As the timeline clears up on the horrific Uvalde shooting, Charlie speaks on the importance of the 2nd Amendment and how to fight for it in the face of intense backlash after Uvalde. Charlie offers an enlightening argument on what the true purpose of 2A is, where it came from, and what everyday citizens need to do to protect it. He also dives back into the heartbreaking and still unfolding story of Uvalde police officers barricading doors and ignoring calls from children in classrooms for 76 minutes that is becoming clearer by the hour as details emerge from Texas DPS. He defends his impassioned and emotional speech regarding the mistakes made by Uvalde police officers, and he updates listeners on the latest news coming in.Support the show: http://www.charliekirk.com/supportSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
Uvalde Update and Second Amendment00:02:29
Hello everybody, today on the Charlie Kirk show.
What is the purpose of the Second Amendment?
It's very important that we clarify the need and the moral necessity for the Second Amendment.
We go through that in great detail and then we give the latest update from Uvalde.
We've received some positive, lots of positive emails and some negative emails about some of our recent comments, what happened to Uvalde.
Well, the recent reports further vindicate and strengthen our argument.
We go through it in a very reasonable way.
You could feel free to disagree, but when you hear this episode, I think you'll be moved and convinced that the actions or the inactions of the police officers in Uvalde, Texas were unacceptable.
Support TurningPointUSA at tpusa.com or we're on high school and college campuses all across the country.
Give a gift of any amount at tpusa.com to get your copy of the conservative response to the great reset.
That's tpusa.com.
You can email me directly, as always, freedom at charliekirk.com.
I love hearing from you, so just send me a note, freedom at charliekirk.com.
Support the Charlie Kirk show at charliekirk.com slash support.
That's charliekirk.com slash support.
If you want to get involved with Turning Point USA or sort of high school or college chapter, you could also do that at tpusa.com.
Buckle up, everybody, here we go.
Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.
Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus.
I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk.
Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks.
I want to thank Charlie.
He's an incredible guy.
His spirit, his love of this country, he's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created, Turning Point USA.
We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country.
That's why we are here.
Brought to you by Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific Mortgage.
For personalized loan services, you can count on.
Go to AndrewandTodd.com, the wonderfulandrewandodd.com.
Our team is monitoring the press conference happening in Uvalde, Texas right now.
We will give you an update as it happens.
Sometimes these press conferences go on and on and on.
And with our precious time together, we want to make sure we are as efficient as possible.
If there's something that becomes breaking of nature, we'll cut right to it as we continue to learn what happened after Uvalde, Texas.
We received a lot of emails yesterday, generally positive, some negative emails, and we take that and we understand that.
Why We Need Armed Citizens00:14:41
A lot of people, some people were saying that we were wrong to criticize the police officers yesterday for the one-hour gap.
And some of the reasoning was that we were accused of rushing to judgment.
We were not doing that.
We said, based on the evidence available, which is the one-hour gap, what is the explanation for this?
Is it cowardice or is it something else?
Was there a stand down order that was issued?
Also, you want to think one of the arguments is, well, Charlie, all the shooting stopped.
Well, could you see a situation where maybe kids were bleeding out and they weren't totally dead yet?
And medical attention could have been offered to save some of their lives.
And so that argument is really silly on face value.
And so we're going to keep on monitoring that.
We love police officers.
Police officers keep us safe.
We're a pro-police show, and we'll always will be.
But also, when we see a situation that is not handled correctly and lives are at stake, we're going to speak out.
We're going to ask the proper and correct questions.
And so some people are accusing the local police of lying.
I'm not going to say that.
What I do know is that, and what you know as well, because it's publicly available, is that there was an inexcusable one-hour gap between the first engagement with a police officer and when a tactical team went in.
Now, some people are saying it's because of equipment or other reasons.
I suppose as time progresses, we'll find out.
But for the record, we are very, very pro-police.
Police are phenomenal.
First responders are heroes.
But when they fail to act, that is when criticism is needed and is necessary.
So, the debate around the Second Amendment is going to be raging in the next couple of days and months.
The National Rifle Association is meeting right now in Houston, Texas.
Governor Greg Abbott has canceled his appearance to the NRA, saying he's going to go to Uvalde and speak there.
I have a conflicting, I have some conflicting thoughts on that, because in some ways I get it.
He's got to be governor of the state.
In other ways, I just don't like surrendering to the mob and acting as if their rank corps and their protests are something worth validating.
It almost makes them more powerful and gives them more strength to do that.
Senator Ted Cruz is speaking there.
President Donald Trump is speaking at the National Rifle Association.
And there will be arguments made at this gathering in Houston all around the Second Amendment.
Now, the easy argument to make when it comes to the Second Amendment is that you need guns to be able to protect yourself against criminals.
That's a good argument for the Second Amendment, but that's not the best one.
And that one is going to be weak on face value because eventually they'll be able to say, well, then all you need is a handgun.
All you need is a couple rounds to protect yourself.
Now, being able to protect oneself is a moral right.
Self-defense is a moral right, but that is not the purpose of the Second Amendment.
It was never the purpose of the Second Amendment.
Now, what I'm about to say here is considered to be very provocative and controversial by the mainstream activist media, but it's true.
We must be very clear about the reason the founding fathers believed an armed citizenry was necessary for a free people.
It was not to be able to hunt deer and to be able to feed your family.
It wasn't to be able to protect against intruders.
It wasn't for marksmanship.
No, it was about something very clear.
Now, Republicans generally don't like making this argument.
They don't like making this argument because it sounds a little bit radical, or they get accused of all these things from the media.
But if you don't make this argument, then we are always going to be on defense.
If you don't make this argument, then eventually the guns will be confiscated, and eventually the gun grabbers will win the legislative fights.
This argument is the necessary argument to be able to say that more sophisticated weaponry, weapons of war, need to be owned by citizens.
And we must be clear about it, and we must be willing to have an informed and hopefully reasonable conversation with detractors on why the founding fathers put the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights, which, by the way, was inspired by the Virginia Declaration of Rights, passed and written by the great George Mason, and that was eventually adopted in 1791 through a ratification of states.
The Constitution was written and ratified, and then the Bill of Rights was written and ratified.
So, what is the purpose of the Second Amendment?
The purpose of the Second Amendment is to give citizens an equilibrium with their government.
The purpose of the Second Amendment is for an armed people, which is a free people, under the hopefully never to see in our lifetime situation that we're able to defend ourselves against a tyrannical government.
Now, the media calls us conspiracy theorists and calls us all sorts of names when we say this.
Do you need any more evidence than what you saw the last couple years with COVID of how important it is that people are able to defend themselves against a potentially tyrannical government?
COVID lockdowns would have been far worse if it wasn't for the Second Amendment.
We would have been closer to New Zealand or Australia because if only one side has the guns, they get to call all the shots.
James Madison, we have a picture of James Madison here in our studio, the father of the United States Constitution, said, quote, always remember that an armed and trained militia is the firmest bulwark of republics, that without standing armies, their liberty can never be in danger, nor with large ones, safe.
Now, what is a militia?
You see, militia gets misrepresented by the media as saying, oh, that's a trained force and only people in the military.
Nope, George Mason, who inspired the Second Amendment, said, I ask, sir, what is the militia?
Quote, it is the whole people.
To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.
The founding fathers were clear that if you disarm a people, you enslave them.
The purpose of the Second Amendment is to be able to protect all the other amendments.
The purpose of the Second Amendment protects your right to privacy, the Fourth Amendment, protects your right against self-incrimination, the Fifth Amendment, protects your right to due process, 6th, 7th, 8th Amendment, protects your right to speech and to assembly.
A free people must have leverage against tyrants.
One of the reasons why America has a tradition of the many ruling the few, not the few ruling the many, is because we've been armed.
And for some people, they just don't like hearing this.
It's an uncomfortable truth.
Well, it's what it is.
Human history shows us that governments will always use their force and their power to oppress the people.
The side with the guns and the side with the power will be able to inflict tyranny on the people.
But if there is some form of an equilibrium, then government knows there's a line they should not cross.
The Second Amendment is the insurance policy.
It's the safeguard.
It is the bulwark against an authoritarian government to lock us down, to force vaccines on you, to force masks on you, to make you live a certain way.
A Second Amendment protects your values against a potential authoritarian regime.
A free people must have leverage.
It is an ultimate check.
It is the final fail-safe.
Now, mind you, I don't like talking about the potential fail-safe of us having to go to protect ourselves against the government, but let's not fool ourselves.
If the 20th century taught us anything, it's that graveyards multiply when people are disarmed.
In order to ensure liberty, you must have an armed citizenry.
Look, over the years, you've probably tried difficult investments in stocks and mutual funds, so you know they could be volatile and unpredictable.
But with inflation running at the highest rate of 40 years, do you want volatility and uncertainty?
Being able to sleep at night, knowing where your money actually is, it's worth its weight in gold.
And speaking of gold, if you've been jumping from one investment to the other, a gold IRA from Noble Gold might be perfect for you.
A reliable hedge against inflation just fell into our laps.
With gold, you shield yourself from gains and taxes.
You keep the real value of your wealth.
You'll own a global asset.
It's something tangible and protect your wealth against an economic crash.
I own gold and you should as well.
So what's not to like?
And this month, for every gold IRA above $20,000, you'll get an incredible three-ounce silver American virtue coin completely free as a thank you.
Call 877-646-5347 now to find out more at noblegoldinvestments.com.
Second Amendment protects all the other amendments.
Now, if we are not clear about why that is the intent of the Second Amendment, then it becomes nothing more than just a self-defense argument.
And then they'll say, well, then why do you need an AR-15 just to protect yourself?
Now, there is a good argument for that if you know about the LA riots and the kind of legendary Korean storekeepers that went on their roof and protected themselves using AR-15s against the rioters.
There is a good reason for self-defense.
But that's not the intent of it, and it will make us profoundly less free as a country if we're not clear about why we have the Second Amendment.
So, right now, about 26 million people in Shanghai, China are locked down.
They cannot leave their apartment buildings.
What would Shanghai look like right now if they had a Second Amendment in China?
What would Hong Kong have looked like a couple years ago when China just annexed Hong Kong if every one of the Hong Kong freedom protesters had an AR-15 slung around their back?
Now, that doesn't mean they had to use it, but as soon as the people have weapons, it becomes a negotiation and it no longer is a hostage situation.
If you do not have a Second Amendment, the government can take you hostage at any time.
If only one side has the guns, then one side gets to determine whether or not you are free.
Now, if you trust the government, then this argument will not resonate with you.
But if you've lived through the last couple years, I don't think I have to give you a very long argument on why you shouldn't trust the federal government.
With all the problems facing us as a nation, one of the few reasons we even have the freedom that we have right now is because the government has some fear that if they go too far, an armed people could react.
And believe it or not, that actually keeps us away from conflict.
It's actually an argument for peace.
It's actually when both sides believe something bad could happen.
It's actually the argument for widespread nuclear proliferation, by the way, is that what keeps us away from nuclear war is both sides having nuclear weapons.
It's actually a deterrent.
Now, I want to be very clear.
You do not have to love guns or be enthusiastic about guns or even own guns to appreciate or respect the philosophical and moral argument that I'm making for the Second Amendment.
I have some dear friends in the suburbs of Chicago, and they're not really big gun people.
They've never really owned guns.
They might kind of get a little freaked out around them, but they wholeheartedly agree as to why we have a Second Amendment.
In fact, they're thankful as to why we have a Second Amendment because they believe they live freer lives thanks to other people that own guns.
And I think that's a very good way of looking at it.
I'm not here to tell you that you should own guns, but I encourage you to do so.
I'm not here to say that you should have to love everything about gun culture.
I happen to love firearms and I love shooting them.
But what I'm asking instead is to appreciate how fragile freedom and liberty is and to understand that without the Second Amendment, your love of liberty and freedom and what you treasure and what you value could vanish.
What we know from a study of human history, what we know from our own life experience just the last couple years, is that liberty is constantly under attack from tyrants.
And a responsible ownership of guns is a check on autocrats.
One of the moral arguments of the United States Constitution is check and balances.
That not one person, one organization, one institution should be able to have too much power over the other.
That sort of attention on a check and balance is a safeguard and a fail-safe for liberty.
In case all other falls apart, well, guess what?
The ultimate check and balance for society is the people to have a little bit of leverage.
Now, believe it or not, Elon Musk has said this.
He came out last evening and said, I want to make sure I get his wording right here, but he said something along the lines of the Second Amendment is a necessary firewall against potential tyranny.
And Elon was right.
And Elon recognizes and understands that if you confiscate the weapons and only one side has the power, then there is no stopping what they could do.
Elon breaks his silence and says, quote, the right to bear arms is an important safeguard against potential tyranny of government.
Elon is right.
You do not have to love guns.
You might be a little freaked out around them.
Police Hesitation and Tyranny Firewalls00:17:44
That's okay.
