RIP Charlie

[Dave Pitman]

I live in a country where anyone can stand on a soapbox and express their opinions on our government or speak of injustice. I may not agree with you I may even stand on mine and debate you BUT I will fight to the death your right to speak even if I don't like hearing what you have to say.

Spot on! Too bad current leadership will target you for firing, litigation, FBI raids, or worse if you have criticism or a different viewpoint. Not the country where you live now.

 

[mavic3usa]

In case anyone wonders, I'm in the middle; exactly right down the middle.

 

[mavic3usa]

Spot on! Too bad current leadership will target you for firing, litigation, FBI raids, or worse if you have criticism or a different viewpoint. Not the country where you live now.

US officials plan to punish foreigners ‘making light of’ Charlie Kirk death

Deputy secretary of state says ‘foreigners who glorify violence and hatred are not welcome visitors’

www.theguardian.com

 

[Dave Pitman]

US officials plan to punish foreigners ‘making light of’ Charlie Kirk death

Deputy secretary of state says ‘foreigners who glorify violence and hatred are not welcome visitors’

www.theguardian.com

Free Speech is now only tolerated if it is the "correct" free speech. Surely we can all agree that that is not what we want for the country?

 

[tstr14]

Interesting how we pick and choose who is an important gun death and who are not.

Indeed. What amounts to a talking head gets flags lowered to half mast while an elected public servant and her husband do not. To me, that is BS of the most odiferous level.

 

[High_Order1]

I don't get the hype.
This guy's life was no more or less valuable than any other. If we're not going to make a big deal out of, say, that woman who was murdered on the bus the other day, why would we make a big deal about this guy?

Being forthright, I don't understand fan idolism.

It's not fan idolism.

Charlie Kirk cared enough about the children of our country to go into liberal strongholds and, without violence, or threats, talk to them. Face to face, with no real barriers, and help them see there is another side besides what their 'progressive' teachers are frantically jamming into their soft noggins.

For that, he merits respect.

 

[High_Order1]

Indeed. What amounts to a talking head gets flags lowered to half mast while an elected public servant and her husband do not. To me, that is BS of the most odiferous level.

You mean the lady murdered by the left because she voted with the repubs and they all went nuts?

 

[High_Order1]

Interesting how we pick and choose who is an important gun death and who are not.

It IS!

Like when that leftist took a rifle to a ball game congresspeople were playing and sprayed them really good. That didn't stay on the news cycle very long, did it? People are killed in blue cities every hour, but we don't talk about who and why.

 

[High_Order1]

No one should be subject to firearms violence, especially children. Yet, it's the number one cause of deaths for children under the age of 18 in the United States. We have a significant firearms violence problem.

No we don't. Especially compared to other countries. The numbers of children killed group suicide and accidents into those numbers, which are only a few hundred more than motor vehicle accidents.

 

[High_Order1]

Spot on! Too bad current leadership will target you for firing, litigation, FBI raids, or worse if you have criticism or a different viewpoint. Not the country where you live now.

Perhaps you are conflating the previous administration?

I clearly remember being fired for not wanting the vaccine and being threatened quite a bit. I also remember people being raided and litigated on the flimsiest bologna sandwich reasons.

I also know that I won't change any of your opinions, none of you wish to honestly debate, I simply am posting because I rebut your positions. I enjoyed my time here.

 

[High_Order1]

Free Speech is now only tolerated if it is the "correct" free speech. Surely we can all agree that that is not what we want for the country?

Totally agree.

When can I begin to say the n word, or things critical of certain 'proclivities' without being doxxed and fired and cancelled?

I'm glad you agree with me; I thought I was the only one that found 'inclusiveness' curiously only extends to certain beliefs. You'll clearly support the nazi and white supremist points of view as equally meriting of protection, right?

Right?

I'll not hold my breath.

 

[mavic3usa]

Nice speaking with you guys have a good weekend

 

[tstr14]

You mean the lady murdered by the left because she voted with the repubs and they all went nuts?

Explain to me what difference it makes who murders who? Are you suggesting one is acceptable and the other not?

 

[MS Coast]

No we don't. Especially compared to other countries.

Let's examine the numbers. Do a web search and choose a reliable source. I promise to examine any reference you provide that supports your statement.

Even strongly pro-gun sites agree that "The United States stands out starkly from other developed nations due to its exceptionally high rate of gun violence."

