Charlie Kirk murder: How sniper attacks have made American gun violence even deadlier

When then-US President John F Kennedy was struck by rifle fire in Dallas on November 22, 1963, the country experienced not just a national trauma but also a grim awakening. The rifle’s scope, fired from a high window in the Texas School Book Depository, came to symbolise the vulnerability of even the most protected public figures.

That moment made “sniper fire” a phrase synonymous with political violence, seeding both fear and a new era of security measures. Six decades later, the killing of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, a staunch ally of US President Donald Trump, from a rooftop vantage point has come as a painful reminder for Americans of their vulnerabilities despite being the most powerful nation in the world.

University of Texas Tower shooting

Just three years after Kennedy’s assassination, sniper terror struck again, this time in a university setting. On August 1, 1966, former Marine Charles Whitman climbed the tower at the University of Texas at Austin, armed with rifles and supplies.

From the observation deck, he rained bullets on unsuspecting students, faculty and passersby for 96 harrowing minutes. Sixteen people died and more than 30 were wounded.

Whitman’s calculated use of elevation and distance turned a bustling campus into a battlefield. The massacre highlighted the tactical advantage a sniper possesses: the ability to kill from afar, sow panic and delay capture.

New Orleans rooftop rampage

In the early 1970s, New Orleans saw another chilling example of sniper violence. Mark Essex, a Black Panther sympathiser embittered by racial injustice, launched a series of attacks culminating in a rooftop siege at the Howard Johnson’s hotel in January 1973. Over two days, Essex killed nine people, including police officers and wounded many others.

From his perch above the city, he pinned down authorities and sparked chaos before being shot more than 200 times by police. The episode demonstrated how a sniper, even without military-grade equipment, could paralyse a metropolis and provoke a massive militarised police response.

The DC Beltway snipers

Nearly three decades later, the Washington, DC region lived under the shadow of another sniper campaign. In October 2002, John Allen Muhammad and his teenage accomplice Lee Boyd Malvo carried out a string of seemingly random shootings that left 10 dead and three wounded.

Stationed in the trunk of a modified Chevrolet Caprice, they fired through a small hole near the license plate, turning suburban gas stations, parking lots and sidewalks into killing fields.

The randomness of the Beltway snipers’ attacks created widespread terror: parents kept children home from school, commuters scanned rooftops nervously and ordinary errands felt perilous.

Their arrest after a weeks-long manhunt brought relief but also reinforced how two determined gunmen, armed with a scoped rifle and mobility, could hold an entire region hostage.

Where Trump narrowly survived

Assassination attempts with rifles have also targeted America’s political leadership. While Kennedy’s death remains the most infamous sniper-style assassination, subsequent decades saw repeated plots. President Donald Trump has twice, within months, faced the lethal geometry of sniper fire.

The first was on July 13, 2024, at a campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. From an elevated rooftop about 130 yards away, Thomas Matthew Crooks fired multiple rounds from a scoped AR-15–style rifle into the crowd and toward the stage.

One bullet grazed Trump’s right ear, leaving a two-centimetre wound that doctors later described as inches from fatal. Blood streaming down his cheek, Trump was rushed from the stage as Secret Service counter-snipers located and killed Crooks.

One spectator was killed and others injured showing how even with heavy security, a concealed shooter can unleash deadly chaos. The FBI later confirmed it was indeed a bullet that struck Trump’s ear ending early speculation about shrapnel or fragments.

Just weeks later, in September 2024, Trump was again the target of what authorities allege was a sniper plot — this time at Trump International Golf Club in West Palm Beach, Florida.

Federal agents say Ryan Wesley Routh concealed himself in thick shrubbery overlooking the course with a scoped SKS-style rifle and range-finding equipment, apparently waiting for an opportunity to fire.

When spotted, Routh fled after a Secret Service agent discharged a round toward him. He was later indicted on multiple charges, including attempted assassination of a presidential candidate.

Unlike the Butler rally, no shots were fired at Trump, but prosecutors described the setup as a “sniper nest” with lethal potential.

Together, these two episodes — one a near-miss that left a former president bloodied, the other a foiled attack that revealed a hidden gunman in striking position — show how the tactical advantages of long-range rifles continue to challenge even the most advanced protective operations.

