Self-proclaimed gun owner and Democrat presidential nominee Kamala Harris revealed on 60 Minutes on Sunday that the gun she claims to own is a Glock and that she’s had it a long time.
The revelation came as she insinuated it should have surprised nobody recently when she said she was a gun owner.
“That was not the first time I’ve really talked about it,” she said, shaking her finger at host Bill Whitaker. “That’s not the first time I talked about it.”
The fact that the anti-gun presidential candidate might own any firearm as she continually tries to further restrict Second Amendment rights is sheer hypocrisy. But what is even more hypocritical is that she owns a Glock. Here’s why.
First, Glock pistols are semi-automatic—you know, they fire a round every time you pull the trigger. However, Kamala, her boss President Joe Biden and other anti-gun advocates like to fudge a little every now and then and say that semi-auto pistols are actually full-auto and can be used to “spray bullets.” Semi-auto rifles using the same mechanism are on their list to ban and confiscate.
But that’s not the only thing. Nearly every Glock model made is designed to accept those evil “high-capacity” magazines Harris and Biden are so keen on banning. If she really does own a Glock, I wonder if she’d like to reveal what the capacity of her magazine is.
Furthermore, what right does Kamala have to own a gun anyway. In court filings during the Heller case, Harris signed on to documents stating that the Second Amendment doesn’t protect an individual right, but only protects those who are in a militia. If she’s not in some militia that we haven’t heard about, she’s a doubly big hypocrite for owning a firearm.
Additionally, the Biden-Harris administration’s White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention recently collaborated with anti-gun billionaire Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety and the City of Chicago to target Glock Inc. in a frivolous lawsuit alleging the company is responsible for the criminal misuse of firearms when criminals unlawfully attach an illegal device to Glock handguns to convert them to full-auto. In that situation, White House officials met privately with Glock representatives to demand a design alteration to their handguns—the very same kind of pistol the vice president claims to own.
When Kentucky U.S. Rep. James Comer, head of the House Oversight Committee sent questions about the matter on June 14 demanding answers, administration officials refused to answer them. Instead, White House Deputy counsel Rachel Cotton responded by accusing Comer of shilling for the gun lobby.
Comer’s response to the counter accusation was short and to the point.
“The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is the principal oversight committee of the U.S. House of Representatives and has broad authority to investigate ‘any matter’ at ‘any time’ under House Rule X,” Comer reminded Cotton. “The White House should spend more time complying with Committee requests, and less time obstructing congressional investigations into potential misconduct and misuse of office by White House officials.”
Last but not least, let’s talk about California’s arguably illegal handgun roster. In California, citizens can only purchase handguns that have been certified by the state, and the number is dwindling year by year.
Interestingly, many Glock pistols are not on that handgun roster so thereby illegal for California residents to own. Gen 3 Glocks and below were grandfathered in as they were sold before the law was passed. But Gen 4 and 5 cannot be sold in the state. If she bought her alleged Glock new since 2009, it’s probably illegal for normal citizens of California to own. Unless, or course, she bought a Gen 3 or earlier at a gun show!
That brings us to Kamala’s biggest Glock hypocrisy of all. Harris previously supported handgun bans in both San Francisco, where she began her political career and served as district attorney between 2004 and 2011, and Washington, D.C., where she has served in federal office since 2017. Can you say, “Guns for me, but not for thee”?
In the end, the vice president’s Glock debacle is just another reason no gun owner should even think about voting for her on Election Day.
It’s Schrodingers gun.
Whether it exists or not is irrelevant. All it does is give people who already support her a tiny bit of ammo to berate those who don’t support her on grounds of gun control.
Simply: “She’s a gun owner too so the 2ndA is safe. You’re just a bigot and/or sexist.”
That’s all this story does.
RE: “The fact that the anti-gun presidential candidate might own any firearm as she continually tries to further restrict Second Amendment rights is sheer hypocrisy.”
I concour.
Someone should ask her if she remembered to take the safety off..
Along with: What’s cylinder’s ammo capacity?
She probably does own one. Just because she does doesn’t mean she has any desire to let the little people own one. Notice the whole carve out thing above. She should be asked about that and if there’s a privileged class in this country/a 2 tiered justice system.
She is not telling the truth. She is not a gun owner at all. Show us her glock if she has one. Just like mayor Diane Feinstein showed everyone she had a revolver.
Poor Kamala, can’t quite pronounce Cock.
If she does have a Glock it was most likely issued to her when she was AG for Komifornia. She kept it as a souvenir and not return it to the state. In other words she STOLE IT!!
Maybe. Perhaps there is a real journalist out there. Who will report on where she got this gun, she now claims she owns.
Did she get her gun from the last gun store in San Francisco? That was forced to close by government edict.
At first I thought it said Kamala’s Big Cock Problem, and that the story was about Willie Brown.😂
She owned a Sig a few weeks ago. Seems like she owns whatever she needs to own at the time.
She currently “owns” a Glock so the country can see her giving up her own gun because it’s easily convertible into a machine gun and need to be banned. she owns a Glock so she can “have some skin in the game” even if it’s only a political stunt.
I’m no fan of Kamala. In fact, I think she’s downright evil.
But that said, I wouldn’t say this pistol issue is even close to being her biggest problem. The reality is she probably got a pistol for personal defense while acting as a DA. That isn’t uncommon or unreasonable–DAs get plenty of death threats from less-than-savory people.
Does she shoot? No, probably not. I doubt she even knows how to use the thing, and at this point, I doubt she even wants it (mostly because she gets gigantic personal security teams now).
Is that still hypocritical? Yeah, probably. But I doubt it sways the needle compared to any of her other, most pressing flaws.