No problem, as I expect you to regularly lie about what I stated. Also, I understand that your comprehension level is quite limited which is probably why you got confused.
And saying that someone was "
misquoted" and saying that someone has said something that is "
taken out of context" are 2 wholly different things.
Now, if you are so illiterate that you now are claiming there is no difference in the 2 italicized issues,, then let's go from the part in my previous posting where I stated that I agreed 100% with Everything that Charlie Kirk said in that long statement.
If I agreed with 100% of what he stated, how then as a rational human being would I then say "but he was misquoted"?
Fact is, that I wouldn't. I said that he was taken out of context because his FULL statement also said that 50,000 automobile deaths was "worth it", just as he said "some gun deaths are worth it".
You falsely claimed that he stated Gun deaths are "acceptable".
So did he say "Murder with a gun is Ok"? NO, he did not. What did he mean? Explain yourself, since you are apparently now a clairvoyant.
He could very well have meant that Accidental gun deaths, as an unfortunate cost of being able to own and defend oneself from a tyrannical gov't, OR another person.
I'll use YOUR favorite catch phrase and throw it back in YOUR face, "
there is NUANCE that you are ignoring" in his FULL, much longer statement.
Isn't that your favorite comeback? So then why are YOU NOW simply ignoring the NUANCE of the small snippet of Charlie Kirks' FULL statement?
Why does NUANCE now NOT come into play when you read his FULL statement? Is it because it doesn't fit the Narrative you want to make about Charlie Kirk? Yes, I think that is Precisely ignoring EVERYTHING Kirk stated BEFORE he said gun deaths are worth it.
His exact words were
"SOME gun deaths are worth it" as a price to pay for having the right to bear arms.
I agree 100% with his statement.
That is the price we will pay for being able to protect ourselves in this society for all kinds of threats to OUR lives and OUR liberty.
My issue with the context is that that the snippet used by the left to distort his meaning was Only a very small sentence of the long dissertation that he gave to the audience.
In fact I was SO specific about his context, I provided what the context was, and
I never stated that he was misquoted so you lied about that.
As YOU often say words have meaning, so don't distort MY words and MY meaning.
Now back to the subject of what is
Worth it.
Lots of things are WORTH IT. We allow people to endanger themselves on the highway.
We allow people to endanger themselves on the ski slopes where there are certain to be avalanche deaths every year.
Should we outlaw skiing? Yes or No?
A certain number of deaths will occur in this country each year via KNIFE STABBINGS, as JUST OCCURRED on a train, a story that was COVERED UP by YOUR Leftist media.
Should we outlaw Knives in the kitchen and in our pockets? Yes or No?
Box cutters were used in the 9/11 attack.
Should we outlaw box cutters in society? Yes, or No?
Your limited understanding of HIS statement about guns is kind of shocking.
But it isn't surprising.
