I wonder if you still support it when peaceful protesters are getting locked up and disappeared. That’s already happening Emily. No due process, no negative repercussions for the orange perp. Every week, the group it will happen to is being insidiously expanded, and gulags around the world are taking your money to lock them up, put them to slave labor…
If we all take your stance, Trump will be dictator for life even if he outlives the current term, and this society will very much resemble Russia’s, including our economic population profiles.
I won’t thank you.

If you have it your way, we'll have a civil fucking war just to avoid a hypothetical possibility. Nothing quite as democratic as waging political persecution against half the country because you've decided "those people" are "evil" and deserve it for the "greater good".

 

[Emily Lake]

What I find especially troubling is the irony here: Kirk himself dismissed empathy, and I disagreed with him. Showing indifference to his death, or to the pain felt by those close to him and/or followed him, would be the very lack of empathy that I've criticized about him.

I see your point but I do not exactly agree.

It's the very lack of empathy that's relevant to me--why should I not judge him by his own standards?

Because how you judge people reflects your values, not theirs.

It's like the difference between respect and courtesy. Whether you respect someone depends on their integrity, whether you are courteous to someone you don't respect depends on your integrity.

The thing is in this case he defined the situation as acceptable. Ok, it's acceptable, why should I have a problem with it?

You can find whatever acceptable you want that’s up to you. That’s my point.

I'm saying he said it's an acceptable outcome. Thus I'm taking him at his word and saying that for it to happen to him is an acceptable outcome. I would not consider it an acceptable outcome if he had not said that.

Have you actually watched the clip in question, in context? Or are you reacting to an out of context clip selected so as to maximize outrage and schism?

One of the points he makes is that cars are very dangerous, about 50,000 people each year die from automobile crashes. That's a cost that we, as a people, have decided is worth it in order to gain the benefits of automobiles. He pointed out that if citizens have the right to own guns, it's impossible to have zero gun-related deaths - it's not going to happen. His argument was that we should do everything we can to minimize those deaths, just as we do everything we can to reasonably minimize auto accidents and deaths. But if we wish to have gun rights in order to protect ourselves from a zealous government, then we as a society are accepting that there's going to be some deaths as a price for that right.

Okay. That's the context.

Now go ahead and parallel that. I assume that you're okay with society paying the price of 130 deaths per day in order to have the benefits of auto travel. Does that also imply that you are perfectly fine with intentional vehicular manslaughter? Would you say it's an "acceptable outcome" for someone to commit murder by car in order for us to retain the freedom to own and operate cars?