Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Charlie Kirk killed at event in Utah

nbcnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 1001 posts

Re: Charlie Kirk killed at event in Utah

#261

Post by mothballed »

quitspamming wrote: post #203

I don't know how a country filled with guns can survive the normalization of calling people you disagree with Nazi, Fascist, etc. We've all been taught since grade school it was a good thing to kill Nazis, even in small percentages there are mentally unstable people who will hear you call someone a Fascist and take the logical step from "it's good to kill nazis" to "they're a nazi so I should kill them". I am both ve…

No one shot the Skokie march Nazis and they literally showed up at a Jewish dominated town at a time when there weren't even background checks for guns. The ACLU even defended them in court, which is unthinkable that they would stand on their principles and do that today.

There's just less tolerance for discussing or exhibiting "extreme" or highly unpopular opinions, nowadays, it seems. Although, I could definitely be wrong -- people like MLK were shot for doing same long ago.

Re: Charlie Kirk killed at event in Utah

#262

Post by bena »

helqn wrote: post #251

[flagged]

He was a religious fundamentalist. Pretty far from a "moderate".

He did not deserve to die for his fundamentalism, but trying to paint him as a moderate who engaged with the process genuinely and in good faith is wildly mischaracterizing his entire life and political career.

Re: Charlie Kirk killed at event in Utah

#263

Post by rented_mule »

vik0 wrote: post #8

Am I wrong in thinking this guy isn't/wasn't a very influential person, outside of Twitter and the people that stay on there 24/7? If so, why even target the poor guy? What change was the person who shot him hoping to elicit? Either way, I hope he makes it, even though it looks like it was a fatal blow

> What change was the person who shot him hoping to elicit?

I think a difficulty in searching for such answers is assuming that it was a well reasoned decision. I'm not sure how often attempting to take a life is a purely rational decision, devoid of intense emotional motivations (hatred, self-preservation, fear, revenge, etc.). And that's all assuming the assailant was of somewhat sound mind.

I think one of the dangers of more and more extreme divisions in society is that those divisions cloud our mental processes, threaten our emotional health, and take away opportunities for meaningful civil discourse. All of which can lead to more heinous acts that we struggle to make sense of. One of the scariest parts for me is that this can all be too self reinforcing ("Their side did this bad thing to our side, let's get them back!!!" repeat/escalate...). How do we break the cycle?

Re: Charlie Kirk killed at event in Utah

#266

Post by Levitz »

aynyc wrote: post #240

[flagged]

You don't deserve death just because you justify a situation in which some people die.

If a person is against, say, laws against tobacco, that person doesn't deserve lung cancer. If a person argues for leniency on criminals, they don't deserve to be murdered.

I am baffled that I have to explain this. I don't think you understand the logic you are defending or its consequences.

Re: Charlie Kirk killed at event in Utah

#268

Post by tokioyoyo »

quitspamming wrote: post #203

I don't know how a country filled with guns can survive the normalization of calling people you disagree with Nazi, Fascist, etc. We've all been taught since grade school it was a good thing to kill Nazis, even in small percentages there are mentally unstable people who will hear you call someone a Fascist and take the logical step from "it's good to kill nazis" to "they're a nazi so I should kill them". I am both ve…

I generally agree with you, but wouldn’t lump Canada into this rhetoric. Its hate speech laws are fairly balanced, if I’ll be honest.

It’s going to sound absurd, but right now, USA’s global image is a very good counter-ad towards “complete” freedom of speech.

Re: Charlie Kirk killed at event in Utah

#269

Post by crooked-v »

mmastrac wrote: post #189

Things are not healthy in the USA, and have not been for a long time. It's all about scoring points now, owning the other side, getting soundbites, etc. It's sad that it's progressed to this. From an outsider, it really feels like there's no middle ground in American politics. You either commit yourself to the full slate of beliefs for one side, or you're the "enemy". I hope that Americans on both side start to see t…

[flagged]

Re: Charlie Kirk killed at event in Utah

#270

Post by wrs »

mmastrac wrote: post #189

Things are not healthy in the USA, and have not been for a long time. It's all about scoring points now, owning the other side, getting soundbites, etc. It's sad that it's progressed to this. From an outsider, it really feels like there's no middle ground in American politics. You either commit yourself to the full slate of beliefs for one side, or you're the "enemy". I hope that Americans on both side start to see t…

If you look closer, I'm pretty sure a majority of us aren't really on a "side", think the whole situation is incredibly stupid, and wish the politicians would just shut up and actually...govern...instead of playing silly games and pandering to the crazy people (on either "side").

However, both the established parties seem to have become totally incompetent to do that, in very different ways. One party got taken over by people who make public statements on a daily basis that would have been immediately disqualifying at any time since 1950 or so. The other party is so bad at doing politics that they're beaten in elections despite running against those people.

Post reply on HN