Kamala Harris, Guns, and Getting Elected
Randy Kozuch
In her stump speeches around the country since accepting her party's nomination,
Kamala Harris has invoked the three tenets of the far left's gun control
platform again and again - bans, red flag laws, and "universal" background
checks. But since her September 10th debate with Donald Trump, Harris has struck
a different note, emphasizing again and again that she owns a gun. But
Americans should not be taken in by Kamala's willingness to take on any
persona - including "pistol-packing Momala" - to mislead voters into thinking
she's a moderate in a cheap ploy to win in November.
Harris began trumpeting her gun ownership at the single debate she participated
in this electoral cycle. Responding to Trump's claim that she wanted to take
people's guns away - a claim supported by her advocacy for bans and "buyback"
programs - Harris said "Tim Walz and I are both gun owners. We're not taking
anybody's guns away. So stop with the continuous lying about this stuff."
A few days later when sitting down with journalists at the National Association
of Black Journalists, she again asserted she, indeed, owned a gun. And when
Oprah entertained her in an on-air chat parading as an interview, Kamala again
leaned in, asserting "I'm a gun owner too," implying that she was just like the
other nearly one out of every three U.S. adults - thirty-two percent - who say
they personally own a gun.
For dramatic effect, Oprah expressed shock despite it being widely reported
since the debate. Harris, took it up a notch, saying unprompted, "if someone
breaks into my house, they're going to get shot," and laughed hysterically. And
with that Kamala became not just a gun owner but a veritable Dirty Harry, meting
out justice with a cackle.
Questions about the propriety of joking about taking someone's life aside, the
real issue is what is driving Kamala's sudden obsession with talking about her
gun. Even casual observers are quick to see Kamala's gun as less a tool of
self-defense and more a symbol to defend her from critiques of her radical
stance on guns, which is well documented.
She openly calls for a ban on some of the most commonly owned rifles in America.
Such a ban, if made retroactive, would immediately turn millions of law-abiding
gun owners into felons and potentially force the mandated surrender of tens of
millions of guns. Her apologists will deny this, but recall that just last year
Harris lauded Australia for its anti-gun action, a 1996 law that outlawed most
guns and led to the surrender and destruction of tens of thousands of personally
owned firearms.
When running for the Democratic nomination in 2019 Harris said repeatedly that
she strongly supported a mandatory gun buyback program, akin to the one in
Australia. Though campaign staffers have claimed she no longer holds that view,
they haven't explained why she changed her mind, and Harris has not denounced
her former position. Can anyone be assured she won't change her mind again?
In 2007, while serving as San Francisco's district attorney, Harris not only
supported but helped implement even more radical policies. At a press
conference to roll out the city's "safe storage" law, she argued - 4th Amendment
be damned - ".just because you legally possess a gun in the sanctity of your
locked home doesn't mean that we're not going to walk into that home and check
to see if you're being responsible and safe in the way you conduct your
affairs."
Harris had also supported a citywide ban on handguns that would have made it
illegal for all but a few in San Francisco to own them. As an officer of the
court, Harris and her handgun would have been exempt, but the measure never came
to fruition.
For all these past extreme anti-gun positions, why now the tough language and
reportedly reversal on buybacks? Bernie Sanders likely nailed it when pressed
about Harris' new, moderate positions saying, "No, I don't think she's
abandoning her ideals. I think she is trying to be pragmatic and do what she
thinks is right in order to win the election."
Kamala herself said as much, in her first post-nomination interview, when she
asserted that her "values haven't changed." And to Harris, values aren't just
about personal beliefs, they're meant to be foisted on others. When she was San
Francisco's district attorney, Harris argued ".when we legislate our values,
it's about trying to encourage certain types of behavior." So, voters have
every reason to believe that Harris still hews to previously held positions and,
if given the opportunity, that she would act on them.
As the election moves into its final days, voters should closely examine Harris'
actions and public statements and realize that she is no moderate. Make no
mistake, if Kamala Harris wins the election, she will strain her executive
authority and move to dramatically erode gun rights and weaken the Second
Amendment. Don't be fooled, just because she owns a gun, doesn't mean she has
gun owners' best interests at heart.
Randy Kozuch is Executive Director of NRA-ILA.
https://www.realclearpolicy.com/articles/2024/10/21/kamala_harris_guns_and_getting_elected_1066459.html 
Kamala Harris, Guns, and Getting Elected