Someone claimed that Charlie Kirk "did not believe in any kind of [gun] regulation", and many others mocked him for being killed by a gun when he supposedly opposed gun regulations; the parallels Charlie Kirk's assassination have with October 7th, where both atrocities got those who supported them very excited and energised because their enemies were hurt, are intriguing and telling.
Putting aside the question of whether stricter gun control would really have stopped his assassination, I've gone to the source and dug up evidence that he supported some gun regulations. He didn't talk that much about guns, at least from his YouTube channel, but in a video with the revealing title, The Best Gun Debate I've Had in Years, we can see some of his views on gun control.
On gun laws in general, he said: "We actually need looser gun laws"
Note that this is not the same as saying there shouldn't be gun laws at all.
On red flag laws, he said: "It's a difficult very um I I don't want to say gray gray area but edge part of the law"
So he was not against all red flag laws, but acknowledged that some individuals should indeed be denied guns.
He even said, "you might have some agreement with me because actually the number one cause of uh errant gun deaths is accidental discharges. People that don't know what they're doing with their gun. I understand. And so I think that could be prevented through better training. So for that I actually might have some middle ground."
In other words, he thought requiring training to have a gun was a good idea. Given that only 10 US states today require training to have a gun, in this aspect it seems he supported more gun regulation, not less.
Furthermore, the fact that he drew a parallel between driving and guns (and not just in this video) suggests that he was not against all gun restrictions, since driving is quite regulated today.
Fact check: false.
