Blogging Hounds
In a town hall interview with Oprah Winfrey, Kamala Harris’ long-standing hypocrisy on gun control was exposed for all to see.
Kamala, known for her anti-gun rhetoric, let slip that not only is she a gun owner, but she would use it to shoot intruders if they dared to break into her home.
For someone who has championed stricter gun laws and even floated the idea of mandatory buybacks, this unscripted moment laid bare her duplicity.
When pressed during her interview with Oprah, she dropped the bombshell that she and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz both own guns.
“I’m a gun owner. Tim Walz is a gun owner,” said Kamala, much to Oprah’s surprise.
“I did not know that,” Oprah said.
But the real jaw-dropper came next. Harris, seemingly emboldened by the moment, continued: “If somebody breaks in my house, they’re getting shot.”
Harris, apparently realizing the gravity of her words, laughed nervously and backpedaled, adding, “I should have not said that. My staff will deal with that later.”
The hypocrisy is glaring. Here is a woman who has championed gun control measures for years, pushing for an assault weapons ban, mandatory gun buyback programs, and tighter restrictions on law-abiding gun owners—yet she is quick to admit she would use her firearm for self-defense.
WATCH:
During the recent presidential debate, Trump rightfully pointed out Harris’s gun-grabbing agenda, warning that she would come after Americans’ Second Amendment rights.
Harris tried to deflect the accusation, claiming, “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.”
For many, Harris’s sudden revelation about owning a gun, followed by her admission that she would shoot an intruder, is the ultimate example of liberal hypocrisy. How can someone so vehemently advocate for gun control while simultaneously enjoying the protection of a firearm?
Her comments on live television further solidified the notion that Kamala Harris’s stance on guns is as inconsistent as her political rhetoric. Just days after the debate, where she insisted no one’s guns would be taken away, Harris has returned to calling for an “assault weapons” ban and universal background checks. She insists that “reasonable gun safety laws” don’t contradict her support for the Second Amendment.
“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,” Harris stated during the interview. “They’re literally tools of war,” she added, continuing her push for stricter regulations.
So which is it, Kamala? Are you the gun owner ready to defend your home by force, or the crusader for disarming Americans in the name of “safety”? It seems like Harris wants to have it both ways—enjoying the protection of her own firearm while working to ensure others don’t have the same right.
[…]
The Most Revolutionary Act 
This is exactly why her cackling ass is toast in the upcoming (s)election, and furthermore, who is going to go after all the people who purchased their guns via the black market? They only know just a fragment about who owns legal guns, but there are far more people who, illegally own firearms. She may as well sit down, cackle some more, and write her consession speech.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’m impressed at the Deep South accent she has cultivated for the election. Now why would that be?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Remember she also stated that she 100% Indian from India, and now she’s an American descendant of slavery, and Black folks get bamboozled AGAIN like when we were bamboozled by that other warmonger with a tint to his skin. Many Black Americans are refusing to be bamboozled yet AGAIN!!!! We have NOT forgotten Obama!!!!!
LikeLike
Someone labile should not be allowed to have weapons, so why is she?
We have same issues about gun-control in Sweden. The politicians periodically talk about taking control of the distribution of illegal weapons. If they actually do something, they will add restrictions to hunters and competing target shooters … A couple of times through the years, there was been campains where it is possible to turn over weapons to the police without questions asked. It’s usually inherited antique weapons that the police recieves …
The political ambition is obvious, the population should not be able to defend themselves, regardless of attacker. The attackers include the politicians obviously …
LikeLiked by 2 people
The powers that be could stop illegal gun sales tomorrow, SasjaL by sanctioning gun manufacturers.
LikeLike
Pingback: Gun Control Hypocrite Kamala Harris Admits She and Walz Are Gun Owners and She Would Shoot Intruders, Then Regrets Saying It | Worldtruth
Sasjal
In the UK if you have a burglar you can shoot at them with a shotgun as long as it isn’t a pump action!!!
But that only applies to the few(elites)not the many, naturally.
Susan
LikeLiked by 1 person
Interesting law, Susan
LikeLike