Instead, the only ask I have out of you is to understand the philosophical and the moral necessity for a people to be able to be armed against a tyrannical government.
Hey, everybody, you've heard me talk about Legacy Box before.
They're a phenomenal product.
I got to tell you, Legacy Box is actually more like a service because it's so simple and it's so easy.
They take all of your old stuff, pictures, film reels, memories.
They're like, boy, if there was a fire, this would all disappear.
So, I mean, look, we have a team member.
His house just burned down.
Poor guy.
He's an amazing guy.
I hope he had Legacy Box.
I do.
He's right there.
He's laughing, actually.
He's laughing because he doesn't know what else to do.
He could start crying.
Did he have Legacy Box?
Your family stuff was burned, though, right, Justin?
Yeah, he'd like, no, this is legitimate.
It's a real thing.
He's nodding his head.
It's not good.
And I think Justin would have loved to have Legacy Box because it would have all been on the cloud.
I mean, it's not a joke.
Justin right in there.
His whole house burned down.
He's got five kids.
Praise God.
They're all okay.
But, I mean, I heard the story.
I'm like, oh my gosh, how about all the stuff?
And boom, gone.
Whole thing burns to the ground.
It's ashes.
So you don't have to worry about that.
Look, it could be a flood.
It could be whatever.
But the point is that things get lost, but family memories need to be protected forever.
So you got Legacy Box.
Here's what happens.
You send it in.
They digitize it.
Legacy Box can digitize 19 different types of media from VHS tapes to Super 8 film to preserve all your treasured moments.
Look, if you're born in the 90s like I was, we didn't have iPhones to catalog all of our family memories.
We didn't.
What are you going to do?
Like take a picture of your pictures for five hours?
Like that's pretty dumb.
And you're not going to be able to have all the quality of it.
The cool thing about Legacy Box is they do it all for you.
It's on the cloud.
It lives forever.
So if you get invaded or you get raided or your house burns down, you'll have all your family memories forever.
Their exclusive barcoded online tracking system provides up to 12 emailed updates along the way.
So get started future-proofing your memories today so you can gather the family and begin the trip down memory lane.
Go to legacybox.com slash Charlie to get an incredible 40% off your first order.
Legacybox.com slash Charlie and save 40% while supplies last.
LegacyBox.com slash Charlie.
We got some nasty emails yesterday directed at me saying that you can't criticize police officers.
I love police officers.
I want to be very clear.
There's some scumbags like Sean King that are going after the police.
And I don't want to give oxygen to the anti-police crowd unnecessarily, but I'm also going to be very clear and fair when there's a situation that any reasonable person believes is mishandled.
And this whole thing kind of comes on an argument from authority where people say, Charlie, you have no right to do that because you've never been in a situation like that.
You're right, I've never been in a situation like that.
But there is an opportunity where you have a little bit of prudence and practical judgment and common sense where you're going to comment on something where you say, What on earth was happening here?
So, guess what?
The additional information from yesterday, where we did some rather, I would say, let's say we had some opinions yesterday.
Everything we have said yesterday has only now been further clarified and strengthened.
So, the Uvalde police have done a police press conference, and they have said this: quote, they made a decision not to break into the classroom because officers on site believed there was no longer an active shooting situation, even though children were calling 911 at the time, pleading for officers to come and save them.
Here's what we know: there was no attempt to breach the doors to the classroom.
Kids in the classroom called 911 over and over again and were ignored.
Police are claiming they didn't know kids were alive in the room, even though kids were pleading to be saved, and they waited.
So, here's the new timeline.
And the timeline is actually reinforces what we said yesterday, but we'll repeat it.
The first call was at 12:03 from room 112 in the school.
At 12:10, she called back and advised multiple are dead.
At 12:13, 12:15, 8 to 10 students are still alive.
12:19, students were told to leave the school.
At 12:21, three shots were fired by the police, lasted 21 seconds.
And then there is a 25-minute gap where they call the police again, repeatedly, asking the police to come now.
And then by 12:51, very loud sounds like officers removing students out.
And then it's a little bit unclear what happened there.
What we do know now, and it's been verified through multiple sources, is that the Border Patrol agents who ended up neutralizing the shooter arrived earlier than was disclosed, but the Uvalde police initially kept them from entering the school, two officials said.
So the Uvalde police kept back the Border Patrol.
Agents from Border Patrol and Immigration Customs Enforcement arrived between 12 and 12.10 while there were still many children alive, far earlier than previously known.
But they did not breach the adjoining classrooms until an hour later, where the gunman had locked himself in until a little before 1 p.m.
So there was a 50 to 55 minute gap where the Border Patrol arrived and then they finally acted.
There is more and more information coming out, and I hate to say this for those of you that sent me some of those nasty emails.
And thank you for listening, and I appreciate your feedback.
And it's an emotional time.
I get it.
I'm not angry at you, even though you're pretty angry at me.
I hate to say it, but this is making the police look worse than yesterday.
They looked bad yesterday, but the more information we learn, and the police have now admitted failure.
In their press conference, the police have come out and they've said, and I'm paraphrasing, we can get the exact clip, this was mishandled.
This was a chaotic situation.
If I was there, I would have had it.
I would have handled it differently.
And I'm paraphrasing it.
But what we do now know, admitted by the police, is that a decision was made not to break into the classroom because the officers believed wrongly that there's no longer an active shooting situation.
And I just want to, the great Judge Denine on Fox News made this point.
I just want to reinforce this.
It doesn't matter if you think there's an active shooter situation.
You might say, of course it matters, Charlie.
What if there was a kid that was still alive that could have been saved through immediate medical attention?
You assume they're all dead?
Cut 117, Colonel Stephen McCraw says, with the benefit of hindsight, of course, it was not the right decision.
It was the wrong decision.
They are admitting failure, and the commentary we provided through Gut Instinct and Reaction yesterday was correct.
And I do want to say, good for you, Colonel Stephen McCraw.
You're doing one of the few courageous things I've seen in this, which is accepting responsibility, admitting failure.
This is a tough job.
And I think he deserves credit for this.
Now, that's not going to be comforting for people, but it is the correct way to handle this.
Instead of lying about it and covering it up and filibustering, which we're so used to, I do want to say it's good for this colonel, and I want to acknowledge him for admitting fault here.
It's a very difficult thing to do.
He was not on the scene, by the way, but he is being a leader.
Play cut 117.
Hey, for the benefit of hindsight, where I'm sitting now, of course it was not the right decision.
It was the wrong decision, period.
There's no excuse for that.
But again, I wasn't there, but I'm just telling you, from what we know, we believe there should have been an entry as soon as you can.
All right.
Well, he confirms exactly what many others said.
And instead, they were too busy arresting parents.
So many parents were arrested at the time, handcuffed, they were in charge and tased because they wanted to go save their kid's life.
Who knows that they would have been able to save their kid's life?
But yeah, this colonel's admitting that there should have been an entry.
And the police stood and did nothing.
I wonder what happened to the country I grew up in.
The country I grew up in, firefighters ran into the two towers on 9-11.
They ran into the fire.
Police officers did too, by the way.
I don't know what happened to that country.
I want to tell you about Patriot Mobile as we get more sound from this press conference.
And Doug has sent a very good question here.
Charlie, I find it curious that an 18-year-old living with his grandmother could have afforded two $2,000 rifles with optics and ammunition and over a thousand rounds.
I think that's a very smart point, Doug.
I don't get it, and we need an explanation.
Unfortunately, this press conference makes it official.
The great sagar in Jetty says, he's a good man.
Uvalde police held up Border Patrol from taking down Ramos while he continued to kill kids despite 911 calls from kids to hell them, to help them.
A colossal failure that is only now being acknowledged by the Texas Department of Press Services.
This press conference in Uvalde now confirms the police prevented Border Patrol from going in and saving children's lives.
Someone just said, Charlie, I believed you passed judgment on cops too quickly before getting all the information.
But today you're sharing information on shooting in a calm and professional manner.
This additional info seems to support you, but you're expressing it in a more calm manner today.
I appreciate that, Kurt.
You're right.
I was emotional yesterday.
And I think I'll defend my emotionality.
I don't get emotional very, very often, but when 19 kids get slaughtered and a couple teachers, I do get a little heated.
But thank you, Kurt, for your kind email.
I appreciate that.
Do we have this clip?
We have 118.
Is that right?
Let's play cut 118.
They've admitted that the police prevented the Border Patrol from going in and saving lives.
I will reinforce what I said yesterday.
I'll say it in a more calm way.
The police bought the shooter time.
19 officers versus one, and they decided not to go.
19 officers stood in wait, stood and waited and watched.
