Fooling most of the people some of the time
Pamala, Kamala. Now that we’ve finally been schooled on how to pronounce Vice-President-in-Waiting Kamala Harris’ name, we can concentrate on other mistakes she allowed to happen as long as no one pressed her on the details. We’re going to give you the details, however, so you can really see where she’s going with this “first hundred days” semi-promise (it wasn’t hers to make in the first place).
Harris boasts that she’s a gun owner. She owns a handgun. If she thinks that legitimizes her persona for all pro-2A supporters to forget her anti-gun biases, she’s got a boat load of other misgivings she can try out on you. But you better hurry; the election that will make her President of the United States edges closer with every tick of the clock.
As most all anti-gun zealots do, Kamala moves over the speed limit on her way to the top. While we wish Joe Biden no harm – he’s really a pretty decent guy with few real life enemies – but he’s apparently got a short shelf life, according to most of the Tucker-Hannity-Graham triumvirate. The hard money is that with Biden entering office to which he was elected – assuming he beats Trump (and let it be said that we’re not betting on that outcome, at least just not yet) – he might not make it through even his first term. While the real lefties may be wet-lipping that process at the moment, the result, should that happen, is that Joe will either have to resign or give us the LBJ pitch President Johnson announced on TV: “I shall not seek, and will not accept, the nomination of my party for another term as your president.”
That shocking message came at the height of the Vietnam war. Jump forward to this year and we have an embattled Donald Trump running across Democrat thin ice hoping for a miracle. The result of a Biden one-term presidency: Kamala Harris becomes POTUS in January 2024 or sooner.
As with most all anti-gun libs, Harris wants to do away with anything she deems a “weapon of war.” Ignoring the fact that just about every conceivable gun has been used in wartime, that covers a lot of ordnance. Essentially, ALL guns had their start in a war. But the political Harris sees anything not measuring up to her purse pistol is a war machine. And on that basis she takes Justice Scalia’s words far out of context. Here they are as written by Scalia:
“There seems to us no doubt, on the basis of both text and history, that the Second Amendment conferred an individual right to keep and bear arms. Of course the right was not unlimited, just as the First Amendment’s right of free speech was not[.]”
“Read in isolation, Miller’s phrase “part of ordinary military equipment’ could mean that only those weapons useful in warfare are protected. That would be a startling reading of the opinion, since it would mean that the National Firearms Act’s restrictions on machineguns (not challenged in Miller) might be unconstitutional, machineguns being useful in warfare in 1939.” (52) “We therefore read Miller to say only that the Second Amendment does not protect those weapons not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, such as short-barreled shotguns.”
The antis love the phrase, “the right was not unlimited.” And they’re willing to let it rest on those laurels. Yet, Scalia continued to stress that there might even be an opening for civilian use of machine guns, though no one has seriously challenged that assertion, and it’s probably just as well that they haven’t.
All the gun controllers want is limited use of guns, including not just the guns themselves, but each and every purchaser. We understand the desire for “universal” background checks. But we also understand the desire to have executive control over guns within their very formidable uses, criminality included.
No honest gun owner wants adjudicated gun owners hung out to dry, only those who take that responsibility and constitutionalized gift seriously. And that includes Pamala Kamala.