R. A.
If I must die, do not let them say I did not live.
- Aug 8, 2022
- 1,470
literally is saying being trans is wrong / the body that GOD gave you must not be altered lol
literally is saying being trans is wrong / the body that GOD gave you must not be altered lol
idk3
Student
- Sep 10, 2023
- 174
That's his belief, and seems to be good intent, so you think he's "talking shit" because you believe otherwise, that's fine.
Anybody celebrating another persons death because they held different views needs to look in the mirror.
R. A.
If I must die, do not let them say I did not live.
- Aug 8, 2022
- 1,470
Hitler had "different views" but never personally killed; you saying he should've been left alone?
Words have consequences.
Charlie Kirk shot at campus event in Utah
Do you propose that people should wait until they're being shipped to camps, oh wait... Do you propose people should wait until they're being attacked in the street, oh wait... Do you propose people should wait until there's a systematic disinformation machine all targeted against them, oh...
sanctioned-suicide.net
GhostInTheMachine
Safeguard
- Nov 5, 2023
- 488
His "belief" has led to a systemic disenfranchising of many trans people, myself included. It's far more than just talking shit, he runs one of the largest conservative media groups in the world, and actively campaigns to make sure that trans people's lives are harder. He actively argues for trans people to be deprived of healthcare simply because he disagrees with it. He actively funds politicians and media that helps enact this goal.
I've looked in the mirror and realized that him getting smoked is still fucking hilarious. I'm not the one campaigning to take conservative's healthcare away, or their identity, or their ability to live without prejudice. I have no need to make demons out of them for the masses because they do that all on their own. I will never feel guilty for celebrating the death of human trash. Not all life is precious, because some lives make other's hell. I strongly believe it to be a moral good to cull such lives in order to protect the rest.
You mentioned you don't keep up with politics, my advice to you is to keep it that way, and just not involve yourself with these discussions.
idk3
Student
- Sep 10, 2023
- 174
I'll take your word for it.
So maybe he's onto something about angry violent trans mass shooters.
GhostInTheMachine
Safeguard
- Nov 5, 2023
- 488
Pessimist
Wizard
- May 5, 2021
- 614
GhostInTheMachine
Safeguard
- Nov 5, 2023
- 488
Probably, to be honest. He probably also laughed at trans suicides caused by the policies he championed. Your point?
Pessimist
Wizard
- May 5, 2021
- 614
GhostInTheMachine
Safeguard
- Nov 5, 2023
- 488
There is another stunning quote of Kirk that is often brought up in this context.
"I can't stand the word empathy. I think it's a made-up, new-age term that does a lot of damage".
I read this article in thehindu and I think in Germany you would get into a lot of trouble for this opinion.
www.thehindu.com
Here are some parts:
A career in vitriol
Kirk's genius, if you can call it that, was in knowing that cruelty makes better content than civility and that sense of disdain ran through his all his work.
He derided affirmative action by claiming Black leaders "stole a white person's spot." He suggested Black pilots might not be qualified, described Black women in customer service as "moronic," and recycled every tired trope about absent Black fathers and criminality. He compared Black Lives Matter to malevolent forces, called Martin Luther King Jr. "awful" and the Civil Rights Movement a "huge mistake." He trafficked in the great replacement theory, warning that migrants would "eliminate" white Americans and that Haitians were "infested with demonic voodoo".
For women, his message was just as cruel: stay home, remain fertile, and forget careers. College, he recently told a fourteen-year-old girl, was worthwhile only as a means to snag a husband. Birth control, he claimed, made women "angry and bitter." On an episode of Jubilee, he once implied that he would force his 10-year-old daughter to carry a pregnancy to term if she was raped.
To queer folk, he offered only contempt, branding them "groomers," celebrating Supreme Court rulings that legalised discrimination, and calling for "Nuremberg-style trials" for doctors providing gender-affirming care. He also famously cited Levitucus: 18 from the Bible, implying the gay community should be, "stoned to death".
For Palestinians, his sympathy was simply nonexistent, because Palestine itself "does not exist". According to him, the thousands upon thousands of children dead was apparently a fault of their own making, just as Japan had brought atomic devastation upon itself.
This is the fascist boomerang at full spin. The violence you normalise becomes the violence you suffer, and then the violence you suffer becomes the violence you justify. Kirk did not just live by the sword, rather built an entire brand around sharpening it. Now the same blade will likely be wielded by others, in his name.
