Tim Walz‘s friends with school shooters comment during the 2024 vice presidential debate against JD Vance quickly became a key point of political controversy. The unexpected remark sparked strong reactions from both sides. It ignited discussions on gun violence, accountability, and rhetoric as the election nears.
Here’s a closer look at what Walz said and the reactions it triggered.
What did Tim Walz say during the 2024 VP debate?
During the October 2024 vice presidential debate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz made a remark that became the center of post-debate discussions. While addressing gun control and his support for an assault weapons ban, Walz stated, “I’ve become friends with school shooters.” This controversial comment, made during a discussion with Ohio Senator JD Vance, raised immediate concerns and confusion.
Walz’s statement quickly became a focal point for criticism. Donald Trump and his campaign were particularly vocal, sharing the clip widely on social media and calling it a significant mistake. The remark led to widespread reactions, with commentators labeling it the “gaffe of the 2024 election” (via Fox News).
Despite the cordial tone between Walz and Vance on stage, the aftermath of the debate became dominated by this one line.
What did Tim Walz mean when talking about school shooters?
When Tim Walz made his school shooters comment during the debate, he meant to reference his relationships with families affected by school shootings. He was not talking about the shooters themselves.
Walz later clarified that he was referring to meeting and befriending survivors and parents of victims from tragedies like Sandy Hook and Parkland. The comment was made in response to a broader conversation about gun control and school shootings, following Vance’s remarks on holding parents of school shooters accountable. Walz’s goal was to emphasize the deep emotional impact these relationships had on him, shaping his stance on gun reform.
Despite his clarification, the initial phrasing led to significant backlash, with critics seizing on the remark and amplifying it as a major misstep.
