Kamala Harris wants your firearms
Posted by Dobrien 6 years, 2 months ago to Legislation
Kamala Harris Wants To Use Extreme Measures To Force Gun Control
Posted at 10:00 am on January 30, 2019 by Tom Knighton
This from a Beeatchwho would not meet an Angel Mom.
Kamala Harris is not someone any of us will mistake for a gun rights proponent. The extremely progressive California politician has made her liberal bonafides apparent for anyone who cares to look. More than that, though, now that she’s announced her intention to run for president, she’s going to make them even more apparent.
Part of that is a discussion of gun control, but she seems to think that emotion should sway the debate. When it doesn’t, though, she has other ideas [empahsis mine]:
Harris shamed Congress for not introducing a bill following a 2011 assassination attempt on Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. Giffords was shot in the head and 6 innocent bystanders were fatally shot.Harris slammed Giffords colleagues, saying, “The people who work with her every day, who know her — you know, we have colleagues. We know them. We know their children. We break bread. We share holiday moments with them. The people who knew her didn’t act.”
Senator Harris became even more impassioned while discussing the inaction by congress following the 2012 Sandy Hook elementary school shooting that took the lives of 20 children between the ages 6 and 7. She said, “I think somebody should have required all those members of Congress to go in a room, in a locked room, no press, nobody else, and look at the autopsy photographs of those babies.” She added, “And then you vote your conscience.”Senator Harris’s response resonated with many viewers, with one person tweeting “Truly blown away by the answer that Kamala Harris just gave on gun violence.”
Yeah, it blows me away too, but for a completely different reason.
Harris is here explicitly saying that if you disagree with her, you should be forced to sit and look at autopsy photos of small children until you do. Really? Does she really want to try that? Because I know what the counter will be. “Sure. Let’s do that with abortion.”
I don’t think she’d enjoy that very much, now would she?
Here’s the problem, though. Harris is arguing that her opponents should be punished for not capitulating with the desires of her party. If the Democrats think something is the answer and Republicans disagree, she’s already shown she’s willing to somehow make them do something until they capitulate.
In other words, her answer to disagreement is to use force.
I’m curious where else she would try and use force to make people change their minds. I seem to remember a concept where people would be herded into and shown things until their thinking changed. It wasn’t education, per se, but a kind of…well…reeducation, I suppose. Reeducation camps. Yeah, that’s it.
Is Harris trying to justify herding her opponents into reeducation camps until the grasp the supposed Utopian glory of gun control?
I’d like to believe that Harris’s stomach would turn at the suggestion of such a thing on American soil, but just how far of a leap is it from making lawmakers look at a stimulus to try and change their minds to doing something very similar to ordinary Americans?
To Kamala Harris, please understand that’s a terrifying concept. You need to back the hell off from that line of argument and retract that kind of thing immediately. You need to be very clear about how you wish to do no such thing to Americans, be they members of Congress or anyone else.
No one should be forced to do anything simply because they disagree with Democrats on something.
As it stands, people like you are why people like me have guns and won’t be giving them up any time soon. After all, I’m pretty sure that if people were to get herded into camps, I’d be among the first to be rounded up, but I’ll tell you one thing.
I ain’t going
Posted at 10:00 am on January 30, 2019 by Tom Knighton
This from a Beeatchwho would not meet an Angel Mom.
Kamala Harris is not someone any of us will mistake for a gun rights proponent. The extremely progressive California politician has made her liberal bonafides apparent for anyone who cares to look. More than that, though, now that she’s announced her intention to run for president, she’s going to make them even more apparent.
Part of that is a discussion of gun control, but she seems to think that emotion should sway the debate. When it doesn’t, though, she has other ideas [empahsis mine]:
Harris shamed Congress for not introducing a bill following a 2011 assassination attempt on Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. Giffords was shot in the head and 6 innocent bystanders were fatally shot.Harris slammed Giffords colleagues, saying, “The people who work with her every day, who know her — you know, we have colleagues. We know them. We know their children. We break bread. We share holiday moments with them. The people who knew her didn’t act.”
Senator Harris became even more impassioned while discussing the inaction by congress following the 2012 Sandy Hook elementary school shooting that took the lives of 20 children between the ages 6 and 7. She said, “I think somebody should have required all those members of Congress to go in a room, in a locked room, no press, nobody else, and look at the autopsy photographs of those babies.” She added, “And then you vote your conscience.”Senator Harris’s response resonated with many viewers, with one person tweeting “Truly blown away by the answer that Kamala Harris just gave on gun violence.”
