Charlie Kirk was assassinated on stage in front of a crowd. For millions of young conservatives, including myself, it was a personal loss.
He was a mentor, a leader, and a voice that reshaped the direction of American politics.
But in the days since his murder, many on the left have tried to use his death as a weapon in their political arguments. They are turning a moment of grief into a platform to push gun control and attack the very principles Kirk stood for.
WATCH: The Patriot Perspective breaks down why gun laws don’t protect American citizens—despite what the left claims.
There is no question that gun violence exists in this country.
Communities are shattered by shootings every single week. But politicizing Kirk’s death to argue that repealing the Second Amendment would have prevented his assassination is both dishonest and insulting.
Criminals do not follow laws. They never have, and they never will. Stripping away the rights of law-abiding citizens will not stop evil from acting.
The reality is clear when you look at the data.
Chicago has some of the strictest gun control laws in the United States.
Yet it remains one of the most violent cities in the country. The homicide rate in Chicago is nearly five times higher than in New York City, even though New York has far more people.
Dozens of Chicagoans die each week in shootings, despite the heavy restrictions already in place.
If gun laws were the answer, Chicago should be the safest city in America. Instead, it is one of the deadliest.
The same is true in other places with tough restrictions. Washington, D.C., has long had some of the strongest gun laws in the nation, but the city continues to face staggering levels of gun violence.
By contrast, states with higher gun ownership rates often report lower crime. Vermont, for example, has one of the highest rates of gun ownership and one of the lowest crime rates in the country.
The difference isn’t the laws—it’s culture, enforcement, and the willingness to hold criminals accountable.
What happened to Charlie Kirk was not the fault of the Second Amendment.
It was the fault of a killer who decided to take a life.
To use his murder as evidence that America should disarm is to ignore both reality and history.
Tyranny thrives when citizens are defenseless. Kirk himself often reminded young audiences that the right to bear arms is what ensures all of our other freedoms. Taking that away would not make America safer—it would make us weaker.
Instead of exploiting this loss, we should be asking how to honor Kirk’s legacy. He believed in equipping young people to think critically, to defend their values, and to stand strong in the face of opposition.
He believed that freedom required courage and responsibility. Those lessons are far more powerful than any attempt to score cheap political points off his death.
Charlie Kirk would have wanted the conversation to focus on building stronger communities and defending the freedoms that make America unique.
The left’s push to politicize this moment says more about their priorities than it does about solving violence.
Charlie Kirk’s life was dedicated to empowering young people to take ownership of their future.
His death should not be reduced to a footnote in a debate about disarming America. To honor him is to reject politicization, confront the truth about violence, and defend the rights that he spent his life fighting for.
The post The Left’s Gun Control Narrative Exploits Charlie Kirk’s Death appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.