Texas State Student Expelled for Mocking Charlie Kirk Shooting Now Solicits Donations on GoFundMe

Texas State Student Who Mocked—and Reenacted—Charlie Kirk’s Assassination Now Wants Your Money

What happened at Texas State is ugly, and the reaction from the campus provocateur who reenacted Charlie Kirk’s murder deserves blunt condemnation. This isn’t a debate about free speech versus protest drama; this is about someone celebrating violence and then asking for cash. Republicans should call out the moral rot, demand accountability, and refuse to let mob theatrics be normalized or funded.

The student, named in reports as Devion Canty Jr., staged a grotesque mockery of a man who was just shot—mimicking the wound, spitting, and taunting mourners. That behavior crossed a line from crude political protest into something that looked like reveling in an assassination. The university responded appropriately by removing him, and the school deserves credit for acting quickly to protect students and mourners.

Despite being expelled or leaving under pressure, Canty launched a fundraiser claiming he needs help with educational expenses. He framed his exit as a safety move and called his behavior a mistake in the heat of the moment, then asked strangers to bankroll his return or study elsewhere. Asking for donations after publicly celebrating a killing is tone-deaf at best and morally offensive at worst.

Warning: Disturbing footage.

We’ve seen campus meltdowns before, but reenacting a neck shot while taunting people paying respects is a different animal. This was not a satirical critique or a policy protest; it was a performance of cruelty aimed directly at grieving people. People who elevate cruelty into a spectacle should not be rewarded with taxpayer-funded readmission or charitable cash.

On Canty’s fundraiser page he explained the choice he said he faced regarding expulsion and withdrawal, and he begged for support to continue his education. He cast himself as a victim of rounding-up and campus pressure rather than as the aggressor whose actions traumatized others. That narrative won’t fly with many conservatives who believe in individual responsibility and consequences for violent rhetoric.

“Recently, I faced a situation where I had to choose between immediate expulsion or withdrawing from the university,” Canty Jr said on the crowdfunding page. “I made the decision to withdraw—not because I wanted to leave, but for my own safety and the well-being of the campus community.”

Canty claimed he was being targeted as an “out-of-control, disrespectful young Black man” and that he was just a “passionate student who made a mistake in the heat of the moment,” he wrote in his self-run fundraiser.

After that, he still expected money to cover his next educational move, calling his plea legitimate while showing no real remorse for celebrating an assassination. That kind of casual blindness to consequences is exactly why universities need clear standards and consistent enforcement. A cheap apology and a crowdfunding link are not a path to redemption.

Video shows Canty shouting at mourners and imitating a gunshot to the neck, behavior that makes you wonder what he was trying to prove. When a student turns a campus into a stage for celebrating violence, the institution has a duty to respond firmly. Letting him return without a serious accountability process would be a signal that showy cruelty is acceptable if you can monetize it.

Canty, who named his fundraiser “going back to txst,” was captured on video shouting at mourners on campus after Kirk was struck by a single gunshot by alleged assassin Tyler Robinson during an event at Utah Valley University.

“Charlie Kirk got hit in the neck, b****!” Canty yelled in the video, slapping his neck and imitating the recoil of a bullet’s impact.

There’s a pattern here that should trouble any parent or taxpayer: provocative stunts, performative outrage, and then a financial plea when consequences arrive. The instinct to refund bad behavior with compassion dollars is a problem. Conservatives believe discipline and accountability build character; throwing money at a spectacle only encourages more spectacle.

Universities that tolerate this kind of behavior risk abandoning their mission to educate, not inflame. Campuses should model civilized disagreement, not curate viral cruelty. Throwing out the offender was the right move; restoring him without a meaningful restitution and rehabilitation plan would be wrong.

And let’s be clear about the wider context: the left-leaning media ecosystem often amplifies provocative stunts and then treats the fallout as an excuse to play victim politics. That cycle rewards attention-seeking extremes and leaves real victims in the dust. Conservative readers should press for clearer standards and insist on consistent punishment when students escalate to celebrating violence.

If Canty wants to rebuild credibility he’ll need more than a fundraising page and a one-line apology. He should make tangible amends, undergo counseling, participate in restorative processes, and demonstrate sustained change. Until then, public sympathy and donor dollars should be withheld.

Actions have consequences, and pretending otherwise erodes trust in higher education and public discourse. Colleges must be places where debate is vigorous but humane, and where students learn responsibility before they head into the world. Until someone proves they’ve learned that lesson, reopening the campus for them is a hard sell.

Good luck to Canty in figuring out a better path forward; he’ll need more than handouts. For conservatives watching this unfold, it’s an opportunity to press for accountability, common sense discipline, and a campus culture that rejects cruelty. Support institutions that take those values seriously and decline to fund the theatrics of hate.