Merged Charlie Kirk shot at Utah Valley University event. / Charlie Kirk Shot And Killed

Ranb said:
If he was actually using a 30-06 rifle at 150-200 yards, then I suspect the shooter was aiming for the chest and went high. Knowing so little about the incident means I'm speculating too much right now.
Click to expand...
My thought as well, I would not be surprised if the shooter grew up hunting.
 
jt512 said:
The New York Times has described it as "an older-model Mauser .30-06 caliber high-powered bolt action rifle."

Click to expand...
William Parcher said:
It's reported that the rifle had a long distance scope.
Click to expand...
Pretty common deer-hunting rifle and round. In fact Sears used to sell a Belgian-made Mauser under its own brand for just such a purpose - the J.C. Higgins Model 50.
 
Last edited:
dudalb said:
Where were all the "good guys with guns" to stop the bad guy with a gun?
That's how things are supposed to work, aren't they?
Click to expand...
I would love to hear your Non Violent way of dealing with armed, violent criminals,
Click to expand...
Thoughts and prayers?

Expecting every building to be built with just one door?

Blaming mental illness, while at the same time cutting funding for programs that can help address mental health problems so they can give tax cuts to millionaires?
 
Vixen said:
I had never heard of Charlie Kirk before seeing a near-live unfolding of events on X-Twitter so feel unqualified to offer a decent opinion. However, I did see in a Finnish newspaper that Kirk had claimed on GB News in a debate that 'Finland is Russian'. Now, that is not only ignorant, but also fighting talk!
Click to expand...
I don't know about GB News, but he definitely said it in a debate with a German student at one of his "Prove Me Wrong" events (see here for a Finnish newspaper article that links to the video). He also stated that Finland was neutral in World War II. You might want to tell any history teachers or professors you know about that; I'm sure they'd be very interested to hear they've been teaching it wrong all these years. :rolleyes:

Vixen said:
What is it about the far right that makes them admire the likes of Putin and Russia? I simply cannot understand their support of Russia.
Click to expand...
It's complicated. Some of them are, as dirtywick said, simply on the Kremlin's payroll--Scott Ritter, for example. He's a former US Marine intelligence officer and UN weapons inspector who's married to a Georgian woman suspected of being a former KGB agent (the Russians undoubtedly introduced her to him as a bribe). But he's also a convicted sex offender, so no Western media outlets will touch him. But RT (formerly Russia Today) is only too happy to pay him to parrot their talking points.

There are also some who've been duped into thinking that Putin is some sort of protector of so-called traditional/Western/Christian values, partly because Putin gives lip service to some of these, and partly because some of them align with his goals, e.g., arresting or slowing Russia's demographic collapse by encouraging women to have more children.

Then there some axe grinders, like Douglas Macgregor, former US Army colonel, who is butthurt because the Army didn't adopt his plan for radically restructuring the ground forces after the first Gulf War.

Next we have the arch-appeasers, like political scientist John Mearsheimer, who has the nerve to call the blog he co-founded Responsible Statecraft. He and his ilk insist that we need to allow Putin his "sphere of influence," because "OMG!!! He might nuke us!!!" Of course, he doesn't quite put it that way, but that's the gist. Some of these people also have the delusion that the West can somehow enlist Russia's help against China, if we only appease Putin enough. If there were ever a time when that might have worked, it's long past.

Finally, we have the people who admire Putin because they think he's some kind of strong leader, not realizing how weak he actually is. Trump, of course, falls in this category; I think Tucker Carlson probably does, too.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Lukraak_Sisser said:
I guess wanting to have access to large amounts of weapons designed to kill humans at a distance without a chance to defend themselves to protect against a potential tyrannical government was never meant to be used against those trying to install a tyrannical government?
Click to expand...
IOW, the "tyrannical government" wants to be free to shoot whomever they want, provided they don't get return fire as a result.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Or he's still butt hurt over the fact he didn't get his way after the Central Park Five were exonerated. He wanted to see them executed even after they were exonerated and the actual guilty person was convicted including his DNA matching.
Click to expand...
(Kirk stated) Children should witness executions and that these should be made public. "Death penalties should be public, should be quick, it should be televised. I think at a certain age, it's an initiation..." he said, adding that the crime rate would decrease if children had seen an execution.
Daily Mail
That should prompt Trump to have the execution (via hungry lions in a pit, of course) put on PPV with Joe Rogan doing the commentary.
and of course all proceeds to benefit the Trurmp 2028 Campaign. :rolleyes:
 
stanfr said:
(Kirk stated) Children should witness executions and that these should be made public. "Death penalties should be public, should be quick, it should be televised. I think at a certain age, it's an initiation..." he said, adding that the crime rate would decrease if children had seen an execution.
Daily Mail
Click to expand...
Let's honour Charlie's wishes.

First up against the wall: Trump cabinet
 
Any idea what will happen to Turning Point USA now?
These organizations are such personality cuts that it's hard to imagine that his successor will be able to marshal the same level of support for Trump that Kirk could.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom