But at least I do not see it morally as a very big problem that a person explicitly says that something is acceptable and then that thing is done to him
This is why one of my wild theories is that the timing of the shot isn’t coincidental, and since there’s so little time between his answer and the shot, there’s a (negligible, too low, ridiculously small) chance that the shooter was waiting for this particular question (and the answer that follows), suggesting some connection between the person asking and the killer. I am aware of how tinfoil hat it sounds, and I don’t think that’s actually the case, but it makes some sense.
There’s no way there is a connection between the person asking the question and the shooter. It was a debate with Charlie Kirk. Of course gun violence is going to come up. Especially since it started by asking about gun violence involving trans people.
This is why one of my wild theories is that the timing of the shot isn’t coincidental, and since there’s so little time between his answer and the shot, there’s a (negligible, too low, ridiculously small) chance that the shooter was waiting for this particular question (and the answer that follows), suggesting some connection between the person asking and the killer. I am aware of how tinfoil hat it sounds, and I don’t think that’s actually the case, but it makes some sense.
I’m not saying that it’s correct, but it’s not unrealistic.
There’s no way there is a connection between the person asking the question and the shooter. It was a debate with Charlie Kirk. Of course gun violence is going to come up. Especially since it started by asking about gun violence involving trans people.