The decision by former US President Donald Trump to bestow the nation's highest civilian honour on conservative firebrand Charlie Kirk has been met with a storm of criticism and disbelief on both sides of the Atlantic.
The controversy stems from past remarks made by Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA, in which he appeared to downplay the severity of school shootings in America. This has led many to question the judgement behind awarding such a prestigious accolade.
A Contentious Honour
During a radio interview in 2018, following the tragic Parkland school shooting, Kirk sparked outrage by suggesting that school shootings were not a "widespread national crisis" and controversially questioned the number of actual deaths. These comments, now resurfacing, have cast a long shadow over his receipt of the Medal of Freedom.
Political opponents and gun control advocates have been quick to condemn the move. Many see it as a deeply insensitive gesture that dishonours the memories of victims and their families.
The Backlash and Defence
The backlash has been swift and vocal. Critics have taken to social media and news outlets to express their fury, labelling the award a "slap in the face" to those affected by gun violence.
In defence of the award, Kirk's supporters and allies point to his work in promoting conservative values on college campuses across the United States through his organisation, Turning Point USA. They argue the honour recognises his political activism, not his past statements.
Nevertheless, the award has undoubtedly reignited a painful debate about gun violence, political rhetoric, and the meaning of presidential honours in a deeply divided nation.
