Since 2016 which party democrat or republican has shot more public figures

Checked on September 21, 2025
Disclaimer: Factually can make mistakes. Please verify important information or breaking news. Learn more.

This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.

Was this fact-check helpful?

1. Summary of the results

The analyses provided do not offer a clear or definitive answer to the question of which party, Democrat or Republican, has had more public figures shot since 2016 [1] [2] [3]. Various sources report on instances of political violence, including the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk and the shooting of Democratic Minnesota state Rep. Melissa Hortman and her husband [4]. Some analyses suggest that both Democrats and Republicans have been targeted in recent political violence, but do not provide a comprehensive comparison of the number of incidents or victims by party affiliation [4]. Right-wing extremist violence is reported to be more frequent and deadly than left-wing violence, with approximately 75% to 80% of U.S. domestic terrorism deaths since 2001 attributed to right-wing extremism [5]. However, this data does not directly address the question of which party's public figures have been shot more often since 2016.

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

A key missing context in the original statement is the definition of "public figures", which could include politicians, activists, influencers, or other individuals [1] [2] [3]. The analyses provided also lack a clear timeline of incidents, making it difficult to determine which party's figures have been targeted more frequently since 2016 [4]. Additionally, some sources suggest that political violence is a complex issue with multiple causes and perpetrators, and that blaming one party or ideology oversimplifies the problem [6]. Alternative viewpoints on the issue of political violence, such as the role of mental health, social media, or economic factors, are not fully explored in the provided analyses [7].

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original statement may be misleading or biased in its assumption that one party's figures have been shot more often than the other since 2016 [1] [2] [3]. The lack of clear data or evidence to support this claim could be seen as sensationalistic or partisan [4]. Furthermore, the statement's focus on party affiliation may oversimplify the complex issue of political violence, which can have multiple causes and perpetrators [6]. Right-wing extremist groups may benefit from the narrative that they are being targeted or persecuted, while left-wing groups may benefit from the narrative that they are being victimized by right-wing violence [5] [6]. Ultimately, a more nuanced and evidence-based approach is needed to understand the complex issue of political violence and its relationship to party affiliation [1] [2] [3].

Want to dive deeper?
What are the most notable cases of public figure shootings in the US since 2016?
How do Democrat and Republican party affiliations correlate with gun violence in the US?
Which party has had more members accused of violent crimes since 2016?
What role does mental health play in US public shootings, and how do parties address it?
How have gun control policies differed between Democrat and Republican administrations since 2016?