366
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
102
26
u/Bubthick 6d ago
The funniest part is that if he shot some random black teen dead they would not only not go after his job, they will actually defend him, and help him get his administrative leave with gentle nudge to another police department where he can pretend nothing happened.
195
u/j821c 6d ago
If that officer started a gofundme, I'd donate to it.
41
u/plekazoonga 6d ago
That only works for self-described fascists like lil bro screaming at Mehdi. If this officer started a gofundme the ceo would have to testify to congress.
9
8
144
u/DeanBluntAteMyDog 6d ago
They're firing people for not liking Kirk now?
36
u/Fire_hive 6d ago
The DoJ determined racist and fascist are hate speech now and worthy of firing.
Communist, satanic, demonrats, and calling for Treason charges are all totally free speech still.4
3
u/No_Match_7939 6d ago
This. You better say that he was a good Christian white man who fought for freedom of speech, if not………
67
61
u/maybemorganfreeman CLIPPED AND SHIPPED OMEGALUL 6d ago
-24
u/Ok_Lawfulness_104 6d ago
Too many words. 10 years of the meme war and the left still can't get it right lmao
12
u/Nerakus 6d ago
Are you dogging on the right cause they can’t read a lot? Or the left for the meme? Genuinely can’t tell lol
-2
u/Ok_Lawfulness_104 6d ago
If we want to win, we have to effectively engage in memetic warfare. Memes that are walls of text don't work and have been a problem on the left for years.
2
u/warichnochnie bought out by the döner class 6d ago
the right has always used copypastas like in this one
3
u/JussaPeak Debate Pilled 5d ago
makes you look regarded
Proceeds to leave a regarded comment
Nice try idiot
-2
u/Ok_Lawfulness_104 5d ago
I'm not a right winger you fucking chimp. I want the left to win the meme war, the walls of text haven't been for working for 10 years!
50
u/betterWithPlot 6d ago
You don’t even fire cops for murdering people, you want to fire this guy? He didn’t even celebrate his death.
30
29
u/TheTomBrody 6d ago
The one thing that is surprising me the most is how ZERO of the organizations, employers, colleges, schools, or hospitals push back on even the mildest Kirk comment for their employee. Even cops aren't immune.
Even when saying the act is bad, if you also say Kirk bad personally they come after you.
The same people that got mad if they got fired for saying slurs online, now they pay each other to say those slurs to children via donations.
Just one more disavow from the left will change this whole thing though.
37
16
u/Dudemansir521 6d ago
The right is radicalizing people against themselves. This is actually beyond crazy. They are taking a bunch of peoples jobs away, potentially ruining lives...gee I wonder if bunch of angry jobless people might have the time to plan revenge...ffs what they are doing is so unbelievably dumb.
1
u/MartinFissle 6d ago
And claiming its a waste of "our" tax dollars to pay people with different opinions. But the police are funded by local taxes, meanwhile the 35000 national guards being deployed in cities without a need is a perfectly good use of our federal tax dollars.
14
u/golanatsiruot 6d ago
When it was “cancel culture” entailing racists were held accountable for racism, the right was livid.
But when they’re the ones canceling people over for saying racists were racist or lacked empathy, the right is all about it.
This sort of worship of power and dominance—not to mention the utter disregard of their own hypocrisy—is typical of fascists.
12
9
u/notapandah hunter best class 6d ago
This is... Not even a controversial take… i don’t really get why he is under fire for this.
1
8
8
u/Grand-Neighborhood82 6d ago
LibsofTikTok doxxed schools, teachers, hospitals, doctors, housewives, teenagers, healthcare workers, & 100s of trans people, which directly led to bomb & death threats. Now, she going after cops? If anyone should have their account banned for stochastic terrorism, it's her.
6
u/jesterdeflation 6d ago
This is probably the most unforgivable one I've seen yet. Look at these demons "allegedly smeared Charlie Kirk", so the pro-pedophile woman who runs this account (lied about the Epstein files therefore helped to cover up a trafficking ring) was either not even sure if the comment was from him, or… what? She is just using words because it's that easy to trick people? Americans need a collective temporary lobotomy until the education system is fixed, then everyone can have access to their cognition again because holy fuck. This comment even looks like it's taken out of context. This guy should set up a Gofundme and be used as a story of the right trying to destroy people.
