You shouldn't shoot Trump
No matter what you think of the guy.
I don’t think it’s a controversial position to say that shooting a presidential candidate is wrong.
But Trump is so often an exception to every rule. He is so unprincipled and so immoral that he makes the principled and moral among us wonder why we bother. He’s repulsive, vitriolic, misogynistic, divisive and evil. So it’s easy to understand why many have struggled to know how to react to the attempted assassination against him.
Some will, quite reasonably, say he should hold some blame. He riled up the nation, he pushed the availability of guns and he normalised political violence on a massive scale on January 6.
But there can be no doubt: you shouldn’t shoot Trump.
I’m not sure this is as universally agreed as most centrists would like to believe. There’s a lot of left-wingers who have and will make a variation on the same “shame he missed!” joke (and Fox News will jump in with faux outrage every time). Jokes are jokes whether tasteful or not. But I am certain there is a very big faction of left-wingers who genuinely think shooting Trump is OK as a means to a political end. Centrists will repeat the mantra that “there is no place”, and that it’s “unequivocally wrong” - but they don’t spell out why. Here’s why.
Democracy is an ideology that believes a population should have control over how they are ruled, through the means of voting. Conflicts of ideas are resolved by putting it into the hands of the entire population, and all agreeing to accept the majority position.
Violence does not have a place in this system (in fact, the system exists to prevent violence. It’s better to vote out those we're tired of than have a civil war every time we want a change of leadership). There are groups that view violence as an acceptable route to achieving political goals - we call them terrorists. In the Western world, as far as I can think, a terrorist has never achieved any political change or shifted public perception towards their worldview.
Democracy works, and it’s the fairest system we’ve come up with.
The American people have the right to accept Trump or reject him in ballot boxes this November. It is not up to some 20-year-old with his dad’s assault rifle to decide who does or doesn’t lead America. And if the nation makes the wrong decision, as they often have and no doubt will in future, the system should have enough checks and balances to ensure the damage is limited and the decision is reversible. American democracy, though not as old and sophisticated as the British version, still has enough experience of being pushed to the brink and pulling through (Trump’s refusal to accept the result in 2020 was a good example).
Some say that Trump will force America into a dictatorship, and that extreme measures are required to save the country. But shooting political opponents - or allowing them to be shot - is a dictatorship. It’s a Putin-league move to kill off those with their name on the ballot.
There are also those who are sceptical of the shooting. The left-wing suspect it was a ploy by Trump to boost his own ratings; while the right-wing think Biden and the deep state sent a shooter to take him down. The latter borders on the ridiculous: why would they send someone with such bad aim, for a start?
The former isn’t as ridiculous. Trump does do things that defy all explanation, and he has total comfort with brazenly lying. But the conspirators should understand that the entire global media would love to uncover evidence of a Trump in-job. The fact that they, with their deep pockets and intrinsic motivation, cannot should be proof enough there was no conspiracy.
The only thing this attempt proves is that America has a febrile political debate, and very loose gun laws.
That’s why Americans of every political persuasion should be prioritising three things. First, lowering the temperature. Politicians - including Trump - must moderate their language and show restraint. They must hold respect for their political opponents, like McCain held for Obama in 2008, or Rishi Sunak spoke of for Starmer just a few weeks ago. The public and the media must reject candidates who do not show this respect and moderation.
Second, sorting out guns. Americans love guns too much to take them away, even though proper gun control time and time again reduces violences and deaths. America should look to introduce gun licences that require registration of all weapons; increase the minimum age for gun ownership; and force gun manufacturers and retailers to start taking responsibility when guns are used to cause harm.
Third, denormalising political violence. Anti-democratic political violence is not just a guy with a gun. It’s also 2,000 people that kill and crush police officers and take nooses to political rallies. It’s claiming to be a ‘journalist’ while following around politicians, shouting them down with a mobile phone camera in their face (this trend that seemed to emerge during Brexit and is now the method of choice for pro-Palestine protestors). We need our police, politicians and media to be firm that all of this is political violence and is intolerable.
Frankly, while it was an anti-Trump perpetrator this time around, it’s the Trumpites who need to take lessons from this - and they will not. They will be emboldened. But defending liberal democracies cannot be partisan.
No matter what you think of the guy, you must not shoot Trump.