Charlie Kirk shot at campus event in Utah

[Hellis]

i understand your reasoning and dont get me wrong- i also felt like he was preaching so much dumb subjective opinions that had no basis in fact or science- but i still cannot rationalize killing him. he wasnt a politician, he was an "activist". and activists are only killed when its to supress and silence the free thinking and opinions of a certain group.

if you disagree with him? then in a civil society you go and argue against him, you show him why hes wrong. not kill him.

a democrat news anchor said something so concerning about this topic- "you cannot [think and say] without expecting action in return"

now we must censor our thoughts? censor our beliefs? conform to the masses so that we dont get hurt? and who decides what we can and cannot say? WHO?

charlie kirk was not a threat, as long as he never became a politician (which he wasnt, thank god). killing him, a civilian, is instead a threat to our freedom of speech and thoughts as american citizens...

There is an arguement to be had that we aren't the civil society we parade as. We are looking at a time where the rich, and quite often republican, politicians are keeping us out of the loop or outright refusing to listen to more democratic beliefs. You have people admitting to not reading the laws they pass, and going with what is popular in their party. This goes on both sides, but as it currently stands there's a side that has the power in our government that is refusing to put pedophiles in jail and refusing to show up to hearings that don't fit what they don't want to hear. Democratic leaning beliefs, or dare I say the beliefs of the common American are being outwardly ignored by the people we elected. The system has failed and people are starting to put matters into their own hands. There's more than just politics at play as well. Trade, stocks, gas prices, the news; all of these things are being used against the American people by those in power. For those of us who have lost our voice, done the protests, called the elected officials, and have been ignored while they continue to increase prices and lie to us, what do we do now?

Charlie Kirk's death won't amount to anything, the deaths that have occurred also won't amount to anything, but we are looking at more and more violence that'll reach a breaking point.

TLDR: In an ideal world we won't solve problems with violence, but we are not an ideal world.

 

[likelyonthespectrum]

It's crazy to think that some people wish death upon others simply because of a difference in opinion. Holding a polarizing view does not mean the other person deserves to die. Real growth comes from discussing differing perspectives, not from living in an echo chamber where everyone agrees on everything.


He advocated for his ideas, and whether you believe those ideas were right or wrong should not change the fact that what happened was tragic. Each of us is responsible for our own opinions and actions. He never forced anyone to agree with him, he simply argued and stood by what he believed. At the end of the day, we all want peace, we just disagree on how to achieve it.


No one should die for sharing or defending an opinion. Disagreement is natural, but crossing the line into wishing harm is not. Many who say he deserved death are reacting to a dehumanized version of him, reducing him to the opinions they hate instead of seeing him as a full person. That's what often happens when people judge someone they don't truly know.


I can only hope those who think that way will reflect on it someday, though most probably won't. Such, unfortunately, is the human experience.

 

[Hvergelmir]

dehumanized version of him, reducing him to the opinions they hate

That's how every mass killing starts. It's concerning, to say the least.
By this kind of reduction, anything can be justified.

 

[GhostInTheMachine]

i understand your reasoning and dont get me wrong- i also felt like he was preaching so much dumb subjective opinions that had no basis in fact or science- but i still cannot rationalize killing him. he wasnt a politician, he was an "activist". and activists are only killed when its to supress and silence the free thinking and opinions of a certain group.

if you disagree with him? then in a civil society you go and argue against him, you show him why hes wrong. not kill him.

a democrat news anchor said something so concerning about this topic- "you cannot [think and say] without expecting action in return"

now we must censor our thoughts? censor our beliefs? conform to the masses so that we dont get hurt? and who decides what we can and cannot say? WHO?

charlie kirk was not a threat, as long as he never became a politician (which he wasnt, thank god). killing him, a civilian, is instead a threat to our freedom of speech and thoughts as american citizens...

Charlie Kirk was absolutely a threat, as are a ton of these fascist media pundits. Stop pretending like you need to be a politician to enact social change.

https://fixupx.com/FortunateRamen/status/1965862068474843213

Somebody like this goes much further than a politician ever can in shaping the political conversation. Do you think that Trump developed all his beliefs in a vacuum? No, he gets them from people like Kirk and all his ilk. Don't break your back carrying that water now.