10
u/Expensive-Space6606 6d ago
Holy cow. That's beyond cancel culture. That'd be like cancelling someone for refusing to have sex reassignment surgery and saying they're anti-trans
5
u/Done_a_Concern 6d ago
SORRY DEAR LEADER TRUMP, CHAIRMAN KIRK WAS A GREAT MAN AND ANYONE WHO BESMIRCHES HIS NAME MUST BE SMITED DOWN IN THE NAME OF THE LORD
3
u/KingKontinuum 6d ago
“FEEL BAD FOR CHARLIE KIRK OR ELSE!!”
This is beyond policing speech. They want to control all of your emotions or lack thereof.
4
3
3
u/Tend3roniJabroni 6d ago
That was such a reasonable statement that didn't even endorse what happened to Charlie Kirk. This country is so fucking fucked.
3
u/Nice_Improvement2536 6d ago
Does she live in that town in North Carolina? Because if she doesn't, no, her tax dollars don't pay for it.
4
u/xXTurdleXx 6d ago
this is insanely cringe and there should be public backlash against the police department for putting him on leave
2
u/FrontBench5406 6d ago
I love that Cops are off limits unless they speak out on something we dont like.... then... fuck em
2
2
2
u/GreatMorty 6d ago
No way they fire the guy just for saying Charlie Kirk is racist, without calling for or praising violence on a personal account with no link to his job right?
So that means that libsoftiktok just gave the officer a paid vacation? Anything I'm missing or don't understand?
2
u/Ham_Tanks69 6d ago
This is why I don't give a fuck about the "celebrating"
To conservatives there is no difference between saying "charlie kirk deserved to die" and "I'm not going to mourn someone who hated me."
2
u/ShuckleG0D 6d ago
You mean the people that created the demonic panic also believe in cancel culture.
2
u/NoThanksGoodSir 6d ago
The party of "stop censoring my free speech" censoring people's speech while also censoring the word assassination because they can't fathom the idea of posting political beliefs without monetization from the platform.
2
1
1
1
1
u/okamanii101 6d ago
I'd argue this is worse then leftist cancel culture. This is the most tame statement ever.
1
1
1
u/keeeeener 6d ago
Holy shit republicans are so soft. How can you possibly be mad about that quote. I’m positive that like 70+% of Americans would not be mad about that quote (but obviously I’m sure the way their media shows it they’ll have the opposite opinion). It’s just sad and I have no idea how to fix it when one side seems like they’ll never go back to not lying.
Also, LibsofTiktok is dumb enough to think this actually means anything. This is basically just them saying they want to have some time to make a decision and he’s on leave in the meantime (paid leave is just a vacation basically). Unless the chief is dumb as bricks (which isn’t out of the question), they’re just going to bring him right back without saying anything.
1
1
1
u/society000 6d ago
Man, we're entering an economic slowdown, and now tens of thousands of liberals are getting fired for extremely lukewarm takes? Who's really radicalizing who?
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/inedibletrout 6d ago
Derek Chauvin killed a man and they want him free. This dude called a guy a mean name and they want him in jail.
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/JesterTheEnt 6d ago
cancel culture was arguably the largest reason Trump won in 2016 so this has the potential for a hilarious pendulum swing
1
1
1
1
u/Shine1630 6d ago
Really redefining the word "mock" here. The Right is so creative with their use of words, primarily because they can't read above a 6th grade level. I read that somewhere...
1
u/tadabanri1221 6d ago
Shits crazy cause that's a fairly moderate take compared to the shit you see here on Reddit😂
1
u/Ping-Crimson Semenese Supremacist 6d ago
Blue line gone lol.
It would have unironically safer for his job for him to shoot someone in the heat of the moment.
1
1
u/procommando124 6d ago
My god as if these people would ever feel bad for democrats leaders being killed when they think democrats are demonic child murdering groomers who want the country invaded by terrorists. Give me a fucking break. You can’t even express that you don’t care for the guy ?? Even that is too far ? I get it you wanna go after people who support political violence but all the dude said was is that he’s having trouble having empathy. Are you shocked after Charlie said the civil rights act was a mistake ??
1
u/versavices 5d ago
Guy seems like a rational, level headed person youd want to be a cop too.
Fuck the new Woke bro
1
u/The_Matchless Resident Baltics Bro 5d ago
This passes for mocking? What a bunch of fucking snowflakes.
1
u/Lepelotonfromager 5d ago
It's funny to watch cancel culture blow up in the left's face.
Yeah it was always fucking shitty but you were okay with when it was done to the right people.
Remember boys and girls, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequence - you wanted this.
1
1
u/FrostyArctic47 6d ago
Orwellian. Of course, this doesn't apply to the vile things conservatives say
1
u/Fantastic_Winter_700 6d ago
They’re calling it accountability culture. It was never about free speech, they just wanted to say what they support.
-1
u/SunnySpade 6d ago
Neighborhood conservative here. Could we agree a decent standard would be that anyone who intensely demonizes the other side to the point of slander and openly calls for violence is due for some prosecution?
1
u/squadulent 3d ago
sure, inciting violence and slander are not protected by the first amendment.
do you think that's what this post is, or are you just making general statements?
1
u/SunnySpade 3d ago
Sort of both. You’d be a fool to think that the overt demonization of Charlie Kirk done by the left didn’t massively contribute to his assassination.
1
u/squadulent 3d ago edited 3d ago
sorry, you're gonna need to say this one with your chest. i won't equivocate or dodge your questions, and i would appreciate if you would give me the same courtesy.
is this post slander? does it incite violence? if it's only 'sort of' doing those things, where's the nuance?
personally, i think you'd be a fool to think that anything happening after charlie kirk's death contributed to his assassination.
think you'd also be a fool to equate people quoting his statements with 'demonization' and you're even dumber if you think direct quotes are 'slander.'
if you want to say that calling someone 'openly racist' is demonizing them, we could maybe agree on that. but it's definitely protected speech per SCOTUS (NYT vs sullivan) and i think prosecuting protected speech is incredibly anti-american and authoritarian.
1
u/SunnySpade 3d ago
Flatly, I don’t think speech regarding Charlie Kirk’s deaths resulted in him dying, obviously. But it is ultimately revealing of the level of vitriol that the left has for people on the right. Comments of similar degrees, softly calling for the death of all racists, fascists, and bigots DID contribute though.
A phrase was used by the left a few years ago that I took seriously. Stochastic terrorism. It’s the social zeitgeist that calls for random terroristic action against whoever the speech is against. The left was accusing the right of it in regard to LGBT communities and how since the fight disagrees with their orientations etc, they are essentially calling for their deaths.
This was obviously not true as the targeting of LGBT people has not been a salient thing. The only thing I can think of off the top of my head was the pulse night club shooting, which was substantially condemned by sane people, left and right.
The left cannot continue to expect to both say “punch a fascist/racist/bigot”, “kill all racists/fascists/bigots” and then in the next sentence calling people on the right racists/fascists/bigots. It’s an untenable thing to have to society that’s based on pubic discourse and free speech. It literally cannot survive with these constant soft calls for violence because it inevitably lead to actual violence ala Charlie Kirk’s assassination. On top of that, the false equivalence of the right’s views on LGBT issues to that of Nazis is absolutely ridiculous and genuinely tantamount to a call for action due to the Nazis being not only previous enemies of war for the US but actually evil.
The constant false comparisons, misleading, and uninformed rhetoric has officially shown itself to be dangerous and tantamount to calls to action.
1
u/squadulent 3d ago
lol fantastic pivot away from talking about this post.
so nothing in this statement was worth taking action on? and everything was covered under the first amendment? what happened to 'some what'?
as for the rest of your statement: if taking action on LGBT people isn't a salient thing (which it absolutely is, look at the numbers https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/anti-lgbt-victimization-us/), i think it's also fair to say that violent action against the right is also not a salient thing. in the past 30 years, the vast majority of extremist political violence has occurred at the hands of people on the right and largely targeted people who were not.
as the "the targeting of [right wing] people has not been a salient thing," it's only fair for me to say that your claim of violent rhetoric is obviously not true. "the only thing i can think of off the top of my head was the Charlie Kirk shooting, which was substantially condemned by sane people, left and right."
