| ▲ | andrewchambers 12 hours ago |
| I've seen a large number of comments online saying the shooter was a trump supporter - I don't really understand where that information comes from. I feel like this is the sort of thing a prediction market might be able sort out. |
|
| ▲ | suzdude 11 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| There are multiple statements from his relatives that his family are "MAGA", his parents are Registered Republicans. https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/crime/ty... It seems he was "raised right", with easy access to firearms and ammunition. Items not nearly as common in left voting urban areas. However, Mr. Kimmel's comments centered on the fact that his political leanings, and reasoning for the school shooting are not entirely clear. |
| |
| ▲ | kelnos 11 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > There are multiple statements from his relatives that his family are "MAGA", his parents are Registered Republicans. To be fair, that doesn't necessarily say anything about his politics. I know plenty of liberals with MAGA parents. I don't think we can draw any conclusions as to his politics at this time. | | |
| ▲ | suzdude 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | Exactly, which was the point Kimmel was making. Apparently that suggestion was too much for the current administration, and the official narrative must not be questioned. |
| |
| ▲ | barney54 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The reasoning for the shooting is pretty clear. He told his transgender lover that “I had enough of his [Kirk’s] hatred. Some hate can’t be negotiated out.” https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/26098852-tyler-robin... | | |
| ▲ | suzdude 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | No, that's the reason to hate Kirk, not a reason to shoot him. What in his upbringing led him to believe the way to handle the situation was with violence is unclear. | | |
| ▲ | ars 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | vjjsejj 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Certainly not more creative compared to painting someone who openly supports school shootings as some sort of a martyr. | |
| ▲ | suzdude 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The school shooting that Mr. Kirk lost his life to is not, "left wing violence". Unless you want to submit that most school shootings are "right wing violence" if the shooter hated public education. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | Redoubts 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > There are multiple statements from his relatives that his family are "MAGA", his parents are Registered Republicans. Most leftists despise their parents politics. None of this suggests a rightward leaning of the culprit himself. | | |
| ▲ | suzdude 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | > Most leftists despise their parents[sic] politics. And do you have a source on that? Anecdotally, most "leftists" I know have left leaning parents. But it's up to the person to define if they are or are not "leftist", because it's a rather narrow, small minded world view that has to define things in those terms. > None of this suggests a rightward leaning of the culprit himself. Nor does it suggest his leftward leaning. Maybe it suggests why he used violence as a means to enact social change on the world. edit:spelling |
| |
| ▲ | fdschoeneman 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | It was well known before Kimmel made his comments that the shooter was in a romantic relationship with a trans woman. Having said that, even if he did not know about that relationship it was irresponsible of Kimmel to repeat rumors he could not have known were true that the shooter was maga. | | |
| ▲ | suzdude 11 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Except your premise is incorrect. Kimmel did not repeat rumors, he asserted that the political affiliations were unknown. edit: He asserted the "MAGA gang" trying to distance themselves from Mr. Robinson, which is true. It does not mean Kimmel views Robinson as "MAGA". | | |
| ▲ | lojban 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Exactly, it wasn't even a joke; it's a fact. MAGA is trying to distance themselves from the killer, and so is the left. No one wants to be associated with that guy, and for good reason. | |
| ▲ | itbeho 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | He did not assert they were unknown: “We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang trying to characterize this kid who killed Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them,” Kimmel said in his Sept. 15 monologue. | | |
| ▲ | benmmurphy 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I guess that leaves the question as to why Kimmel did not say: 'We hit some new lows over the weekend when people of all political stripes were trying to characterize this kid who killed Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them'. Because that seems like it gives more information to the viewer because that is what actually happened and acknowledging people from both sides were doing the 'bad thing' should help to bring people together instead of driving people apart. | |
| ▲ | suzdude 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Correct! He never asserted what Mr. Robinson's affiliations were to begin with. I added an edit after re-reading the comments. |
|
| |
| ▲ | asdff 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Caitlyn Jenner is a trump supporter fwiw. Trans is not incompatible with conservatism despite the cognitive dissonance required to take such a stance. | |
| ▲ | foogazi 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | You don’t think trans people or their friends can be republican / conservative? |
|
|
|
