Would you consider banning all handguns “common sense gun reform”?
Look, sure she has a right to carry a gun.
But let’s say one of the most rabid GOP right to lifers had a abortion. Or a evangelist that preaches hatred to gays- is found sucking cock thru a glory hole. Having a abortion is legal (mostly, ymmv) and of course the politico has the right to have a abortion. But wouldn’t you call her a hypocrite? Being gay is legal, protected even, and of course the minister has a right to be gay- but wouldn’t you call him a hypocrite?
So Harris believes and has supported laws that would ban all private ownership of handguns. Doesn’t that make her a hypocrite?
The only claims I can find (in a quick search) that Harris wants to ban private gun ownership are from disreputable sites on the subject that have been known to lie about gun control issues, like the NRA’s site, Breitbart, and other right wing pro-gun organizations.
…the very first reply to you said “I doubt that this thread will work the way you may be envisioning. Not many who post here have expressed sentiments of the type you suggest. Many progressives support responsible gun ownership.”
So stop pretending its “only just me.”
I never said your OP “wasn’t clear.” I said your OP was not complex and not nuanced. I said it was based on a series of strawmen.
You’ve shown that someone thinks Harris is “dumb.” Congratulations! Someone thinks Harris is dumb because she owns a gun for “personal safety.” Well okay then? What does that say about Harris? What does that say about that particular poster? And is that particular poster representative of the “various posters” you claim exist in the OP? What is your thesis here? What is it you think you’ve managed to point out?
You say “She said that gun laws that were unconstitutional were perfectly OK.” Was she doing that when they were unconstitutional, or when they weren’t?
Is this really that hard to figure out? It can be the case that, for the average person, owning a gun increases your risk, but a black Democratic politician is not the average person – she’s at increased risk for assassination compared to, for example, me. Even in NYC, where handgun laws were (still are?) draconian, you could get one if you often carried large amounts of money or had other risk factors.
I don’t think it’s that useful to have a parachute with me at all times, but if I were a pilot, I might think otherwise. And, parachutes don’t even increase my danger level!
So, for her, it may certainly be the case that carrying a gun increases her personal safety, even though for the average person it doesn’t. Do you get that? Why did you ask those questions in your last paragraph if you do?
If I were a former cop that lived in the neighborhood where a lot of my arrests took place, a gun may certainly increase my personal safety, right?
Plus, she may be more careful with her weapon than the average person, and maybe has no depression or suicidal thoughts. Someone who is depressed or suicidal should certainly remove any weapons from her home. She probably lives in a nice neighborhood, with a lower chance of someone wanting to break in to steal her gun.
Honestly, I’m not sure your questions in the last paragraph were really in good faith. It seems so obvious that a particular person may increase their personal safety by carrying a gun than the average person that I can’t believe you wouldn’t get it.
Some Trumpist types argue that those advocating for a gas tax should pay a higher price for gasoline voluntarily. Is this something like that? We know that “pro-Life” people in one state are now calling for the deaths of women who eat morning-after pills. If I advocated gun control publicly, by this point I’d certainly worry about my own self-defense from gun nuts.
Is this the intended point? That gun control advocates should make themselves vulnerable so that when revolution comes gunnists will be able to gun them down without fear?
She had a long career in the enforcing the laws business. It is not at all unusual for someone who spent a great deal of time enforcing laws to own a gun. Such a person will have made a negative impression on a number of dangerous people and their dangerous associates due to his or her role in enforcing laws against them.
That’s the point.
Some things that are beside the point…
Was she a law enforcement officer? She was.
Are peace officers law enforcement officers? They are.
Arguing about those two points is not really germane to the thread in addition to being a losing battle for you. You’d be better served making up things that Kamala Harris supposedly said that she definitely didn’t say.
That’s on average. The calculus would probably be different for someone with as many enemies as a former prosecutor, now US Senator and Presidential candidate (of either party) would be likely to have.
Bait and switch much?
Your cited article says nothing about any Democratic Party (or individual) arguing to confiscate weapons. All the positions involve controlling for irresponsible distribution with not one effort for confiscation. So the article does nothing to support your belief in “gun grabbers.”
Democraps are massive hypocrites, and HD just pwned the libruls.
Lacking a cult leader like Trump, Democrats are willing to disagree among themselves about policies and don’t face excommunication for doing so. Harris’s willingness to own a gun doesn’t make other Democrats wrong, nor does their unwillingness to one one make Harris wrong.
HD fundamentally doesn’t get the rationale behind gun control, and the hypocrisy he delights in pointing out is really just his own misunderstanding. That misunderstanding may be due to lack of intellectual curiosity, willful misunderstanding, or a failure to think the issue through successfully; I don’t know.
I should be surprised at all the right-wingers having a hissy fit because someone wants a gun for self-protection…but I guess supporting those who do so only extends to those of the correct political persuasion and/or religion and/or race. What I get from threads like these is that it doesn’t really matter what people like her do-it will be wrong no matter what.
I’d like to know if she owns a pistol that is on Cali’s banned list (okay, not on the approved list).
Harris is behaving like a typical California democrat. She is allowed things the rest of us are not. Because of laws and restrictions she has been part of creating and enforcing. It was okay for Dianne Feinstein to have a concealed weapon, until she decided she didn’t, but CC is not allowed for the peasants.
Her ‘status’ shouldn’t mean crap. People in certain neighborhoods are in more danger than this peace officer woman of color candidate, but they cannot get a CC permit, nor can they afford bodyguards to carry firearms. And if I want to gift one of mine to my daughter, i have to get a background check done on her and pay a FFL dealer for the privilege.
But this changes little. We already knew Harris is a hypocrite. Like the other Democrats.