Should Kirk have been assassinated? No. Should we mourn him? Not necessarily. The more urgent mourning is reserved for his victims — the trans kids driven to despair by his rhetoric, the Black people he belittled, the migrants he caricatured as animals, the women demeaned, and the Palestinians whose deaths he shrugged off. They deserve empathy. Kirk, who sneered at the very word, is harder to mourn without feeling complicit in hypocrisy.
So how should one respond? Perhaps the clearest path is to divorce empathy for Kirk from empathy for the world that produced him. It is possible to feel sorrow for his family without sanctifying his life's work. It is possible to lament the climate of violence without pretending its latest victim was innocent of creating it.
Empathy is not unconditional. It is conditional on how we live, what we give, and whom we harm. Charlie Kirk lived without it. He leaves the world no poorer for its absence.
"I can't stand the word empathy. I think it's a made-up, new-age term that does a lot of damage".
I read this article in thehindu and I think in Germany you would get into a lot of trouble for this opinion.
The assassination of Charlie Kirk and the conditionality of empathy
The American conservative activist and MAGA firebrand built his brand on vitriol, scorn for empathy, and a defense of violence. His assassination has now split the internet over how much empathy he ever deserved
Here are some parts:
A career in vitriol
Kirk's genius, if you can call it that, was in knowing that cruelty makes better content than civility and that sense of disdain ran through his all his work.
He derided affirmative action by claiming Black leaders "stole a white person's spot." He suggested Black pilots might not be qualified, described Black women in customer service as "moronic," and recycled every tired trope about absent Black fathers and criminality. He compared Black Lives Matter to malevolent forces, called Martin Luther King Jr. "awful" and the Civil Rights Movement a "huge mistake." He trafficked in the great replacement theory, warning that migrants would "eliminate" white Americans and that Haitians were "infested with demonic voodoo".
For women, his message was just as cruel: stay home, remain fertile, and forget careers. College, he recently told a fourteen-year-old girl, was worthwhile only as a means to snag a husband. Birth control, he claimed, made women "angry and bitter." On an episode of Jubilee, he once implied that he would force his 10-year-old daughter to carry a pregnancy to term if she was raped.
To queer folk, he offered only contempt, branding them "groomers," celebrating Supreme Court rulings that legalised discrimination, and calling for "Nuremberg-style trials" for doctors providing gender-affirming care. He also famously cited Levitucus: 18 from the Bible, implying the gay community should be, "stoned to death".
For Palestinians, his sympathy was simply nonexistent, because Palestine itself "does not exist". According to him, the thousands upon thousands of children dead was apparently a fault of their own making, just as Japan had brought atomic devastation upon itself.
This is the fascist boomerang at full spin. The violence you normalise becomes the violence you suffer, and then the violence you suffer becomes the violence you justify. Kirk did not just live by the sword, rather built an entire brand around sharpening it. Now the same blade will likely be wielded by others, in his name.
Should Kirk have been assassinated? No. Should we mourn him? Not necessarily. The more urgent mourning is reserved for his victims — the trans kids driven to despair by his rhetoric, the Black people he belittled, the migrants he caricatured as animals, the women demeaned, and the Palestinians whose deaths he shrugged off. They deserve empathy. Kirk, who sneered at the very word, is harder to mourn without feeling complicit in hypocrisy.
So how should one respond? Perhaps the clearest path is to divorce empathy for Kirk from empathy for the world that produced him. It is possible to feel sorrow for his family without sanctifying his life's work. It is possible to lament the climate of violence without pretending its latest victim was innocent of creating it.
Empathy is not unconditional. It is conditional on how we live, what we give, and whom we harm. Charlie Kirk lived without it. He leaves the world no poorer for its absence.
Last edited:
Pessimist
Wizard
- May 5, 2021
- 614
That's the worst quote you could find?There is another stunning quote of Kirk that is often brought up in this context.
"I can't stand the word empathy. I think it's a made-up, new-age term that does a lot of damage".
I read this article in thehindu and I think in Germany you would get into a lot of trouble for this opinion.
The assassination of Charlie Kirk and the conditionality of empathy
The American conservative activist and MAGA firebrand built his brand on vitriol, scorn for empathy, and a defense of violence. His assassination has now split the internet over how much empathy he ever deserved
Should Kirk have been assassinated? No. Should we mourn him? Not necessarily. The more urgent mourning is reserved for his victims — the trans kids driven to despair by his rhetoric, the Black people he belittled, the migrants he caricatured as animals, the women demeaned, and the Palestinians whose deaths he shrugged off. They deserve empathy. Kirk, who sneered at the very word, is harder to mourn without feeling complicit in hypocrisy.
