Hacker News Reader

Comment by mensetmanusman | Hacker News Reader

[flagged]

Did Jimmy Kimmel celebrate the assassination? (He did not.)

No, enough people were angered by him when he accused Trump supporters of killing Kirk that abc had to pull for financial reasons. Not sure why he would’ve said that on a comedy show.

No, Kimmel accused Trump supporters of publicly trying to distance themselves from the shooter.

Yes, but in the same breath Kimmel said the assassin was a MAGA supporter.

Kimmel's words:

"...the MAGA gang [was] desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them..."

The assassin may have indeed once been a MAGA supporter - his family certainly appear to be so. But political beliefs can change quickly as his history demostrates:

The assassin found true love in a transsexual roommate/lover.So overcome was he by his love for his transsexual roomie and so offended by MAGA supporter Charlie Kirk's objections to LGBTQ+, that he engraved LGBTQ+ graffiti on 30-06 ammo and shot Charlie Kirk in the neck with one of the bullets. He left the remaining bullets with the rifle IIRC.

Was the assassin a MAGA supporter at the moment he pulled the trigger? Beats me!

"I think empathy is a made-up, new age term that does a lot of damage."

the man’s speech was against human rights for black people, women, lgbtq+. people are allowed to have free speech against those beliefs too. they are not “average”.

This mischaracterization was a view that many on the left have already disproven in the past few days (major black, gay, and women influencers who have changed their views on Kirk) when they looked into it, which is why a mass outflow from the left is being witnessed.

It’s not a surprise with the bubble people are living in though.

>Therefore people argue that we have to shame (not imprison or kill) celebrations on attacks on free speech to protect free speech.

So what you're saying is "freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences?"

Odd. I suspect the same people arguing that now would have been outraged at the very thought before Charlie Kirk's death. Because they celebrate the death of people also practicing free speech all the time while insisting that freedom of speech exists to defend the speech you disagree with, not the speech you agree with.

It's just weird how fast their principles turn on a dime when it's one of theirs.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com