19 officers did nothing.
19 officers made a decision that inaction was the right move.
And 19 kids died.
Play cut 118, please.
You say there were 19 officers gathered in the hallway or somewhere.
What efforts were made to try and break through that door?
You say it was locked.
What efforts were the officers making to try and break through either that door or another door to get inside that classroom?
None at that time.
The on-scene commander at the time believed that it had transitioned from an active shooter to a barricaded subject.
The on-scene commander believed it had transitioned from a active shooter to a barricaded situation while kids were still calling 911 pleading for help.
So do you know what that tells us?
It tells us that this shooter was being methodical, that this shooter was taking his time.
That this shooter wasn't acting quickly.
Nope.
But it tells us this shooter was going person by person by person.
While according to now reports, 19 police officers stood outside the hall, and an on-scene commander didn't want to go in and save people's lives.
And you think, even if the shooting has stopped, what about the wounded people that could be saved that were bleeding out to death?
What kind of a judgment call is that?
And some people say, oh, well, they don't have the training and all that.
Sure, fine.
But does courage require training?
The country I grew up in was the Flight 93 country.
The country I grew up in were the heroes of the firefighters that went into the fighter.
Flight 93, there was no training to storm the cockpit in Flight 93.
Yeah, they all died, but we remember them every 9-11.
And the last words that we heard from the cockpit before they stormed the cockpit for the al-Qaeda terrorists that tried to kill people in D.C., they said, let's roll.
And yeah, they all went to their death.
I was raised in a country where people said, I would rather die as a hero than live as a coward.
That's the country I was raised in.
So now we know children called 911 at 12.15 and confirmed students alive.
The Bortak team, the Border Patrol team, was there at 12 or 1210.
And a teacher called saying that there are students still alive.
And so there were 19 police officers in a hallway that, according to now, the admission of the investigation, Texas Department of Public School, DPS, I'm not public school, public safety, I'm sorry.
They made a decision not to go in.
There was no attempt at all whatsoever.
And so the question was asked: what efforts were the officers making to try and break through either that door or another door to get inside the classroom?
None at that time is what the answer is.
So I hate to be this blunt and I hate to be this kind of candid, but they stood and watched and listened.
Gregory emailed me.
Interesting how people say do not need to be emotional about this event.
However, when Democrats are the nutcases, stormtroopers write and threaten that, it's okay.
When a conservative expresses genuine anger over child's lives that could have been saved, it is not correct.
Seriously, something is wrong with these seemingly rational emails you received.
I got a lot of negative emails last night.
A lot of people say they won't listen to me anymore.
Well, Greg says you do not need any vindication for your delivery on the show yesterday whatsoever.
All the best, Greg.
Thank you for listening.
I appreciate that.
Someone did make a nice note here, Bill.
He said, Charlie, when you're advocating for gun ownership, please, please, please encourage to get proper training.
You're exactly right.
You should.
Owning a firearm is no joke.
You should treat every gun like it's loaded and do not joke around.
Do not do that when you're impaired under any substance or even low on sleep.
It's a commitment and buying a gun makes you, I believe it has to have a higher standard of responsibility.
Bill, thank you for that email.
That's so smart.
I really appreciate that.
That's exactly right.
Look, our show is based on facts, and I rarely get emotional.
I try to stay very reasonable and rational.
I got fired up yesterday.
I'm not going to apologize for that.
It just so happens that now the new information further reinforces it.
And the Texas Department of Safety, in their investigation, has admitted the following, that there was no breach attempts made, that there was a 30 to 40 minute gap, that Border Patrol was told to stand down, that parents were arrested and tased, that kids were calling, begging, and pleading for police to intervene, and they didn't.
That there was knowledge that children were alive inside.
So this idea that, oh, everyone was dead, even though that's silly because people could be bleeding out, so on and so forth, or there could be kids literally playing dead because there were kids playing dead, believe it or not.
That's a really, really, really weak argument, is that there's now an inexplicable and irreversible.
So an hour and 16 minutes, just so we know, this is the new timeline.
76 minutes from the moment the police first entered the school and when they finally killed the shooter.
It is worse than what we said yesterday.
We said 40 minutes yesterday, 76 minutes from when the police first entered the school to when they finally killed the shooter.
What do you think was going on in their heads, 19 police officers standing there?
What were they thinking?
Now, I know a lot of you are going to say, Charlie, you'd have been in a situation like that.
