I mean, most gang activity comes from young black men, but that does not mean it’s racist to talk about it. I think talking about whether to include or exclude “gang violence” from a conversation about mass shootings is appropriate and not offensive in the slightest.
That’s why you just had to go out of your way to point out that gang activity comes from people of color. Not to mention lecturing to people of color about what YOU don’t find offensive. 😂 Thank you for your contribution, goodbye. 🙂
unless you use it as a overgeneral brush, and fill it with only minorities, and use it as a short hand for black people like it’s used in this context. are you a native english speaker?
dog whistles specifically use words with a cover meaning and the group agrees to internally change its meaning.
He didn’t use “gang violence” as short hand for “black violence.” That wouldn’t make sense in the context of mass shootings. He said “Counting or not counting gang violence?” more as a shorthand for “Are we counting criminals killing each other?” Whether it’s hispanic, white, or black gangs isn’t very relevant.
Gangs contribute to the majority of designated “mass shootings,” and are often excluded from conversations that want to focus on innocent victims of mass shooting as opposed to cases of criminals killing each other. After all, if all mass shootings were just gangsters shooting each other, people wouldn’t care nearly as much as they do now. They care about the mass shootings that don’t involve gangs.
EDIT: Seems like many sources explicitly exclude gang violence in their stats. So my statement may be incorrect that gangs contribute to “designated” mass shootings as they are not designation such by many sources.
Maybe he was waiting for Chuck to say a number. But chuck was too slippery. One last owning of the libs, right before he was triggered. At least you know he died doing that thing where he opens his mouth and just kind of shows his gums with glee
He was engaging in hate-mongering right until the end. Just like the Nazi propagandists of the WW2 era, he was spreading a message of a demonized minority group being responsible for countless crimes and social ills. He ran literally the exact same playbook against trans people as the Nazis did against Jews.
I have no more sympathy for him than the Nazi propagandists we hanged at Nuremberg. They’re guilty of the exact same crimes against humanity.
I would actually like to know what he was leading to with that question. Is the implication that gangs have an overrepresentation of trans people? Or that gang violence doesn’t count for some reason?
It’s a deflection technique. The intention was to not answer or address the question at all, but to shift to another topic he could more easily use to manipulate his audience. If you’ve ever watched him “debate” he was a master of deflection.
Pointing out that gangs do a lot of violence is an attempt to shift blame onto the demographic groups which are overrepresented in gangs due to socioeconomic reasons (systemic racism).
Does anyone have video of this? (This conversation, not the shooty part) All the news media are quoting this while referring to a video but not showing it.
I watched the close up video and didn’t find it traumatic especially given all what has been happening in gaza and Ukraine, not to mention the children being shot in schools
His last words
“Gang violence” = racist dog whistle. The assassin couldn’t have picked a more perfect time to fire. 😂
I mean, most gang activity comes from young black men, but that does not mean it’s racist to talk about it. I think talking about whether to include or exclude “gang violence” from a conversation about mass shootings is appropriate and not offensive in the slightest.
That’s why you just had to go out of your way to point out that gang activity comes from people of color. Not to mention lecturing to people of color about what YOU don’t find offensive. 😂 Thank you for your contribution, goodbye. 🙂
“That’s racist.”
“It may involve a race, but it’s not racist.”
“That’s why you said it involved that race!”
Bizarre logic.
Offensive was the wrong word. I meant that it’s not racist. It’s unhealthy that one would be offended by acknowledging the existence of gang violence.
a dog whistle has nothing to do with the facts but a shared agreement between people in the know as to its hidden meaning.
I understand that. I’m saying that there is no hidden meaning. Gang violence is understood on its face by everyone.
unless you use it as a overgeneral brush, and fill it with only minorities, and use it as a short hand for black people like it’s used in this context. are you a native english speaker?
dog whistles specifically use words with a cover meaning and the group agrees to internally change its meaning.
He didn’t use “gang violence” as short hand for “black violence.” That wouldn’t make sense in the context of mass shootings. He said “Counting or not counting gang violence?” more as a shorthand for “Are we counting criminals killing each other?” Whether it’s hispanic, white, or black gangs isn’t very relevant.
Gangs contribute to the majority of designated “mass shootings,” and are often excluded from conversations that want to focus on innocent victims of mass shooting as opposed to cases of criminals killing each other. After all, if all mass shootings were just gangsters shooting each other, people wouldn’t care nearly as much as they do now. They care about the mass shootings that don’t involve gangs.
EDIT: Seems like many sources explicitly exclude gang violence in their stats. So my statement may be incorrect that gangs contribute to “designated” mass shootings as they are not designation such by many sources.
His last word was “violence”.
A sniper with an innate sense of comedic timing?
Maybe he was waiting for Chuck to say a number. But chuck was too slippery. One last owning of the libs, right before he was triggered. At least you know he died doing that thing where he opens his mouth and just kind of shows his gums with glee
I’m guessing shooting at any other point would produce similar results.
Yeah, nearly every sentence he uttered could have ended with a bang. 💥
He was like a fascist Wile E Coyote.
shot; dies
Narrator:
This is the best use of this meme I’ve ever seen, bar none.
Make Fascists Afraid Again.
He was engaging in hate-mongering right until the end. Just like the Nazi propagandists of the WW2 era, he was spreading a message of a demonized minority group being responsible for countless crimes and social ills. He ran literally the exact same playbook against trans people as the Nazis did against Jews.
I have no more sympathy for him than the Nazi propagandists we hanged at Nuremberg. They’re guilty of the exact same crimes against humanity.
I would actually like to know what he was leading to with that question. Is the implication that gangs have an overrepresentation of trans people? Or that gang violence doesn’t count for some reason?
I guess we’ll never know.
It’s a deflection technique. The intention was to not answer or address the question at all, but to shift to another topic he could more easily use to manipulate his audience. If you’ve ever watched him “debate” he was a master of deflection.
With words, maybe. With lead, evidently not.
Pointing out that gangs do a lot of violence is an attempt to shift blame onto the demographic groups which are overrepresented in gangs due to socioeconomic reasons (systemic racism).
deleted by creator
Does anyone have video of this? (This conversation, not the shooty part) All the news media are quoting this while referring to a video but not showing it.
I watched the close up video and didn’t find it traumatic especially given all what has been happening in gaza and Ukraine, not to mention the children being shot in schools
I had the same experience. It’s regrettable how desensitized to violence I am these days.
I always said “You can tell when Charlie Kirk is arguing in bad faith by when his lips are moving and sounds are coming out.”
And it was literally the last thing he ever did.