 

[Unseelie]

Charlie Kirk was absolutely a threat, as are a ton of these fascist media pundits. Stop pretending like you need to be a politician to enact social change.

https://fixupx.com/FortunateRamen/status/1965862068474843213

Somebody like this goes much further than a politician ever can in shaping the political conversation. Do you think that Trump developed all his beliefs in a vacuum? No, he gets them from people like Kirk and all his ilk. Don't break your back carrying that water now.

For real. Fascism is not just politicians. It's the media that spreads the ideas, putting hate speech in a smile and a suit.

 

[Dejected 55]

Fuck him, he deserved it. Anybody trying to pull the "it's never justified" card simply doesn't feel the result of these people's politics coming to ruin every aspect of their lives. He literally died talking shit about trans people in society, during a time where the state is clamping down on basic rights and privileges we ought to be granted. "It's never justified" until you're ostracized from society for just being visible. "It's never justified" until you get hate crimed because of the lies and rhetoric spread about you. "It's never justified" until you're in a fucking camp.

I'm sick of playing the "we need to be nice to fascists" game. We're not the ones calling for government programs to mark as us insane and take our rights away. We're not the ones trying to find reasons they can't vote. We're not the ones creating entire manifestos of lies about us. Fuck you if you want to defend this guy.

The problem here is, even if you don't want to be nice about this... if you're just going to add fuel to the fire, then we are getting to the "If they send one of yours to the hospital, you send two of their to the morgue" territory... and that ends with a lot of people dying, mostly innocent people too.. since it's typically the young and more innocent that fight these kinds of wars. And the world you get at the tip of the spear isn't necessarily a better one, especially not in civil war when it's more like a family squabble than good vs evil... and it's just no way to live.

On the topic of why it should matter, I remember being young and having people like him or pragerU on my YouTube through ads or recommendations. I thought that it was speakers who were knowledgeable that I could trust, but a lot of the opinions that they pulled off as facts (and wasn't there a whole meme involving Charlie Kirk and his tendency to do that?) were really just hurtful rhetoric used to bring young and impressionable teens/children to his side. Maybe I was a dumb child, but it did work on me.

Looking at our latest election, a great deal of the republican voters were a young demographic that were raised in a time where Charlie Kirk was able to reach them. Look at this thread as well, many people know and praise his accomplishments. A school shooting occured earlier today and the news is filled with Charlie Kirk's death with very little mention of it. To say he's not a threat because he can't pass laws ignores the fact that he has an incredibly large fan based that voted for the people who can enact the laws he would wish for. He went to colleges and spoke out for these laws (or lack thereof) because he had that power. Politicians are already tweeting about all the things he did, go on Twitter and scroll.

So, in your first paragraph you say you were an impressionable youth who got taken in by the likes of Kirk and others and their rhetoric "worked" on you... which then implies that at some point between then and now you learned more and changed your viewpoint. At one time you would have been one of the "them" you would say deserved to die like Kirk for believing and saying those things... but now you aren't... and you know who can't change? Someone who was shot and killed over their ideas.

I'm not going to defend Kirk at all... or even say it makes sense to think he could have changed... but in the span of one post you relate the story of how you once aligned with him until you didn't. The people cheering for Kirk's death today would have cheered for you... now you would cheer for it after switching sides. I would hope that would bring home the point better than anything I could ever say... just read your own words and realize people aren't always everything you think, and nobody should die like that for the offense of saying things you don't like, even if those things are hateful.

Wealthy people aren't to blame for everything. That's a shallow observation. I'd rather see all out bloody civil war so we can actually get past this.

I didn't say wealthy people were at fault. I'm saying they will be the beneficiaries of a world where the only people who can have their free speech are the ones who can afford to hire enough security to defend it. If this continues to escalate at the pace it has been recently, we are going to fast get to a place where the only people who truly have free speech will be the rich and powerful, because none of the rest of us could possibly defend ourselves against being sniper assassinated.

