top 93 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 225 points 1 year ago* (67 children)

His last words

He was asked how many shooters were trans in the last 10 years and replied "Too many"

He was corrected, the number is 5.

He was then asked how many shootings happened in these years (there were 5700)

He asked back: "Counting or not counting gang violence?" and got shot

  • source
  • hideshow 67 child comments
  • [–] 152 points 1 year ago (11 children)
  • [–] 52 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    A sniper with an innate sense of comedic timing?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago*

    Maybe he was waiting for Chuck to say a number. But chuck was too slippery. One last owning of the libs, right before he was triggered. At least you know he died doing that thing where he opens his mouth and just kind of shows his gums with glee

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 68 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 36 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    And isn't it poetic?
    Don't you think?

    It's like rain on that assholes birthday
    It's a free ride when they've already paid
    It's the gun shot that you just took to the neck And who would've thought? It figures

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 94 points 1 year ago (12 children)

    I always said "You can tell when Charlie Kirk is arguing in bad faith by when his lips are moving and sounds are coming out."

    And it was literally the last thing he ever did.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 63 points 1 year ago (11 children)
  • [–] 29 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    Lying for money. I hope he saved enough for his family

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I do unironically feel bad for his kids, even if they may grow up better without him they still watched their dad get ganked in public. Note they were with him at the time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I did not know that... That sucks

    And I wasn't being ironic either. I hope his ill gotten gains are enough for his kids to be ok... The damage he did collecting it will never equal what he squirreled away, but hopefully it at least is enough for his kids to grow up with food and therapists

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago

    That's my take as well, right now they need comfort food and a highly respected trauma therapist. Maybe keep them away from crowds for awhile as well, who knows what issues will start to manifest in the coming days/weeks/months/years.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (4 children)

    I feel bad for his kids, actually.

    They’ll likely be raised to think their father was a martyr, so the poor things (like 1 and 3 years) will probably grow up in the alt-right-o-sphere where their dad was a martyr to the cause.

    That’s very sad. They’ll likely won’t have had a chance.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    I do too... But I wouldn't say they don't stand a chance

    Their dad got shot while encouraging gun violence. That might instill some strong opinions in them

    The kind of strong opinions that will likely be buried and come out later in therapy

    But it could go either way

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    Depends. I expect his wife is just as alt-right-addled as he was, which might mean she’ll raise them to be little Nazis. I guess they might break out of that, and I hope so, but being raised alt-right with a prominent martyr to the cause as your father could seriously fuck you up. Don’t forget they’re very rich, so they’re insulated from the real world.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    I mean you might be right, but I imagine the martyr thing could go either way

    Just putting myself in their shoes, it probably won't feel nice having their dad constantly praised for doing what they saw him die doing

    Plus, Charlie Kirk was more hated than loved. There's no putting them so deep in a bubble that they aren't confronted with that fact

    Kids tend to either follow or reject their parents beliefs... I'm not sure what this kind of trauma does to that, but I'll bet it'll make it more extreme

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    For their sake, I hope you’re right.

    e: and, putting myself in their shoes as a child whose father was both prominent and absent (though not dead), I idolised him well into my 30s. Raising a teen boy finally disabused me of his sainthood. He’s still the most remarkable man I’ve ever met, but he’s also fallible.
    If he’d been dead, I may never have been forced to accept he’s human.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 53 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    “Gang violence” = racist dog whistle. The assassin couldn’t have picked a more perfect time to fire. 😂

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    I mean, most gang activity comes from young black men, but that does not mean it's racist to talk about it. I think talking about whether to include or exclude "gang violence" from a conversation about mass shootings is appropriate and not offensive in the slightest.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    a dog whistle has nothing to do with the facts but a shared agreement between people in the know as to its hidden meaning.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I understand that. I'm saying that there is no hidden meaning. Gang violence is understood on its face by everyone.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    unless you use it as a overgeneral brush, and fill it with only minorities, and use it as a short hand for black people like it’s used in this context. are you a native english speaker?

    dog whistles specifically use words with a cover meaning and the group agrees to internally change its meaning.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    He didn't use "gang violence" as short hand for "black violence." That wouldn't make sense in the context of mass shootings. He said “Counting or not counting gang violence?” more as a shorthand for "Are we counting criminals killing each other?" Whether it's hispanic, white, or black gangs isn't very relevant.

    Gangs contribute to the majority of designated "mass shootings," and are often excluded from conversations that want to focus on innocent victims of mass shooting as opposed to cases of criminals killing each other. After all, if all mass shootings were just gangsters shooting each other, people wouldn't care nearly as much as they do now. They care about the mass shootings that don't involve gangs.

    EDIT: Seems like many sources explicitly exclude gang violence in their stats. So my statement may be incorrect that gangs contribute to "designated" mass shootings as they are not designation such by many sources.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    That’s why you just had to go out of your way to point out that gang activity comes from people of color. Not to mention lecturing to people of color about what YOU don’t find offensive. 😂 Thank you for your contribution, goodbye. 🙂

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago

    "That's racist."

    "It may involve a race, but it's not racist."

    "That's why you said it involved that race!"

