House lawmakers grappled with shock and sadness following the killing of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. The news, which emerged Wednesday, cast a pall over the House as it conducted evening votes. A member of Congress described the environment as “somber,” reflecting a growing worry among legislators for their safety in an increasingly contentious political climate.
Rep. Randy Fine, R-Fla., expressed deep concern, saying, “If we don’t do something about this, a member of Congress is going to get killed.” He shared an alarming truth: “People in my family asked me today not to run for re-election. I mean, they’re scared.” This sense of fear is not unique, as lawmakers have faced safety threats frequently in recent times.
The assassination of Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA, has reignited a conversation on security measures for elected officials. This incident follows several others that have placed politicians’ safety in the spotlight. There have been two assassination attempts on President Donald Trump this year, a fatal shooting incident involving a Minnesota state lawmaker, and a firebombing at the Pennsylvania governor’s mansion. The Utah governor characterized Kirk’s killing as a politically motivated act, indicating its severity.
Fine and Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., have voiced intentions to discuss enhanced security measures with the Capitol sergeant-at-arms. “I am concerned about my safety. I’m concerned about the safety of my family. I’m concerned about the safety of my employees,” Mace stated. In light of Kirk’s death, she mentioned that many lawmakers are likely to “pause outdoor events” for now. “They almost killed Donald Trump, they killed Charlie Kirk, both outdoors,” she noted, emphasizing the pressing nature of the safety discussions.
Fine added he would put more distance between himself and the dangers of Washington. “I will probably, you know, stay in the bubble more in Washington than I might otherwise,” he remarked. Concerns also extend to laws governing firearms. Rep. Carlos Gimenez, R-Fla., suggested that lawmakers might require more lenient firearm regulations. “I know there’s 435 of us. It’s kind of hard, but each and every one of us are out there in public, and there’s crazy people out there,” he said.
Gimenez pointed out that his own concealed weapons permit stems from a genuine fear for his safety. He implied that lawmakers might need exemptions from strict firearm laws for their protection, adding, “I hope it doesn’t happen, but there may be a tragedy, and then things will change.”
Another member of Congress voiced similar feelings of vulnerability, stating, “You can’t help it… People still are living their lives, but the topic of conversation is almost exclusively the tragedy.” The impact of Kirk’s assassination is vast, leading some to reassess their very public lifestyles as they consider their own safety.
Kirk was shot while speaking at a student event at Utah Valley University. Aged 31, he leaves behind a wife and two young children. His death has initiated vigils across the United States, though many in Congress remain focused on immediate personal safety concerns, sidelining the grieving process for the moment.
Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., acknowledged the bipartisan acknowledgment of safety fears, saying he has received messages from many lawmakers across the aisle. “We’re in a deliberate review process right now to determine what measures are appropriate, how much we can allocate for that,” he explained.
In the wake of Kirk’s death, another Congress member revealed their office had gradually increased security measures since prior assassination attempts involving Trump. “Our office steadily increased its safety protocols after the attempted assassination of POTUS last year,” they shared. This precautionary approach reflects the rising tensions and emotional strain that elected officials are under during public events.
Despite the fears that permeate the halls of power, there is an evident reluctance among members to draw too much attention to their own concerns in light of Kirk’s tragic fate. Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., noted, “We don’t have enough resources to protect the people who are threatened around here. But I don’t want to make it about us right now. This is just, it’s awful.” Such sentiments underscore the gravity of the moment as lawmakers navigate their grief alongside their apprehension for personal safety amidst a changing political backdrop.
"*" indicates required fields
