After the UVU assassination

For What It’s Worth, Buffalo Springfield

Table of Contents

• Editor’s Commentary

• TL;DR

• What happened (and what we actually know)

• Kansas law, translated

• What Kansas schools actually do (not theory)

• Kansas impact: what should change now

• Two assassinations, two feedback loops

Editor’s Commentary

Charlie Kirk was a provocateur. He created a powerful political force, and earned millions in the process, by taking the most extreme positions of conservative fascism and broadcasting it. Loudly. Without wavering. I disagreed with virtually everything he advocated, but he did not deserve to die.

At the same time, he had a substantial history of polarizing statements. Others presently debate the continuing expansion of political violence (in ways that are dangerous and unsettling), but let’s also remember and honor Mr. Kirk for who he was:

• “Gun deaths are an unfortunate but acceptable cost of preserving Second Amendment rights.”

• “If I see a black pilot, I’m going to be like, ‘Boy, I hope he’s qualified.’”

• When asked what he would do if his 10-year-old daughter were raped, he replied, “That’s awfully graphic. But the answer is yes, the baby would be delivered.”

• “The ‘Great Replacement’ is not a theory, it’s a reality.”

• “We must ban trans-affirming care — the entire country. Donald Trump needs to run on this issue.”¹⁴

• “Vaccine mandates for students are medical apartheid.”¹⁵

• “America does not need more visas for people from India. Perhaps no form of legal immigration has so displaced American workers as those from India. Enough already. We’re full. Let's finally put our own people first.”¹⁶

The authoritarian movement underlying the Trump era fully aligns with these ideas; Kirk’s assassination doesn’t kill the ideological virus that propelled him to such public success. Violence only leads to more, escalating violence. That is why you see elected Democrats condemning this shooting (just as they condemn all shootings):

• Joe Biden (former President): “There is no place in our country for this kind of violence. It must end now. Jill and I are praying for Charlie Kirk’s family and loved ones.”

• Barack Obama (former President): “We don’t yet know what motivated the person who shot and killed Charlie Kirk, but this kind of despicable violence has no place in our democracy.”

• Gavin Newsom (Governor of California): “The attack on Charlie Kirk is disgusting, vile, and reprehensible. In the United States of America, we must reject political violence in EVERY form.”

• Kamala Harris (former Vice President): “Political violence has no place in America. I condemn this act, and we all must work together to ensure this does not lead to more violence.”

• Nancy Pelosi (former Speaker of the House): “The horrific shooting today at Utah Valley University is reprehensible. Political violence has absolutely no place in our nation.”

The conservative media ecosystem has been less measured:

• Jack Posobiec: “There’s never going to be another Charlie Kirk. But you know what else is going to happen: there’s never going to be another assassin to take out someone like the way they did, because of what comes next. Because what comes next will be swift, it will be quick and it will be retribution.”

• Megyn Kelly: “This has been a very radicalizing week. A message to the left: debate time is over. You ended it.”

• Jesse Watters: “We are going to avenge Charlie’s death in the way that Charlie wanted to be avenged.”

• Alex Jones: “Make no mistake — we are at war.”

• Matt Forney: “Charlie Kirk being assassinated is the American Reichstag fire. It is time for a complete crackdown on the left. Every Democratic politician must be arrested and the party banned under RICO.”

Where from here?

Nobody can say for sure whether this was an isolated tragedy or the opening act of a darker chapter. What is clear and urgent is that murder must never become a political instrument; anger, however deep, must not be allowed to harden into a license for revenge. If this moment is to carry meaning, it should be a reckoning for those who traffic in dehumanizing rhetoric and a test of our collective capacity to resist the urge to answer fire with fire.

Leaders, media platforms, and organizers across the spectrum must step back from the brink, ground themselves in facts and law, and rebuild a civic culture where disputes are resolved at the ballot box and in the public square of ideas…not through violence. Above all, we should grieve the death of a human being while refusing to let that grief be weaponized.

TL;DR

• What happened: Charlie Kirk, 31, was fatally shot during a public event at Utah Valley University on Sept. 10, 2025. Early statements conflicted on whether a suspect was in custody. Utah’s governor called it a “political assassination.” ²

• Kansas basics: State law allows concealed carry on public campuses unless a building or event is posted and has “adequate security measures” (ASMs)…think metal detectors plus armed personnel at entrances. KU, K-State, and WSU all publish policies reflecting that framework.^{3  4}

• Bottom line: Schools can already toggle ASMs for higher-risk events. The real questions are when they flip the switch, who pays, and how clearly they tell the public what to expect.

• Why now feels heavier: The reaction cycle to Kirk’s assassination looks very different from June’s killing of Minnesota House Speaker Emerita Melissa Hortman: two shocks, but two completely different feedback loops. That divergence, plus social-media speed, could shape the 2026 cycle in ways that echo the 1960s, minus any gatekeepers. ^{5  6}

What happened (and what we actually know)

By late afternoon Sept. 10, multiple outlets confirmed Charlie Kirk was killed after a single shot struck him at a Utah Valley University (UVU) event in Orem. Cell-phone video shows the moment the crowd hears a pop; Kirk clutches his neck; panic follows. Utah’s governor Spencer Cox labeled it a “political assassination.” Early statements diverged: some officials referenced a person of interest in custody; later updates stressed the shooter remained at large or that the person was released after questioning. (That’s first-hour breaking-news chaos 101, not conspiracy.)

AP, Reuters, ABC, and PBS all framed the incident as a targeted attack; local updates captured the rooftop/overwatch angle and the one-shot detail. UVU’s official post acknowledged the shooting and rapid lockdowns/evacuations. Federal partners (FBI/ATF) joined locals. An open-air setting, line-of-sight vulnerabilities, mass audience, and a VIP on-site combined to create exactly the sort of atmosphere that drives event-security decisions on Kansas campuses.