 

[whywere]

I look at it this way, he did NOT get a college degree, dropped out and what did he do to "earn" his millions, nothing, except stir up emotions. Work? nope, Produce anything for the good of man and woman, nope.

He had a $4,750,000 mansion and a $855,000 oceanfront condo in Florida at the age of 30 Total wealth of around $12,000,000.

Now my central question again, and this goes for anyone, anywhere, BUT at the age of 30 and just stirring up hatred towards others and the like what did he produce for the general welfare of ALL humans? Nothing in my book.

Women should think of motherhood over careers. He criticized birth control saying that birth control made women "angry and bitter". and that women over 30 are not attractive in the dating pool!

Do NOT even ask about what he thought about the LGBTO community, YIKES!

We ALL MUST work together period.

When someone comes along and on a national spotlight has extreme viewpoints that they want not only for everyone to hear BUT should abide by.

I am NOT conservative OR liberal or anything, and it is HORRIBLE for any type of violence period, we should talk NOT do anything ever of that nature,

I always remember a person telling me once, "when pointing your finger makes sure you are NOT standing in front of a mirror".

I wonder when they catch the gunperson, I will be curious to hear what his/her motive(s) were.

Walter

 

[Dejected 55]

Charlie Kirk was absolutely a threat, as are a ton of these fascist media pundits. Stop pretending like you need to be a politician to enact social change.

https://fixupx.com/FortunateRamen/status/1965862068474843213

Somebody like this goes much further than a politician ever can in shaping the political conversation. Do you think that Trump developed all his beliefs in a vacuum? No, he gets them from people like Kirk and all his ilk. Don't break your back carrying that water now.

But that shouldn't equate to assassination. There are going to be an increasing number of people, I fear, on both sides who keep demanding blood when someone is for something they don't like. The answer just can't be killing everyone who says things, even horrible things. Words shouldn't be justification for killing.

 

[GhostInTheMachine]

The problem here is, even if you don't want to be nice about this... if you're just going to add fuel to the fire, then we are getting to the "If they send one of yours to the hospital, you send two of their to the morgue" territory... and that ends with a lot of people dying, mostly innocent people too.. since it's typically the young and more innocent that fight these kinds of wars. And the world you get at the tip of the spear isn't necessarily a better one, especially not in civil war when it's more like a family squabble than good vs evil... and it's just no way to live.

Buddy, the fascists add fuel to the fire every single day I exist. I'm not cutting my legs off to make this an even fight. That's what all these centrist pacifists expect of marginalized people who simply want to exist. We're not waiting until a second holocaust to fight back.

 

[likelyonthespectrum]

Charlie Kirk was absolutely a threat, as are a ton of these fascist media pundits. Stop pretending like you need to be a politician to enact social change.

https://fixupx.com/FortunateRamen/status/1965862068474843213

Somebody like this goes much further than a politician ever can in shaping the political conversation. Do you think that Trump developed all his beliefs in a vacuum? No, he gets them from people like Kirk and all his ilk. Don't break your back carrying that water now.

Just because a person is exposed to someone's beliefs, it doesn't make the person who shared the original belief a threat.


That's similar to arguing that people shouldn't be exposed to beliefs you deem dangerous because they might end up believing them.


You can expose yourself to different beliefs, but in the end you'll take the ones you personally identify with. This is why I said we're all responsible for our own actions and beliefs.


For example: just because a serial killer shares their rationalization of why we should be free to kill people (a "dangerous belief"), I won't automatically believe their ideas just because they shared them. Ultimately, sharing their ideas( separate from their actions) doesn't make the sharing itself a threat, if a political figure reads an idea and decides to identify with, its not the person that shared the idea that should be blamed, its the political figure as the actions are ultimately took by them.


In this case, it isn't much of a debate to say the serial killer is wrong. But ideas in politics are more arguable and less clear-cut.


I know the serial killer example is extreme, but it's just to communicate a point. If you don't agree with that analogy, that's fine, we can agree to disagree.

