January 19th is Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, though it's often shortened to MLK Day. For some, it's a day off. For others, it's something else. I'm not going to get into what it is and isn't.
For anti-gunners, though, it's a day to use MLK's legacy to push their own agenda, and you know that bunch. They never miss an opportunity to push that agenda.
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. dreamed of a world rooted in justice and peace.
— GIFFORDS (@GIFFORDS_org) January 19, 2026
His life was cut short by gun violence—but his vision continues to guide the work we do every day at GIFFORDS: standing up for justice, protecting lives, and building a safer future.
This MLK Day, we… pic.twitter.com/FuuilPFvSr
Dr. King taught us that every person has the right to live free from fear.
— Stop Gun Violence PAC (@SGVPAC) January 19, 2026
Yet, gun violence steals that freedom from our families every day.
We are committed to lifting and advancing gun safety to protect the safety of all of our communities.
However, as my friend Jeff Charles notes at our sister site Townhall, MLK wasn't necessarily anti-gun.
Here’s something the anti-gunners won’t tell you about King. He applied for a concealed carry permit in 1956 after his home in Montgomery, Alabama, was firebombed.
Back then, the police were responsible for determining who would be allowed to have a permit. They denied his application as they had with most other Black applicants.
King wished to carry a firearm to protect himself and his family against the KKK and others. Yet, the sheriff deemed him “unsuitable.”
The civil rights leader was known for his nonviolent approach to fighting for equality. Yet, most don’t know that he still approved of the use of firearms for self-defense in one’s home.
In a 1966 essay titled “Nonviolence: The Only Road to Freedom,” he wrote:
It goes without saying that people will protect their homes. This is a right guaranteed by the Constitution and respected even in the worst areas of the South. But the mere protection of one's home and person against assault by lawless night riders does not provide any positive approach to the fears and conditions which produce violence.
In a 1961 letter to Robert F. Williams, King wrote, "The principle of self-defense, even involving weapons and bloodshed, has never been condemned, even by Gandhi."
While Democrats of the time used King's assassination, among others, to push the Gun Control Act through Congress, it wasn't because of some deep respect for King's legacy. Democrats were against King's efforts, after all.
So, to say it's a little ironic and even hypocritical for them to use MLK Day to push their narrative and to use King's legacy to do so is putting it mildly.
Dr. King was a fan of non-violence, sure, but advocating for non-violent protests to oppose an oppressive government doesn't mean becoming a doormat for every peckerwood who thinks he can end change by murdering someone. "Non-violent" doesn't have to be a synonym for "doormat" or "easy prey."
And yes, it's more than a little ironic that they're using a civil rights leader's legacy to try to attack a civil right. They're pushing gun control and pretending that there's no racist origin for that gun control.
Because yes, there most definitely is. As Jeff noted, King was denied a concealed carry permit even after his home was firebombed. There was a legitimate threat to his life, and the sheriff at the time decided he was "unsuitable."
When one must get permission, a right ceases to be a right and becomes a privilege. What King experienced is proof of that.
And, unsurprisingly, both groups shown above actually support sheriffs having that kind of authority.
We're not going back to the bad old days, when men like Dr. King were denied their rights, even when there were threats against their lives, simply because some sheriff didn't like them. We're not going back to anywhere that anti-gunners want, and the fact that they're using a man's legacy to support the measures he argued against is more than a little disgusting.
