Charlie Kirk assassinated at Utah campus event

I'm not sure the irony here. This was a targeted assassination. It could be knife attack, or poison, bombs, as long as they can shut him up.
Yet, it turned out to be a gun. Guns are effective for killing and (at least in America) not particularly hard to get access to; hence why they are a 'go to' for the very purpose of killing, threatening to kill or as many like to argue to for their right own one, as a means of self defence.


I mean you can kill someone with nothing but your fists, but given a choice, I doubt anyone would be willing to throw fists at a gun fight.......
 
Excuse Me What GIF by Bounce
You can go somewhere that prefers to stifle everything at every corner. Places like Reddit, resetara, Bluesky.

I'm an adult. I also don't like political discussion here too much but there are events that need to be covered and things that are silenced because virtue signalers or people who would rather brush it off are missing the bigger picture.
 
Short sighted. UK already lost free speech as the state knows it has a monopoly on violence. The state turned a blind eye to the rape of British children on an industrial scale because it knows there is nothing an unarmed citizenry can do about it anyway. This is also why successive governments have felt free to ignore the clearly expressed wishes of the people on immigration for decades, until in a generation or two the only choice Brits will have left is whether they want to convert or die.

An unarmed citizenry has to take whatever is forced upon them. The state -correctly- considers itself untouchable.
Oi guvna, we still 'as our bastard swords if anything goes a croppa
 
I know that our gun-related deaths was far, far higher than what it is now.

And i defined what "sensible" meant.

We have sensible ways to own and drive a car, for example. Why not follow the same approach with guns?
what is your take about the 54K sharp objects related crime in UK ( just this year ) ? should we take a sensible approach on selling knives ??
 
Last edited:
Serious question for anyone that knows : in America, are these sites monitored by any kind of government agencies ? What about blue sky ? Surely cheering on someone's death has got to have some kind of repercussion(s) especially since it involves a terrorist act ?

Depending on the government, the information is sent to the authorities and you are surveilled 24/7. It's common in authoritarian states like China, but I'm already seeing news this will happen in the USA in the near future.

Technically speaking, anything you post on the internet is forever, Big Tech hold all your data but in some countries you have to enter with Request For Disclosure. Considering most popular big tech apps don't have end to end encryption, it's very easy for them to hand your data and figure out who you are. Most people today don't care about privacy, so an individual using networks like Onion and decentralized VPNs in a Linux Machine is going to be a ghost. The government doesn't expect most criminals on the internet are covering their tracks.
 
Last edited:
Spoken like someone who has never known what freedom is.
What element of freedom has been taken away from the people in the UK? How different is it now from say 5 or 10 years ago, for example?

What exactly can't people do now they couldn't do back then?

Oh, hate speech was banned many years ago there.
 
I definitely understand the counter-point.

The problem is the majority of human history (and frankly our lived experience in current time) shows that trusting 'the power' to determine if you should 'have power' is a major problem of incentive.

The government is by far, not even close, the biggest killer of man. "democide", death by government. Nobody kills more than government.

Serial killers are a drop in the bucket. government is the ONLY and consistent serial killer. There is no argument against this, nominally.

Communist and socialist governments killed 200+ million people in the 1900s
As I said, I'm all for you/we/us having guns. But why give them to people who are already a threat to themselves and others?
 
What is so important about the 2nd amendment though is the first sentence, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State.."

That's a beautifully crafted piece of text but is often overlooked and ignored.
And when you consider the era it was written, the militia was ALL MEN, aged 18-45 and "Well-regulated" meant "well equipped and trained", so essentially EVERY MALE in the US should have a modern infantry mans load out and practice small unit tactics regularly.

The Militia Act of 1792<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_(United_States)#cite_note-29"><span>[</span>29<span>]</span></a> clarified whom the militia consists of:

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia, by the Captain or Commanding Officer of the company, within whose bounds such citizen shall reside, and that within twelve months after the passing of this Act.
 
What element of freedom has been taken away from the people in the UK? How different is it now from say 5 or 10 years ago, for example?

What exactly can't people do now they couldn't do back then?

Oh, hate speech was banned many years ago there.

See below
You dont have free speech when you have hate speech laws. Especially when this "hate speech" isnt even defined in any way. Its just complete random and can (and is) be abused for everything and anything.
 
what is your take about the 54K sharp objects related crime in UK ( just this year ) ? should we take a sensible approach on selling knives ??
Absolutely and we did. What would those numbers be if we hadn't?

Any violence of any kind is reprehensible. But a knife can harm people in single digits, a gun can kill dozens.
 
What is so important about the 2nd amendment though is the first sentence, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State.."

That's a beautifully crafted piece of text but is often overlooked and ignored.
There is only one sentence, you just cut it in half which removes the meaning of the sentence entirely.
 
And when you consider the era it was written, the militia was ALL MEN, aged 18-45 and "Well-regulated" meant "well equipped and trained", so essentially EVERY MALE in the US should have a modern infantry mans load out and practice small unit tactics regularly.

The Militia Act of 1792<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_(United_States)#cite_note-29"><span>[</span>29<span>]</span></a> clarified whom the militia consists of:
Yes "well equipped and trained". Exactly right!

