Listen to the article
Trump Comments on Guns at Protest Following Fatal Minneapolis Shooting
In a controversial statement following the fatal shooting of Minneapolis resident Alex Pretti, President Donald Trump told reporters that protesters should not be carrying firearms, stating plainly: “You can’t have guns. You can’t walk in with guns.”
The remarks came on January 27, 2026, as Trump was departing the White House for a scheduled trip to Iowa. When asked by reporters about Pretti’s death, which occurred three days earlier during protests in Minneapolis, Trump distanced himself from statements made by his own administration officials.
“No, I don’t think so,” Trump responded when asked if he agreed with White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller’s characterization of Pretti as a “would-be assassin.”
The president then added: “With that being said, you know, you can’t have guns, you can’t walk in with guns, you just can’t. And you can’t — listen, you can’t walk in with guns. You can’t do that, but, uh, it’s just a very unfortunate incident.”
Later that same day, Trump reiterated his position, telling another reporter that Pretti “shouldn’t have been carrying a gun,” while describing the incident as “very unfortunate.”
“I don’t like that he had a gun. I don’t like that he had two fully loaded magazines, that’s a lot of bad stuff,” Trump stated, though he still characterized the shooting as “very unfortunate.”
The context surrounding Pretti’s death has fueled intense debate. Pretti had been participating in demonstrations following the killing of Renee Nicole Good by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent in early January. The Department of Homeland Security claimed federal agents shot Pretti after he approached them with a handgun.
However, this account has been disputed. Bystander videos show Pretti was holding only a phone at the time he was shot, and news analysis of the footage indicates federal agents had already secured the handgun Pretti was carrying before shooting him. According to the Associated Press, Pretti’s family confirmed he had a valid permit to carry a concealed handgun in Minnesota.
The shooting has raised serious questions about the use of force by federal agents and the rights of protesters. Civil liberties groups have pointed to this incident as part of a troubling pattern of federal response to demonstrations.
Trump’s comments have drawn scrutiny from both gun rights advocates and those concerned about civil liberties. While the president appeared to acknowledge the tragedy of the shooting, his emphasis on Pretti’s firearm possession has sparked debate about the Second Amendment rights of protesters and the administration’s stance on armed demonstrations.
The White House has not provided additional clarification on Trump’s comments, specifically regarding whom he was referring to when he said, “You can’t have guns.”
The Pretti case continues to develop, with ongoing investigations into the circumstances surrounding the shooting and growing pressure on the administration to address concerns about the use of federal agents in response to protests.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.


5 Comments
This seems like a significant pivot from Trump’s past pro-gun stance. I wonder if this signals a broader rethinking of his position on the issue or if it’s just a reaction to this particular case.
It’s noteworthy that Trump is distancing himself from his own administration’s characterization of the victim as a ‘would-be assassin’. This suggests a more nuanced view of the situation.
Trump’s comments are a stark contrast to his previous rhetoric around the Second Amendment. Will this mark a shift in the GOP’s approach to gun policy or is it just a temporary response to this incident?
This is a surprising development given Trump’s long history of supporting gun rights. It will be important to see if this represents a genuine policy shift or just a response to the specific incident.
Interesting shift in Trump’s stance on gun ownership. His comments seem to contradict previous statements supporting gun rights. Curious to see how this impacts the political landscape and debate around gun control measures.