 

[GhostInTheMachine]

But that shouldn't equate to assassination. There are going to be an increasing number of people, I fear, on both sides who keep demanding blood when someone is for something they don't like. The answer just can't be killing everyone who says things, even horrible things. Words shouldn't be justification for killing.

"Something they don't like" in this case is LITERALLY making my life a living hell by taking my healthcare, demonizing me to the public, creating an aura of hatred and fear around me as a person, and if that gets me killed, they shrug and say "Oops, oh well". Nah, fuck that, I'm not waiting for a death squad to come after me to decide "Hmm, maybe I should shoot back".

Just because a person is exposed to someone's beliefs, it doesn't make the person who shared the original belief a threat.

That's similar to arguing that people shouldn't be exposed to beliefs you deem dangerous because they might end up believing them.


You can expose yourself to different beliefs, but in the end you'll take the ones you personally identify with. This is why I said we're all responsible for our own actions and beliefs.


For example: just because a serial killer shares their rationalization of why we should be free to kill people (a "dangerous belief"), I won't automatically believe their ideas just because they shared them. Ultimately, sharing their ideas( separate from their actions) doesn't make the sharing itself a threat, if a political figure reads an idea and decides to identify with, its not the person that shared the idea that should be blamed, its the political figure as the actions are ultimately took by them.


In this case, it isn't much of a debate to say the serial killer is wrong. But ideas in politics are more arguable and less clear-cut.


I know the serial killer example is extreme, but it's just to communicate a point. If you don't agree with that analogy, that's fine, we can agree to disagree.

Look up stochastic terrorism, and please educate yourself on it before commenting further.

Stochastic terrorism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Dejected 55]

Buddy, the fascists add fuel to the fire every single day I exist. I'm not cutting my legs off to make this an even fight. That's what all these centrist pacifists expect of marginalized people who simply want to exist. We're not waiting until a second holocaust to fight back.

Nobody said don't fight back. Start your own Youtube platform and speak to the people who also do not like the Kirks of the world.

Shooting someone in the head from a distance isn't "fighting back." If anything, you prove in that moment that you don't have a legitimate informed argument against that person's rhetoric. You can't beat him in chess if you play chess... you have to go off the board and assassinate him before he finishes his turn.

That is not the world I want to live in any more than I'd want to live in the world Kirk would have wanted.

 

[Pessimist]

Murdering people over politics is just dumb.

 

[Unseelie]

Nobody said don't fight back. Start your own Youtube platform and speak to the people who also do not like the Kirks of the world.

Shooting someone in the head from a distance isn't "fighting back." If anything, you prove in that moment that you don't have a legitimate informed argument against that person's rhetoric. You can't beat him in chess if you play chess... you have to go off the board and assassinate him before he finishes his turn.

That is not the world I want to live in any more than I'd want to live in the world Kirk would have wanted.

People debated nazis all the time. They still did the holocaust.

 

[GhostInTheMachine]

Nobody said don't fight back. Start your own Youtube platform and speak to the people who also do not like the Kirks of the world.

Shooting someone in the head from a distance isn't "fighting back." If anything, you prove in that moment that you don't have a legitimate informed argument against that person's rhetoric. You can't beat him in chess if you play chess... you have to go off the board and assassinate him before he finishes his turn.

That is not the world I want to live in any more than I'd want to live in the world Kirk would have wanted.

"Start your own platform" said the person ignorant to the massive amounts of capital funding the right-wing hate machine right now. You don't argue away fascism, you stomp it into the ground and ensure it has no place to grow. Are you seriously under the impression that the "marketplace of ideas" is how we defeat this? News flash, that marketplace is what got us here, because your argument can be rock solid but political ignoramuses will STILL believe the stupidest shit. A lie is half way around the world before the truth even wakes up.

 

[Hvergelmir]

I'm not waiting for a death squad

Where have you seen death squads? Do you propose that all parties starts preemptively defending themselves?

 

[hippiedeath]

Hopefully this is just a loud minority, but I don't understand how people can celebrate his murder or call it justified. Nobody should be killed for their political beliefs or any beliefs for that matter. Even disregarding the fact that murder is simply wrong and illegal, this really just does more harm to the political landscape, further radicalizing both parties with violence. I'm sure we've all seen the footage; How can you cheer that on?

