Freedom of speech isn't tolerated by some

[WhatNextBanana]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/comment/2025/09/10/charlie-kirks-shooting-terrible-moment-american-democracy/

Political violence on the rise.

People are getting angry when people have Political views they don't agree with. Freedom of speech must be allowed not shutdown.

Tragic news of a young family man shot by someone today. Please remember he was a human with a family. Violence is never ok.

I don’t think at any part I was writing a report or paper where I had to provide sources and references when I wrote my post at 6am this morning. I was shocked and reeling by this terrible news and also shocked by some of the posts dripping with ‘served him right’ kind of messages.

if this article is true, then my hunch that he eas killed for what he has said and believes was correct. This is absolutely awful.

Rest in peace Charlie, rest in peace freedom of speech

I fear for JKR. She has been a brilliant advocate for women and girls rights, has spoken truth and common sense when so many people refuse to and has been vilified in the media. I hope none of these crazies touch her

There is no irony or lack of 'self awareness.' (as the poster @Locutus2000 stated!) I do listen to other peoples points of view. (Who I may not agree with!) Until they start hurling their predictable leftie insults and vitriol, when people DARE to think differently to them!!! Then I start ignoring them, because I CBA with the childish and predictable tantrums.

Re: hiding a few threads. YES, when the same load of drivel about the SAME SUBJECT (the England flags!) is repeated on 30 threads in about 3 weeks, day after day after DAY, same wording, same tedious insults, and vitriol and barbed comments (from lefties) aimed at people who don't think like them, it gets boring.

So yes, I hide the bashing the flag threads now, because I don't need to see the same bullshit drivel 30 times in 3 weeks. Those are the only ones I am hiding because I am sick to the back teeth of seeing them. Lefties must be so narrow-minded and lacking imagination so much, if they have to keep repeating the same shite!

HTH.

.

Yes, directly (or sort of directly) quoting what he said, but devoid of context, nuance or any attempt or wish to understand (in good faith) what lead to him saying that particular thing in that particular moment.

It is pretty much what people did who came to challenge him on campuses.

No, the fascists are the fascists. They are increasingly powerful across the globe. It is of great concern.

Ok well when he said that girls as young as 5 years old should be forced to carry their rapists baby and give birth, he was speaking at multiple of his events which he has complete control over, in front of huge crowds of his supporters. There's videos all over social media if you care to look. He's variously said girls of age 5, 10 and 12 that I've seen. Including his own daughter, if she were pregnant through rape.

Do you need any more context?

@LittleYellowQueen I didn't misrepresent anything.

Yes, you did. As you are doing again with your "rush to condemn" and "extensive research". Forgive me if I do not applaud your clear skill in this area.

I will paraphrase @Auroraloves (thank you Auroraloves) who said it upthread: Why are you so I am not bothered if you are obsessed with what I did not write. Whatever I have said or think, it doesn’t change the fact that a man was brutally assassinated in front of of wife and children.

He appears to me to have been a man who spoke his thoughts and ideas with conviction and passion, but was equally passionate about hearing and discussing opposing views with grace and good humour.

I hope he is now at peace with the God he believed in. I hope those who loved him most will find the peace that passes all understanding, as they deal with the horror they witnessed, and the sudden violent death of their daddy, husband, son, friend. In his words: "When you stop having a human connection with someone you disagree with, it becomes a lot easier to want to commit violence against that group person".

I have no wish to engage with you any further as you continue along this vein of wanting to argue the toss about things I have never said. Spin that as you wish.

I'm not sure what additional context is required for a normal thinking human being to condemn the idea that raped young girls must give birth to their rapist's baby if they end up pregnant. Someone tell me.

IMO social media is a big part of the issue.

Too many echo chambers and lies. People are raging about things that aren't even happening. It's madness.

I've had so many threatening DMs from men because of my 'wokeness'.

So the alleged shooter is shown wearing a veterans disability organisation T shirt, and the FBI are offering a 100,000 dollar reward.