So how should one respond? Perhaps the clearest path is to divorce empathy for Kirk from empathy for the world that produced him. It is possible to feel sorrow for his family without sanctifying his life's work. It is possible to lament the climate of violence without pretending its latest victim was innocent of creating it.
Empathy is not unconditional. It is conditional on how we live, what we give, and whom we harm. Charlie Kirk lived without it. He leaves the world no poorer for its absence.
Not really. But many right-wingers say how disrespectful leftwingers act in the context of this assassination. But according to Kirk's own words empathy does a lot of damage in our society.
Pessimist
Wizard
- May 5, 2021
- 614
And according to Hasan Piker's own words America deserved 9/11. Everyone has bad or controversial quotes.
I think it is true that almost all public people have bad or controversial quotes. But he specifically referred in the first quote to shootings where people get killed. And the second quote also specifically referrs to a situation which now occured to him. It would probably a different story if these were single bad quotes of an otherwise reasonable commentator. But this was his brand and his identity of the public person he presented to be to an audience which was influenced by his takes.
I don't know whether I fully support the framing of the article though. The main topic is empathy and the article has in my opinion strong arguments. However, political violence must be prohibited under (almost) all circumstance. (Yes, e.g. in the case of Hitler it would have been justified). It leads to more toxic polarization and even more hatred. It might even empower the far right.
I certainly don't celebrate it. It should not have happened. I wish he would be still alive. Political opponents should not be killed in democracies. I can understand though why some people don't feel sad for him. For example, minorities who he mocked and made their lives worse.
idk3
Student
- Sep 10, 2023
- 174
It should be deleted outright. Openly supporting the brutal murder of a guy, and even more members reacting positively to these posts. It's not doing this website any favors.
Personally, I don't support the death of him. I think though we crossed the rubicon already with Luigi Mangione. There are members on here with his profile picture as a saint. The box of pandora is already opened. It is a slippery slope. I don't condone the murder of political opponents in democracies.
I am not sure whether this assassination was much different to what Luigi Mangione did. I don't have a final conclusion how these cases differ. We don't know the motive of the shooter though. Maybe a plan to divide the American society even more?
According to this poll 70% of SaSu think Luigi Mangione is a hero.
Luigi Mangione
Below is Mangione full manifesto as it can be found here https://www.kenklippenstein.com/p/luigis-manifesto I think Mangione do not particularly care about poor people struggling with healthcare. He is just angry about the inefficiency and greediness of healcare system which could not take care...
sanctioned-suicide.net
Hmh Luigi Magione did not kill a political opponent rather a representative of capitalism. Still it is astonishing how many people condoned his actions. Despite saying that I don't know how to position myself.
Last edited:
cait_sith
・
- Apr 8, 2024
- 309
the video of this is crazy. i wonder if an artery shot like this results with immediate unconsciousness like an headshot or is it been chosen by the perpetrator to both land a guarateed kill while still providing suffering.
Lyn
Momentary
- Mar 1, 2025
- 298
Mourning the assassination of someone who spent their life attacking trans people, talking shit about women, and pushing those so-called "traditional values"?
Are you kidding me? What planet are you even on?
Look, this isn't just about "violence is wrong." The world isn't some moral playground where everything just works itself out peacefully. Nope. Systems, societies, even so-called justice… they're built on force, struggle, confrontation.
Sitting quietly, waiting politely, hoping things will magically get better?
That's exactly how people like him appear and thrive in the first place.
No, killing him doesn't bring anything good. He was a relatively small figure. And it might make things worse.
But people who dedicate their lives to get rich by hate speech and just literally making life worse for other people don't deserve sympathy. They deserve consequences.
And yeah, sometimes those consequences come violently. It's ugly, yes. It's shitty - yes. It's unfair - again YES.
Byt it's how our reality is. The world is messy, violent, unfair, and if you keep pretending it's not it will only get even worse.
Mourning the death of someone who actively caused harm, someone who literally lived by cruelty and manipulation… that's insane. If you really want to stop people like that from hurting others, you have to confront them, head-on, no sugarcoating. Sitting quietly thinking moral high ground will save everyone? It won't. It never has. That's exactly why assholes like him keep existing.
Ok, you could say an assassination might feed the right-wing narrative, make him a martyr of sorts or whatever.
True. I agree on this point. Yeah, I hate it too.
Though I wouldn't be surprised if he were taken off the scene by his own people, this assassination is still a consequence, not the cause of what's happening and what is yet to come.