Kansas law, translated

Kansas doesn’t do campus gun bans by default. Instead, we run on a “switch:”

• Default: Concealed carry is permitted at public universities.

• Exception: A university can prohibit carry at a building or at a specific event if it posts notice in the area and provides “adequate security measures” (ASMs)—defined as electronic screening and armed personnel at public entrances. That’s in K.S.A. 75-7c20, with posting rules in K.S.A. 75-7c10.

The state Board of Regents and each university then translate that into policy. KU’s public pages explain the practical side in plain English⁷ : most carry is allowed, but for big-ticket events (athletics over ~5,000 attendees, commencements, some high-profile speakers) ASMs are activated and carry is barred inside the controlled perimeter. K-State’s PPM 3770⁸ and WSU’s policy/FAQ⁹ mirror the same concept.

What Kansas schools actually do (not theory)

When you actually attend an event at a Kansas college or university (or are evaluating whether to attend), here’s what you can currently expect.

• University of Kansas (Lawrence & Edwards): KU says the quiet part out loud: concealed carry is the default; event-based restrictions happen only when ASMs are in place. If KU screens a venue, it posts the building, routes people through metal detectors, limits bags, and stations armed personnel at entrances. Tickets for screened events include notice that carry is prohibited. In short: when KU flips the switch, you’ll see it—signs, detectors, and staff.

• Kansas State University (Manhattan): K-State’s PPM 3770 aligns with the statute: carry is allowed unless ASMs. Athletics and other major events already use enhanced screening (detectors, bag policies). On top of that, campus police and administrators can designate ASMs for a particular speaker when risk, venue layout, or VIP status justifies it.

• Wichita State University: WSU’s policy and FAQ emphasize the same detectors-and-armed-personnel standard for any posted, gun-free event area. Practically, that means certain concerts, lectures, or ceremonies become screened events (again, with visible notice at the door and controlled ingress).

If you’re sensing a theme, you’re right: schools already have the power to implement higher security standards. Universities don’t need a new law to screen a high-risk speaker; they need staff, equipment, and a venue that can be controlled. Outdoor settings with overwatch exposure (think the rooftop angle in Utah) are simply harder to secure.

Kansas impact: what should change now

The UVU assassination is a gut-check for three straightforward things our schools can do today:

1. Publish clearer criteria for turning on ASMs.
   Campuses currently decide case-by-case. Sensible, but opaque. Adopt a public rubric—crowd size, VIP status, known threats, venue layout—so decisions look less political and more procedural. KU’s guidance already gestures at this; codifying it makes everyone’s job easier.

2. Be explicit about who pays when third-party sponsors book space.
   Whether it’s a national group or a student org, say upfront: if your event requires ASMs, here’s the cost share and here’s the minimum package (detectors, armed personnel, bag rules). That lowers the temperature when the next polarizing speaker comes through.

3. Tighten the comms playbook for the first hour.
   Utah officials’ statements diverged in real time, creating confusion. That happens, and they were later clarified. But the lesson for Kansas is to front-load a single source of truth (e.g., a campus alert or law-enforcement feed) so rumors don’t outrun safety instructions.

Two assassinations, two feedback loops

This isn’t our first political murder of 2025. On June 14, Minnesota House Speaker Emerita Melissa Hortman and her husband were shot and killed at their home; Sen. John Hoffman and his wife were wounded earlier the same night. A suspect was arrested after a two-day manhunt, and later federally indicted. Minnesota’s response moved from shock to ritual: bipartisan mourning, flags at half-staff, an extended lying-in-state, court updates, and caution about motive. Coverage was intense regionally, then normalized into the judicial timeline.

Kirk’s killing produced a different response: viral videos within minutes, national chyrons for hours, and a rapid clash between “person of interest in custody” and “shooter still at large” narratives. The modern speed of algorithmic social media content makes it dangerously easy for before facts settle. Leaders across parties condemned the attack, but online reaction jumped quickly to assigning blame and retaliatory talk—the performative rush that often collides with law-enforcement timelines.

Kansas can’t control national rhetoric. But our campuses can control process. Clear triggers. Clear costs. Clear comms. That’s how you dampen the performative politics and keep the focus on safety and speech.

1  AP live updates: “Live updates: Charlie Kirk assassinated at university event in Utah.”

2  CBS News live page: “Charlie Kirk shot and killed at Utah event; ‘subject in custody’ was released, FBI director says.” (Sept. 10, 2025).

3  KU policy: Weapons policy + concealed carry faculty/staff guidance (event-based ASMs). (Updated 2025).

4  KU Information for Faculty | Concealed Carry.

5  U.S. Department of Justice: After Two-Day Manhunt, Suspect Charged with Shooting Two Minnesota Lawmakers and Their Spouses

6  U.S. Department of Justice: Vance Boelter Indicted for the Murders of Melissa and Mark Hortman

7  University of Kansas Policy on Weapons, Including Firearms

8  K-State policy: PPM 3770 (weapons). (Rev. 2023).

9  WSU policy/FAQ: Weapons and ASM description. (Current).

10  April 2023, Salt Lake City, after the Nashville school shooting.

11  January 2024, The Charlie Kirk Show.

12  Youtube: Can 25 Liberal College Students Outsmart 1 Conservative? 

13  Instagram, March 2024

14  April 2024, The Charlie Kirk Show. (Media Matters coverage)

15  July 2021, Tucker Carlson Tonight & Fox News

16  September 2, 2025, Twitter/X.