Trump's Gun Alliance Fractures After Minneapolis Shooting Sparks Rare Rebuke
In a surprising turn of events, Donald Trump's long-standing alliance with pro-gun groups has shown significant cracks following the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti in Minneapolis. This incident has driven a wedge between the former president and his traditionally loyal supporters in the gun rights movement.
Rare Criticism from Pro-Gun Groups
Gun rights organisations, including the National Rifle Association and Gun Owners of America, have forcefully pushed back against the Trump administration's response to the killing. In the days after the shooting, these groups released statements calling for a thorough investigation and criticising comments from US officials that they deemed misleading.
Gregory Bovino, the border patrol commander, claimed without evidence that Pretti's goal was to "massacre law enforcement". Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem falsely stated that Pretti aimed to "inflict maximum damage" and kill officers. FBI Director Kash Patel incorrectly told Fox News that bringing a gun to a protest is illegal.
US Attorney Bill Essayli argued on social media that approaching law enforcement with a gun makes shooting legally justified. These statements prompted immediate backlash from gun rights advocates who saw them as demonising law-abiding citizens exercising their constitutional rights.
Defending Second Amendment Principles
The gun groups have maintained their stance that the Second Amendment serves as protection against government overreach. They emphasised that in Minnesota, it is legal to carry firearms openly or concealed with a permit, which Pretti possessed. The location of the incident was not among the state's prohibited areas for firearms.
Bryan Strawser, chairman of the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus, expressed widespread disappointment among gun rights advocates. "The messaging from the federal government has been very misleading and that causes a lot of distrust and disappointment," he stated, highlighting the delicate balance between supporting law enforcement and defending constitutional rights.
Trump's Controversial Comments
Donald Trump himself weighed in during a visit to Iowa, stating bluntly: "I don't like that [Pretti] had a gun, I don't like that he had two fully loaded magazines, that's a lot of bad stuff. And despite that, I'd say it's very unfortunate." These remarks further strained relations with pro-gun organisations that have consistently argued against any limitations on firearm carrying rights.
The groups pointed out that carrying extra ammunition does not necessarily indicate violent intent, pushing back against administration suggestions that Pretti's actions proved he planned to harm officers.
Historical Context and Selective Advocacy
The shooting has renewed questions about which incidents prompt responses from major gun rights organisations. When Kyle Rittenhouse shot and killed a man during protests in 2020, groups like the NRA and GOA defended him as acting in self-defense. However, when Philando Castile was killed by police in 2016 while legally carrying a firearm, these same organisations remained largely silent.
Danielle Campbell of Protect Peace criticised this discrepancy, stating: "When Philando Castile lost his life, you didn't see this sort of a reaction. Either you believe in the Second Amendment or you don't." This selective advocacy has raised concerns about political motivations overshadowing consistent principles.
Immigration Politics Complicate Response
Both the NRA and GOA were careful to avoid criticising Trump's broader immigration policies while condemning the administration's rhetoric about the shooting. They suggested that progressive politicians' criticism of immigration enforcement contributed to the violence, with the NRA specifically mentioning Minnesota Governor Tim Walz.
Despite their critiques, the groups emphasised their continued support for law enforcement and avoided direct confrontation with Trump's immigration agenda, highlighting the complex political calculations involved.
Future of the Alliance
Strawser believes the rift is unlikely to become permanent, noting that the Trump administration has generally been favourable to gun rights through actions like creating a gun rights unit in the Justice Department and reversing Biden-era restrictions. "The Trump administration is probably the most pro-Second Amendment one we've had in decades," he observed, suggesting the recent tensions represent an aberration rather than a fundamental break.
However, the forceful response from traditionally loyal allies indicates growing frustration with what they perceive as inconsistent application of Second Amendment principles, particularly when intersecting with other political priorities like immigration enforcement and law enforcement relations.
