BREAKING Conservative Charlie Kirk Shot During Debate In Utah

[cdub55]

Charlie Kirk has long argued that the epidemic of gun violence in America is the regrettable, but acceptable, price of liberty. In his words, the trade-off is a “prudent deal,” a “rational” sacrifice to preserve the Second Amendment and protect what he calls “God-given rights.” (He said these cruel and heartless words at a speaking event in April 2023 — I'm just the messenger.)

When children are slaughtered in their classrooms, when congregants are gunned down in churches, when families are erased at grocery stores, Kirk’s response is not grief but calculus. The deaths are tragic, he says, but worth it. A necessary toll paid at freedom’s gate. “Thought and prayers.”

And so, when he himself was shot at a speaking event in Utah, the hypocrisy was deafening. Here was a man who minimized other people’s agony, suddenly forced to taste the violence he once dismissed. This is what I mean by Second Amendment justice: not that the shooting should be celebrated, not that violence solves anything, but that the logic he defended has folded back on him like a tesseract.

He declared that mass shootings were an unfortunate but tolerable part of liberty. Then he became a victim of the very “tolerable violence” he worked so hard to normalize.

It is not justice in the sense of moral balance or divine retribution. It is justice in the way a mirror delivers justice: cold, impartial reflection. The gun culture he championed did not exempt him. The bullets he waved away in theory found their way into practice. He is not immune. None of us are.

The asymmetry here is staggering. When Nashville lost six lives, when Buffalo buried grandmothers and fathers, when children in Uvalde were executed one after another, Kirk’s sympathy was withheld. He hardened his rhetoric. He doubled down. His “deal” demanded that others bear the cost, while he collected the political dividends of defiance. They are some sweet economic dividends, I tell you. Charlie Kirk gets paid for his support of the Conservative agenda.

But compassion is a muscle. Fail to exercise it for others, and you cannot expect it to be exercised for you. If he offered no tears for the slain, why should the public be compelled to offer them for him?

This is not schadenfreude. It is a reckoning. It is the exposure of a brutal dissonance at the core of American politics: leaders who protect the idea of rights while sacrificing the reality of lives. Leaders who worship an amendment more than they grieve for the children whose bodies become its sacrament. Leaders who declare that freedom requires blood, and then recoil when their own blood is drawn.

Let me be clear: the shooting of Charlie Kirk was a crime. It was not noble resistance. It was not an answer. Political violence corrodes democracy; it breeds escalation, not resolution. But understanding the irony is not the same as endorsing the act. Recognizing the karmic symmetry does not mean cheering it. What it means is this: when cruelty is normalized, when violence is rationalized, when deaths are rendered acceptable by ideology, eventually the logic boomerangs.

That is the lesson here, the harsh and unsentimental truth. You cannot unleash a culture of violence, bless it as liberty, and then feign shock when it arrives at your own doorstep. The Second Amendment, as interpreted by Kirk and his allies, does not discriminate. It devours indiscriminately.

That is the justice of it. Not divine, not poetic — merely inevitable.”

- Thaddeus Howze

The old list 2,000 reasons why someone was a bad person but end it with a holier than thou "but he didn't deserve this" diatribe. Ahhhhh refreshing....

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Who would threaten James Spann? Not saying he has not been threatened, but that is so weird. What could he possibly have done that would cause some viewer to see him and say to himself, "I have to threaten that guy."

Are you kidding?

Spann won't hitch his wagon to the Climate Change Religion (note: I'm referring here to the failed prophecies group, not the scientific reality of such), and thus he must be shunned. If he will not comply and fearmonger, he MUST be silenced. I don't doubt for one second he's gotten threats - from both the hardcore climate change folks who glue their hands to highways AND from Trumpers, too, for refusing to go along when Trump used that Sharpie to insist Alabama was in danger from a hurricane and Spann wouldn't budge (to his credit).

And as I've said here dozens of times - my brother works in the news media, and it is an almost daily thing: no matter what they say or do, someone who is an unstable follower of a politician calls up whining about their coverage, accusing them of "fake news" and asking whey they didn't cover Story X with the same wall-to-wall coverage as they did Story Y. (His experience the last decade is that the Trump, Bernie, and Warren folks are all about the same - which given he's in New England is probably to be expected).