Yeah, it blows me away too, but for a completely different reason.
Harris is here explicitly saying that if you disagree with her, you should be forced to sit and look at autopsy photos of small children until you do. Really? Does she really want to try that? Because I know what the counter will be. “Sure. Let’s do that with abortion.”
I don’t think she’d enjoy that very much, now would she?
Here’s the problem, though. Harris is arguing that her opponents should be punished for not capitulating with the desires of her party. If the Democrats think something is the answer and Republicans disagree, she’s already shown she’s willing to somehow make them do something until they capitulate.
In other words, her answer to disagreement is to use force.
I’m curious where else she would try and use force to make people change their minds. I seem to remember a concept where people would be herded into and shown things until their thinking changed. It wasn’t education, per se, but a kind of…well…reeducation, I suppose. Reeducation camps. Yeah, that’s it.
Is Harris trying to justify herding her opponents into reeducation camps until the grasp the supposed Utopian glory of gun control?
I’d like to believe that Harris’s stomach would turn at the suggestion of such a thing on American soil, but just how far of a leap is it from making lawmakers look at a stimulus to try and change their minds to doing something very similar to ordinary Americans?
To Kamala Harris, please understand that’s a terrifying concept. You need to back the hell off from that line of argument and retract that kind of thing immediately. You need to be very clear about how you wish to do no such thing to Americans, be they members of Congress or anyone else.
No one should be forced to do anything simply because they disagree with Democrats on something.
As it stands, people like you are why people like me have guns and won’t be giving them up any time soon. After all, I’m pretty sure that if people were to get herded into camps, I’d be among the first to be rounded up, but I’ll tell you one thing.
I ain’t going
How many were able to travel to the US for college? Answer only the Elite.
She , meaning her mother was the daughter of an Indian diplomat. After being educated and becoming a Doctor ,why did she not return home to treat her people?
Kamal’s dad is a Jamaican. To me Kamala is a DACA dreamer. Whoprostituted her self to advance politically.
Perhaps it is time to unmask this cynical party and its machinations. My guess is that they are angling to get Bloomberg as their standard bearer (Oligarch, anti-freedom, anti-gun as in confiscation and with ample money to steal an election).
However, better than Bloomberg would be Schultz and his billions, liberal but not as virulent (at least in the public persona) as Bloomberg. Watch the game playing by Schumer and Pelosi in setting such a gambit up! The Dems are setting us up for such subterfuge I believe......
If you are unable to see the life and death struggle between the sides and keep clinging to your esoteric dream of an objectivist president, then you are ignoring reality in favor of an unrealistic idea while the country perish.
When you do a search on him, it is all BS, listing only his BD and what a great attorney he is suing banks!
He has not released the name of his parents and nothing is public about his personal life other than he is divorced with two children
What is there to hide?
Good by Sen Noname and Flake see you later Corker. BTW nobody divided a country more than your Hussein.
Brainstreammedia. Plaster memes on twitter and Facetook your data , and the rest of social media.
She arrogantly declared "I am doing the questioning" to shut up her subjects.
If H Clinton was a witch what is Harris?
The left has always been more "efficient" in smear, innuendo and racial attacks than the right could ever get even close to.
Do we see the right marching on the streets terrorizing representatives of the left as they are common on the left against the right? No.
The left is well aware of this and uses it without any moral hindrance, soliciting the approval of the sheeple in the process.
That is the problem.
“I’m sitting here, I’m trying to figure out what’s the difference between Stormy Daniels and Kamala Harris? Well, I mean, stop and think about it. What is the real difference?” conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh said. He added that it was unlikely to matter to Democrat primary voters.
“Just as the media began telling us that ‘everyone lies’ and ‘lying is healthy and human’ during Bill Clinton's sexual scandal, we can expect the media to begin informing us ‘Actually, sleeping with your married boss for what basically amounts to a monetary payoff is very empowering’ and suchlike,”
I see them as similar in their dividing people into groups and accepting using gov't force to help favored groups. I am concerned one day someone will unit Democrat and Republican impulses and become very dangerous.
Load more comments...