Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva introduced a persistent campaign feature that unsettles many: the bulletproof vest increased security risk in voters’ minds. As polls tightened ahead of Brazil’s October presidential vote, supporters of the Workers’ Party (PT) grew more vigilant. Fear of violence is no longer marginal. Recently, a city guard and Bolsonaro ally killed Marcelo Arruda, while openly cheering for Jair Bolsonaro. For Lula, the crime became inseparable from what many describe as hate speech incited by an irresponsible president, and polling numbers reflected a shift in momentum.
This climate prompted heightened alerts and a sense of urgency for Lula, who faced challenges on three fronts. A Bolsonarist group in Minas Gerais used a drone to broadcast attacks on the public at a rally. A homemade explosive device was detonated during a campaign event in Rio de Janeiro. On June 27, Lula and his vice presidential candidate, Geraldo Alckmin, were ambushed while presenting their program in São Paulo.
The current atmosphere echoed concerns from the 2020 legislative elections, when political crimes rose sharply. Yet these are the first presidential elections in which a broad fear has become a noticeable factor since Brazil’s return to democracy in the mid-1980s. Fernandes Gabeira, a columnist and writer, observed in a column that violence is now a decisive factor in Brazilian history and not merely a fringe issue.
The Estado de São Paulo reported a tally of politically motivated murders this year, with victims not always PT members. What emerges is a pattern of violence that can be normalized, prompting political scientist Sérgio Praça of the Getúlio Vargas Foundation to warn against underestimating the seriousness of the moment. He noted that this cannot be seen as normal.
hate ideology
Folha de S. Paulo columnist Nabil Bonduki commented on the killing of PT member and domestic affairs expert Bruno Pereira, who died in the Amazon alongside British journalist Dom Phillips. Bonduki said the event provokes anger and concern, though it does not come as a surprise given what he describes as an ideology of hate associated with Bolsonaro, who has repeatedly questioned the integrity of the October contest.
Bolsonaro has expressed distrust of electronic ballot boxes, a system in place since 1996. While the far right helped secure a victory in 2018 with this method, there is now a belief among some that it can be manipulated. Before the diplomatic community, Bolsonaro warned that Brazil would only find peace if the Supreme Electoral Court (TSE) agrees to change how the polls operate. He reminded that even a computerized system cannot guarantee 100 percent security. The spokesperson for the armed forces indicated that final assurances rest with the military. TSE Chairman Luiz Edson Fachin urged an end to misinformation and authoritarian populism.
Increased weapon purchase
The risk of a tragic event is tied not only to rhetoric but also to concrete conditions. The Soy de Paz Institute, which compiles army data through public records requests, notes a growth in armed Brazilians. Many individuals join the ranks as collectors, sport shooters, or hunters through the CAC framework.
CAC memberships surged by 262 percent from July 2019 to March this year, rising from 167,400 to 605,300 people. During the same period, roughly 449 people per day obtained gun licenses, according to government data. The 605,000 CAC holders exceed the official count of active military personnel from the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Military Police combined, which is around 417,000. Analysts warn that the scale of this arsenal is a real concern, especially as some groups coordinate politically. Gun rights advocates cite safety and freedom, while critics stress unchecked access and potential risk to public order.
Shooting clubs have expanded rapidly as well, increasing by about 168 percent since 2018. Between January and March 2022 alone, hundreds of clubs opened. The position held by Bolsonaro has framed firearms as a symbol of personal security and national sovereignty, a view echoed by supporters and opponents alike.