The shooting of right-wing commentator Charlie Kirk shocked people on all sides of the political spectrum. Whether one agrees with Kirk’s politics or not, the attack served as a disturbing reminder that violence is becoming an alarmingly common part of our political environment.

But incidents of political violence don’t exist in a vacuum. They’re part of a much larger and more dangerous trend. And while it’s easy to focus only on high-profile moments of violence, this crisis runs deeper than any one person, party, or ideology.

To fully understand what’s happening, we need to take a step back and ask: What is political violence, really? Where is it coming from? And why has it become such a prominent force in American life?

What Is Political Violence?

Political violence is the deliberate use of force or harm to achieve political objectives. It occurs when individuals or groups use physical aggression, intimidation or destruction to influence power structures, policies or social order. This can includes armed uprisings, terrorism, assassinations, voting intimidation or violent protests. What sets political violence apart from ordinary violence is its intentions; it is motivated by political aims rather than personal gain or individual disputes. Because it seeks to shape or maintain systems of power through fear and force political violence often destabilizes societies and deepens political conflict. 

A Sharp Increase Since 2016

The problem of political violence in the U.S. didn’t begin in 2016, but that year marked a turning point as the presidential campaign and success of President Trump marked a change to the America public; the political climate became more divided, more angry, and more hostile. As extremist rhetoric gained ground in mainstream politics, acts of political violence began to rise.

The events speak for themselves:

In 2017, a white supremacist drove his car into a crowd of anti-racist protesters in Charlottesville, killing Heather Heyer. In addition, Steve Scalise, the then Republican Minority House Whip, was shot during practice for the Congressional baseball game.

In 2018, 11 people were murdered in a mass shooting at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, the deadliest attack on Jews on American soil.

In 2019, a gunman targeting immigrants killed more than 20 people in a Walmart in El Paso, Texas, after posting a white nationalist manifesto online.

On January 6, 2021, rioters stormed the U.S. Capitol in an attempt to overturn the results of a fair, democratic election. At least seven people lost their lives in connection with the attack.

In 2022, a white supremacist killed 10 Black people at a Buffalo, New York supermarket, motivated by racist conspiracy theories.

In 2023, Paul Pelosi, husband of then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, was brutally attacked in his home by an intruder seeking to harm the Speaker, citing political grievances.

In 2024, Donald Trump was the target of an attempted assassination at a campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. 

As Louis Jacobson and Amy Sherman point out in the article, How recent political violence in the U.S. fits into ‘a long, dark history’:

“In 2025 alone, Minnesota Democratic state Rep. Melissa Hortman and her husband were fatally shot; an arsonist set fire to the Pennsylvania governor’s residence with Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro and his family inside; an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer was shot and injured outside a detention facility in Texas; the New Mexico Republican Party headquarters was set on fire; and a shooter attacked the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention headquarters.” 

These were not random acts of violence; they were political acts, driven by ideology and fueled by misinformation, hate and fear. And they’re not isolated either. In recent years, political threats against elected officials have skyrocketed. Armed groups have shown up at protests and polling stations. Voter intimidation is back in the headlines.

What we’re seeing is a shift in political norms. The american public is more likely to supporting the breaking the “rules” of democracy and political violence is increasingly viewed as a legitimate tool in political conflicts.

Guns Make It All More Dangerous

In no other wealthy country is this trend of political violence more deadly than in the United States, and that’s because of one defining factor: gun. While it is true that there are many factors leading to a rise in political violence, the number of fatalities is unique to America.

America’s deep-rooted gun culture means that political violence here isn’t just loud—it’s lethal. In an already polarized climate, widespread access to firearms turns heated disagreements into potential battlefields.When armed groups show up to polling places or rallies, it’s no longer just speech, it’s intimidation. And when people with extreme views believe they have both a cause and the firepower to fight for it, innocent lives are often caught in the crossfire.

The United States has far greater access to firearms than any other country.  In fact, the United States is the only country where civilian guns outnumber people. This creates a unique cultural of gun violence, “In 2023, 46,728 people died by firearms in the United States — an average of one death every 11 minutes.”  The connection is simple: the easier it is to access guns, the deadlier political violence becomes.

Why It Matters and What We Can Do

It’s easy to feel overwhelmed or helpless in the face of rising political violence. But apathy will solve nothing. We, as American citizens, have an obligation to protect the democratic norms that keep people safe. This means questioning what we see in the media, holding leaders accountable for their words and actions, and rejecting ideologies that dehumanize others. It means understanding that democracy cannot survive if people believe violence is the only way to be heard.

On Monday morning at 9:54 a.m. on Mar. 27, 2023, The Covenant School, a Nashville Christian elementary school, was targeted by an active shooter. Three employees, Katherine Koonce (head of the school, aged 60), Mike Hill (custodian, aged 61), and Cynthia Peak (substitute teacher, aged 61), and three nine-year-old students, Evelyn Dieckhaus, Hallie Scruggs, and William Kinney, were shot and killed before the shooter was stopped and killed by police.

Police released six minutes of police body camera footage and two minutes of security camera footage. The event spanned at most 15 minutes. 

The shooter was identified as 28-year-old transgender man Aidan Hale, previously known as Audrey Hale, a former student at The Covenant School.

A message Hale sent at 9:57 a.m. to a former classmate, Averianna Patton, stated, “I’m planning to die today. You’ll probably hear about me on the news after I die.” After another message ominously stating “something bad is about to happen,” Patton called the Suicide Prevention Help Line and the Nashville Police.

Shortly after, Hale was seen through security camera footage breaking into the elementary school with three guns: A KelTec SUB200, a semi-automatic rifle; an M&P 9mm semi-automatic handgun and a grunt rifle.

