Erratic415
Superstar
Just like all those Latino idiots who voted for Trump, who campaigned with signs of “Mass Deportation Now”, and suddenly got mad when they realized they weren’t exempt.
“I thought he meant THOSE types, not us!”
Charlie Kirk: Some gun deaths every year are okay to have so we can protect the 2nd amendment
- Thread starter Tair
- Start date
Just like all those Latino idiots who voted for Trump, who campaigned with signs of “Mass Deportation Now”, and suddenly got mad when they realized they weren’t exempt.
“I thought he meant THOSE types, not us!”
This one time he was actually right. If you support the 2nd Amendment, you are saying I support the right of Americans to own guns. It is illogical to think you can have guns mass produced in a country and there are not going to be shooting deaths. You might not WANT innocent people to die but it is inevitable. Having a 2nd Amendment and no innocent deaths is a fantasy.
the bossman
Superstar
This oversimplifying an important issue. The point is there doesn't need to be the high amount of shooting deaths in the US that there is. saying "it's inevitable" is just throwing your hands up like it's whatever. mass shootings are not 'inevitable' nor the norm. They shouldn't be. Other countries with gun rights find a way to not have the insane amount of gun deaths we have.
Sacrificed on his own altar.
Firstly, you misquoted me. I didn't say mass shootings are inevitable, because that's not what he said. He said:
“I think it’s worth to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights,” he said.
Meaning if you have guns mass produced and available in society, people are going to get shot. And sometimes it will be innocent people. There is absolutely no way anyone can dispute this. You are living in a fantasy world if you think there can be millions of guns in society and no one gets shot.
There are only two other countries on the planet with a constitutional right to bear arms - Mexico and Guatemala. And ONLY the U.S. has no constitutional restrictions implemented (although of course some states have individually restricted gun ownership).
So explain how you would refute his quote. Explain how a country that mass produces and sells firearms to it's citizens is not guaranteed to have "some" gun deaths every single year.
And even though you misquoted me, while you're at it, explain what would stop even mass shootings while at the same time respecting the 2nd Amendment.
The numerous videos of cóons trying to prove he wasn't racist
Dameon Farrow
Superstar
The more you hear this guy speak the more unhinged you realize his followers have to be. 
Is that the bullet?
I’m happy Charlie stayed true to his word.
the bossman
Superstar
There was no misquote. I’m not arguing for zero deaths. no reasonable person is. don't know where you're getting that from.Firstly, you misquoted me. I didn't say mass shootings are inevitable, because that's not what he said. He said:
“I think it’s worth to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights,” he said.
Meaning if you have guns mass produced and available in society, people are going to get shot. And sometimes it will be innocent people. There is absolutely no way anyone can dispute this. You are living in a fantasy world if you think there can be millions of guns in society and no one gets shot.
There are only two other countries on the planet with a constitutional right to bear arms - Mexico and Guatemala. And ONLY the U.S. has no constitutional restrictions implemented (although of course some states have individually restricted gun ownership).
So explain how you would refute his quote. Explain how a country that mass produces and sells firearms to it's citizens is not guaranteed to have "some" gun deaths every single year.
And even though you misquoted me, while you're at it, explain what would stop even mass shootings while at the same time respecting the 2nd Amendment.
The point is that framing it as simply 'inevitable' is downplaying/oversimplifying the scale of what we have here in the US. Of course some deaths are inevitable but the extremely high number we have in the US is not inevitable. Other countries with gun rights prove it.
Cutting down the high number of gun deaths here isn’t a fantasy it’s very doable with basic common-sense restrictions like other countries have employed. That’s the part you’re missing or purposefully avoiding.
The more you hear this guy speak the more unhinged you realize his followers have to be.
To be honest he's not much different than your average Republican voter, he just says the quiet part out loud
most of them believe the same shyt