The Charlie Kirk murder

The September 2025 shooting of Charlie Kirk marked the most recent—and perhaps most politically explosive—use of sniper tactics on US soil. Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA and a prominent conservative voice, was addressing students at Utah Valley University when a bullet struck him fatally.

Investigators quickly determined the shot had been fired from the roof of the Losee Center building nearly 200 yards away. Within hours, a bolt-action rifle with unfired rounds was recovered in nearby woods.

The FBI released surveillance images of a person of interest, while Utah’s governor declared the killing a “political assassination”.

The Kirk shooting echoed the Kennedy assassination in its use of distance, concealment and precision. Like Whitman’s tower or Essex’s hotel rooftop, the vantage point amplified the shooter’s power.

And like the Beltway snipers, the attack instilled fear not just among those present but across the nation, as news outlets replayed the footage and law-enforcement agencies launched a manhunt.

Sniper-capable weapons in civilian hands

One reason sniper violence recurs is the widespread civilian availability of firearms that, with the right optics and accessories, can deliver lethal accuracy at long distances. These weapons are not exotic imports but common fixtures of American sporting culture.

Bolt-action precision rifles are the backbone of long-range shooting. Models chambered in .308 Winchester, 6.5 Creedmoor, or magnum calibres like .300 Winchester Magnum are widely sold for hunting and target competition. Their mechanical simplicity makes them accurate and reliable qualities that also appeal to those intent on misuse.

Semi-automatic precision rifles, often built on AR-10 or AR-15 platforms, can be configured for designated marksman roles. Civilian shooters often employ them for varmint hunting or competitive shooting. In the wrong context, they offer a dangerous blend of mobility and accuracy.

Optics and accessories—scopes, bipods, match-grade ammunition, adjustable stocks—are critical force multipliers. Sold without special federal restrictions, they dramatically increase effective range. Unlike military-only technology, these items are mass-market and easy to purchase.

Some accessories are subject to stricter laws. Suppressors, short-barreled rifles and machine guns fall under the National Firearms Act, requiring registration, background checks and tax stamps. Magazine capacity restrictions exist in some states, but not under federal law. The patchwork of regulations reflects deep divisions over how to balance constitutional rights with public safety.

Why snipers terrorise

Sniper attacks differ from other forms of violence because of the unique psychological terror they generate. Victims cannot see the attacker. They often do not know where the shot came from until it is too late.

Elevation and concealment give the shooter disproportionate power against unarmed crowds or even trained security forces. Each incident reinforces the notion that any open-air event—whether a presidential motorcade, a university rally or a suburban gas station—could suddenly turn lethal.

The randomness of the target selection, as in the Beltway case, magnifies public fear.

Security evolutions and limitations

After Kennedy, presidential motorcades were restructured to include bullet-resistant vehicles, tighter perimeter control and advance rooftop sweeps. After the Whitman and Essex attacks, universities and local police began to train special weapons and tactics (SWAT) units capable of neutralising rooftop gunmen. T

he Beltway snipers prompted new surveillance and inter-agency coordination protocols. And the Routh attempt showed the importance of proactive intelligence. His stockpile of burner phones and stolen plates revealed the lengths to which individuals might go to evade detection.

Yet the Kirk assassination demonstrates the limits of security. Even in a university setting with local police present, a concealed gunman could access an elevated position and fire from hundreds of yards away. The balance between protecting free assembly and safeguarding public figures remains delicate.

Political violence and polarisation

Sniper attacks in America have often intersected with political moments. Kennedy’s assassination shattered national innocence. Whitman’s rampage came amid rising social turbulence in the 1960s. Essex’s actions were steeped in racial grievance. The Beltway snipers sought personal empowerment in chaos.

The attempt on Trump and the killing of Kirk come at a time of extreme polarisation, with political rhetoric at fever pitch.

The history from Kennedy to Kirk shows that sniper violence is not a historical anomaly but a recurring challenge. Each generation faces its own version of the same nightmare: a hidden gunman, a distant shot and a community left stunned.

Forensic science, protective technology and inter-agency coordination have improved, but the tactical advantages of the sniper—concealment, distance, precision—cannot be eliminated.