The lawmaker shootings in Minnesota are a disturbing trend: Analysis

The shooting of two Minnesota state lawmakers has sent shockwaves across the nation. This grim development marks a disturbing escalation: while violence is not new, its recent migration to the state and local level represents a concerning trend.

Violence against public officials has been increasing in recent years, including the two recent assassination attempts in 2024 against President Donald Trump. The 2011 assassination attempt on Rep. Gabby Giffords, initially perceived as an anomaly at the time, now appears to have been a precursor to a rising tide of threats against an expanding sphere of elected officials.

This trend was further highlighted in 2017 when a congressional baseball practice in Alexandria, Virginia, was targeted by an individual motivated by political grievances. Five people were wounded, including Majority Whip Steve Scalise, when the gunman unleashed a hail of 70 rounds.

In many of these cases, investigations consistently revealed that the suspects harbored either real or perceived grievances against the politician or their political beliefs, and subsequently acted upon those grievances.

A 2015 study by the U.S. Secret Service, examining attacks against the federal government, shed light on the perpetrators. It found that offenders choose their targets for reasons including retaliation, the furtherance of ideological beliefs, personal gain, or seeking fame and attention. Nearly half of these offenders exhibited evidence of fixation – an intense or obsessive preoccupation with an individual, activity, or idea. Over half had prior arrests or criminal charges, and more than half had a history of violence towards others.

Furthermore, the study found, almost half communicated their intentions to others about the target or directly with their targets. A third of the offenders made threats or veiled references of harm through online postings, verbal comments, personal manifestos, letters, and other means. Only three offenders communicated threats verbally and in-person directly to their targets.

The 2025 Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Homeland Threat Assessment underscored these concerns, stating that “the 2024 election cycle will be an attractive target for many adversaries.”

“Some domestic violent extremists (DVEs) likely view a wide range of targets indirectly and directly associated with elections as viable targets for violence with the intent of instilling fear among voters, candidates, and election workers, as well as disrupting election processes leading up to and after the November election,” the assessment added.

So, why is this rise in targeted violence occurring?

A June 2024 Chapman University study suggests “declining levels of confidence in some of our most important social institutions and growing political divisions across society” as a possible cause. The study notes a steady increase in threats against public officials since 2017, coinciding with a general rise in polarization following the 2016 presidential election. It further posits that “the growing number of threats may represent a growing tolerance for violence among Americans and the formation of ‘a culture that helps normalize their use to express certain ideas and emotions.'”

The study identifies what it says are significant obstacles to effective responses, including the blurry line between protected speech and criminal threats and the anonymity facilitated by digital technology.

As the study points out, the digital age, with its access to the “dark web,” violent online content, and the ease with which individuals can identify public officials, their residences, and their activities, has created unprecedented targeting opportunities. This helps explain the observed increase in violence across all levels of government, including state and local officials, a trend that unfortunately appears to be continuing.

For those in the public sphere, prioritizing personal protection and implementing basic security measures are crucial. These include alarm systems at home, security cameras to identify visitors, and controlling who comes into contact with them. While being a public official and ensuring safety can be conflicting and elusive goals in this climate, these fundamental steps can significantly enhance their security.

Donald J. Mihalek is an ABC News contributor, retired senior Secret Service agent and regional field training instructor who served during two presidential transitions. He was also a police officer and served in the U.S. Coast Guard.

Richard Frankel is an ABC News contributor and retired FBI special agent who was the special agent in charge of the FBI’s Newark Division and prior to that, the FBI’s New York Joint Terrorism TASK force.

The opinions expressed in this story are not those of ABC News.