I condemn political violence. So do all of our former Presidents. So do lots of other Americans liberal and conservative. But a lot of gun-loving rightwingers who are demanding that “The Left” condemn political violence, as if we don’t already, mostly to further MAGA’s narrative that liberals are an evil, treasonous bunch who don’t belong in America.
But if you condemn political violence, you must condemn the Second Amendment, which inherently justifies political violence.
Recall the words of Charlie Kirk, recently sacrificed at the altar of the Second Amendment, on which he professed this expertise:
The Second Amendment is not about hunting. I love hunting. The Second Amendment is not even about personal defense. That is important. The Second Amendment is there, God forbid, so that you can defend yourself against a tyrannical government [Charlie Kirk, response to question at Turning Point USA Faith event, Awaken Church, Salt Lake City, Utah, 2023.04.05; transcribed by Media Matters, reposted with emphasis by Jordan Liles, “Charlie Kirk Once Said Some Gun Deaths ‘Worth It’ in Order to Have Second Amendment,” Snopes.com, 2025.09.10].
I don’t agree with Kirk. I contend the Second Amendment is an obsolete and ineffective provision intended to support a militia that would defend the nation, not attack its political institutions from within.
But since MAGA faithful are writing the Book of Charlie to append to their Trump Bibles, let us take Kirk’s words as gospel. Kirk said the Second Amendment provides defense against tyranny. Kirk’s Second Amendment envisions taking up arms to overturn the political order. By Kirk’s words, the right to bear arms embodies a right to commit political violence.
If you say political violence has no place in America, then you must say the Second Amendment and its threat of political violence has no place in America’s Constitution.
A full and honest call for an end to political violence necessarily calls for an end to the Second Amendment. If we have no right to use violence to achieve our political ends (and I agree that resorting to violence represents a grievous and contemptible failure of reason, discourse, and respect for human dignity), then we cannot tolerate the constitutional provision that Charlie Kirk himself said exists exclusively to make it easier to kill members of a political order with which we disagree.
If you adhere to Charlie Kirk’s words and profess to abhor political violence, then you must reject the Second Amendment and demand its repeal, to remove that justification of political violence from our nation’s fundamental governing document.
Excellent points.