But let's not confuse consequences with morality, it has nothing to do with it.
Celebrating or defending someone whose life was basically a bunch of harm, intimidation, and hate? That's… well, I dont even know what word can be used to describe this madness...
Morally bankrupt. Naive. Dangerous. Delusional even. Real change doesn't come from passivity. It comes from action.
Stop pretending the world is fair. Stop normalizing sympathy for someone who literally built their life on hurting others while getting richer off it. That's how hatred and abuse survive. If you can't see that... maybe it's time to wake the fuck up and face reality. Come on people, for real?? So many centuries have passed and we're still in the same spot, doing same mistakes over and over and over again?
Okay, maybe I'm ranting to much...
I guess this cannot be changed. That's just how humanity is. And it will never change, until we destroy our kind.
So stupid...
Are you kidding me? What planet are you even on?
Look, this isn't just about "violence is wrong." The world isn't some moral playground where everything just works itself out peacefully. Nope. Systems, societies, even so-called justice… they're built on force, struggle, confrontation.
Sitting quietly, waiting politely, hoping things will magically get better?
That's exactly how people like him appear and thrive in the first place.
No, killing him doesn't bring anything good. He was a relatively small figure. And it might make things worse.
But people who dedicate their lives to get rich by hate speech and just literally making life worse for other people don't deserve sympathy. They deserve consequences.
And yeah, sometimes those consequences come violently. It's ugly, yes. It's shitty - yes. It's unfair - again YES.
Byt it's how our reality is. The world is messy, violent, unfair, and if you keep pretending it's not it will only get even worse.
Mourning the death of someone who actively caused harm, someone who literally lived by cruelty and manipulation… that's insane. If you really want to stop people like that from hurting others, you have to confront them, head-on, no sugarcoating. Sitting quietly thinking moral high ground will save everyone? It won't. It never has. That's exactly why assholes like him keep existing.
Ok, you could say an assassination might feed the right-wing narrative, make him a martyr of sorts or whatever.
True. I agree on this point. Yeah, I hate it too.
Though I wouldn't be surprised if he were taken off the scene by his own people, this assassination is still a consequence, not the cause of what's happening and what is yet to come.
But let's not confuse consequences with morality, it has nothing to do with it.
Celebrating or defending someone whose life was basically a bunch of harm, intimidation, and hate? That's… well, I dont even know what word can be used to describe this madness...
Morally bankrupt. Naive. Dangerous. Delusional even. Real change doesn't come from passivity. It comes from action.
Stop pretending the world is fair. Stop normalizing sympathy for someone who literally built their life on hurting others while getting richer off it. That's how hatred and abuse survive. If you can't see that... maybe it's time to wake the fuck up and face reality. Come on people, for real?? So many centuries have passed and we're still in the same spot, doing same mistakes over and over and over again?
Okay, maybe I'm ranting to much...
I guess this cannot be changed. That's just how humanity is. And it will never change, until we destroy our kind.
So stupid...
Last edited:
I strongly doubt that it was chosen. Hitting moving targets at range is hard. Even more so under the kinds of stress loads an assassin must experience.
Could be a head shot, or even a center of mass shot, going slightly off target.
I don't know Kirk. He's allegedly a right-wing conservative, and speaks on campuses. I know the type - annoying characters. My knowledge really doesn't go deeper.
What I have gathered is that an execution, without trial, and in front of an unsuspecting crowd, occurred.
I also see widespread celebration of it. That breakdown of the justice systems concerns me.
We can discuss whether death is good punishment or not, but the process is deplorable.
I can't think of a single instance where proliferation of extrajudicial executions have resulted in anything but chaos and violence. It's terrorism; not as a slur, but as a strategy. It's not about left or right, but about whether we want a state power, or faction rule akin to Somalia.
If this continues, I better study Chinese or Hindi, while the U.S. celebrates its own downfall.
girlsboysthems
no i dont have a gun
- Dec 19, 2022
- 434
eh i feel bad for the kids since they lost their father. but the irony of this guys death is too much lol. imagine this happening everyday to kids in america and making a big deal out of one guy getting shot.
tercermundista
Member
- Apr 23, 2024
- 89
If what's being said here is true, I think the trans community is going to start to have a really bad time and it all sounds very suspicious.
https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/ch...fascist-ideology-sources-pdymd1sXXMSlVRhpvR4b
https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/ch...fascist-ideology-sources-pdymd1sXXMSlVRhpvR4b
Charlie Kirk makes a career out of pushing hate and saying shit like "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." and then dies in a school shooting. That's a direct quote by the way. I wonder if he was able to appreciate the irony before he hit the ground. In the words of conservatives, he "fucked around and found out."