And if you believe murder can be okay in some situations, Kirk was a SPEAKER who had no impact on policy. Most importantly he did not commit violence against other people, even if you strongly disagree with what he says. Killing anybody for voicing an opinion is a savage attack on everyone's freedom. It's ironic that people on a SUICIDE FORUM can cheer this on. We of all people should cherish the freedom of expression that enables a site like this to remain up. The media constantly tries to demonize this forum and have it shut down, but we are protected by the very freedom that should have protected Kirk today.

You can't value freedom of expression for some groups and not others. This forum of all places has to understand that.

But we saw the hypocrisy when Luigi Mangione was celebrated for killing a banker. Libs promote murder to progress their agenda.

The problem here is, even if you don't want to be nice about this... if you're just going to add fuel to the fire, then we are getting to the "If they send one of yours to the hospital, you send two of their to the morgue" territory... and that ends with a lot of people dying, mostly innocent people too.. since it's typically the young and more innocent that fight these kinds of wars. And the world you get at the tip of the spear isn't necessarily a better one, especially not in civil war when it's more like a family squabble than good vs evil... and it's just no way to live.

So, in your first paragraph you say you were an impressionable youth who got taken in by the likes of Kirk and others and their rhetoric "worked" on you... which then implies that at some point between then and now you learned more and changed your viewpoint. At one time you would have been one of the "them" you would say deserved to die like Kirk for believing and saying those things... but now you aren't... and you know who can't change? Someone who was shot and killed over their ideas.

I'm not going to defend Kirk at all... or even say it makes sense to think he could have changed... but in the span of one post you relate the story of how you once aligned with him until you didn't. The people cheering for Kirk's death today would have cheered for you... now you would cheer for it after switching sides. I would hope that would bring home the point better than anything I could ever say... just read your own words and realize people aren't always everything you think, and nobody should die like that for the offense of saying things you don't like, even if those things are hateful.

I didn't say wealthy people were at fault. I'm saying they will be the beneficiaries of a world where the only people who can have their free speech are the ones who can afford to hire enough security to defend it. If this continues to escalate at the pace it has been recently, we are going to fast get to a place where the only people who truly have free speech will be the rich and powerful, because none of the rest of us could possibly defend ourselves against being sniper assassinated.

I don't agree. I'm a constitutionalist. Everyone has a right to free speech,under the constitution. The left is trying to subvert the constitution as I see it. Class warfare stinks of Marxist ideology. I will fight socialism with my last breath. The rich don't have everything, and the poor nothing. It's a matter of appreciating what you have, and not wanting someone else's. The reason Charlie was shot probably.

 

[GhostInTheMachine]

Where have you seen death squads? Do you propose that all parties starts preemptively defending themselves?

I said: "I'm not waiting for a death squad." Reading must be hard.

Do you propose that people should wait until they're being shipped to camps, oh wait... Do you propose people should wait until they're being attacked in the street, oh wait... Do you propose people should wait until there's a systematic disinformation machine all targeted against them, oh wait... At what point do people earn the privilege to defend themselves?

I swear a second night of the long knives could happen, and some of you people would finger wag at us and say "violence is never the answer".

 

[Pessimist]

People debated nazis all the time. They still did the holocaust.

I don't want neo-Nazis to die and I'm literally Jewish. People shouldn't be killed because of "evil" political views.

 

[Dejected 55]

People debated nazis all the time. They still did the holocaust.

Did they? I mean, Hitler was elected in Germany, wasn't he? The nazis in power did the holocaust because they were the people in power. Here in the USA we had Japanese internment camps. I don't think we randomly killed Japanese, but we were only a hair better. Also, considering the US rejected Jewish refugees trying to escape Germany during the war, who later found themselves in those concentration camps and part of the holocaust.

But... do you know there was lots of debate about nazis back then? I don't. I don't know what kind of opposition there was to the nazi party during that war. And, sure... once the fighting starts then you kind of have to fight. But is that where we are now? Is there a civil war going on already here in the US? Are we all enemy combatants now? I mean, if we are... then nobody can complain about anything I guess because it's a war until one side kills enough of the other to win it.

