Update
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

The Charlie Kirk shooting suspect

While few details are coming from official sources (reportedly, Tyler Robinson is "not cooperating with law enforcement," meaning he's exercising his Fifth Amendment rights), the media is interviewing anyone who so much as saw Robinson at any time from his birth to the present. So we're learning that he was a Groyper, a furry, a MAGA, that his roommate (with whom he may or may not have been in a relationship with) was transitioning from male to female, that his family was MAGA but he "rebelled" against them, that he had become very political in recent years, that he wasn't political at all, that he shot Kirk because Kirk was conservative, or because he wasn't conservative enough - whatever narrative you need to support your preferred conclusion, you can find something to back it up. And this doesn't even touch on the conspiracy theories - Trump ordered it because Kirk was demanding the release of the Epstein files, the Mossad killed him because he was "questioning Israel" in his final weeks, that his own team of bodyguards took him out with a shot from a few feet away, that it was a squib and Kirk faked his own death, and I'm sure others that I haven't seen yet that are even more unhinged.

The reaction from conservative lawmakers and pundits right after Kirk's assassination, that it was "the Democrats" before the shooter was even caught, set the tone. Everyone is desperate to pin the assassination on the other side as "proof" that their side is reasonable and peaceful, while their opponents are violent extremists who must be suppressed. This is nothing more than guilt by association. His "debates" on college campuses notwithstanding, Kirk was a gleeful participant in the demonization of liberals and the Democratic party, and did his part in increasing the polarization in the U.S. If a prominent liberal influencer had been killed instead, I have no doubt that Kirk would have been one of the conservative voices making light of the incident (as he did after the attack on Paul Pelosi) while also saying that the victim had it coming.

It's possible we'll never know the shooter's motivations, and unless somebody hired him to shoot Kirk, it really doesn't matter what they were. From what I can tell, he fits the pattern that so many assassins of prominent figures have - a troubled young white man with no coherent philosophy that can be nailed down, failure to fulfill his potential, and some degree of mental illness. This would describe Lee Harvey Oswald, the would-be Trump assassin, the killers of Presidents Garfield and McKinley, Reagan's shooter John Hinckley, John Lennon's killer, Gabby Giffords' shooter, and many others. People make fun of the response "how are we as a society failing these young men," but it's a reasonable question. There aren't that many purely political assassins; the ones that come to mind are John Wilkes Booth, Sirhan Sirhan, and the Puerto Rican nationalists who attempted to kill Harry Truman. Trump's shooter reportedly considered going after Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi; the only reason he targeted Trump was because Trump happened to be holding a rally near where he lived. Robinson lived close to where Kirk was speaking. Maybe we'll learn that he also considered killing Ben Shapiro or Zohran Mamdani, and only shot Kirk out of convenience. In the end, maybe all he wanted was to be famous and the subject of discussion; if that's the case, he achieved it.
Top | New | Old
WestonT · 18-21, M
The responses to this question just prove your point. Lol. Everyone will construct their own narrative and reality and dismiss any facts that contradict that as conspiracy. It doesn't really what the shooter was or what he believed. He's whatever you want him to be to serve your political interests. Everyone's mind is already made up. No further information is relevant.
boudinMan · 61-69, M
@SatanBurger the motive is crystal clear… he hated charlie kirk and wanted to shut him up.
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
@boudinMan That's not what I meant, my response is in line with rest of the op
SumKindaMunster · 51-55, M
@LeopoldBloom Responses like this just serve to mock you Bloom.

Trans isn't left or right, it's a medical condition
😲

Seriously? You really want me to believe that? That's like saying being gay is a sexual orientation. That barely scratches the surface of what being trans is. People make it their entire identity.

There is a movement within transgenderism that is radical and violent. Look up the intersection of Antifa and Trans, with Trantifa. You aware of the Zizian cult? No of course you aren't. Radical trans cult responsible for several deaths. You wouldn't know about it.

Transgenderism is absolutely a leftist movement, and it's way more than a "medical condition".
This message was deleted by its author.
FreddieUK · 70-79, M
@Bella98
Those just do not go together.

I thought that was the entire point of the post: everything that is being said about this person is contradictory and therefore nothing is being said of any substance.
@FreddieUK Well said!
Jackaloftheazuresand · 26-30, M
What if the reason for how they are being failed is because of the practice of left wing ideas?
SumKindaMunster · 51-55, M
@Jackaloftheazuresand
I'm a bit confused where this animosity for me is coming from with you in particular because the last time we spoke it was on what I'd call okay terms but now things are being attributed to me without me even saying them.

Leftist liberals are very frustrated that they cannot control the narrative on this political assassination so they are flailing around and attacking anyone who disagrees because they believe this will get people to accept their narrative.
Jackaloftheazuresand · 26-30, M
@SumKindaMunster I would prefer not to engage in the same whether that's true or not as I've said there is somewhat of a history here of respectableness
SumKindaMunster · 51-55, M
@Jackaloftheazuresand The 2 people that I can see you are having a discussion with don't typically give the benefit of the doubt, in my experience.

Additionally, the Charlie Kirk assassination was shocking and exposed the divisions that have been nurtured in the last 10 years during the Trump era.
AthrillatheHunt · 51-55, M
Utah Gov confirmed he’s in a sexual relationship w a man who is transitioning or plans to transition to a woman
@AthrillatheHunt Right, just like when Trump “confirmed” that the 2020 election had been stolen…

Also, even if he is, does that mean he’s a loony leftie? If so, why?
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
badminton · 61-69, MVIP
All you've written is reasonable speculation.
@badminton That's all there is at the moment. There are so many conflicting conspiracies going around that no-one will fully accept the truth, no matter when, or if, it comes to light.
@badminton There's nothing wrong with reasonable speculation.
badminton · 61-69, MVIP
@LeopoldBloom Correct.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
@SumKindaMunster Liberals are exhibiting the same behavior you are - ridicule of the victims of violence. Kirk himself joked about the attack on Paul Pelosi. So far, nobody has suggested that Kirk and Robinson were gay lovers and Robinson killed him because Kirk refused to divorce his wife. If you disapprove of this, start calling out the people on your side who are doing it instead of complaining when our side does it.

I mentioned Groypers before because the slogans on Robinson's ammo are popular among that group. Of course, it's possible he's not a Groyper and just saw those slogans and thought they were cool. Many people address each other as "my brother in Christ" even though they're not Christians. They just think it's funny. However, since you don't know what Groypers are, they are young men who follow the neo-Nazi Nick Fuentes. Fuentes hated Kirk and encouraged his followers to disrupt Kirk's events. Here's an explanation in case you didn't see it.

What's your opinion of Trump immediately blaming "leftists" before Robinson was caught and any facts were known about Kirk's killer's motives?
SumKindaMunster · 51-55, M
@MoveAlong
I've seen no indication there was a relationship outside of that. If he's part of an antifascist movement why aren't there videos or photos of him at rallies or or indications that he was active on line

Right, along the same lines, did you need this sort of evidence to condemn the guy as a Republican and right wing because his parents were Republican? Where was his MAGA hat? Where is a photo of him at a Trump rally?

Stop reaching and just accept you posted information that isn't proven.

Yah, that's why I made this comment:
You have about several days, perhaps a week or so before all this is officially confirmed. So get it all out while you still can.

He's a member of Antifa. You don't need to wear the uniform or riot in Portland to be a member of antifa. His lover was trans. His motivations are apparent. I don't need it to be confirmed, but rest assured, when it is I will make sure you hear about it.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
RedBaron · M
What’s the point of speculating, which is all you’re doing?
Avoidance 101

 
Post Comment