Vice President Kamala Harris has become an expert in verbal gymnastics, bending around her own statements like a contortionist at a circus. While she insists that there’s no scheme to strip Americans of their Second Amendment rights, a closer look at her track record reveals a different story. She feigns innocence on the debate stage, yet her actions consistently betray her intentions regarding gun control.
During a recent presidential debate with former President Donald Trump, Harris attempted to dismiss Trump’s claims about her alleged plan to seize firearms. She talked a big game about being a gun owner herself, claiming there’s no agenda to take guns away from responsible Americans. But here’s the kicker: her own lips have been caught hinting at just the opposite. After the debate, in front of a friendly crowd of journalists, she let slip her fondness for a broad gun ban that would ensnare countless firearms and their owners. Sounds familiar, doesn’t it?
Harris articulated her support for an “assault weapons” ban in a discussion about handguns, which, ironically, are implicated in a significant number of violent incidents. While she reiterated her gun ownership status, she quickly pivoted to a call for action against those terrible “assault weapons.” To any reasonable person, it becomes evident that the terminology she uses is just a euphemism for more significant restrictions on all gun owners.
The uncomfortable truth remains that this isn’t the first rodeo for Harris and gun control. Back in 2019, she championed a mandatory buyback program as a presidential candidate. It doesn’t take a political science degree to decipher that buybacks, while cloaked in lovingly crafted language, equate to forced confiscation for many law-abiding citizens. She insists on caring for public safety but has yet to clarify just how such measures would sustainably co-exist with the rights of citizens to defend themselves.
As the number of modern sporting rifles, particularly AR-15-style guns, continues to rise—over 28 million and counting, according to the National Shooting Sports Foundation—one has to wonder how Harris might enforce such broad policies with merely 2,600 special agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives keeping tabs on millions of responsible gun owners. The concept of “mandatory” confiscation sounds less like a definitive policy and more like a bold suggestion that would leave many families armed and unwilling to comply.
Kamala Harris may put on a friendly face and talk about universal background checks and closing “gun show loopholes,” but for anyone paying attention, it’s clear that those conversations are merely part of a larger narrative aimed at undermining Americans’ fundamental rights. One has to love how politicians manage to frame their next move under the guise of public safety while neglecting the very principles this country was founded upon. Harris’ ambitious plans, touted as measures for security, may just well be the first nail in the coffin for the rights of responsible gun owners across America.
Leave a Reply