Kamala Harris has made it abundantly clear that she wants to ban so-called assault weapons. But how does she define that made-up phrase? What does she think the punishment should be for violating her ban? And why does her campaign now say she no longer supports a mandatory “buyback” of the more than 20 million semi-automatic long guns in lawful hands across the country?
Those are all perfectly legitimate questions, but none of them were presented to Harris when she sat down for a one-on-one interview with Philadelphia news anchor Brian Taff. Instead, Taff lobbed a softball at Harris.
“I think you probably caught a lot of people off-guard and maybe a bit by surprise when you mentioned during the debate the other night that you were are a gun owner, ” Taff said. “I know you said it in 2019 as well. I want to talk to you about your values on this issue a little bit. When it comes to gun ownership, where do you draw the line on gun ownership and gun use?”
Harris: Well, like you said Brian, I am a gun owner. Tim Walz, my running mate, is also a gun owner. We’re not taking anyone’s guns away. I support the Second Amendment and I support reasonable gun safety laws. Part of my approach to this is I was a career prosecutor for most of my career. I have personally prosecuted homicide cases. I have personally looked at autopsies. I have personally seen what assault weapons do to the human body. And so, I feel very strongly that it is consistent with the Second Amendment and your right to own a gun to also say ‘we need an assault weapons ban.’ They’re literally tools of war. They were literally designed to kill a lot of human beings quickly. I say we need universal background checks. The majority of NRA members support that. Why? It’s just reasonable. You just might wanna know before someone can buy a lethal weapon if they’ve been found by a court to be a danger to themselves or others. You just might wanna know.
Instead of pressing Harris about why she supposedly no longer supports the compensated confiscation of tens of millions of lawfully purchased firearms, or how banning the most popular style of rifle in the country is consistent with our right to own a gun, Taff pivoted to asking Harris about Donald Trump’s appeal with voters and allowed her word salad to go unchallenged.
If Harris believes that semi-automatic rifles were “literally tools of war”, then why is she okay with law enforcement having them? If she thinks that semi-automatic long guns were “literally designed to kill a lot of human beings quickly”, then what’s her stance on semi-automatic handguns, which are used in far more homicides than long guns of any kind? If she wants background checks on every purchase or transfer of a “lethal weapon”, does she also believe there should be background checks on the purchase of knives?
Taff could also have asked Harris about what she believes the Second Amendment actually does protect. After all, in 2008 she signed on to an amicus brief arguing the Second Amendment didn’t protect the right of D.C. residents to purchase or possess a handgun, and now she says the Second Amendment doesn’t protect the right to own a semi-automatic rifle (or however she would define an “assault weapon”). If Harris thinks that commonly owned handguns and long guns can be banned without infringing on anyone’s Second Amendment rights, is there any gun control law or policy that would violate the right to keep and bear arms, in her opinion?
It is utterly pointless for reporters to ask Harris questions about her “values” as they relate to gun control and the Second Amendment. We need some serious and specific questions about her policy choices. Taff had the opportunity to at least ask those questions, but instead he let her skate by after offering up a single and unserious query that allowed her to regurgitate her talking points without the slightest bit of pushback. It was a wasted opportunity on the part of the anchor, and another example of Harris evasiveness about her gun control agenda.
I don’t know how many more of these interviews Harris is going to give between now and Election Day, but I hope there’s at least one reporter with the curiosity and courage to ask her some tough questions about her long history of hostility toward the Second Amendment and the particulars of her gun ban plans instead of lobbing up softballs like Taff did during his sit-down with the Democratic candidate.
Look into the mass shootings that have happened the last 40 years. What you will find is that 99 percent of all the shootings came from a demacrat. Why a how can you tell? If the press does not tell you that the shooter was a Republican then you know they are a Democrat. Plus by having the mass shootings then the demacrats claim they have a leg to stand on by removing our rights to have guns. This way it will be much easier for the demacrats to bring back slavery since they are the party of slavery and of the jim crow laws. Why else have they changed the history about slavery in the early years of this country plus by removing monuments about the civil war. This makes it easier to have history to repeat itself. Plain and simple.