Charlie Kirk Assassination Thread

[Senator Clay Davis]

Technically, Charlie died in a school shooting, so I guess kudos to practicing what you preach.

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by MonaTone

He repeatedly stated children dying in school shootings was just the price the 2nd amendment and happily grifted off that take, so yes unequivocally.

Is this the quote you're (or PepsiFree) referencing and using to make the claim that he was happy to see children put to death:

-"I think it's worth it. I think it's worth to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our God-given rights."

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

Is this the quote you're (or PepsiFree) referencing and using to make the claim that he was happy to see children put to death:

-"I think it's worth it. I think it's worth to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our God-given rights."

That was his answer, yes, when being asked in the context of the Nashville school shooting that occurred just a week prior.

Sorry, there is no explaining that away as some sort of enlightened or noble position. It is running a cost-benefit analysis using other people's kids as the currency of choice.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

Is this the quote you're (or PepsiFree) referencing and using to make the claim that he was happy to see children put to death:

-"I think it's worth it. I think it's worth to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our God-given rights."

You are aware you just misquoted this poster while complaining about misquoting right.

This poster said he happily grifted off of his second amendment position as opposed to Pepsi original claim.

Your quote supports the claim of monotone rather than rebuts it.

[DownInFlames]

I like how Fonz has pivoted from not giving examples of great things Kirk said to defending the things he said and somehow making them worse.

I will say, the quote of Kirk about the Civil Rights Act being “a mistake” is accurate, but more in the context that it was not written properly. He agreed with some protections for black people but doesn’t like that it led to DEI. Basically, we shouldn’t keep the black man down, but don’t help him up neither.

https://www.factcheck.org/2025/09/vi...e-kirks-words/

[BigThief]

When actual truth and facts are on your side you don't have to do much talking. When you're pushing nonsesne you better get yapping.

[CroFlames]

Haven't read the thread yet, but:


1. Political violence is not acceptable in a civilized society.
2. Charlie Kirk is a piece of ####.

[Izzle]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Haven't read the thread yet, but:





1. Political violence is not acceptable in a civilized society.

2. Charlie Kirk is a piece of ####.

To your point 2, 'was.'

And thankfully so.

[The Fonz]

"Kirk was happy to see innocent children put to death"


He was pro 2nd amendment and protecting those rights. He advocated different safety measures in order to prevent school shootings, such as
-armed security guards in schools, as you see at sporting events, banks, airports
-security upgrades to schools such as reinforced doors, bulletproof glass, and secure entry points
-arming school staff who are trained & willing, as a last line of defense

Can disagree with his solution to preventing school shootings all you want. But to repeat any iteration of "happy to see children put to death" is just vilifying him in your own mind in order to reconcile being happy that's dead.

In the quote where he said "it's worth it" + "having an armed citizenry comes with a price", he also said "driving comes with a price - 50,000 people die on the road every year - that's a price. But we have decided that the benefit of driving - speed, accessibility, mobility, having products, services - is worth the cost of 50,000 people dying on the road every year".

It'd be baseless and inflammatory to say Kirk is happy to see children killed by drunk drivers.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

"Kirk was happy to see innocent children put to death"


He was pro 2nd amendment and protecting those rights. He advocated different safety measures in order to prevent school shootings, such as
-armed security guards in schools, as you see at sporting events, banks, airports
-security upgrades to schools such as reinforced doors, bulletproof glass, and secure entry points
-arming school staff who are trained & willing, as a last line of defense

Can disagree with his solution to preventing school shootings all you want. But to repeat any iteration of "happy to see children put to death" is just vilifying him in your own mind in order to reconcile being happy that's dead.

In the quote where he said "it's worth it" + "having an armed citizenry comes with a price", he also said "driving comes with a price - 50,000 people die on the road every year - that's a price. But we have decided that the benefit of driving - speed, accessibility, mobility, having products, services - is worth the cost of 50,000 people dying on the road every year".

It'd be baseless and inflammatory to say Kirk is happy to see children killed by drunk drivers.

So why are you upset when people take the same callous approach to Kirk’s death. The general theme here is indifference to the world is a better place. This seems well inline with a certain number of deaths are acceptable for causes I advocate for.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Originally Posted by Izzle

To your point 2, 'was.'

