Trump ally Charlie Kirk shot at campus event in Utah

It is not uncommon or unheard of for individuals to make donations to both sides. I rarely read much into it if the donations are balanced. Have seen several instances where the donor makes significantly larger donations to one side over the other.
 
j_hungary said:
I don't understand the fascination with guns. I own guns, more than 1, and both in the US and Australia. Yes, if you are a responsible gun owner who knows what you are doing, that's probably can make a difference. However, as a cop and someone who knows that things can go wrong when you introduce more weapons to a problem, that's not always the best outcome.

Guns are like any tool; you need to master them for you to be able to use them confidently. I don't know your experience with firearms, and even at my level, I don't generally feel extra comfortable pulling it out to diffuse a violent situation. And if you can't use it confidently, that's a problem.

When you are in an armed situation, that's very volatile, you have specific element to look at, you need to mind your cross fire, make sure you have a clean line of sight, make sure people won't stray into your firing line and when they do, you need to know when to stop, how to approach with your weapon drawn, and how to protect your weapon, because if you don't mind the corner when you round it, you got ambush and have your gun taken away, that's not good at all. You basically need to know how to do all that to contribute to a particular situation. At the end of them all, you need to be accurate, because if you don't, any stray round could hit someone, and that will be on you.

If a country has a sound training regime like Switzerland, probably what you think will work. Still, for an average Joe not regularly trained at a range and pulling them out every which way, this is going to do more harm than good for any violent situation, and not everyone in America who owns guns knows how to use them responsibly, let alone accurately. That is the issue.
Click to expand...
My points is not promoting violence and every human has the right within the bounds of responsibility to self-defence. Its a right.

The technicalities of various types of armament and tactics is a side debate that I am not engaging in because that's not what I am trying to propose, but rather the 'right of responsible citizens to be responsibly armed'

Without getting into a lengthy debate that ends nowhere, the point I made earlier are valid enough in my view. If there is a situation where the system has collapsed and non state actors are in your territory. Like France in WW2 a generic example.

Would it have helped the population to have enough citizens who are armed?
 
This is something interesting from daily mail

www.dailymail.co.uk

Everything we know about Charlie Kirk 'assassin's' parents

Robinson was taken into custody on Thursday night in southern Utah after having allegedly confessed to his father.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk

1757700925439.png

In another interview with Debbie Robinson, apparently she claims "They have got the wrong person" but that piece was locked behind a paywall so I can't read it.
 
AZ_HighCountry said:
It is not uncommon or unheard of for individuals to make donations to both sides. I rarely read much into it if the donations are balanced. Have seen several instances where the donor makes significantly larger donations to one side over the other.
Click to expand...
True. Take Charlie Kirk for example, spent his life batting for the right, but towards the end, he leaned left.
 
Asfandyar Bhittani said:
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
Click to expand...

You didn’t really expect Western hypocrisy to just end suddenly, did you?

Zionists still control a lot of levers of power and the media - The Genocidal Yahoo himself came on US TV and blamed Kirks killing on a nexus of Islamic Radicals and Communists.

Their hasbara to spread hate against all Muslims is nowhere close to done.
 
Path-Finder said:
My points is not promoting violence and every human has the right within the bounds of responsibility to self-defence. Its a right.

The technicalities of various types of armament and tactics is a side debate that I am not engaging in because that's not what I am trying to propose, but rather the 'right of responsible citizens to be responsibly armed'

Without getting into a lengthy debate that ends nowhere, the point I made earlier are valid enough in my view. If there is a situation where the system has collapsed and non state actors are in your territory. Like France in WW2 a generic example.

Would it have helped the population to have enough citizens who are armed?
Click to expand...
I don't see the right to bear arms as a fundamental human right; the right to self-defence is, but it is a stretch for me to say right to bear arms. Bear in mind, the right of self-defence is proportional. As I said in a previous post, if guns surround you, then you want to have one, and probably it's your right to have one, because everyone has one. Still, the trade-off is that you may be responsible, but it cannot be guaranteed that everyone will be, again, unless you have a sound training regime in place for everyone.

The problem for me is that the technical part is the issue here, because that's what makes you responsible. I mean, you can say that if you went to the range twice a week and you are proficient with a firearm, but that alone won't make you responsible. You need to be a master of the tool before you can use it responsibly. I mean, that's the reason why, before you are qualified to use a rifle in the army, they give you a rubber ducky.

Regarding a non-state actor, you need to consider two key factors. What if the non-state actor has more guns than you? And what if they have things that even guns won't do? If you have zero experience using a firearm other than shooting maybe 200 rounds off it in a leisure setting, how good do you think you would be if I gave you a fully auto M4 and told you to go on patrol? Guns are not the issue here; it's how you use them.
 
The guy was a dick. He was a racist fascist fkwit. I wont lose any sleep over him. These guys in the west talking about him as if he was some kind of hero
AZ_HighCountry said:
To the contrary, Kirk was very active politically. He founded TPA shortly after graduating from HS. He was young, charismatic, and well-spoken. He attracted a lot of younger voters. He was instrumental in getting out the young vote in this last election cycle.

Many considered him a rising star in the conservative movement and well on his way to a notable political career.
Click to expand...
 
It’s good to see even the American Right is waking up to threats of Israel and Zionism.
 
Asfandyar Bhittani said:
True. Take Charlie Kirk for example, spent his life batting for the right, but towards the end, he leaned left.
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t say Tyler was ‘leaning left’ just yet, given his upbringing and family’s political views (Republicans, pro gun, former LEA, pro Trump).

It’ll be interesting to find out how he engaged with his Republican family on political issues - did he get into arguments with them against Trump/MAGA etc to understand if there was an ideological change since 2020 when he donated to Trump (we’ll have to wait and see if he donated to any Democrats).
 
Aryan_B said:
The guy was a dick. He was a racist fascist fkwit. I wont lose any sleep over him. These guys in the west talking about him as if he was some kind of hero
Click to expand...
He proudly proclaimed (in an older debate) that he would make his 10 year old daughter give birth if she was raped and impregnated.

Absolutely disgusting human being.
 
Agnostic Muslim said:
You didn’t really expect Western hypocrisy to just end suddenly, did you?

Zionists still control a lot of levers of power and the media - The Genocidal Yahoo himself came on US TV and blamed Kirks killing on a nexus of Islamic Radicals and Communists.

Their hasbara to spread hate against all Muslims is nowhere close to done.
Click to expand...
They are already playing down his
White
Christian
Republican
Pro gun stances.

I wouldn't be surprised if they start calling him Al Tyler bin Robin or Tahir Rabbani.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)

Pakistan Defence Latest

Country Watch Latest

Latest Posts

Share this page

Back
Top