The popular political talk figure, Charlie Kirk, came to Pitt’s campus to debate for his “You’re Being Brainwashed” tour. Three hundred fifty-seven days later, while visiting Utah Valley University’s campus for an “interactive tabling event,” he was fatally shot from 200 feet away by someone still at large.
After roughly 146 school shootings from 1996-present, that are constantly reported in the news, it took the live, public assasination of a public figure to gain outrage on social media and statements by conservative politicians.
Although Charlie Kirk remains a controversial figure, no one deserves to die in such a public way in front of their family and a large crowd. By no means was his death deserved or condoned. However, that doesn’t erase the harm and political violence he himself incited. Regardless of Kirk’s hateful rhetoric, his assasination forces America to confront the realities of shootings.
In a best-case scenario, we can hope this situation is a call for better gun reform. The issue is near impossible to ignore with rampant shootings occurring often. However, on the opposite end, Charlie Kirk’s assasination represents a fearful turn for our future. It shows a state of the country where violence is the norm, frequently resulting in disregard for when it does occur.
Violence — specifically against political figures — is nothing new in this country, even within the last year. Nancy Pelosi’s husband was attacked with a hammer in his home, with Kirk previously calling for someone to bail the attacker out of prison. Melissa Hortman, a Democratic state representative from Minnesota, and her husband were killed in their home by someone pretending to be a policeman, and the public outcry was nowhere near the same as for Kirk. Despite the assasination of Kirk and Hortman, even responses from President Trump varied — he ordered flags flown at half-mast for Kirk, but not for Hortman or a nearby shooting. Soon after Kirk was killed, a shooting at a school district in the next state happened, wounding two children, which likely would have been largely unreported in the news had it not been for the large conversation created from his assasination. This response to shootings shows how society remains largely apathetic towards most acts of gun violence with indignation reserved for a subset of people. Although gun violence repeatedly kills children, it takes the death of someone who said some gun deaths were “worth it” to preserve the Second Amendment — an ironic way of standing by his words — to start a conversation.
Political violence, specifically regarding guns, is not something that should be merely reported in the news. It requires meaningful change with stricter legislation on gun access. There is no telling what this means for this country, as it took the killing of an extremely right-wing figure to finally incite conversations about gun violence. If anything, it shows the United States is heading in a direction that proves gun violence can make anyone the victim.
The Pitt News editorial is a weekly article written by the opinion editors, in collaboration with all other desk editors. It reflects the collective opinion of the current Pitt News editorial staff.