And thankfully so.

Those are the sort of intrusive thoughts you think, but shouldn't say out loud.

You're better off keeping it to yourself.

[Drak]

Here’s an interesting point.


If you go to the Turning Point USA Faith site, their Mission Statement says:


TPUSA Faith exists to unite the Church around primary doctrine and to eliminate wokeism from the American pulpit.

https://tpusafaith.com/#:~:text=Our%...0and%20Freedom.

Unite Christianity and Eliminate “wokeism” from the pulpit.

Potential contexts here since we’ll get the typical, “you’re taking it out of context” bs that MAGAts like to parrot.

Defenders might try and argue that it means eliminate wokeism from the church itself.

But it means eliminate wokeism using the pulpit.

Regardless, It doesn’t matter. Both contexts have the same goal. Because the Christofascist goal that CK and his organization seek is a united pulpit that controls the government. A theocratic state that writes policy and implements law. Which we already know is being implemented through the current admin via legislation, Project 2025 and SCOTUS.

Not debate, tolerance or freedom of speech, like Charlie’s fans like to claim he was about. Eliminate the rights and lives of liberals, women, LGBQT and minorities. Atheists, too.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

"Kirk was happy to see innocent children put to death"


He was pro 2nd amendment and protecting those rights. He advocated different safety measures in order to prevent school shootings, such as
-armed security guards in schools, as you see at sporting events, banks, airports
-security upgrades to schools such as reinforced doors, bulletproof glass, and secure entry points
-arming school staff who are trained & willing, as a last line of defense

Can disagree with his solution to preventing school shootings all you want. But to repeat any iteration of "happy to see children put to death" is just vilifying him in your own mind in order to reconcile being happy that's dead.

In the quote where he said "it's worth it" + "having an armed citizenry comes with a price", he also said "driving comes with a price - 50,000 people die on the road every year - that's a price. But we have decided that the benefit of driving - speed, accessibility, mobility, having products, services - is worth the cost of 50,000 people dying on the road every year".

It'd be baseless and inflammatory to say Kirk is happy to see children killed by drunk drivers.

What a stupid post, I owe Azure an apology.

'He didn’t enjoy the corpses, he merely accepted them' is basically your argument here, with all the ethical sophistication of a mafia accountant. To point out that he did not smile at the deaths is irrelevant, he rationalized them, normalized them, and lobbied for the conditions that made and continue to make them all but inevitable.

His 'solutions' are the usual conservative theatre of futility and surrender politics. Yes, let's turn schools into armed bunkers so that children can be educated under siege, conceding the carnage as permanent and trying only to harden the targets. He didn’t seek to prevent the bloodshed, his answer was to build thicker walls around it.

And the car analogy is as obscene as it is lazy. Driving deaths are tragic externalities of an activity not designed to kill; guns are designed expressly for that purpose. A society that accepts accidental deaths from transport is not morally equivalent to one that shrugs at deliberate slaughter by firearms.

No no, take solace that you're right that he may not have celebrated the deaths. But it's a compete failure of intelligent thought on your part to fail to recognize that he framed them as the acceptable price of his ideology. And when you declare children's lives to be an unfortunate but tolerable toll, you don’t have to giggle while they die to be implicated in their deaths. You only have to keep calling it "worth it".

[sketchyt]

I had very little idea who Charlie Kirk was until a few days ago. It must be exhausting to be that angry about everything all the time. That's what toxic people do. Discounting political ideologies, I was always taught as a child to avoid people like that.

[DownInFlames]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

"Kirk was happy to see innocent children put to death"


He was pro 2nd amendment and protecting those rights. He advocated different safety measures in order to prevent school shootings, such as
-armed security guards in schools, as you see at sporting events, banks, airports
-security upgrades to schools such as reinforced doors, bulletproof glass, and secure entry points
-arming school staff who are trained & willing, as a last line of defense

Can disagree with his solution to preventing school shootings all you want. But to repeat any iteration of "happy to see children put to death" is just vilifying him in your own mind in order to reconcile being happy that's dead.

