Thread 2 Turn your son in knowing he’d get the death penalty

[Idinnaenah]

1st thread is full - this is to continue the convo. My original question is below:

’Kirk’s killer has apparently been turned in by his family - or persuaded to hand himself in.
Trump &’his supporters have been very vocal about getting the death penalty for the shooter.
would YOU hand your child over, knowing that the electric chair would be the likely outcome?

YANBU - I wouldn’t turn him in to die.
YABU - I would he’s a killer and deserves all he gets

Everard was the victim of misogynistic hate, the other seems to be a hate crime against a white woman.

CK was a victim of a leftist trans ally. Which is why we are all talking about it

So only misogynistic hate can come from white men? Is this what you are saying @RingoJuice

I think he targeted her because she was white, yes. There were other women in the video after all.

I’m asking you again- who are “these people”? What group are you speaking of please?

The ones threatening to punch, stab and rape women? Those would be transwomen, men who claim they are women - there are thousands of examples on the website I posted.

That doesn't count as hate speech though, does it?

*charlie Kirk was not shot by a transwoman.

Where did anyone say he was?

He was shot by someone who believes in that ideology. And who believes that it is acceptable to kill someone because they believe different things than you.

It's a problem for the world, if people decide that it's ok to kill or attack others because they have different beliefs. Whatever those beliefs are. It's not 'hate speech' to point that out.

It’s absolutely 100% hate speech to say this:

”We always knew what these people were capable of, they proudly made death threats against their perceived enemies.”

whereby “they” means trans women.

No ifs, no buts, no excuses. Hate speech.

There is no “these people” . There is no “they”. There are no “enemies”. There is a man called Tyler Robinson who shot CK.

Did you look at the terf is a slur website I posted? Lots of transwomen making death threats on it. I don't need ifs buts or excuses when the evidence of their own words is there for anyone to read. It's not 'hate speech', it's literal fact that lots of transwomen have made death threats and threats of physical and sexual violence towards women. You know this.

It's futile to try to pretend that the killer was just a random who killed someone randomly. He killed Charlie Kirk because Charlie Kirk believed in a different ideology than he does. That's the issue, people who believe that others ought to be killed for wrong think.

This is simply more divisive, hate speech. There’s no excuse for it whatsoever.

Sadly there will always be unstable individuals who will develop extreme views, and in some cases this escalates to murderous intent. Add in easy access to a deadly weapon and this is the tragedy that results. This case is unique only in as much as the victim was a public figure. All other elements are tragically familiar and some real reflection needs to be done to identify how they can be prevented.
I think pinning that all on one particular ideology is a mistake. If it does emerge the murderers motive was connected to having a trans partner, and so our response is to try to stamp out the ideology, then that doesn't help us with all the other young men, before and after Robinson who have and will kill because they've latched onto something else. Or they see themselves as victims, or they hate women, or school, or Mondays.
The website you posted is beyond disgusting. I've seen it before and find the hard evidence of such mysogyny deeply disturbing. It makes me fearful of what young males radicalised on line, egging each other on to violence are capable of.
But I think we make a mistake in focusing too much on the issue they have chosen as their focus rather than the state of mind that turns them into rapists and killers, in thought if not in deed.
There's a community of young men who are losing their hunanity, becoming brutalised and highly dangerous using an issue as an excuse. We need to understand why and how this is happening.

I agree with much of what you say. In some ways it doesn't matter what the extreme ideology this killer follows is, it's what he's ended up doing because of his extremism.

But look at the rhetoric that was being chucked around when it was assumed that he was a right wing gun nut, and then look at what changed as soon as it became clear what he actually believes in. Look at Tandora's attempt to shut down discussion by shouting 'hate speech'.

It's dangerous for society for there to be extreme ideology that you're not allowed to question or criticise.

There has been rhetoric from both sides that has been extreme, emotionally incontinent and dangerous.
I have been on this site for years, and have never seen such a determined effort to push people into boxes marked left and right based on their expressed opinions on a specific topic.
Then once in their box they are force teamed with a whole host of views and behaviour that they may or may not agree with or exhibit. When in fact in a historically politically centrist country like the UK, the majority of people are moderate and tolerant.
Keep up this left/right rhetoric, and it fuels the idea that other people who don't agree with us on a topic are our enemies. Because if they believe this thing we don't agree with, then they must believe that more extreme thing also, and so are therefore 'bad' people.
This is not an idea we want to encourage amongst young men with guns, looking for a cause.

kirks killer was a conservative, white, Christian raised to shoot guns. it’s not convenient for MAGA fans to remember that, but there you go.

I'd also add that I completely agree, we must be able to question and discuss. Unfortunately when the president calls for journalists who oppose his government to be taken off air and a chat show is cancelled because the host expressed an opinion, our ability to discuss is under grave threat. Loss of free speech does not come from a lunatic committing a murder. State sanctioned silencing of anything but the views that administration supports poses a huge risk.

I think we're agreeing really. The US government is dictatorial and tries to shut down dissent. So did the last US government, they just tried to shut down dissent about different stuff. Whoever's doing it it's dangerous.

The tribalism and over simplification of politics is a danger - people getting their opinions in a job lot and outsourcing their thinking is a really bad idea, whichever job lot they pick.

This isn't a left/right issue, its an intolerance issue.

Absolutely. Personally I think that those who believe that people can change sex are wrong. Equally I think that those who believe that the opinions of CK are 'God's truth' and try to ban abortion and reintroduce traditional sex based roles are wrong. Both ideologies seek to impinge upon the rights of others, and if given free rein, threaten my safety.
However, I strongly believe that both sides are entitled to their say, to try to persuade others to their stance if they wish and to campaign for policies to further their ideology if they want to. And it's up to the rest of us to decide whether we support them or not and to argue and persuade in our turn.
What is never right is to use force to strengthen ourselves. Be that of violence or misuse of political power to silence others in a democracy that's supposed to allow free speech.

He was a gay furry with a trans identified male boyfriend who shot Kirk for supposedly spreading ‘hate’. I suggest deleting Discord and reading something like the New York Times.

Excuse me.

Evoking the language of “they”- “what they are capable of”- in reference to trans women as a group of people. Othering trans women as a category of person as “violent” and the “enemy” is hate speech.

And there is no excuse for it.

this isn’t a “discussion”, or question / critique of the issues.

it’s simple spouting/ promoting the same divisive, dangerous , extremist rhetoric that incites the very same violence you are condemning.

Both ideologies seek to impinge upon the rights of others, and if given free rein, threaten my safety.

So disappointing from a person who is seemingly intelligent and reasonable on other subjects.

I have read your posts over the last week and admired your courage and tenacity in arguing your point. I have found we have far more areas on which we agree than which we don't. I do not agree with you on this particular issue but choose to focus on the respect I have for your other stances, rather than any disappointment I might feel we do not align on this one. Both of us are coming at this issue with the protection of others in mind. We disagree on who should be protected.

@5128gap I find your posts to be very refreshing.
We need to take about 50 paces back from the left/right argument and any ideology either side encompasses and look at the bigger picture. That in a free society, we should be able to put our opinions across without fear of losing our jobs or our lives.

you are right. I’ve really appreciated so many of your posts/ thoughts over the past few days x

Same.

❤️