How does the US compare to other countries in gun violence? | [September Updated]

How Does the US Compare to Other Countries in Gun Violence? The United States stands out starkly from other developed nations due to its exceptionally high rate of gun violence. This disparity is driven by a complex interplay of factors, including readily accessible firearms, cultural attitudes...

thegunzone.com

The numbers of children killed group suicide and accidents into those numbers, which are only a few hundred more than motor vehicle accidents.

The first reference I provided considered only unintentional firearms deaths. Suicides were not included. Well, of course accidental deaths must be included in a tabulation of unintentional deaths. Traffic fatality figures count accidents, don't they? If suicides and intentional firearms deaths were included, the situation in the US would look even worse.

Yes, the number of child deaths from motor vehicle accidents is nearly as great as the number of deaths by firearms in the US. Even if the numbers were reversed, there's still a problem with children dying from firearms.

I also know that I won't change any of your opinions, none of you wish to honestly debate,

I wholeheartedly agree that honest debate is required. And it needs to be based on facts and truth rather than opinion. Let's roll. Please post a few references that support your statement.

 

[High_Order1]

Explain to me what difference it makes who murders who? Are you suggesting one is acceptable and the other not?

I honestly doubt I will be able to explain it to you.

When you have a body of people dedicated to the same thing, and use phrases like 'by any means necessary' and 'smash...(insert idea here), then, it matters greatly.

But you knew that.

You know there are no conservative riots, no conservatives burning down communities.

You knew that the last dozen shootings had a nexus in the left/progressive/woke ideology.

That you choose to bait me into responding tells me all I need to know.

That you poorly try to frame it into one groups' violence being more acceptable than the others, knowing that one side doesn't use violence tells me even more.

This place is where I get my drone news, and I don't want to be banned for my speech. I know I have no rights here, it is a private platform and I appreciate the forum.

So, I've said my piece.

 

[MS Coast]

You know there are no conservative riots,

January 6 ,2021
300–348 South Capitol St SE, Washington, D.C.

 

[High_Order1]

We can't debate gun violence, because there is no such thing.

It's just violence. In other places where guns are less prevalent, it's knives, or machetes, or fire.

Having said that, outside of democratically controlled areas, you don't need a skewed and massaged set of numbers. Violence is very low.

Inside democratically controlled large cities, you are in as much danger here in America as you would be in Paris or London.

We can't talk about the why though, because equity and inclusiveness only supports a very narrow construct of language.

Inside democratically controlled large cities, there is a TON of violence. I've been to a few; some look exactly like places overseas now.

If you want to talk culture, or anger, or why people hurt so badly that self-medicating or hurting others is the only answer, we can discuss that.

But if you are persisting in belief that access to firearms is the problem, I can't help you. Bet anyone on that bus wishes they had one though.

 

[tstr14]

I honestly doubt I will be able to explain it to you.

When you have a body of people dedicated to the same thing, and use phrases like 'by any means necessary' and 'smash...(insert idea here), then, it matters greatly.

But you knew that.

You know there are no conservative riots, no conservatives burning down communities.

You knew that the last dozen shootings had a nexus in the left/progressive/woke ideology.

That you choose to bait me into responding tells me all I need to know.

That you poorly try to frame it into one groups' violence being more acceptable than the others, knowing that one side doesn't use violence tells me even more.

This place is where I get my drone news, and I don't want to be banned for my speech. I know I have no rights here, it is a private platform and I appreciate the forum.

So, I've said my piece.

Got it. Kill my guy, OK. Kill your guy, BAD.
Can you say hypocrite boys and girls?

 

[MS Coast]

We can't debate gun violence, because there is no such thing.

That just may be the most absurd thing I've ever imagined. Then again, I've never understood cults and the power they have over their single-minded devotees.

I'll leave it to you to discuss that with those three kids shot at school a couple of days ago and their classmates and their families and with Charlie Kirk's widow and children.

 

[Dave Pitman]

Totally agree.

When can I begin to say the n word, or things critical of certain 'proclivities' without being doxxed and fired and cancelled?

I'm glad you agree with me; I thought I was the only one that found 'inclusiveness' curiously only extends to certain beliefs. You'll clearly support the nazi and white supremist points of view as equally meriting of protection, right?

Right?

I'll not hold my breath.

Fascist and racist speech are pretty prevalent these days, so join right in if that's who you are, I guess. No one is going to throw you in jail, for that. But if your employer doesn't share your views, don't you think they have a right to not employ you? Others have rights too.

AI Overview

In the vast majority of cases, an employee can be fired for racist behavior, comments, or actions.
.While the First Amendment protects citizens from government censorship, it does not protect private-sector employees from being fired for speech or conduct that an employer deems inappropriate.