By James Oliphant, Bo Erickson and Trevor Hunnicutt
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -What was meant to be a moment of silence in the U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday for the slain conservative activist Charlie Kirk erupted in shouting and finger-pointing, an episode that provided a bitter illustration of a nation divided by political acrimony.
As news of Kirk’s fatal shooting at a Utah university spread, lawmakers began to argue how to best honor him. U.S. Representative Lauren Boebert, a Colorado Republican, raised her hand and asked for someone to lead a prayer, adding, “Silent prayers get silent results.”
Some Democrats then questioned why other killings that involved less prominent figures were not getting the same attention, according to one lawmaker present, which resulted in swearing and accusations about politicizing tragedies.
Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson pounded the gavel for order, while an unidentified person shouted, “Pass a gun law!”
Kirk, 31, co-founder of the conservative advocacy group Turning Point USA and a staunch supporter of President Donald Trump, was shot while speaking at an event in Orem, Utah, on Wednesday. The motive is unknown and it was not clear whether a suspect had been arrested.
His death left many of his fellow conservatives seething and blaming liberals for the assault, while Democrats largely kept to a more reserved tone, decrying political violence generally and again calling for stronger gun laws.
It was a debate far too familiar – and personal – for lawmakers.
“There’s no excuse for political violence in our country, it’s got to end,” said Steve Scalise, the No. 2 Republican in the House of Representatives, who survived being shot in 2017 at a congressional baseball practice.
“It’s a problem that we’ve seen grow and it’s got to be addressed. It’s got to stop.”
According to the most recent data compiled by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 46,728 people died from gun violence in the U.S. in 2023, the third-highest figure ever recorded.
Two years ago, Congress passed the first sweeping gun-control measure in 30 years, a bipartisan bill that tightened loopholes and increased background checks but has done little to stem shootings.
YAWNING POLITICAL DIVIDE
The differing reactions suggested that Kirk’s death likely will only deepen America’s yawning political divide – as two assassination attempts on Trump did last year. Almost a quarter century has passed since the nation was last unified by tragedy, following the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington.
Before the identity of the shooter was known, prominent right-wing figures were framing the incident as a part of a broader assault by the left against conservatism.
“America has lost one of its greatest champions,” White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller wrote on X. “All of us must now dedicate ourselves to defeating the evil that stole Charlie from this world.”
Laura Loomer, a MAGA loyalist who has Trump’s ear, called for “cracking down on the Left with the full force of the government. Every single Left wing group that funds violent protests needs to be shut down and prosecuted. No mercy.”
Elon Musk, the X platform’s billionaire owner, was even more blunt. “The Left is the party of murder,” he wrote.
The reaction from Democrats was more muted. “We don’t yet know what motivated the person who shot and killed Charlie Kirk, but this kind of despicable violence has no place in our democracy,” former President Barack Obama said in a statement.
Democratic former U.S. Representative Gabby Giffords, who was critically wounded by a gunman in 2012, said, “Democratic societies will always have political disagreements, but we must never allow America to become a country that confronts those disagreements with violence.”
One exception was Illinois Governor JB Pritzker, a potential 2028 presidential candidate who placed his finger squarely on Trump for encouraging political violence.
“It’s gotta stop,” Pritzker told reporters. “I think there are people who are fomenting it in this country. I think the president’s rhetoric often foments it.”
PUBLIC REJECTS POLITICAL VIOLENCE
Americans overwhelmingly reject political violence.
A Reuters/Ipsos poll conducted in October of last year asked if Americans agreed with a statement that it was “acceptable for a member of my political party to threaten and/or intimidate others to achieve a political goal.” Just 6% of respondents – a trivially small share in terms of an opinion survey – said they agreed.
Ruth Braunstein, a professor of sociology at Johns Hopkins University who has studied Kirk and the right, said the shooting had the potential to spike already heated political tensions in the country.
“It is obviously a tragedy on a personal level, but it also does have the capacity to further inflame a political environment where the temperature is already way too high. That’s a real possibility, and a real risk,” Braunstein said.
Christian Heyne, chief policy officer at Brady – a gun violence protection group named for James Brady, a former White House press secretary shot and seriously wounded during a 1981 assassination attempt against Republican President Ronald Reagan – urged the parties to find common ground on guns.
“Gun violence doesn’t check party ID. It is indiscriminate. And the American people always lose,” Heyne posted on the social media site BlueSky. “We know change is possible. We must stop pretending there are ‘sides’ and fight together to build a safer future.”
Kirk’s shooting came as the conservative media ecosystem had been convulsing for several days over the political significance of violence.
In recent days, its prominent voices including Trump have been spotlighting the August 22 killing of a Ukrainian refugee in North Carolina, claiming it was a product of liberal criminal-justice policies.
Kirk, no stranger to fanning the flames of controversy, had taken a deep interest in the case. In an interview on Fox News on Tuesday, Kirk said the “narrative” advanced by liberals “in the past 10 years (is) that there is a relentless assault against Black people on behalf of white people.”
Kirk said that was not true. “White individuals are more likely to be attacked, especially per capita, by black individuals in this country.”
One Republican who was trying to lower the temperature was Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina, who said Kirk’s death should not serve as an excuse for further strife.
“Every single person who encourages aggressive responses to it rather than civil discourse owns a certain amount of responsibility for his death and anyone else’s,” Tillis said in an interview.
Few on either side are likely to listen to Tillis, however. He is retiring from politics.
(Reporting by James Oliphant, Bo Erickson and Trevor Hunnicutt; Additional reporting by Jason Lange, Nolan McCaskill, Jeff Mason and Andrea Shalal; Editing by Scott Malone and William Mallard)
Comments