"Start your own platform" said the person ignorant to the massive amounts of capital funding the right-wing hate machine right now. You don't argue away fascism, you stomp it into the ground and ensure it has no place to grow. Are you seriously under the impression that the "marketplace of ideas" is how we defeat this? News flash, that marketplace is what got us here, because your argument can be rock solid but political ignoramuses will STILL believe the stupidest shit. A lie is half way around the world before the truth even wakes up.

So, you're saying there are no wealthy people who believe differently than Kirk or the right-wing? How did they get all the money? The more you argue for killing your "enemy" the more the rest of us start wondering when we too are seen as the enemy. That's why I can't live in your world any more than Kirk's world. At least in Kirk's world I would know what things he didn't like... In your world I only know that I better agree with everything you want or you advocate a bullet to my head. Again, that's not the world I want to live in...

The fact that anyone would cheer an assassination like this is the surest sign that humanity is doomed.

 

[Unseelie]

I don't want neo-Nazis to die and I'm literally Jewish. People shouldn't be killed because of "evil" political views.

Well you're allowed to have that opinion, up until the moment they come for you.

Did they? I mean, Hitler was elected in Germany, wasn't he? The nazis in power did the holocaust because they were the people in power. Here in the USA we had Japanese internment camps. I don't think we randomly killed Japanese, but we were only a hair better. Also, considering the US rejected Jewish refugees trying to escape Germany during the war, who later found themselves in those concentration camps and part of the holocaust.

But... do you know there was lots of debate about nazis back then? I don't. I don't know what kind of opposition there was to the nazi party during that war. And, sure... once the fighting starts then you kind of have to fight. But is that where we are now? Is there a civil war going on already here in the US? Are we all enemy combatants now? I mean, if we are... then nobody can complain about anything I guess because it's a war until one side kills enough of the other to win it.

So, you're saying there are no wealthy people who believe differently than Kirk or the right-wing? How did they get all the money? The more you argue for killing your "enemy" the more the rest of us start wondering when we too are seen as the enemy. That's why I can't live in your world any more than Kirk's world. At least in Kirk's world I would know what things he didn't like... In your world I only know that I better agree with everything you want or you advocate a bullet to my head. Again, that's not the world I want to live in...

The fact that anyone would cheer an assassination like this is the surest sign that humanity is doomed.

There were communists in Germany, Liberals in Germany, all sorts of other political ideologies. Of course there were debates against it. Just as there were debates against Trump and he was elected. What are you even on right now?

 

[GhostInTheMachine]

Did they? I mean, Hitler was elected in Germany, wasn't he? The nazis in power did the holocaust because they were the people in power. Here in the USA we had Japanese internment camps. I don't think we randomly killed Japanese, but we were only a hair better. Also, considering the US rejected Jewish refugees trying to escape Germany during the war, who later found themselves in those concentration camps and part of the holocaust.

But... do you know there was lots of debate about nazis back then? I don't. I don't know what kind of opposition there was to the nazi party during that war. And, sure... once the fighting starts then you kind of have to fight. But is that where we are now? Is there a civil war going on already here in the US? Are we all enemy combatants now? I mean, if we are... then nobody can complain about anything I guess because it's a war until one side kills enough of the other to win it.

Yes, there are a plethora of books, videos, and articles about how people constantly tried to debate the nazis, and they all still lost. I very strongly recommend you educate on the influx of facism in the early 20th century, because it's very clear you're not aware of any of it.

So, you're saying there are no wealthy people who believe differently than Kirk or the right-wing? How did they get all the money? The more you argue for killing your "enemy" the more the rest of us start wondering when we too are seen as the enemy. That's why I can't live in your world any more than Kirk's world. At least in Kirk's world I would know what things he didn't like... In your world I only know that I better agree with everything you want or you advocate a bullet to my head. Again, that's not the world I want to live in...

The fact that anyone would cheer an assassination like this is the surest sign that humanity is doomed.

https://objectivejournalism.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/onlineshows-mark5-1.png

In Kirk's world, you would be dead for not being a traditional white conservative.