At 10:13 am, Nashville police were notified of the shooter threat. At 10:26 am, the officers and Hale exchanged gunfire, then confirmed that the shooter had died.

Though Nashville police and the FBI have gone through writings and documents left by Hale, a motive for the shooting remains undisclosed for the time being. What is known, however, is that the shooting was planned for many months and that Hale studied the actions of other mass murderers.

Immediately following this tragedy came many protests and walk-outs that took place outside the state capitol demanding more restrictive gun control legislation. In recent years, Tennessee’s government has loosened gun laws in the state, such as lowering the minimum age to carry handguns to 18. This legislative change took place the same day as the shooting. 

As a response to the protests, Governor Bill Lee and state lawmakers decided to add more funding to schools for mental health resources, armed security guards and an extension to the state’s homeland security network to include public and private schools.

Although this might contribute to lowering rates of gun violence in schools, the state government has yet to add any restrictions to gun policy in Tennessee this year.

To donate to survivors of the shooting, please visit https://www.cfmt.org/story/support-survivors-of-the-covenant-school-shooting/

Additionally, students have formed March for Our Lives in order to organize a nationwide protest to demand that a comprehensive bill be presented in Congress to address guns and school safety. The march will take place in Washington, D.C., Kansas City, Lee’s Summit and over 490 other cities across the U.S. March 24.

This article is not about my opinions on an AR-15 ban or for a bill that presents possible gun restrictions. Instead, I am arguing that people should be supporting students and young people who are effecting change. Regardless of your opinion on gun control, it is necessary to thoughtfully consider the students who are fighting for change.

Young people have been effecting serious change for generations yet continue not to be taken seriously. Many people who attempt to shut down young change-makers assert that they do not have enough life experience or do not have all of the facts about the topic they are supporting.

These arguments do contain some truth. Young adults do not have as much life experience as middle-aged or senior citizens. This is obvious. However, they do have enough experience to be passionate about the topics in which they believe. If not, they would not be fighting so hard for those causes.

Young people may not know all of the facts pertinent to the subject that they are fighting. Expecting them to is hypocritical. People in charge, from presidents to parents, make mistakes all of the time. How can young people be expected to know every detail about a certain issue when their elders are not held to that same standard?

People always have something to learn. Young people are taught from birth to listen to and obey their elders, but those same elders are not expected to listen to the young people surrounding them. To some extent this is an issue of power. Young people questioning their elders and the status quo they have established threatens their power. Regardless, young people continue to effect change and change the status quo under which they are raised. These feats, challenging authority and changing the status quo, deserve respect.

Some of the most prominent American revolutionaries were under 25 years old in 1776. Marquis de Lafayette and James Monroe were 18 years old, Aaron Burr was 20 and Alexander Hamilton was 21. Although the revolutionary era caused them to mature rapidly, their young age at the start of the war is incredible. These are some of the men who founded our country. Soldiers and citizens alike respected their leadership and today we respect their insight.

In 1969, the Supreme Court sided with a group of students protesting the Vietnam War in “Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District.” The movement began when, in 1965, a group of high school students was suspended for wearing black armbands to show support for a truce in the Vietnam War.

When the students challenged their suspension, the district court dismissed the case on the grounds that the school district’s actions were reasonable in order to uphold school discipline. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed the decision of the district court. Undeterred, the students appealed to the Supreme Court where the decision was 7-2 in favor of the students. This decision guaranteed First Amendment rights to students, ensuring that constitutional rights applied in schools. Additionally, the decision gave students the right to peacefully protest on school grounds.

Malala Yousafzai, a Pakistani school girl, defied threats from the Taliban in order to campaign for girls’ rights to education. Despite being shot in the head by the Taliban, she continued her movement and has now become a global advocate for human rights and women’s rights to equal education. She attends Lady Margaret Hall at Oxford University, where she studies politics, philosophy and economics.

These are just a few of the many examples in which young adults took initiative and fought for the change they wanted to see. A majority of the time, the causes for which youths campaign are successful because of the passion and dedication that they have. Young adults have been successfully fighting for change for too long now to be told that they don’t know what they’re doing.

People will benefit from listening to empowered youth as well. Studies have shown that the brain is not fully developed until age 25. This is not to say that youth are incapable of informed decisions. Rather, young people are less set in their ways and opinions than those older than them. Because of this, young people are typically more willing to compromise with and listen to people who have opposing points of view. They deserve to be granted the same courtesy.

Young people are the future. They know what changes they want to better the society in which they have already begun to participate. They are told to vote and begin their adult lives at age 18 but still are not taken seriously when they try to change the status quo. Active participation in civic life and attempting to change it for the better is the duty of every U.S. citizen. Don’t shut young people down in their attempt to do just that. These change-makers are attempting to better their society. The least the public can do is listen to them and seriously consider the changes they are trying to make.

Photo courtesy of HelloGiggles/Joe Raedle.

The weapon was donated by a team member’s father who co-founded Black Rain Ordnance Inc., a gun manufacturing company.

“We were approached by a local Neosho youth traveling baseball team to donate a product that we manufacture here in our local gun friendly community of Neosho, Mo. The winner of these donations must abide by all federal, state and local regulations that are set in place for taking ownership of a firearm,” announced the company.

Levi Petterson, the baseball team’s coach, has received severe criticism on Facebook for selling the gun. Despite this, he decided to continue with the raffle to “turn it into a positive thing.”

“Gun raffles have been going on for years. Evil has and will always exist,” Petterson said.

The school principal made a Facebook post after the shooting encouraging people to buy raffle tickets to support the baseball team. She did not return any calls or text messages from critics after her announcement.

The raffle giveaway is supposed to take place March 17, 2018. The winner will have to undergo a background check before receiving the gun.

Photo courtesy of WTUG 92.9 FM.