Did he even say thank you?
Listen to him talk. You can tell he
iswas askin’ for it.Which means he wanted it, dare if I say: he enjoyed it. Therefore no assassination.
I mean… he DID frequently say some gun deaths a year are a worthy price to keep the second amendment, so… yea, absolutely unironically, at some level, he did want it.
ok I laughed at this big time for real
That is what he gets for saying gun violence isn’t a problem and daring people to prove him wrong.
It’s not what he was wearing but how he looked. Ever seen him smile? Creepy as fuck, it’s a wonder nobody shot him sooner.
i thinks its his wierd facial feature, its all compressed in the middle.
Funnily, I heard he was wearing a bulletproof vest and the bullet ricocheted off of that vest up into his neck. If that’s true, his clothing did in fact get him killed.
No. Bullets that already hit something do not make a small, circular hole.
He was not. This has already been categorically debunked over and over again by people who know literally the first thing about ballistics.
Its ok we can have a little misinformation. As a treat
Where can I find more information on this? I heard the same info from a right wing coworker I have conversations with occasionally. He’s real big into guns so what he said sounded legit to me as a not gun enthusiast.
Firstly, the burden of proof says it’s their job to demonstrate that Kirk was wearing a bulletproof vest in the first place (let alone that the bullet struck him in it first), not yours to debunk it. We’ve really lost sight of how important this is in recent years.
- There’s zero evidence Kirk was wearing body armor whatsoever.
- I don’t think we’ve ever seen evidence of Kirk wearing body armor to debates elsewhere.
- A bullet would’ve left at minimum a noticeable tear in Kirk’s clothing.
- Neither journalists nor investigators mention anything about this even though there’s zero compelling reason for them not to and, for journalists, incentives to do so.
- The round was 7.62x63 mm fired from a bolt-action rifle.
- If that round strikes body armor, in order for it to stop (let alone ricochet rather than embed), the armor needs to be so thick that you cannot hide it under civilian clothing like Kirk’s. The armor would’ve been readily visible to everybody in attendance. Light armor Kirk realistically could’ve been wearing would be a non-factor.
- Even if this magically happened, the improbably fucked-up physics required for a bullet to bounce from the torso into the cartoid artery seem vanishingly unlikely at best and implausible at worst.
While much of this just shows extreme unlikelihood, the thickness of the alleged body armor is impossible to reconcile with the round and the weapon it was fired from.
If he’s right wing, he’s a fucking dipshit moron that NEVER knows what they’re talking about.
i hear he was wearing a bulletproof neck and it ricocheted off his neck and then his vest just did that
“His neck just did that” is unironically more believable
must be high blood pressure causing a neck dissection of the artery, caused bya suspicious metal object.
His neck just gave out feom funneling bullshit
I appreciate that you used “I heard” and “if that’s true”. Word choice can be very important, and it’s frustrating when people don’t notice it.
They’re still repeating bullshit.
True, but they’re not trying to claim otherwise. It’s an honest statement of ignorance, and practically a question. Because it was brought up, anyone reading this who hadn’t heard the truth now has.
The world needs more of this type of thinking
Why thank you!
yeah its fun huh
that is funny
