Staff Reports
Vice President Kamala Harris is on a frantic quest for votes, dabbling in the market of persuasion for anyone who will listen. Unfortunately for her, die-hard supporters of the Second Amendment have already put up their proverbial “No Vacancy” sign. In a shocking twist, many Americans have decided to exercise their rights and become gun owners since 2020. However, these new gun enthusiasts are not exactly lining up at the Harris campaign’s door, especially since they’ve managed to steer clear of the left’s incessant push to undermine their constitutional liberties.
In what some might generously call a strategic move, Harris has graced the public with the claim that she isn’t interested in confiscating anyone’s firearms. This, of course, can be filed under the “Believe It When You See It” category. Harris’ proclamations about being a gun owner herself might make for relatable banter in a campaign ad, but history is far less forgiving. A quick glance back reveals her staunch early support for a handgun ban in San Francisco when she was the city’s district attorney. That ban didn’t materialize, but only because the courts stepped in to remind her that the Second Amendment still exists, much to the chagrin of her leftist agenda.
Tim Walz: "No one's trying to scaremonger and say we're taking your guns."
Kamala Harris supports gun bans, and as DA of San Francisco, she called for police to break into private residences to check how firearms were being stored.
She would absolutely take your guns. pic.twitter.com/SGCBocleRx
— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) October 2, 2024
Fast forward to 2020, and Harris revved up her anti-gun rhetoric, particularly targeting “assault weapons.” Her campaign to eliminate certain types of firearms included a mandatory buyback for AR-15s and other similar guns, totally disregarding those who purchased them legally. It’s quite the show of confidence in the Second Amendment. Harris has danced around her anti-gun advocacy for quite some time, and her latest declarations seem more like tactics to snag votes than genuine respect for citizens’ rights.
Currently, her narrative emphasizes that she doesn’t want to take anyone’s guns, but she still holds firm on advocating for an assault weapons ban. Could this be a classic case of “better to ask forgiveness than permission”? With her history of supporting bans on firearms, one has to question how long her current stance will remain untainted by a transformation of ambition should she ascend to the Oval Office.
Looking ahead, skepticism seems to be the only reasonable response to a politician with such a checkered past on gun rights. Harris has made it abundantly clear that as charming as she may appear today, her political history lacks any solid foundation for a true commitment to the rights granted by the Second Amendment. The question remains: how long before those “temporary” allowances become the first casualties of her administration? The truth is simple. The public would do well to remember that when discussing support for the Second Amendment, it’s almost always followed by a “but,” revealing the real agenda lurking beneath the surface. Those who wish to trust her will likely find themselves in a tricky place—with no firearms to protect themselves if her policies gain traction. It’s a grave concern that every American should take seriously.
