Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) On The Issues Of Gun Possession & Abortion
New York – -(AmmoLand.com)- Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) has been an outspoken critic of the Second Amendment and a strong proponent of gun control for years.
She has vigorously attacked civilian ownership and possession of modern sporting and self-defense semiautomatic rifles—what antigun zealots pejoratively and erroneously refer to as ‘assault weapons’ and ‘weapons of war’—and has called for an “assault weapons” ban. In fact, she has made pushing an “assault weapons” ban one of her top two legislative priorities. At a town hall, hosted by CNN Anchor, Jake Tapper, on April 4, 2019, Senator Harris stated,
“ ‘There is no reason that in a society we have assault weapons around communities that can kill babies and police officers,” Harris said during her CNN town hall with Jake Tapper. ‘Something like universal background checks. It makes perfect sense that you might want to know before someone can buy a weapon that can kill another human being. You might want to know, have they been convicted of a felony where they committed violence? That’s just reasonable.’”
Note Harris’ reference to “babies” in the above-cited passage. Kamala Harris argues for an outright civilian ban on semiautomatic weapons, ostensibly to protect babies and police officers, but without explaining how an outright ban on semiautomatic weapons would, in fact, protect babies and police officers. Kamala Harris and other Radical Left politicians believe this to be a self-evident truth. It isn’t.
There are, of course, glaring massive holes in Senator Harris’ claim—a bare unsupported assumption—that banning semiautomatic firearms will in and of itself curb the threat to the life of innocent people, most notably, that of infants. But, her absurd assertion isn’t the remarkable point to be addressed at length here.
What is stunning is that Harris’ stance on abortion is, on logical grounds, alone, at loggerheads with her pretentious claim that it is the lives of babies she is most interested in protecting.
She isn’t interested in protecting the lives of babies, not at all. Just take a look at her policy prescription on abortion. If implemented, her abortion policy wouldn’t safeguard babies. Instead, implementation of her abortion policy, nationwide, would result in the lawful massacre of hundreds of thousands and, conceivably, millions of unborn babies a year.
A baby’s death is no less certain whether by knife, ostensibly done lawfully, or by gun, unlawfully. But, Kamala Harris isn’t the least bit troubled by the glaring inconsistency in her policy positions. Since she intends to raise abortion to the level of a fundamental right, she must, of course, insist that abortion be all nice and legal. Harris seems to fail to recognize, though, the apparent contradiction in her policy stances.
She asserts the need to constrain the right of the people to keep and bear arms ostensibly to protect babies, and, yet, asserts, contemporaneously, an unconscionable desire to open the floodgates to wholesale slaughter of innocent babies, through the vehicle of late-term or on-demand abortion.
Whatever protestation Senator Harris might make against the claim that her policy position on guns on the one hand and abortion on the other are not inherently incompatible, the fact remains that, on logical grounds, alone, they are inconsistent. One must come to the irrefutable conclusion that it isn’t an innocent infant’s life that is an abiding concern for Kamala Harris, it’s just the mode employed for ending that life that is of pressing concern to her. Harris isn’t troubled by infant deaths at all. The attempt at dissimulation is both plain and disconcerting and ineffective. Her blatant dishonesty serves to undermine the efficacy of both policy stances.
Kamala Harris will take firearms away from the American citizenry ostensibly to protect the body politic and the life of babies—or, so she says.
It is all just a makeweight, a pretext, to disarm law-abiding citizens, so that tyranny, in the form of a Left-wing Marxist/Socialist autocratic Government, that she envisions, isn’t threatened by a rebellious citizenry. And, Harris will allow abortion on demand, ostensibly to promote a State-created right to do so, dismissing out-of-hand, not merely deemphasizing, the fact that a human life is the regrettable price to be paid for implementation of that State-created right.
Is it just a callous disregard for the life of a human being that drives Harris’ abortion stance, or is it something even more perverse?
With a new population consisting of millions of illegal aliens in the wings—we have an alien population who have no comprehension of and little concern for our Constitution. They have no understanding of and even less concern for the concept of a Bill of Rights consisting of natural, fundamental, and unalienable rights and liberties, and who have no comprehension of and no concern at all for the concepts of personal autonomy and of personal responsibility. Kamala Harris and other Radical Left-wing elements may have seen, in the implementation of the policy of on-demand abortion, a sure-fire recipe for encouraging abortion in the native population. And the importation of a new community not reared on our history and heritage and core values; and one not raised on our system of laws; and one not looking for personal autonomy; and one that does not pride itself on integrity of Self; but, rather, a population that has one objective and need in mind: a society that is looking only for Governmental largess. And, it is that which has driven this alien population to demand entry to our Nation in the first place.
On May 28, 2019, The New York Times reported on Harris’ abortion plan, stating:
“Senator Kamala Harris of California unveiled a plan on Tuesday that would require states and localities with a history of unconstitutionally restricting abortion rights to obtain federal approval before such laws can take effect.
Ms. Harris, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for president, called for what is known as a ‘preclearance requirement’ in the plan, released as numerous states have passed laws to sharply limit abortions.
‘When we look at a law like what’s happening in Alabama and they’re saying they’re going to sentence a doctor to 99 years, as a prosecutor, let me tell you, I got a real problem with that,’ Ms. Harris said on MSNBC on Tuesday night, referring to an Alabama law intended to ban most abortions in the state.
‘We cannot tolerate a perspective that is about going backward and not understanding women have agency, women have value, women have authority to make decisions about their own lives and their own bodies,’ she said.’”
“Going backward,” Oh, really? How many young children died by gunfire last year?
USAToday reports that 73 juveniles, aged 12 or less, died by gunfire in 2018, a figure that has remained essentially constant for the previous five years, according to the newspaper. Compare that figure to unwanted babies that were deliberately killed through abortion.
The website Abort73 reports that, in 2017, over 862,000 abortions were performed in the U.S. Abort 73 further reports that,
“According to the United Nations’ 2013 report, only nine countries in the world have a higher reported abortion rate than the United States. They are: Bulgaria, Cuba, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Romania, Russia, Sweden, and Ukraine.”
Obviously, killing babies is not an issue for Harris. It is how babies are killed; that is her sole concern. So it is that, on the subject of firearms, Harris talks about protecting the life of babies. She does so to make a faulty case for gun confiscation. And, on the subject of abortion, no discussion of babies ensues. How can it? The whole point of abortion is taking of a life. So, Harris limits her remarks to a discussion on the purported right of a pregnant woman to kill a life inside her, without talking about that innocent life at all. That life is perceived as a non-entity, nothing more than an unwanted body part. Yet your guns are the real problem?
About The Arbalest Quarrel:
Arbalest Group created `The Arbalest Quarrel’ website for a special purpose. That purpose is to educate the American public about recent Federal and State firearms control legislation. No other website, to our knowledge, provides as deep an analysis or as thorough an analysis. Arbalest Group offers this information free.
For more information, visit www.arbalestquarrel.com.