    Bizarre logic.

    Offensive was the wrong word. I meant that it's not racist. It's unhealthy that one would be offended by acknowledging the existence of gang violence.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago

    He was engaging in hate-mongering right until the end. Just like the Nazi propagandists of the WW2 era, he was spreading a message of a demonized minority group being responsible for countless crimes and social ills. He ran literally the exact same playbook against trans people as the Nazis did against Jews.

    I have no more sympathy for him than the Nazi propagandists we hanged at Nuremberg. They're guilty of the exact same crimes against humanity.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 37 points 1 year ago (15 children)

    I would actually like to know what he was leading to with that question. Is the implication that gangs have an overrepresentation of trans people? Or that gang violence doesn't count for some reason?

    I guess we'll never know.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 42 points 1 year ago

    Pointing out that gangs do a lot of violence is an attempt to shift blame onto the demographic groups which are overrepresented in gangs due to socioeconomic reasons (systemic racism).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago

    As others mentioned, "gang violence" is generally a euphemism for non white, especially poor, people. I used to listen to Knowledge Fight(stopped after election not because of the boys, but didn't want to hear Jones gloat) and during several shootings that involved black victims Jones dismissed it as gang violence.

    One case I recall was a shooting in a school in GA that he was spinning some other way, until he found out the school was primarily black and the victim (who survived iirc) was black. He then just stated the kid was in a gang with no proof and dismissed the story.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    It's a deflection technique. The intention was to not answer or address the question at all, but to shift to another topic he could more easily use to manipulate his audience. If you've ever watched him "debate" he was a master of deflection.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    It was more anti-trans hate mongering. 2 or 3 trans shooters out of 5700 is nothing. If you can whittle down the number of "mass shootings" to just a handful of incidents, can make it seem like trans people are vastly over-represented among school shooters.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    The number of trans shooters versus non-trans shooters probably has trans shooters falling comfortably into a margin of error. I can't do the math, though, I'm no numbersmith.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Sure. Even if the raw numbers said that say, trans people are 1% of the population, and 1.5% of shooters, that would still be a meaningless figure. The sample size is too low to make any meaningful conclusion.

    But the point is even if you don't apply statistics, even using the sample we have, trans people are vastly under-represented among shooters. We represent about 1% of the population and 0.1% of shooters. You don't even need to apply statistics. The numbers on their face show that there is zero evidence that trans people are over-represented.

    Now, statistically, I would say that there is insufficient evidence to suggest that the rate of trans shooters is any different from the overall population, higher or lower. But there is less than zero evidence that trans people are over-represented.

    The trans shooter myth is simply blood libel.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago*

    He was obviously arguing that skin colour minorities were doing any shooting that trans Americans weren't. Because his goal in life was to make people feel like they belonged - by vilifying out groups. And then monetizing that shit.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    Does anyone have video of this? (This conversation, not the shooty part) All the news media are quoting this while referring to a video but not showing it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    They're /very/ intertwined. I don't recommend looking for it unless you want trauma

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

    I watched the close up video and didn’t find it traumatic especially given all what has been happening in gaza and Ukraine, not to mention the children being shot in schools

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    You're desensitized to violence. Not something to be proud of or encourage 😟

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    Do you say the same to those somehow still supporting Israel’s genocide in Gaza when there is vastly more grotesque footage? Or for the slaughtering and rapping in Ukraine with now years of footage? Or those enabling the children being blasted away in schools across the us on a daily basis, including yesterday? 🧐

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 161 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    I'm laughing at the song choices being posted on the music community.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Golden Earring - Twilight Zone for the lyrics

    "Where am I to go now that I've gone too far? Soon, you will come to know when the bullet hits the bone"

    Utah Saints - Something Good, for the hilarious, to me, coincidence between the song title, the band name and the location of the event

    *NSYNC - Bye Bye Bye, need I say more

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • Man, I haven't thought about Heaven 17 in decades. My favorite lyric of theirs was "brothers, sisters, we don't need that fascist groove thing". I remember liking them in the '80s but thinking that their political stance was pretty over the top and that things weren't really that bad in the world. How wrong I was.

    Fun fact: the band took their name from a fictional group that was referenced in A Clockwork Orange.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 291 points 1 year ago (11 children)

    Couldn't have happened to a nicer guy.

    No really, if he was a nicer guy this probably wouldn't have happened.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 102 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    I’m not convinced it did happen. His last words were literally making light of gun violence. If I read this in a book, I’d say it was too on-the-nose

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 77 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    We have no clue how long the shooter was zeroed in. It's entirely possible they chose the funniest moments to pull the trigger.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    It was all set up. The person who asked the question, before the universe just throw a bullet at Charlie Kirk.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 117 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 68 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    so does this mean that any maggot who says they feel for his family or friends or colleagues, are really just liberal cucks in disguise?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 63 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I'll respond the same way he would have.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Yeah but you gain one smug counter or one sanctimony counter.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 62 points 1 year ago

    Let's also not forget how giddy he was when Paul pelosi was nearly killed over his politics.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/paul-pelosi-charlie-kirk-bail-conspiracies-b2214680.html

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›