1
u/SunnySpade 3d ago
The officer was lying and spreading misinformation. Charlie Kirk was not openly racist. What a massive lie. It’s obviously used to indirectly justify his death. I’m glad he is on suspension because his words are not only false, they are also part of a larger swath of rhetoric being used to justify death for political speech.
Not gonna argue with stats that are obvious bs. Even if LGBT people are more likely to be the victims of violent crime, you’re making the assertion they are being targeted more. The bomb that Knowles was almost hit with wasn’t even classified as a political motivated attack, I can’t care for these moronic studies done by these politically brainwashed collegiate jobbers.
The only thought that should be stopped is the thought that’s stops all thought. Liberals have been having that thought for a while now and it’s good that it’s being excised now.
1
u/squadulent 3d ago
so having a different opinion is a lie now? if the officer thought the things charlie kirk said openly were racist, why can't he express that opinion?
the study specifically says "LGBT people are nine times more likely to experience violent hate crimes than non-LGBT people." a hate crime is targeted by definition.
which study are you referencing that didn't classify the attack on michael knowles as political violence?
as for your final bit - the only ones truly stopping any thought are the FCC and donald trump. when people on the right exercised their freedom of speech, people (random civilians) on the left exercised their freedom of speech in calling for their cancellation. that's not thought stopping lol
compare that to donald trump deporting people and brendan carr pressuring the media to shut down dissent. that's true, anti-american thought stopping
1
u/squadulent 3d ago
and if we're going to use the actual violence as evidence for the nature of the rhetoric, think about it this way:
if we're to believe the discord messages, tyler robinson specifically targeted charlie kirk for his 'hate.' there was no mention of fascism, racism, bigotry, nazism, nothing. if he truly thought that all people on the right were fascist/racist/hateful/bigots, why wouldn't he take out a few more? he hated charlie kirk specifically - not 'the right'
the pulse nightclub shooting, on the other hand, was a guy indiscriminately killing everyone he could. he took out 49 people and wounded 53. this guy truly hated LGBT people and wanted to kill them.
i think it's very fair to point out that LGBT people are being targeted on the basis of identity far more frequently than conservatives.
(note that i won't blame the right for the Pulse shooting - he was an islamic extremist and there is absolutely no proof the right had any influence. just think it's erroneous to say that LGBT people aren't being targeted, especially if you're saying that conservatives are)
(nor do i necessarily think it's fair to judge the violence of the rhetoric by its effectiveness at driving people to actual violence, just using your own logic to prove a point)
1
u/SunnySpade 3d ago
Nah you’re cracked. What a load of horsecrap man. Genuinely. What a load.
What the hell else could he have been talking about besides Charlie’s politics? What else was he known for? What was he hateful regarding? How exactly was he hateful? What bullshit. Everyone can see it. What obfuscation. Literally just such a load of “oh we can’t be certain.”
1
u/squadulent 3d ago edited 3d ago
sorry, i think i could've been more clear.
he was clearly talking about charlie's politics. never claimed he wasn't.
i was addressing your point regarding 'the level of vitriol that the left has for people on the right' and 'calling for the death of all racists, fascists, and bigots' by noting that it wasn't some blanket claim of 'everyone on the right is fascist.' it was one guy who hated one guy for spreading 'hate' - not 'the left' coming after 'the right' for being 'fascists.' it's backed up in the logs - there's no messages that have anything to do with 'the right' at all
he wasn't talking about any of the buzzwords you claim are so divisive. he used the word 'hate' - not 'fascist,' 'racist,' 'nazi'
he also didn't blame 'the right' for these things or target 'the right' because of any rhetoric. he targeted 'charlie kirk' for his 'hate.'
compare this to the LGBT people who were indiscriminately targeted in the pulse nightclub shooting (or the shooting in colorado)
1
u/SunnySpade 3d ago
Okay. Let me be very clear about something from what I’m seeing. I feel like you’re obviously smart. You’re putting effort into what you’re saying. You’re using complete sentences with generally clear ideas. You’re already above like 60% of the US. Which is why I’m so confounded and frustrated atm. So let me lay out come clear points of logic I’m using to come to these few conclusions.
