It's tough fighting an uphill battle, where all the institutions are actively working against you. While there's something noble in fighting against the current, it's also scary in a lot of ways.
Donald Trump is doing it, though. Having billions probably helps, to be sure, but it can't be easy. Especially when Kamala Harris has a history that should be front and center in the campaign but the media just opts to ignore it.
A prime example of that is the fact that outside of the pro-gun alternative media--places like Bearing Arms--you're just not going to find any use of this press guide.
Harris’ Recent Comments on Guns
Kamala Harris has taken an interest in projecting to voters that she is not opposed to gun rights, at least insofar as it pertains to handguns. In a recent interview, she debuted her stance on the Second Amendment. The Vice President, who had previously never met a gun control proposal she didn’t like, said that if “somebody breaks into my house, they’re getting shot. [laughter] Sorry, probably shouldn’t have said that! [more laughter] But my staff will deal with that later.” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSNSq19z2C4)
Then, in an interview with 60 Minutes, when asked what kind of gun she has, Harris answered that she owns a Glock handgun but did not specify what model or which generation. (https://www.youtube.com/shorts/aC6EK2in544)
Paired with her constant new refrain that she and her running mate Tim Walz are gun owners, the Harris Campaign wants to send the message to swing state voters that while Kamala Harris endorses universal background checks, red flag laws, and a ban on so-called “assault weapons” (i.e., common semiautomatic rifles), she is otherwise very much pro-Second Amendment. Harris is thus trying to give voters the impression that while she doesn’t want regular citizens to have guns like AR-15s (some of the most popular rifles in the U.S.), their right to own and acquire handguns is safe under a Harris administration. Without revealing the type of Glock Harris possesses, it is unclear if she possesses an unlawful firearm that is not allowed in California under policies that she fought to implement.
Of course, they also bring up Harris's past comments supporting handgun bans in San Francisco and her support for mandatory gun confiscation of so-called assault weapons and other things that don't exactly mesh with who she is presenting herself as today.
The truth is that Kamala Harris isn't remotely interested in what we want regarding guns. She just has to go through the motions because those aren't winning positions. The American people aren't open to anything quite that restrictive and she knows it.
She isn't the least bit open to gun rights and I've seen no real evidence that she believes the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right at all.
What bothers me most, though, isn't that Harris is anti-gun. She's a Democrat and that's the party's default position. Regardless of what they say they want, they'll eventually push for a near-total gun ban--only their buddies will be exempt, of course, which keeps it from being a total ban--sooner or later. So no, that doesn't faze me.
What bothers me is that the media won't even look at that history, for the most part. They're not hammering her over it.
I'm not shocked by it, mind you, just bothered by it. It's like going outside when it's hot and wet and being bothered by mosquitos. You know it's just going to happen, but you don't have to like it.
Unlike mosquitos, though, the media has a choice about what they do. They're not insects driven by instinct, much as we might refer to them as such. They're exercising free will to be like this and ignore the truth, which is far worse.
