Remix.run Logo
mschuster91 5 days ago

[flagged]

firesteelrain 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

> He somewhat ironically said that unfortunately some deaths are worth it to keep the Second Amendment

Why does this keep getting posted everywhere after he got shot? It’s like someone is running a campaign

I have seen it in Reddit comments, Twitter/X, HN, and TikTok. Literally same comment or variation plastered

bdhe 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

Because it is incredibly apt. He and his campaigns and influence have worked very hard over the years to stop progress on gun reform, aimed at preventing the very kind of violent actions that he was unfortunately subject to today.

This doesn't condone violence but offers context as to how he would've assessed a similar situation if he weren't the target.

firesteelrain 5 days ago | parent [-]

2nd amendment doesn’t protect against mental health or someone deciding to hurt someone.

Hikikomori 5 days ago | parent [-]

What do you mean, Charlies whole argument is that good guys with guns solve shooter problems instead of limiting gun ownership.

firesteelrain 5 days ago | parent [-]

I get it

But are we suggesting that he should have deployed counter snipers?

Hikikomori 5 days ago | parent [-]

I think we're suggesting that his solution isn't really a solution.

trimethylpurine 5 days ago | parent [-]

I don't see that he suggested a solution. Just the opposite, he pointed out that gun laws also aren't a solution. Much like the war on drugs isn't. Much like "though shalt not kill" didn't stop the inquisition, or the Moorish conquest.

Hikikomori 5 days ago | parent [-]

Worked in Australia. Works in Europe. It's not that hard to understand.

trimethylpurine 4 days ago | parent [-]

Worked to do what? There are no murders in Europe and Australia?

selcuka 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

No murders? No. You should read about the "Nirvana fallacy".

Fewer murders? Yes. The homicide rate is 0.854 per capita in Australia (5.763 in the US) and much lower than US in most European countries (Russia being the exception).

Hikikomori 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

trimethylpurine 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

[flagged]

bdhe 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I think I need to just post the Sartre quote over and over again. The inability or disinterest of certain factions of the right in having a good faith argument is just genuinely frustrating.

trimethylpurine 2 days ago | parent [-]

I'm still here if you'd like to make an argument. The above rebuttal is not remotely a good faith argument. It appears to be a hope that repeating misinformation will somehow make it an accepted truth.

That might work for circles of low performing political movements, but it doesn't work for those of us interested in a scientific approach to knowledge.

By all means, explain what making guns illegal has actually done for Australia, the whitest country in the world, and the UK, the capital of knife crime.

You're about to prove facts that neither of us want to admit.

I'm a listening scientist. Are you?

Hikikomori 2 days ago | parent [-]

Nobody was suggesting that it would remove all crime. The racist undertones in your post are evident.

trimethylpurine a day ago | parent [-]

The correlation between lower crime and gun laws is very weak and disproven by countless other examples. The two countries given as proof aren't exceptions to that. Instead they are examples of how lower poverty correlates with lower crime rate.

Race isn't a factor, just as gun laws aren't. Pointing out that race isn't a factor is the opposite of racism.

Read carefully.

rokkamokka 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Why? It's an interesting coincidence. Don't you think?

firesteelrain 5 days ago | parent [-]

It’s an interesting coincidence that the comment keeps getting posted as if some anti conservative robot got turned on.

Plus, this isn’t a 2nd amendment issue

mrguyorama 5 days ago | parent [-]

[flagged]

roughly 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Because it’s both a deeply ironic thing for him to have said and also fairly emblematic of his political movement. It doesn’t have to be a conspiracy - if he’d said “only dumb idiots slip on banana peels” and then died after slipping on a banana peel, there’d be a lot of content posted organically about that, too.

Almondsetat 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

It's almost like when a lot of people are posting some ideas get picked on and shared en masse. Why not say the same exact thing about all those "guys he's in stable conditions he's gonna make it" tweets that got spammed? Wasn't that a campaign also?

firesteelrain 5 days ago | parent [-]

No, it’s not.

DiggyJohnson 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You don’t have sympathy for a non-violent public figure being brutally murdered at a speaking event on campus? That’s messed up.

creata 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

Fwiw, I don't think anyone should ever be killed, but nobody's entitled to anyone's sympathy, and it's not messed up that many people find it difficult to sympathize with Kirk, given the political positions he preached.

For example, maybe (or maybe not) for you it's just an abstract argument about far-away matters, but when Kirk called Leviticus 20:13 (the one about killing men who lie with men) "God's perfect law", it's not so abstract to gay people.

mschuster91 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I don't celebrate his death, I fear the consequences it will most certainly bring (especially with the hot mess going on in the US), but given his evidenced lackluster attitude to tens of thousands of gun victims every year in the US alone, a kick in the face to the relatives of all the victims and their families, yes I do not feel a single shred of smypathy for him.

noobr 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

some people would not consider his hateful rethoric as non-violent, and his words had and will have violent consequences for other people

DiggyJohnson 5 days ago | parent [-]

That is a definition of “violence” that does not register with most people, and especially in a discussion of one of the most brutal public murders we’ve seen in awhile in this country

ModernMech 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[flagged]

DrillShopper 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

FergusArgyll 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

yfw 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

Would you like to live in a society like that?

mschuster91 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

My position is that guns should be strictly regulated and traffic as well to achieve zero traffic deaths ("Vision Zero"). Alternatively, the US could look into what gun culture difference they have to Switzerland, because the Swiss have amongst the most liberal gun laws of Europe but are pretty average amongst European countries when it comes to gun violence.

Kirk's position was to have guns as unregulated as possible, so I pretty much DGAF when the consequences of his position come home to roost.

FergusArgyll 5 days ago | parent [-]

[flagged]

mschuster91 5 days ago | parent [-]

Helsinki in Finland proves Vision Zero be possible [1] and a number of European countries have gun policies [2] that basically restrict carrying guns to hunters, people in proven danger of life, police officers and special security guards, in addition to gun sports who can own, but can't carry outside of dedicated venues.

Objectively, my position is both serious and not just realistic, but actually lived reality here in Europe. You are free to visit our continent whenever you want, I can only recommend it.

[1] https://www.dw.com/en/no-traffic-deaths-in-helsinki-finland-...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_of_gun_laws_by_nation

hn_acc1 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

We've tried vision zero here (city in CA), and it's resulted in constant driver aggravation due to slowing down commute traffic, worse driving than before, and more traffic fatalities than before.

Helsinki may be a lucky coincidence. It doesn't prove it's possible everywhere.

eldaisfish 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

vel0city 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

We really should regulate cars far more than we do.

There are only ~16,000 non-suicide related firearm deaths in the US. There are about 40,000 vehicle related deaths in the US. We could save a lot of lives if we made our society far less car dependent and had more restrictions on allowing people to operate vehicles in public spaces.