Is it just me or is there a very big pot being stirred?

He appears to me to have been a man who spoke his thoughts and ideas with conviction and passion, but was equally passionate about hearing and discussing opposing views with grace and good humour.

Where do you stand on his belief that children who have been raped should not be allowed abortions? That's all good as long as he said it passionately and with conviction?

I never purported to be either actually and yeah, I'm not upset over the death of a person who incited hate and profited from the deaths of others. Do you get this upset when all terrorists are killed or just the white ones I wonder? 🙄

Why are you calling Charlie Kirk a terrorist?

He wasn’t a terrorist.

I know that. You know that. Everyone reading this thread knows that.

Why do people like you think it’s perfectly acceptable to lie like this?

Definition of a terrorist

someone who uses or threatens serious violence, property damage, or disruption of critical systems to advance a political, religious, ideological, or racial cause, with the intent to intimidate the public or influence a government or international body.

He fits. They aren't all Muslims you know.

someone who uses or threatens serious violence…

Words aren’t violence.

Being shot in the throat is violence.

Look at you, out here engaging in outright lies about someone, yet believing yourself to be such a better person than them.

What veterans organization is that? I'm an American veteran and the logo isn't familiar to me.

Not even remotely similar analogies. Some things have an inherent risk, driving, crossing the road, getting on an airplane, the risk is that something can go wrong and when it does it's an unfortunate NON PREVENTABLE accident. Profiting from and promoting unfettered gun use and ownership without restrictions and stating that the casualties of said gun ownership are worth It and then subsequently becoming one of those casualties, much diff.

I suppose your analogy might come close if say you had a stretch of road where people kept dying bc people kept driving drunk. You then went and said, let's not add any blocks or alcohol checks on the road and let people continue to drive drunk. Then after about 10 people die you say, yeah, that's acceptable. Then, one day, you are walking on the road and are hit by a drunk driver. Not sure how many people would say, oh, poor them, so sad, esp not the people whose family members have also died on that road.

Expressing a belief you don’t agree with doesn’t make someone a terrorist. It’s important to use words correctly.

Why spread misinformation?

Such blatant disregard on this thread.

Disregard for the meaning of words.

Disregard for truth.

And ultimately, disregard for human life.

You think rape is an unfortunate non-preventable accident, and that’s why the analogy doesn’t work? Or that traffic fatalities are all too, for that matter.

No. Paglia’s point is not that rape is a sort of act of nature for whom no one can be blamed. And she’s certainly not in favour of it either.

What both Kirk and Paglia believed is that there are important freedoms that, unfortunately, realistically, mean accepting a real chance of harm (often deliberate harm). And they opposed people who would use that risk to remove the freedom.

I disagree with Kirk and agree with Paglia on their respective topics, but their arguments are parallel.

Saying Kirk is an “acceptable causality of gun violence according to his own logic”, unless you would say the same of Paglia and rape, is dishonest. It’s a way of saying that he/she had it coming, but without owning it.

It seems it was searched for by Internet sleuths who found it on Ebay with some sort of veterans reference in the title according to Agenda Free TV who run live feeds from the US for breaking news. Could be something, could be nothing.

Surely anyone who agrees with the right to bear arms has to also concede that gun deaths are an acceptable price to pay to have the second amendment, or as Charlie Kirk said ‘worth it’.
Anyone who defends the second amendment has to know deaths will inevitably occur but they don’t care as long as they can still have their guns. Charlie Kirk just said it out loud.
Would he find his own death worth it? Probably not because let’s face it no one wants to actually die for their opinions.

No one should ever be killed or harmed for their views. I don’t agree with a single one of Charlie’s views but I certainly don’t think he deserved to be killed

It’s not freedom of speech that’s not tolerated as often the people offended have plenty of vocal opinions, it’s having a different POV. So many insensitive fragile people out there that can’t discuss conflict healthily

Luckily she lives in a civilised country where we have laws restricting gun ownership.