You would have been paralyzed.
You're right.
I might have been.
I might have been a coward.
I totally admit it.
I don't know.
I'm not saying I would have acted correctly, and you don't know if you would either.
What I'm saying, though, is that if your job is a police officer, it's your job to go into the unknown, to go against evil.
I get seven minutes, maybe 15, but 76 minutes?
You're trying to tell me that after 50 minutes, someone doesn't say, there's kids in there.
Let's roll.
Those are the heroes that stormed Normandy Beach.
They said, let's roll.
Those are the people that went into the burning towers.
They said, let's roll.
Those are the people in Flight 93.
What causes that paralysis?
Selfishness, maybe.
Fear of being sued?
Maybe.
Warren Police definitely played a role.
I think that's probably right.
Overly bureaucratic management?
Yep, I think that's right.
Evil moves quick, but in this case, it actually moves slow.
It was methodical, child by child.
And for 76 minutes, police did not make a breach attempt.
They did not try to stop the shooter.
According to the own admission now, they waited and they did nothing.
In fact, even worse than doing nothing, they arrested parents and they told Border Patrol not to intervene.
Antidepressants and Social Isolation00:03:59
And 19 kids and two teachers are dead because of it.
There's something that we must talk about that plays into all this, which is the lockdowns.
The lockdowns, look, there was bad school shootings before the lockdowns, of course.
But I'm just warning you that what we have done to our nation's young people has created a pressure cooker.
We have created a pressure cooker and social isolation.
There is spiritual damage that will be irreversible.
And for what?
Lockdowns will go down as one of the great mistakes in the history of Western civilization.
And you must understand that for most young men in America, they're completely miserable.
I know that.
They email me.
They tell me that their life has no meaning, no purpose.
They don't even know what life is.
It's the most suicidal generation, the most alcohol-addicted generation, the most drug-addicted generation.
And it's unfortunately manifested itself in these unbelievably tragic school shootings in the last two weeks.
It's one school shooting and I suppose one a supermarket shooting.
And I'm not afraid.
I'm not, I'm not, not afraid.
I'm very afraid, I should say, that it's going to get worse.
We are just seeing the beginning stages of this.
And look, you have an entire generation addicted to pornography.
You have a generation that doesn't interact with other people, especially girls, because of the hyper-feminization of our country.
I believe the hyper-feminization of America leads to some of these things.
I'm not saying it leads to school shootings directly, but it leads to social isolation.
It leads to antisocial behaviors, and it leads to men not being able to develop properly.
And look, I think we need to have a very serious investigation into the over-medication of our children.
I think we need to look into whether or not benzodiazepans and antidepressants and Prozac are actually doing what they should be doing.
Are they making people more violent and actually more depressed?
I'm just asking because there's a lot of conflicting data when it comes to the prescription of antidepressants.
I know some people that they say it helps them, okay, but I could tell it causes a lot of damage to people.
And I wouldn't have said this a couple years ago, but I could tell you that after the lying from the pharmaceutical companies of the last couple of years, I certainly don't trust them.
I know you don't either.
And are the pharmaceuticals industry helping or not?
Is the over-medication a good thing?
Is the fact that we have more 10, 11, and 12-year-olds on antidepressants and anxiety medication good?
I think it's terrible.
I think it's creating a lot of damaging effects that we can't even manage and we can't track in a very, very serious manner.
We have created a set of environmental and cultural influences that put such incredible pressure in a negative way, not good pressure, because there's a lot of good pressure on young men.
Young men are increasingly isolated.
They're estranged.
The Me Too movement has had something to do with this.
Just staring at screens all day long has had some has had a lot to do with this.
I know parents right now are just looking for help.
And one of the takeaways is that if you feel as if your child is engaging in this type of antisocial behavior, you need to engage very, very quickly.
You need to intervene.
You need to change environments.
Hopefully get involved in some sort of faith community.
Socialization is a very, very important thing, being around other people their age, pushing of boundaries, challenging of limits.
And you look at what's happening, not just with these specific incidences that pop off the charts, but you look at the broader pharmaceutical industrial complex that is pushing these medications on children.
Parents, be very careful, please, medicating your children.
Be very careful giving them antidepressants.
Thank you so much for listening, everybody.
Email me your thoughts as always, freedom at charliekirk.com.
Thanks so much for listening.
God bless.
For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to CharlieKirk.com.