155
top 19 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] Carmakazi@piefed.social 70 points 6 months ago

Even in the best of circumstances, ballistic matching is bunk science used to secure confessions. When the bullet is mangled, nobody is going to take the stand as an expert witness and say "yeah that came from this gun."

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 15 points 6 months ago

Yep, everyone that thinks this is some huge deal doesn't just not understand guns, they don't have a basic understanding of physics or even basic critical thinking...

It means absolutely nothing either way, but there's a lot of shit that does make it look shady.

[-] nightwatch_admin@lemmy.world 16 points 6 months ago

Not true. CSI taught me that you can make a phone photo and then do an enhance enhance ENHANCE and you will instantly see the shooter’s dna and birth certificate.

Fucking enhancify!

[-] RePsyche@lemmy.world 10 points 6 months ago

Despite the legitimacy of your statement I will continue to suggest that this was just one of those ‘1 in a Billion’moments when a carotid artery spontaneously just went pop.

[-] AmidFuror@fedia.io 1 points 6 months ago

The version of this crossposted to news@lemmy.world is a shitshow of ridiculous conspiracy theories.

I haven't really kept up with the stories about the Kirk killer, but I remember all the initial evidence suggested he had moved to the left and opposed Kirk's rightwing stances. Yet many here were convinced that he was a rightwinger himself and that all the statements from the police, roommate, and family couldn't be trusted. What are the current, rational views about the killer's motives?

[-] TheFogan@programming.dev 2 points 6 months ago

I mean in rational views... the police and DOJ can't be trusted, the story still has a lot of oddities in it, the text messages seem staged as hell, whether that being Robinson going out of his way to actively clear his roomate, or the police just forging messages.

That being said I haven't seen anything that seems to contradict the idea that Robinson himself, was opposed to Kirk's hate mongering, and took the shot for that reason.

[-] inb4_FoundTheVegan@lemmy.world 28 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

could not conclusively connect a bullet fragment recovered during Charlie Kirk’s autopsy to the rifle found near the scene

No confirmed match =/= confirmed to not match.

They didn't find a link, not that they proved that a link was immposible. Don't fall in to the Klandece Owens crazy hole.

[-] Murse@slrpnk.net 23 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Plot twist: the guy they arrested only tried to kill Kirk, but missed. Turns out some someone else had the same idea at the same time, landed their shot, and spent the next several days confused as hell reading headlines about the shooter turning himself in.

[-] iThinkDifferentThanU@lemmy.world 14 points 6 months ago

if the bullet doesn't fit, you must acquit!! no play in the case just need to know where gis shitter/grave is!! lmao

[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 14 points 6 months ago

That’s because he spontaneously exploded.

[-] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 7 points 6 months ago

Necks just do that sometimes. It was probably just a really bad pimple that finally popped.

[-] Fishnoodle@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

Yup, he just had a super fierce neck aneurysm

[-] Akasazh@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

The hate couldn't come out of the mouth quick enough, so it found the weak spot.

[-] cobysev@lemmy.world 11 points 6 months ago
[-] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago

Are they trying to say that there was a different shooter, or that "necks just do that sometimes"?

[-] Krono@lemmy.today 6 points 6 months ago

They're saying that, when a bullet is fired from an ancient gun and ricochets off of hard objects, then that bullet will likely be mangled beyond identification. This means that there is not enough evidence to positively connect the bullet to the gun in court. This is normal.

I think there's a list of questionable things about Crooks and the FBI allegations. The timeline, the re-assembly of the gun, the sketchy discord messages, etc. This bullet doesn't make the list.

[-] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

Bullet analysis is hogwash anyways

[-] Headofthebored@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I just want to say it's a bit poetic to me that the antique ~~rifle~~ wireless hole-puncher allegedly used has a long history of deleting fascists.

this post was submitted on 01 Apr 2026
155 points (97.5% liked)

politics

31286 readers
2166 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS