To be reasonable a dead man cannot start a riot .
The people who hailed him as a hero may have started some riots, but he did not cause them.
George Floyd should not have been killed the way he was.
I know a lot of people disagree with me- that's okay ,it's America you can disagree with me.
George Floyd did not get a trial or any sentencing.
It was caused by a police officer who would not listen to his cries of distress.
Should he have been made into a hero?
No, I really don't believe he should have .
That still doesn't mean I think it's great he died or the person who disregarded his pleas for help should be exonerated.
Every American citizen has a right to stand befor a court of law.
Mr Kirk didn't do anything that warranted death.
Some of his rhetoric might have made people nervous or angry.
He didn't commit crimes.
He only advocated his right to speak freely about what he believed- I did not always agree with him or his rhetoric, but he should have not had any violence perpetrated against him and in that respect he was more innocent than George Floyd, but that doesn't mean George Floyd should have been denied his rights, because he's seen as a more despicable character.
Because ,you see if we only uphold rights for one set of people and defend violence against other people we find more seedy then we like, then we go against the very laws we say we believe and that we should uphold.
I do not see the correlation between the two whether a conservative or a liberal brings this up.
Two different stories and two different outcomes,with only death being the common denominator.
George Floyd may have been a criminal, but he was denied his rights, and accidental or not,his life was taken by someone who would not listen to his cries of help-
I cannot celebrate that any more than I can celebrate what happened to Charlie Kirk, but I see them as two distinct incidents.
