There have been several moments in recent history when America came shockingly close to losing President Trump.
In Butler, Pennsylvania, a bullet was fired during a live broadcast, nearly altering the trajectory of the nation. Meanwhile, in Florida, Secret Service agents caught an armed individual near the president’s golf course, stopping an attack before it could start. Not too long ago, another man allegedly planned an assault on Trump and his Cabinet, attempting to breach security during the White House Correspondents’ Dinner.
In each of these instances, disaster was averted. But it wasn’t due to any restraint from the attackers; it was thanks to law enforcement, the Secret Service, or simply lucky breaks. These events weren’t random—they were calculated attempts to take the life of the President.
A failed attempt is still an attempt, and it’s time our laws acknowledged that.
According to current federal law, someone who successfully assassinates the president can face the death penalty. However, those who try and fail? They face significantly lesser penalties, which, I suppose, gives these failed assassins a bit of a legal loophole.
This contradiction is evident throughout history.
Back in 1881, Charles Guiteau shot and killed President James Garfield, who later succumbed to his injuries. Guiteau was convicted and executed for murder.
Then, in 1901, Leon Czolgosz shot President William McKinley, who died shortly after. Czolgosz quickly faced trial and was put to death in the electric chair.
But what about those who try and miss?
In 1975, Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme pointed a gun at President Ford but didn’t succeed. She was sentenced to life in prison but was released after over three decades. Just a few weeks later, Sarah Jane Moore fired at Ford in San Francisco but missed as well. She also received a life sentence and was eventually set free after many years.
Their failures were more like a twist of fate than mercy.
This raises an important question: Why are potential assassins given leniency simply because their weapons malfunctioned or because they were thwarted by faster security?
Attempting to kill the President is an outright declaration of war against the peaceful transfer of power and the principles of America’s democracy. The penalties should align with the gravity of the crime, not just the actual harm inflicted.
This is where proposed legislation comes in. A bill called “Obey the Presidential Law” aims to ensure that an attempt on a president’s life receives the same penalties as a successful assassination, including potential eligibility for the death penalty. This would close the legal gap and clarify that those who attempt to kill the president will face serious consequences.
It’s not just an assault on one individual; it’s an attack on the office of the president and the constitutional rights of the American people to elect their leaders without fear or intimidation.
Such actions warrant the harshest legal repercussions.
No matter if it’s a Republican or Democrat in office, no president should live under the specter of a would-be assassin potentially walking free again. Americans shouldn’t have to wait until after a president’s funeral for the legal system to act decisively.
It’s vital that we don’t normalize assassination attempts against our leaders. Violence, whether successful or not, must never serve as a way to alter elections or silence opponents.
The law needs to deliver a clear message: if you attempt to kill the President, the law will treat you as the assassin you aimed to be.
A failed assassin remains an assassin, and it’s high time our laws reflected that.