In the quote where he said "it's worth it" + "having an armed citizenry comes with a price", he also said "driving comes with a price - 50,000 people die on the road every year - that's a price. But we have decided that the benefit of driving - speed, accessibility, mobility, having products, services - is worth the cost of 50,000 people dying on the road every year".

It'd be baseless and inflammatory to say Kirk is happy to see children killed by drunk drivers.

We do accept deaths on our roads because the value of being able to travel is an immeasurably huge benefit to our society. And yet, we have strict laws about who can operate a vehicle and how.

Kirk is against any laws that restrict anyone from owning guns, or requiring them to be trained to use them safely. We strive for better road safety every day, but America does nothing to prevent death from guns, and he likes it that way. That’s why he was scum.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by sketchyt

I had very little idea who Charlie Kirk was until a few days ago. It must be exhausting to be that angry about everything all the time. That's what toxic people do. Discounting political ideologies, I was always taught as a child to avoid people like that.

Pays so well though. At the high end these social media rage grifters are making tens of millions a year.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

"Kirk was happy to see innocent children put to death"


He was pro 2nd amendment and protecting those rights. He advocated different safety measures in order to prevent school shootings, such as
-armed security guards in schools, as you see at sporting events, banks, airports
-security upgrades to schools such as reinforced doors, bulletproof glass, and secure entry points
-arming school staff who are trained & willing, as a last line of defense

Can disagree with his solution to preventing school shootings all you want. But to repeat any iteration of "happy to see children put to death" is just vilifying him in your own mind in order to reconcile being happy that's dead.

In the quote where he said "it's worth it" + "having an armed citizenry comes with a price", he also said "driving comes with a price - 50,000 people die on the road every year - that's a price. But we have decided that the benefit of driving - speed, accessibility, mobility, having products, services - is worth the cost of 50,000 people dying on the road every year".

It'd be baseless and inflammatory to say Kirk is happy to see children killed by drunk drivers.

He called school shootings worth the cost and a rational, prudent deal to make for having the Second Amendment. Even if you want to argue he wasn’t happy, he was certainly beyond indifferent, he thought children being gunned down was worth it and justifiable.

Saying I’m happy he’s dead is just attempting to vilify me in your own mind to reconcile your defence of a hate monger. In reality, I just don’t care he’s gone. Unlike Kirk’s desire to justify and hold up as worthy the killing of children, I don’t think his killing was justified or his silence worth the price of a public assassination, I just don’t care he isn’t around anymore.

But I get that I don’t share enough bigoted views for my opinions to be appealing and worthy of appreciation to you. All good.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by sketchyt

I had very little idea who Charlie Kirk was until a few days ago. It must be exhausting to be that angry about everything all the time. That's what toxic people do. Discounting political ideologies, I was always taught as a child to avoid people like that.

It's hate speech, not political ideology. Standing against tyranny is a virtue, not a character flaw.


This is basic ####, people.

[Reggie Dunlop]

He was a bad person.

Sometimes bad things happen to bad people.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Drak

Here’s an interesting point.


If you go to the Turning Point USA Faith site, their Mission Statement says:


TPUSA Faith exists to unite the Church around primary doctrine and to eliminate wokeism from the American pulpit.

https://tpusafaith.com/#:~:text=Our%...0and%20Freedom.

Unite Christianity and Eliminate “wokeism” from the pulpit.

Potential contexts here since we’ll get the typical, “you’re taking it out of context” bs that MAGAts like to parrot.

Defenders might try and argue that it means eliminate wokeism from the church itself.

But it means eliminate wokeism using the pulpit.

Regardless, It doesn’t matter. Both contexts have the same goal. Because the Christofascist goal that CK and his organization seek is a united pulpit that controls the government. A theocratic state that writes policy and implements law. Which we already know is being implemented through the current admin via legislation, Project 2025 and SCOTUS.

Not debate, tolerance or freedom of speech, like Charlie’s fans like to claim he was about. Eliminate the rights and lives of liberals, women, LGBQT and minorities. Atheists, too.

Didn't we already agree anyone using the term "woke" in a non-sarcastic way is not to be taken seriously? That should be a life principle. For you, too, Conservatives. Unless you care to define woke in a way that isn't a thinly veiled justification to hate on people different than you.