The person who stabbed the lady was homeless with mental illness.
He didn’t give two ****s about “the left” or “the right”.
The person who stabbed the lady was homeless with mental illness.Huh? Are you suggesting the Democrats are using mental illness to foster and grow progressive, liberal ideology through influencing minds of the less stable to carry out heinous acts of murder?
Don't know if I would go that far, but it doesn't look good for the democrats who spew hateful rhetoric. The right does too, but there's no where near the level of violence. The left are seen as promoters of violence not just through the spoken words of pundits or radicals, but through actual policies of their politicians. Releasing of violent criminals and mentally ill, the active participation into censorship, open border policies, defunding police, and the ridicule of police agencies across the nation.
It all seems so purposeful with intent to damage, hurt, and kill the opposition while hiding behind the mentally ill. It's crazy as hell.
"People who lean into that, such as Kirk, immerse themselves into that social decay and find themselves targets of the very decay they are contributing to."Nope. I very carefully sprinkled examples in what I wrote that should have shown you that this comes from a variety of social sectors.
And yet in the Colorado school shooting, not one MAGA chimed in to provide thoughts or prayers. Proves that MAGA are selective in their concern for life.Yes, comparisons can be made and you're, ironically, demonstrating the connection: the left's lack of concern for human life when the matter doesn't jibe with their political views.
Do you go into the scary part of town at night and make a scene?"People who lean into that, such as Kirk, immerse themselves into that social decay and find themselves targets of the very decay they are contributing to."
Yes, you have been clear. You believe its Kirks fault for getting shot. If he hadnt dared to disagree with the left, he would be alive today.Nope, nothing is on me. I have been very clear the whole time while you have ether responded in bad faith or tried to make a very nuanced situation black and white.
That's almost the opposite of what I wrote.
You're in a a reality bubble.And yet in the Colorado school shooting, not one MAGA chimed in to provide thoughts or prayers. Proves that MAGA are selective in their concern for life.
MAGA are all in their feels about Kirk and how his death is the work of “the left”.
When you wave away school shooting deaths as acceptable losses to preserve the second amendment there is always the possibility that someone who lost someone in a school shooting would be mortally offended.So, youre saying that Kirk had it coming. He should have known better than engage in his first amendment rights knowing that there were so many unhinged hateful leftists out there. Do you also believe that women who dress provocatively have it coming when they get attacked by men as well? I thought we had moved past this sort of thinking a couple of decades ago. Guess not.
Why do you bother debating other people if you just want to repeat your own narrative and not actually listen to what people write?Yes, you have been clear. You believe its Kirks fault for getting shot. If he hadnt dared to disagree with the left, he would be alive today.
So you're equating intolerant, left-wing political orthodoxy with a "scary part of town?"Do you go into the scary part of town at night and make a scene?
This just happened yesterday. Is there a thread on it?And yet in the Colorado school shooting, not one MAGA chimed in to provide thoughts or prayers. Proves that MAGA are selective in their concern for life.
MAGA are all in their feels about Kirk and how his death is the work of “the left”.
As I already mentioned, since the wealth gap has increased and we have had increasing social instability, basically the entire US is the scary part town right now.So you're equating intolerant, left-wing political orthodoxy with a "scary part of town?"
Interesting.
Bullshit.You're in a a reality bubble.
Both happened on the same day.This just happened yesterday. Is there a thread on it?
There were 40,000 automobile deaths last year. Are those acceptable losses to you? Or should we ban cars?When you wave away school shooting deaths as acceptable losses to preserve the second amendment there is always the possibility that someone who lost someone in a school shooting would be mortally offended.
Not saying it was the case here, but it could have been personal rather than political.
Nah.But what you are saying is that people who do not subscribe to your political views, somewhat understandably, put their own lives at risk. Yes?
You tell me. This site is like 80-20 liberal, why are you libs so disinterested in the school shooting and obsessed with Kirk?Bullshit.
The Colorado shooting thread has 55 posts.
55.
That’s right. 55.
The Kirk thread has over 3000K.
But when you adjust for taxation and social benefits, the "wealth gap" (as measured by the GINI coefficient) really hasn't changed in 40 years.As I already mentioned, since the wealth gap has increased and we have had increasing social instability, basically the entire US is the scary part town right now.
You can kill someone with a hammer. Should we ban hammers?There were 40,000 automobile deaths last year. Are those acceptable losses to you? Or should we ban cars?
If you believe this, why do you engage in the type of hateful rhetoric that would lite a fuse under such unhinged people?Nah.
Just that we have crappy mental health care and readily available firearms and shit is gonna happen when that is the situation.
Lol. Of course it was political.Y’all really need it to be political when it could quite likely be personal.
So it was Kirks fault for daring to challenge the left.By definition an edgelord exists on the edge. It’s dangerous on the edge. That’s why it’s called the edge. One can fall off.
You are definitely part of that groupSince you arent ignoring me I guess that means you dont consider me part of that group.
Charlie Kirk had a lot of problems. Do you know he once advocated for children to watch public executions? Apparently he thought it would do society a lot of good. Ironically, he would later be gunned down in front of his children.But when you adjust for taxation and social benefits, the "wealth gap" (as measured by the GINI coefficient) really hasn't changed in 40 years.
Charlie Kirk's "problem" is that he was an unapologetic social conservative. He was murdered for speaking his mind. To even remotely imply that he somehow courted that fait or deserved it is as ghoulish as it is reprehensible.
Bullshit.
The Colorado shooting thread has 55 posts.
55.
That’s right. 55.
The Kirk thread has over 3000K.
Tell me again which side is stuck in a bubble?
The “acceptable losses” argument may not have swayed everyone who lost a loved one in a mass shooting.But when you adjust for taxation and social benefits, the "wealth gap" (as measured by the GINI coefficient) really hasn't changed in 40 years.
Charlie Kirk's "problem" is that he was an unapologetic social conservative. He was murdered for speaking his mind. To even remotely imply that he somehow courted that fait or deserved it is as ghoulish as it is reprehensible.
You will have to show that. You will also need to explain how this is an adequate replacement for wages and property among people.But when you adjust for taxation and social benefits, the "wealth gap" (as measured by the GINI coefficient) really hasn't changed in 40 years.
That is what you keep asserting. I am showing you what’s really going on.Charlie Kirk's "problem" is that he was an unapologetic social conservative. He was murdered for speaking his mind. To even remotely imply that he somehow courted that fait or deserved it is as ghoulish as it is reprehensible.
By the 'logic' of the left, yes.You can kill someone with a hammer. Should we ban hammers?
No, its a right, just as your liberty is a right. The problem is, you engaged in criminal behavior that, if you were sent to prison, caused you to lose your right to liberty and your right to bear arms. If you did your time, your liberty was restored. Not sure anyone agrees that felons should have access to weapons one they get out.I’m a second amendment liberal that is also a federal felon who may never posses a firearm.
My situation proves categorically that the second amendment isn’t actually a “right”. Rights by definition can’t be taken away. But my right to keep and bear arms was taken away.
So it’s really just a privilege and as such can be modified. Have conditions imposed.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?