Quo Vadis GOP?

[Zoupa]

 

[Syt]

Tbf, this wasn't a mass shooting.

[Syt]

I'm not exactly a fan of Charlie Kirk or his works. However, assassinations of politicians, CEOs, or persons of public life are not exactly something that contributes to social order or safety.

[garbon]

The "freedom" being discussed is really insurance.  You can have freedom, but if populace has no means of defending it, then it is more brittle than the freedom that has armed population behind it.  I don't know if I personally buy it myself, but it's an argument that deserves a nuanced discussion.

No it doesn't deserve nuanced discussion. There's zero evidence that the second amendment helps Americans to keep the government in check.

[garbon]

I'm not exactly a fan of Charlie Kirk or his works. However, assassinations of politicians, CEOs, or persons of public life are not exactly something that contributes to social order or safety.

I'm not a fan of anyone getting assassinated. But I also am not entirely convinced it should matter less when it is only the 'little people' who get killed by guns.

In fact, I'm not sure why you put CEOs in that same category.

[garbon]

Tbf, this wasn't a mass shooting.

Sure but when he was this person, I think you can then say, well you deemed it an acceptable risk. Time to move on.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/queens-heartbreaking-four-word-response-142503390.html

Charlie Kirk claims gun deaths are 'worth it' to protect second amendment

[Admiral Yi]

I'm not a fan of anyone getting assassinated. But I also am not entirely convinced it should matter less when it is only the 'little people' who get killed by guns.

In fact, I'm not sure why you put CEOs in that same category.

The assumption is that political violence is more pernicious than street violence.

Similar logic makes punching a gay guy for being gay a hate crime and not just battery.

[Josquius]

The "freedom" being discussed is really insurance.  You can have freedom, but if populace has no means of defending it, then it is more brittle than the freedom that has armed population behind it.  I don't know if I personally buy it myself, but it's an argument that deserves a nuanced discussion.

No it doesn't deserve nuanced discussion. There's zero evidence that the second amendment helps Americans to keep the government in check.

When/if things get back to normal post-Trump I do hope this lesson is remembered and America finally does the sensible thing.

[garbon]

I'm not a fan of anyone getting assassinated. But I also am not entirely convinced it should matter less when it is only the 'little people' who get killed by guns.

In fact, I'm not sure why you put CEOs in that same category.

The assumption is that political violence is more pernicious than street violence.

Where is the line on what is more pernicious and not?

Is killing a CEO or a 'person of public life' inherently political violence? If Kim Kardashian was killed while talking about prison reform would that be more pernicious?

It is less pernicious to public order when members of the public die to gun violence while 'people who matter' like Kirk talk about acceptable loss of life to protect the 2nd amendement? Is rampant knife crime in London less pernicious to public order than say the assassination of MP David Amess?

If Kilmar Abrego Garcia had died during the period of his illegal deportation, would that be more pernicious?

[garbon]

The "freedom" being discussed is really insurance.  You can have freedom, but if populace has no means of defending it, then it is more brittle than the freedom that has armed population behind it.  I don't know if I personally buy it myself, but it's an argument that deserves a nuanced discussion.

No it doesn't deserve nuanced discussion. There's zero evidence that the second amendment helps Americans to keep the government in check.

When/if things get back to normal post-Trump I do hope this lesson is remembered and America finally does the sensible thing.

I don't see how. Even as they are being shot at (and killed), conservatives are still defending the 2nd amendment.

[Admiral Yi]

Where is the line on what is more pernicious and not?

Is killing a CEO or a 'person of public life' inherently political violence? If Kim Kardashian was killed while talking about prison reform would that be more pernicious?

It is less pernicious to public order when members of the public die to gun violence while 'people who matter' like Kirk talk about acceptable loss of life to protect the 2nd amendement? Is rampant knife crime in London less pernicious to public order than say the assassination of MP David Amess?

If Kilmar Abrego Garcia had died during the period of his illegal deportation, would that be more pernicious?

The line is where DGuller set it.

It is not more pernicious to public order per se, but it is more pernicious to freedom of speech, and thus the functioning of our political system.

[garbon]

The line is where DGuller set it.

It is not more pernicious to public order per se, but it is more pernicious to freedom of speech, and thus the functioning of our political system.

What does DGuller have to do with this? I didn't see him talking about that and my post was in reply to Syt.

I think my hypothetical question still stands: If Kim Kardashian was assassinated while talking about prison reform would that be 'pernicious to freedom of speech, and thus the functioning of our political system.'

New question: What 'freedom of speech' was threatened when CEO Brian Thompson was assassinated (which is only recent CEO assassination that comes to mind that Syt might have been referencing)?

[Sheilbh]

I think yes to Kardashian - agree on Thompson not being about free speech. But I think a political culture is heading into dangerous territory when there's political violence like this or assassinations on the streets - even if the two aren't linked.

I'd add that I also think the beneficiary is almost always whoever claims the mantle of the "party of order".

[Norgy]

I'm not exactly a fan of Charlie Kirk or his works. However, assassinations of politicians, CEOs, or persons of public life are not exactly something that contributes to social order or safety.

I'm not a fan of anyone getting assassinated. But I also am not entirely convinced it should matter less when it is only the 'little people' who get killed by guns.

In fact, I'm not sure why you put CEOs in that same category.

You may be too young to remember Rote Armee Fraktion in Germany. They went after CEOs. Well. They went after several public figures.

[Sheilbh]

Years of Lead too.