Trained. In your exact words. If we want to have a gun, we should be properly trained in how to use them.

If we want a car, we need to be properly trained how to use them and then carry a license, which is renewed.
 
I know that our gun-related deaths was far, far higher than what it is now.

It was 0.14 per 100K in 1996 (gun related only), the year prior to banning handguns. In the USA that same year, it was 12.94 per 100K.

My point was even before the UK banned guns, their murder rate was far lower than ours. For similar reasons, I pointed out that there are multiple subgroups in the USA that own less guns but have higher rates of murder.

Also, murder rates in the USA have been trending down (outside of the covid jump), despite more advanced weapons being available:


E6CMxmDx9NmFrTgB.png
 
Wouldn't surprise me at all, assuming it's true. The rest reads like bad fan fiction.

She was killed literally like 5 days after being the only Democrat to break ranks and vote with Republicans to end free healthcare for illegal immigrants. You don't need the help of leftist propaganda to successfully join those dots.
Tinfoil Hat GIF by The Tick
 
There is a video circulating on Twitter about a a perp on a roof. And last I knew, they haven't found the guy yet. It's possible that that nigga in that video isn't even the shooter.
He's not. He was cleared shortly after. For some reason the old man was screaming shoot me when he was in custody.
 
Last edited:


This is my issue: you don't have to like someone's views to stand up for them when they're killed over those views. Charlie Kirk didn't lose his life because he brought violence to anyone; he was targeted for speaking. In any decent civic culture, there's a baseline respect owed to the messenger, the town crier who brings the message to the square, even when we hate the message. The shooter denied him that, and that should offend all of us when it happens to the least and the greatest of us, ops to us or allies to us.
 
It was 0.14 per 100K in 1996 (gun related only), the year prior to banning handguns. In the USA that same year, it was 12.94 per 100K.

My point was even before the UK banned guns, their murder rate was far lower than ours. For similar reasons, I pointed out that there are multiple subgroups in the USA that own less guns but have higher rates of murder.

Also, murder rates in the USA have been trending down (outside of the covid jump), despite more advanced weapons being available:


E6CMxmDx9NmFrTgB.png
Oh, absolutely and the fact that it's coming down IS a great thing. Why wouldn't it be? In fact, there were 18,000 fewer gun-related deaths in 2024 compared to 2023, for example. But having 30,000 gun related deaths, including kids in schools, is still not great, even though it's trending down.

What happens when it goes up again?
 
Absolutely and we did. What would those numbers be if we hadn't?

Any violence of any kind is reprehensible. But a knife can harm people in single digits, a gun can kill dozens.
Tell that to the families of slain children at schools in china. The only thing stopping someone from killing others is their creativity, but the fastest way to stop them from doing it is a bullet.
And when you consider the era it was written, the militia was ALL MEN, aged 18-45 and "Well-regulated" meant "well equipped and trained", so essentially EVERY MALE in the US should have a modern infantry mans load out and practice small unit tactics regularly.

The Militia Act of 1792<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_(United_States)#cite_note-29"><span>[</span>29<span>]</span></a> clarified whom the militia consists of:
If the government were handing out guns and organizing militias, I'd almost agree with you
 
Last edited:
Tell that to the families of slain children at schools in china. The only thing stopping someone is their creativity, but the fastest way to stop them is a bullet.

If the government were handing out guns and organizing militias, I'd almost agree with you
China murder rate is 0.50 per 100,000
 
Yes "well equipped and trained". Exactly right!

Trained. In your exact words. If we want to have a gun, we should be properly trained in how to use them.

If we want a car, we need to be properly trained how to use them and then carry a license, which is renewed.
I always wondered to myself if the 2nd amendment was written recently, would it be the same as it was when it was first proposed. I bet they didn't expect guns to have the amount of firepower and attachments that they do now.

If someone is going to kill me, at least have the balls, vagina or anything in-between to do it up close and personal.
 
Oh, absolutely and the fact that it's coming down IS a great thing. Why wouldn't it be? In fact, there were 18,000 fewer gun-related deaths in 2024 compared to 2023, for example. But having 30,000 gun related deaths, including kids in schools, is still not great, even though it's trending down.

What happens when it goes up again?
America is a population of over 340 million.
 
Last edited:
The right's response to this tells me that they're very easy to manipulate. Just do something that makes them lean into their biases. Easy.

Now I'm definitely thinking it was an IDF sniper that did it.
 
Yes "well equipped and trained". Exactly right!

Trained. In your exact words. If we want to have a gun, we should be properly trained in how to use them.

If we want a car, we need to be properly trained how to use them and then carry a license, which is renewed.
The "Well-regulated militia" though is drawn from the citizenry. Therefore the citizen must be armed FIRST, then the militia, whatever the needs are, are drawn from them. This is why the complete amendment says

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

So THE PEOPLE (i.e. all the citizens) need free access to firearms, such that the militia, whoever it maybe, can pull folks in who are already equipped and ready to be trained.

Kinda hard to honor the Constitution if you require folks to be trained first, only then to be 'allowed' to buy/possess firearms. That leads to gatekeeping of an elite "militia" who can then oppress the unarmed populace, which we see in COUNTLESS countries throughout time.
 
Top Bottom