Conservative commentator Charlie Kirk was shot and killed at an event held at Utah Valley University on Wednesday. Investigations are ongoing, but one can only assume his death was politically motivated given Kirk’s place in national discourse and the messages recently discovered on the shooter's bullet casings.

Immediate reactions to Kirk’s death varied widely based on political leanings. High-profile politicians from both sides of the aisle responded with shock and grief. President Trump himself even published a four minute video where he lauded Kirk’s willingness to engage in difficult political conversations (while being sure to throw some jabs at Democrats). Democrats, like former President Joe Biden, former Vice President Kamala Harris and Representative Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, all decried the horrific act of violence.

That didn’t stop other prominent left wing commentators from noting Kirk’s ardent defense of gun rights, pointing out the irony of his past statements that “some gun deaths every single year” are necessary to protect the Second Amendment and our “God-given rights.”  

Whatever the result of those Twitter feuds are, I can’t help but feel like they miss the most striking aspect of this event. That question I heard last year is being seriously mulled over in the minds of people around the country, and it no longer elicits a chuckle.

Politically motivated violence is becoming an increasingly normalized act in this country. Before Kirk’s death, high-profile political violence had already seen a significant upward trend. President Trump was the target of two separate assassination attempts on his 2024 campaign trail. This year, arsonists lit Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro’s house ablaze, and a Minnesota House Speaker and state Senator were murdered, all for political reasons. 

It’s difficult not to see Kirk’s murder as a frightening new norm. 

Even at MSU, that perspective would not be unfounded. The most recent FIRE College Free Speech rankings found that 38% of MSU students agreed that “using violence to stop someone from speaking on campus is acceptable, at least in rare cases.”

This new norm of political violence is even more destructive on college campuses, which are supposed to be bastions of free speech. Kirk visited MSU’s campus last year, as part of the same “American Comeback Tour” he was continuing at Utah Valley University. If these senseless acts of violence continue, speech on campus will surely suffer. MSU regularly welcomes high profile political speakers, from Senators, to Governors to Presidential candidates. If this violence continues, and speaking events start to involve risking one’s health, it seems increasingly unlikely they will want to come back. 

That aforementioned survey already gave MSU a rating of D- for campus speech climate, citing major issues with MSU’s political tolerance, administrative support, prevalence of self-censorship and a lack of comfort expressing ideas. Kirk’s death could only make these problems worse. 

Perpetrators of political violence commit these acts to put an end to speech they dislike. They see an assassination as a legitimate solution to political issues. In reality, all the violence does is intensify existing political animosity, limit genuine forms of political discourse and encourage more extreme violence. The last thing MSU needs is a further poisoning of its already toxic political climate.

Jack O'Brien is a junior studying Political Theory and Constitutional Democracy and a columnist at The State News. The views in this article are his own and independent of The State News.