Kamala’s Comments After Heller Decision Raise Questions Media Won’t Ask Her

“A recently unearthed video gives us some valuable insight into exactly who Kamala Harris is and what she really believes,” Second Amendment attorney Kostas Moros reported Friday in Shooting News Weekly. “The date was June 28, 2008 and anti-gun politicians were reeling from the announcement of the Supreme Court’s Heller decision guaranteeing an individual right to keep and bear arms. They could see what it meant for gun control laws on the books in cities all over the country and they weren’t happy about it.”

Moros, described by the California Rifle and Pistol Association as “a warrior for the Second Amendment,” transcribed what then-San Francisco DA Harris said as she bemoaned the decision and focused on infringements that would still be exploited:

“Yes, it acknowledged that the Second Amendment is not an absolute right. Yes, it acknowledged the Second Amendment is not without limitations.

“However, because of the way the language was used to uphold the Second Amendment as an individual right, the NRA and others will be attacking San Francisco with the belief that the Heller decision equips them with an argument to say that we should not keep guns in lockboxes.”

By opposing Heller, she was declaring the Second Amendment is not an individual right (whether she really believes that or is just exploiting it). Her first thoughts were on exploiting the doors Antonin Scalia’s critical error suggesting potential infringements left open. Her next thought was essentially, “Curses, foiled again!” on not being able to force citizens to lock up their safety.

So much for “Harris … branding herself as a pro-Second Amendment gun owner.” As her actions have proven, everything she says about “not taking anybody’s guns away” is a lie.

As noted in my recent Firearms News article, “By focusing on the word ‘all,’ propagandists can deflect from addressing the real issue: ‘shall not be infringed.’” And so far, she’s up front about going after semiautos demonized as “assault weapons,” due process-free red flag disarmament, and invading homes to ensure guns are rendered locked and useless.

Moros’ article proves she wants them all. He included a screenshot of a pre-Heller decision news story on a brief headlined “Calaveras DA joins in call to uphold ban on handguns,” which DA Harris “ha[d] a lead role in filing” and joined.

Handguns have been the unholy grail of the prohibitionists since they first started organizing in earnest for gun bans.

Nelson “Pete” Shields, the founder of what would become the Brady Campaign, declared that in 1976 with a telling admission to The New Yorker: “Our ultimate goal — total control of handguns in the United States — is going to take time…  The first problem is to slow down the number of handguns being produced and sold in this country.  The second problem is to get handguns registered.  The final problem is to make possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition-except for the military, police, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors-totally illegal.”

While Harris claiming she owns a handgun is fair game for critics, questioning what type it is would reveal more than hypocrisy. If it’s a semiautomatic, what makes it not capable of accepting banned magazines or being modified with a “Glock switch”? And is it on the California Department of Justice roster? Her staffers are avoiding those questions, and now saying she was “joking” about shooting a home invader. Ha ha. Sick “humor,” these gun-grabbers…

But assuming someone did have to defend themself against a home invader, how would they do it if their gun was locked up separately from its ammunition, like Harris, with her tax-funded 24/7 armed security detail, wants to mandate for everyone?

And there’s one fundamental question the “media” isn’t asking, and she wouldn’t answer if it did: What was the Framers’ intent for the Second Amendment? Flesh it out.

That would expose Tim Walz’s Fudd-posing and the whole “collective rights/weapons of war” fraud for what they are.

And there’s one other neither she nor any of the citizen disarmament groups will define: At what point would you say, “Enough gun control”? (And why should we believe them?)

Of course, they’re talking about taking your guns.

Just after Heller was decided, Kamala Harris gave a presser with Newsom criticizing the decision. Thankfully, Chuck had saved the link to the video in an old memo. The video only had 4,200 views on Youtube, so we assume few have seen it.

I downloaded it, incase it vanishes from… pic.twitter.com/b9XebJ3HES

— Kostas Moros (@MorosKostas) September 26, 2024

About David Codrea:

David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating/defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament. He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” is a regularly featured contributor to Firearms News, and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.