 

[Dejected 55]

I don't agree. I'm a constitutionalist. Everyone has a right to free speech,under the constitution. The left is trying to subvert the constitution as I see it. Class warfare stinks of Marxist ideology. I will fight socialism with my last breath. The rich don't have everything, and the poor nothing. It's a matter of appreciating what you have, and not wanting someone else's. The reason Charlie was shot probably.

I'm not sure what you are disagreeing about... I'm for free speech. Both sides are calling for blood from where I sit. Not everyone, but enough... and shootings and killings are starting to become more public and more frequent.

 

[hippiedeath]

I'm not sure what you are disagreeing about... I'm for free speech. Both sides are calling for blood from where I sit. Not everyone, but enough... and shootings and killings are starting to become more public and more frequent.

It's an inevitability, war. It clears the floor. Unfortunate, but the world today needs a good scouring. I'll fight. I'm ready. I am not afraid to die.

 

[Dejected 55]

There were communists in Germany, Liberals in Germany, all sorts of other political ideologies. Of course there were debates against it. Just as there were debates against Trump and he was elected. What are you even on right now?

So what you're advocating then is... let's not talk to people we disagree with, let's just assume they are completely evil and deserve to die and kill them before they kill us... and then let's somehow act surprised if people on their side say the same about us, because we just literally said we're going to shoot first and not ask questions later... so then, when we're all shooting and a lot of us are dying... this is what we want?

I mean if you want a civil war, fine... sign up for that. I'm hoping I'm long dead before we get there because I don't care which side wins that bloody war, I know I will not belong in that world.

 

[likelyonthespectrum]

"Something they don't like" in this case is LITERALLY making my life a living hell by taking my healthcare, demonizing me to the public, creating an aura of hatred and fear around me as a person, and if that gets me killed, they shrug and say "Oops, oh well". Nah, fuck that, I'm not waiting for a death squad to come after me to decide "Hmm, maybe I should shoot back".



Look up stochastic terrorism, and please educate yourself on it before commenting further.

Stochastic terrorism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

ironic, because someone from the opposite side can say the shooter's action were influenced by Stochastic terrorism, you're arguing against yourself here

Echo chamber (media) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

i can also just link a term and tell you to educate yourself further

 

[Dejected 55]

The world just keeps disappointing me more and more every day. Even if I ever solved my personal problems, I either live in a world where people are hateful and oppressive OR I live in the world where everyone cheers when you kill people who think differently.

 

[GhostInTheMachine]

ironic, because someone from the opposite side can say the shooter's action were influenced by Stochastic terrorism, you're arguing against yourself here

Echo chamber (media) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

i can also just link a term and tell you to educate yourself further

When they're shipping you off to a camp, at least you can smugly say to yourself "at least I didn't punch first".

 

[hippiedeath]

The world just keeps disappointing me more and more every day. Even if I ever solved my personal problems, I either live in a world where people are hateful and oppressive OR I live in the world where everyone cheers when you kill people who think differently.

The world is a beautiful place. People are inherently evil.

 

[Unseelie]

So what you're advocating then is... let's not talk to people we disagree with, let's just assume they are completely evil and deserve to die and kill them before they kill us... and then let's somehow act surprised if people on their side say the same about us, because we just literally said we're going to shoot first and not ask questions later... so then, when we're all shooting and a lot of us are dying... this is what we want?

I mean if you want a civil war, fine... sign up for that. I'm hoping I'm long dead before we get there because I don't care which side wins that bloody war, I know I will not belong in that world.

Brother, no real political change has ever been achieved without violence. I wish I could live in your world of "Peace no matter what" but the government actively wants me, and people like myself to die. Now I may not particularly value my own life. But I do value the lives of those like me, and those who would be harmed by this administration and it's pawns. You can sit on the sidelines, do nothing. People like you will always exist. It's fine. Somebody of actual value will actually do something while you virtue signal about the tragedy of the death of a hatemongering bastard on a website about suicide. I won't be able to convince you, so I'm done talking to you. It does nothing.