 

[75thru79]

Charlie Kirk has long argued that the epidemic of gun violence in America is the regrettable, but acceptable, price of liberty. In his words, the trade-off is a “prudent deal,” a “rational” sacrifice to preserve the Second Amendment and protect what he calls “God-given rights.” (He said these cruel and heartless words at a speaking event in April 2023 — I'm just the messenger.)

When children are slaughtered in their classrooms, when congregants are gunned down in churches, when families are erased at grocery stores, Kirk’s response is not grief but calculus. The deaths are tragic, he says, but worth it. A necessary toll paid at freedom’s gate. “Thought and prayers.”

And so, when he himself was shot at a speaking event in Utah, the hypocrisy was deafening. Here was a man who minimized other people’s agony, suddenly forced to taste the violence he once dismissed. This is what I mean by Second Amendment justice: not that the shooting should be celebrated, not that violence solves anything, but that the logic he defended has folded back on him like a tesseract.

He declared that mass shootings were an unfortunate but tolerable part of liberty. Then he became a victim of the very “tolerable violence” he worked so hard to normalize.

It is not justice in the sense of moral balance or divine retribution. It is justice in the way a mirror delivers justice: cold, impartial reflection. The gun culture he championed did not exempt him. The bullets he waved away in theory found their way into practice. He is not immune. None of us are.

The asymmetry here is staggering. When Nashville lost six lives, when Buffalo buried grandmothers and fathers, when children in Uvalde were executed one after another, Kirk’s sympathy was withheld. He hardened his rhetoric. He doubled down. His “deal” demanded that others bear the cost, while he collected the political dividends of defiance. They are some sweet economic dividends, I tell you. Charlie Kirk gets paid for his support of the Conservative agenda.

But compassion is a muscle. Fail to exercise it for others, and you cannot expect it to be exercised for you. If he offered no tears for the slain, why should the public be compelled to offer them for him?

This is not schadenfreude. It is a reckoning. It is the exposure of a brutal dissonance at the core of American politics: leaders who protect the idea of rights while sacrificing the reality of lives. Leaders who worship an amendment more than they grieve for the children whose bodies become its sacrament. Leaders who declare that freedom requires blood, and then recoil when their own blood is drawn.

Let me be clear: the shooting of Charlie Kirk was a crime. It was not noble resistance. It was not an answer. Political violence corrodes democracy; it breeds escalation, not resolution. But understanding the irony is not the same as endorsing the act. Recognizing the karmic symmetry does not mean cheering it. What it means is this: when cruelty is normalized, when violence is rationalized, when deaths are rendered acceptable by ideology, eventually the logic boomerangs.

That is the lesson here, the harsh and unsentimental truth. You cannot unleash a culture of violence, bless it as liberty, and then feign shock when it arrives at your own doorstep. The Second Amendment, as interpreted by Kirk and his allies, does not discriminate. It devours indiscriminately.

That is the justice of it. Not divine, not poetic — merely inevitable.”

- Thaddeus Howze

"I'm out there, Jerry. And I'm loving every minute of it!".

- Kosmo Kramer (at least everyone knows who I am).

 

[DzynKingRTR]

Who would threaten James Spann? Not saying he has not been threatened, but that is so weird. What could he possibly have done that would cause some viewer to see him and say to himself, "I have to threaten that guy."

Some lunatics think the weatherman makes the weather. seriously. I knew one in Atlanta that said she was yelled at in a Kroger for "making it rain Saturday"

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Some lunatics think the weatherman makes the weather. seriously. I knew one in Atlanta that said she was yelled at in a Kroger for "making it rain Saturday"

The WCBI weatherman back in the 80s and 90s was a deacon in my church and a retired Air Force meteorologist. He loved how if the weather was bad, it was somehow his fault, but if it was good, well, God deserved all the credit.

 

[colbysullivan]

I only judge people by who they are and what they believe.

I am diametrically opposed to just about everything he stood for.

He was a professional provocateur.

If you can't understand this, you've obviously not read any of the stuff he pushed. Or you agreed with it.

Either way, the world is a better place without people like that. But there are better ways to rid a nuisance. Violence isn't the answer.

Simply wanting to debate with the other side is a “provocateur”? You’ve never actually WATCHED any of his videos have you?

 

[Tidewater]

Are you kidding?