| ▲ | seanw444 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| [flagged] |
| |
| ▲ | ceejayoz 11 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Confused politics isn’t all that unusual; look at Caitlyn Jenner for a concrete example. Add in the usual bad blood between well-armed groups and it certainly happens. I wish everyone would wait a week for actual reliable info to come out. I wish we weren’t getting a bunch of said info from deeply partisan and untrustworthy fuckwits. Neither end result would shock me. | | |
| ▲ | barney54 11 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | [flagged] | |
| ▲ | throwacct 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | According to the latest iteration, his right-wing family said he was left-wing and even neighbors saw him with his roommate. Freedom of speech is protected. That people are celebrating a man's death, and worse yet, justifying it, is evil but still protected. But what's not protected is the consequences of these actions. I don't want to live, work, etc... next to someone who thinks that it's ok to commit acts of violence against others just because we don't share the same views. | | |
| ▲ | ceejayoz 11 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > But what's not protected is the consequences of these actions. But this is protected in this case. I can unfriend you on Facebook for saying “I’m not sad he’s dead”. (And to be clear, Kimmel didn’t even go that far.) I can kick you out of my birthday party. I can complain to your employer. They can fire you. (They can fire you for having tattoos, or red hair!) But the government cannot do these things. That is the entire point of the First Amendment. The FCC can not threaten the license of a broadcaster for protected speech, but we are here anyways. | | |
| ▲ | dylan604 11 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The FCC s/can/should/ not threaten the license of a broadcaster for protected speech, but we are here anyways. They absolutely can do it as they've just shown. It's not like they are unable to do it. It's that they shouldn't do it. There's a big difference. | |
| ▲ | throwacct 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The entire point of the 1st Amendment is to protect the citizens from being thrown in jail or being prosecuted for speaking against the government. Where do you see that here? The FCC chairman just said that
"...broadcasters are entirely different than people that use other forms of communication. They have a license granted by is at the FCC, and that comes with it an obligation to operate in the public interest". | | | |
| ▲ | rattlesnakedave 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | There is no First Amendment right to an FCC broadcast license. | | |
| |
| ▲ | vjjsejj 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > next to someone who thinks that it's ok to commit acts of violence against others just because we don't share the same views. But that still only includes a subset of views? I mean what you are saying is right. But these people were perfectly fine with ignoring or sometimes outright endorsing political violence until one of their own was the target. That does not seem extremely hypocritical? | |
| ▲ | mindslight 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | To be fair, the new revanchist right calls actual conservatives "left wing". They call libertarians "left wing". They call the shared American values of the past fifty years "left wing". They call straightforward consensus reality "left wing". They basically call anyone who doesn't subscribe to the extended reactionary cinematic universe "left wing". So the only data point there is that his parents are suffering social media psychosis. Also, non-normative sexual behavior is more indicative of being a Republican ("I have a wide stance!", etc, etc, etc). Democrats just espouse not beating yourself up over it, whereas Republicans seemingly yearn for the closet. |
|
| |
| ▲ | cloverich 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | My bias in these cases is that the simplest answer, same as any mass shooting, is that the killers motivations are a manifestation of mental illness and nothing more. Not always true but typically so; wasnt the trump would be assassin not left for instance? When i was told that i wasnt surprised, not because i think it was more likely of someone on the right, but because i think its mostly random. Eg we have a gun culture, a toxic culture, and a lack of mental health institutions culture. That will only ever produce (among other things) a consistent stream of random acts of violence. In this particular case i am a little more curious than usual to find out if that holds up here if only because the narrative was so immediately anti left attacks. | | |
| ▲ | tootie 11 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Just look at the guy who shot Trump's ear. He had no discernable motive or explicit political leaning at all. And had supposedly been tracking both Trump and Biden. He just did it for attention. | |
| ▲ | barney54 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] |
| |
| ▲ | halfmatthalfcat 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Are you saying there are no conservatives who are attracted to those who identify as trans? Not too long ago you could say the same thing about being conservative and being attracted to the same sex, yet that isn't something be bat an eye at anymore. | |
| ▲ | krisboyz781 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Ahhh yes, whose entire family is maga and lives in the most conservative state in America | |
| ▲ | andrewchambers 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | My point isn't really about what is correct or incorrect in this case. My point is about making it so that you have to actively risk money to push the truth needle in the wrong direction. | | |
|