He also said "I can't stand the word empathy. I think it's a made-up, new-age term that does a lot of damage." So don't cry for him, he wouldn't have wanted that.
That being said, Charlie Kirk made his fortune polarizing and radicalizing people into hate. He literally contributed nothing but opinions that led people to fear and distrust their neighbors. He was a cruel and dangerous individual. Anyone in here defending him is either willfully ignorant or an active supporter of him, and I honestly can't tell which is worse.
He also said "I can't stand the word empathy. I think it's a made-up, new-age term that does a lot of damage." So don't cry for him, he wouldn't have wanted that.
That being said, Charlie Kirk made his fortune polarizing and radicalizing people into hate. He literally contributed nothing but opinions that led people to fear and distrust their neighbors. He was a cruel and dangerous individual. Anyone in here defending him is either willfully ignorant or an active supporter of him, and I honestly can't tell which is worse.
Do you think they will ever get the shooter?
In case he will never be caught the thing is really suspicious. It must have been a professional.
I really hope they get the assassin and that he will get his just punishment. But if they don't get him the conspiracies around this case will go pretty nuts.
I hope we will find out the motives. The FBI says they have pictures of him, but for now they won't release them.
In case he will never be caught the thing is really suspicious. It must have been a professional.
I really hope they get the assassin and that he will get his just punishment. But if they don't get him the conspiracies around this case will go pretty nuts.
I hope we will find out the motives. The FBI says they have pictures of him, but for now they won't release them.
ElTopo
Don't listen to me, I am drunk
- Mar 30, 2025
- 188
I can get behind the point of everyone, even stalwart conservatives I tend to understand their point of view, but he invested himself with Christianity while saying the most anti-Christian things imaginable, literally said empathy is a disease and the reason society is bad, openly racist, justified genocide and also justified the Trump administration being silent about Epstein. He wasn't a good person, of course no one should be shot in the neck for their opinions but he didn't exactly lay the seeds to be regarded an admirable person.
Also the South Park episode about him is pretty spot on, he literally rabbits out every time someone who is averagely prepared about the topic steps into the discussion.
Also the Trump video is pretty weird, people are saying it's a deepfake, if I was American I'd be freaking out.
Also the South Park episode about him is pretty spot on, he literally rabbits out every time someone who is averagely prepared about the topic steps into the discussion.
I'm getting behind the idea that it was some Mossad agents, lately he started criticizing Israel all of a sudden and you can see the people behind him making weird hand signs just before the shot, also the fact that it was a 200y shot and they got two wrong people at the start. Also read a post on twitter about a plane going transponder-silent a little while after the shooting.
Also the Trump video is pretty weird, people are saying it's a deepfake, if I was American I'd be freaking out.
R. A.
If I must die, do not let them say I did not live.
- Aug 8, 2022
- 1,470
Solid first post; welcome to the site (sad to say).
Fucking educate yourself this is the information age for christ's sake; i'd never heard of the prick till yesterday but I already made you a summary holy shit
Charlie Kirk shot at campus event in Utah
Do you propose that people should wait until they're being shipped to camps, oh wait... Do you propose people should wait until they're being attacked in the street, oh wait... Do you propose people should wait until there's a systematic disinformation machine all targeted against them, oh...
sanctioned-suicide.net
but, but, we have electoral politics to fix the problems!!1!1 lolzors
Last edited:
quietwoods
Easypeazylemonsqueezy
- May 21, 2025
- 488
Can't really agree that violence was the appropriate solution or that he deserved to die but also not really broken up about his death.
This is the world he wanted, one of polarization, division, and devoid of empathy and understanding.
This is the world he wanted, one of polarization, division, and devoid of empathy and understanding.
SputnikSweetheart
New Member
- Sep 10, 2025
- 1
Didn't like the guy's politics but I do not agree with political violence. People should not be killed for their opinions.
idk3
Student
- Sep 10, 2023
- 174
Are you guys brave enough to post how hilarious this murder was from your personal x or ig accounts?
They're permanently archiving your kind for future generations.
www.charliesmurderers.com
They're permanently archiving your kind for future generations.
Expose Charlie's Murderers
www.charliesmurderers.com
Similar threads
- helplesship
- Suicide Discussion
Suicide Discussion
Life'sA6itch