Spann won't hitch his wagon to the Climate Change Religion (note: I'm referring here to the failed prophecies group, not the scientific reality of such), and thus he must be shunned. If he will not comply and fearmonger, he MUST be silenced. I don't doubt for one second he's gotten threats - from both the hardcore climate change folks who glue their hands to highways AND from Trumpers, too, for refusing to go along when Trump used that Sharpie to insist Alabama was in danger from a hurricane and Spann wouldn't budge (to his credit).

And as I've said here dozens of times - my brother works in the news media, and it is an almost daily thing: no matter what they say or do, someone who is an unstable follower of a politician calls up whining about their coverage, accusing them of "fake news" and asking whey they didn't cover Story X with the same wall-to-wall coverage as they did Story Y. (His experience the last decade is that the Trump, Bernie, and Warren folks are all about the same - which given he's in New England is probably to be expected).

Honestly, I have never heard him question anthropogenic climate change. He seem to be the guy that they sent to the worst possible weather locations to report from the field.

 

[Cruloc]

There wasn’t a hateful bone in his body. They couldn’t beat him with words, so they killed him.

He was a devout Christian and let people know it...even those that disagreed with him.

But this narrative that he didn't deserve this, but he brought it on himself.....that's an awful take.

 

[cdub55]

Speaking of weather men, news reports say that northwest winds of 10 to 15 mph with gusts as high as 25 mph were prevalent in Utah yesterday at the rally. This theory of just anyone could do it just got a little less likely.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Honestly, I have never heard him question anthropogenic climate change. He seem to be the guy that they sent to the worst possible weather locations to report from the field.

He didn't question it.

He just won't jump on the bandwagon and to the extremists, it means he's a "climate denier."

he's stay out of it - and folks think he has an obligation.

You know, the same people who say "weather isn't climate" insist the "weather" man be for them.

 

[Bodhisattva]

The "Charlie Kirk didn't deserve to be murdered but he was bad (because I think he's bad and here’s an out-of-context take by some other hack that agrees with me) so it's totally appropriate that he was murdered” schtick is just another version of “he’s a Nazi.” Go get a better hobby, people.

 

[cdub55]

The "Charlie Kirk didn't deserve to be murdered but he was bad (because I think he's bad and here’s an out-of-context take by some other hack that agrees with me) so it's totally appropriate that he was murdered” schtick is just another version of “he’s a Nazi.” Go get a better hobby, people.

It's almost a projection tactic. "Oh I'm not a bad guy, he is"! Relax fella, we see you for who you are.

 

[Its On A Slab]

Simply wanting to debate with the other side is a “provocateur”? You’ve never actually WATCHED any of his videos have you?

I have, and I noticed a continuous trend of selective editing.

He was in the James O'Keefe mode. Always ginning the videos to support his points.

 

[crimsonaudio]

Who would threaten James Spann? Not saying he has not been threatened, but that is so weird. What could he possibly have done that would cause some viewer to see him and say to himself, "I have to threaten that guy."

He said it himself - we have a mental health crisis in this country.

 

[Crimson1967]

Some lunatics think the weatherman makes the weather. seriously. I knew one in Atlanta that said she was yelled at in a Kroger for "making it rain Saturday"

Never understood that. It would be like blaming the sports guy for the Florida State game.

 

[cdub55]

Never understood that. It would be like blaming the sports guy for the Florida State game.

Weathermen do have to make analytical decisions on things. Sometimes they are right and often they are wrong. But to send a threat to a weatherman is We-Todd-It.

 

[colbysullivan]

I have, and I noticed a continuous trend of selective editing.

He was in the James O'Keefe mode. Always ginning the videos to support his points.

Or maybe, just maybe, the Left does not have a defensible position anymore after what they have done to this country. After all the lies during COVID and about Biden’s cognitive decline, why would I listen to anything they say? Nevermind all the horrible stuff they have done to children…it genuinely boggles my mind how the radical Left even still exists after everything they have done.

 

[colbysullivan]

He said it himself - we have a mental health crisis in this country.

This is the bottom line. Until people are willing to admit “the kids are not all right”, this kind of crap is going to continue.

 

[CrimsonJazz]

Sure. He was a great guy.

View attachment 52800

Source?

 

[colbysullivan]

I still can’t believe some of the reactions. We should be mourning the loss of a great American. Not a “Right wing activist”, not a “conservative”, not a “young white guy”, but a great AMERICAN. Two children have to grow up without a father now, and are likely scarred for life.