Charlie Kirk and the 2nd Amendment
Published in Analítica
(Venezuela) on 15 September 2025
by Carolina Jaimes Branger (link to
original)
The assassination of Charlie Kirk, a 31-year-old American ultra-right activist, while he spoke at a university in Utah, has once again raised the long and probably endless debate about the dangers of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.
This amendment establishes the right of any citizen of legal age to a carry weapon. Although many defend it as a fundamental pillar of freedom, others — among whom I find myself — point out the dangers associated in purchasing weapons with such ease. In my opinion, there are many more risks than benefits.
One of the more frequent arguments made by those who have tried to change the law is that easy access to weapons leads, in some cases, to their irresponsible use. The absence of regulation in the U.S., where anyone can acquire a firearm, can lead to dangerous situations. In fact, we have already seen in schools across that country thousands of victims of those who have unleashed their anger and frustration by killing children and teachers.
This is particularly relevant and should not be forgotten in a serious analysis: Homicide rates and mass shootings have increased countrywide. Are the current gun control laws effective? Obviously not.
On June 25, 2024, in view of the fact that in the United States many more people die annually from firearm-related causes than in other high-income countries, the general director of public health of that country, Dr. Vivek Murthy, officially declared gun violence to be a "public health crisis."]
And yet, in discussions regarding control of the sale and use of weapons, someone always invokes the Second Amendment, an issue deeply rooted in the sociopolitical fabric of the United States. While many argue that this right is an essential part of individual freedom, it is also essential to consider the dangers of uncontrolled access to weapons.
Public statistics also show an increase in the use of weapons in cases of domestic violence. Studies have indicated that the presence of a weapon in situations of domestic violence significantly increases the risk of homicide. The conclusion is that emotional conflicts can escalate quickly when a firearm is involved.
Another concern is access to weapons by individuals with mental health problems. Although in many states there are laws prohibiting the sale of weapons to people with a history of mental illness, the implementation of these regulations can be inconsistent. How does a gun dealer know that a customer has mental problems? It is not obvious in all cases. Undoubtedly, a more rigorous focus on background checking and mental health assessment could help prevent weapons from falling into dangerous hands.
In a country where the culture of violence is promoted at the highest level of government, the ease of obtaining weapons is an ally. It encourages the mentality that, in solving problems, resorting to violence first is better — more expeditious — than seeking peaceful solutions.
The powerful lobby of the National Rifle Association has been a decisive factor in the protecting the sale of firearms. This has already had devastating effects on society, especially in young communities where cycles of violence are perpetuated.
During a talk in 2023, Charlie Kirk said, "I think it's worth it. I think it's worth it to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights." He may never have imagined that his would be one of the lives that would be paid to keep it alive.
This amendment establishes the right of any citizen of legal age to a carry weapon. Although many defend it as a fundamental pillar of freedom, others — among whom I find myself — point out the dangers associated in purchasing weapons with such ease. In my opinion, there are many more risks than benefits.
One of the more frequent arguments made by those who have tried to change the law is that easy access to weapons leads, in some cases, to their irresponsible use. The absence of regulation in the U.S., where anyone can acquire a firearm, can lead to dangerous situations. In fact, we have already seen in schools across that country thousands of victims of those who have unleashed their anger and frustration by killing children and teachers.
This is particularly relevant and should not be forgotten in a serious analysis: Homicide rates and mass shootings have increased countrywide. Are the current gun control laws effective? Obviously not.
On June 25, 2024, in view of the fact that in the United States many more people die annually from firearm-related causes than in other high-income countries, the general director of public health of that country, Dr. Vivek Murthy, officially declared gun violence to be a "public health crisis."]
And yet, in discussions regarding control of the sale and use of weapons, someone always invokes the Second Amendment, an issue deeply rooted in the sociopolitical fabric of the United States. While many argue that this right is an essential part of individual freedom, it is also essential to consider the dangers of uncontrolled access to weapons.
Public statistics also show an increase in the use of weapons in cases of domestic violence. Studies have indicated that the presence of a weapon in situations of domestic violence significantly increases the risk of homicide. The conclusion is that emotional conflicts can escalate quickly when a firearm is involved.
Another concern is access to weapons by individuals with mental health problems. Although in many states there are laws prohibiting the sale of weapons to people with a history of mental illness, the implementation of these regulations can be inconsistent. How does a gun dealer know that a customer has mental problems? It is not obvious in all cases. Undoubtedly, a more rigorous focus on background checking and mental health assessment could help prevent weapons from falling into dangerous hands.
In a country where the culture of violence is promoted at the highest level of government, the ease of obtaining weapons is an ally. It encourages the mentality that, in solving problems, resorting to violence first is better — more expeditious — than seeking peaceful solutions.
The powerful lobby of the National Rifle Association has been a decisive factor in the protecting the sale of firearms. This has already had devastating effects on society, especially in young communities where cycles of violence are perpetuated.
During a talk in 2023, Charlie Kirk said, "I think it's worth it. I think it's worth it to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights." He may never have imagined that his would be one of the lives that would be paid to keep it alive.
Previous article![]( "Trump Is Rigorously Consistent")