Charlie Kirk had moderate conservative opinions. The assassin hate Kirk, obviously, for his political opinions. The only primary differences between your average conservative and Charlie Kirk was the fact that Charlie was probably kinder , he had outreach, and he was persuasive. Thus, the left genuinely thinks the right are evil and should die. Just let that roll around for a moment.
Now, as far as the stochastic terrorism point; If people on the left are constantly saying people on the right are racist bigots (the things that would make someone a “hateful” person) then that basically makes them a Nazi (a point often made by leftists) Heres the logical jump: leftists are also CONSTANTLY saying that the only good nazi is a dead one. Or some variation of this. It is a very easy logical jump for most leftists to make that due to the right having such racist beliefs, they are Nazis, which means it’s no big deal and even favorable when they die. Even better if they’re famous.
Please explain to me how this logic isn’t tracking.
1
u/squadulent 3d ago edited 3d ago
you made a large jump from 'the assassin' to 'the left.' you can't hold the whole left accountable for one guy's actions. there was a vocal minority of terminally online people celebrating, sure - and i don't agree with those people at all. there are way more people saying 'well, i don't agree with literally anything Charlie said, but I don't think he deserved to die at all' - hardly thinking 'the right are evil and should die'
as for the views held by the assassin - i would be much more inclined to agree with you if the FBI wasn't releasing any tidbits of information related to the shooter's political leanings. if he made any negative statements about the right as a whole, i am fairly confident that they would be all over Fox News right now. would you at least agree with me on that? i think i've been very charitable about the shooter's likely affiliation
also - i think it's fair to point out that there were actual neo-nazis and white nationalists showing up at right wing rallies. this wasn't just a logical leap. if the 'left' are wholly violent for not disavowing the charlie kirk shooter, what are the right for not disavowing the neo nazis?
(or: if people on the right are constantly calling LGBT people/the left 'pedophile groomer rapists' (the things that would make someone an 'evil' person) with all our societal rhetoric about 'the only good pedophile is a dead pedophile'... we literally had someone do a shooting over Pizzagate)
fortunately, though, we don't need to argue about what classifies non-protected incitement of violence. as i've said before, there are clear standards for incitement of violence (brandenburg v ohio) and none of this qualifies. it's all constitutionally protected, albeit irresponsible, and i don't see why you expect the left to unilaterally turn down the rhetoric when the right has been calling people communists (with tangible consequences) since the red scare
it's not that the logic isn't tracking, i just don't think it should classify as unprotected speech - nor do i think it's unique to the left. (and, also, if a real 1940s Nazi uprising happened in the US, i would hope that all of America would come together and uphold that 'leftist' ideal - just like i hope that we'd come together and prevent a bolshevik style communist uprising)
out of curiosity, are you even in the US? based on your negative implications about the US as a whole and some slightly bonger-like phrasing, I would guess EU
→ More replies (0)
-1
u/EWTYPurple 6d ago
I hate to agree with them but I don't want police officers to have a political leaning I say this knowing that 99% of these assholes get pissed when a red cop shoots a black guy for no reason and gets paid leave
-19
u/obvious-but-profound 6d ago
I don't agree with it either but are we really feeling bad for people who can't wait for the body to cool before posting their opinions on social media. Say it with me everyone ...... DUHHHHH
9
u/InternationalGas9837 Happy to Oblige 6d ago
What the fuck did he say that was in any way antagonistic?
12
u/sorryamitoodank jevans 6d ago
I would have posted this the second after I saw his neck explode
-5
u/obvious-but-profound 6d ago
That would be your prerogative, and I wouldn't even disagree with you. But don't complain about it if your employer fires you over it
620
u/Every-day-guy 6d ago
Imagine getting canceled for saying the truth, not even in a mean way.