“I’m a gun owner; Tim Walz is a gun owner,” Harris said.
“I did not know that,” Winfrey replied.
“If somebody breaks into my house, they’re getting shot,” Harris added. “Probably should not have said that. But my staff will deal with that later.”
The article has a video clip. I love the bullshit "probably..." It's a 100% certainty she spoke with her staff and workshopped the phrasing and presentation of gun stuff. Plus I bet she practiced her lines. No American politician is going to wing it when talking about guns.
Ah yes, the American dream of being able to murder a threatening stranger.
Life is cheap in the Burger Reich.
surprised she didn't throw a "that's how we do it down where i'm from y'all" in there to REALLY sell how down home and folksy she is. she's just like me!!!! im gonna vooooooooote!!!
I love how Harris is starting out with every advantage a candidate could possibly have and systematically blowing it.
Trump too tbh. This election feels like both candidates are doing their damnedest to throw it for the other one because neither actually wants to be president right now lol.
Is she? These seem less like flubs than attempts to flank Trump from the right, like with her “I love fracking SOFUCKINGMUCH” but at the debate. Libs are gonna vote for her no matter what and leftists are demographically a non-factor so why wouldn’t she?
The true believer democrats that vote will vote for her, yes, but she needs a way to increase democrat voter turnout to actually win. She might have less charisma than Clinton, and I'm not confident that "Not Trump" is going to be enough now that Trump has been out of office for 4 years.
We'll find out soon enough, but I'm doubtful that this inauthentic pandering campaigning she's doing is going to energize enough voters to win. Thanks to boomers and voter suppression and the electoral college every race is kind of the republicans' to lose by default, so they can get away with a lot more stupid shit.
The goal of the Democratic Party is to become the Republican Party, not to win elections.
Let’s put it this way: the goal is to capture Republican donors, not to capture Republican voters. Two separate things.
Oh don't get me wrong I'm not trying to say that they're actively trying to win voters and elections and that this is their best effort at that. I just don't think this little show is going to be enough to win an election this time -- accidentally or otherwise -- in spite of how bad Trump seems to be doing from the outside.
I'm not even sure if they read it. I think their comment was just a reflex or something lmao
Even if Trump wanted to be a dictator, it's not like the military would let him lol
I can hear the switches flipping in lib brains in order to support this.
They showed themselves to have no moral compasses when it comes to genocide. Their true colors are that they're weathervanes.
Their compasses are like in Pirates of the Caribbean, they just point to whatever they want most. Which, regrettably, is just The Status Quo...or perhaps Brunch if they haven't had one in a while
Be a pirate
Whip out my magic compass
I look to the horizon
Roguish grin
"Hoist the mainsail and set a course for Good Vibes!"
The crew replies in unison
"Yasssss queen! Slay!"
The cargo hold is full of bombs for Israel
It’s so obviously performative when they each have a battalion of secret service on security detail. If they pulled a gun out and started wandering the halls of their houses, they are more likely to cause a friendly fire incident than stop an intruder
Donald Trump doesn't even own a gun! The man never fired a gun in his life!
Even people with private security and millions of dollars still fantasize about castle doctrine gun battles?
I have a hypothesis that burgerland's "everyone should own a gun and be ready to use it at the drop of a hat" culture was cultivated as part of the white yeoman farmer ideal so that the burger regime could offload as much of the genocide work as possible onto the average settler. I think you're more spot on than you intended.
One of the best kind of leftist moments is when you come to a conclusion you think is original only to find out someone discovered it decades ago and put it better than you ever could.
was cultivated as part of the white yeoman farmer ideal so that the burger regime could offload as much of the genocide work as possible onto the average settler.
This is not a theory really, if you look into Hitler's whole "generalplan ost" thing he planned to have nazi settlers set up farmsteads and do "defend their land" type shit. It all makes perfect sense ngl.
I'm not out of my mind for believing that this would have been unthinkable in the Hillary or even Biden era, right?
Like this is just blatant blood-guzzling NRA chud pandering that would be completely relegated to Clinton body count and Dark Brandon type shit.
Unthinkable? I don't think so.
I think the main thing that's becoming obvious in the past 8 years is that the Obama years were an illusion. He was politically progressive, sure, but what he was progressive towards was an increasingly brutal fascist empire, just like every one else.
People who think the racists left the Democratic party with Reagan have been demonstrably proven wrong over, and over, and over since Clinton, they just never quite quit telling the lie.
The presumption the Democrats are even mildly less racist because of their love of meritocracy, solely when rich citizens of the US are concerned, even with all those qualifiers it's wrong. The Democrats are who they were when I was a kid here in Texoma - the people who wouldn't vote for a Republican because they're the party of the rich, the north, and cause of the Civil War (y'all should meet my papa sometime, it'd change how you see this country).
I don't really have a coherent way to distill the country as I see it compared to the constant pretense Democrats are different than the republicans in any fashion apart from the exact manner in which they're vile condescending villains, but the sooner the left stops talking about progressives like that's something anyone should be, the better. CAuse they sure as hell ain't what you think they are, I don't care if they kinda-sorta-maybe-implied they might be okay with an anti-racist policy sometime far in the future. Besides which, Liberals are conservatives now, in the literal sense. They are the reactionary party. Fascism isn't a reaction to Capital in crisis - it's a revolutionary expansionist project. What people mean by fascism when they call it reactionary is just when fascism starts killing white people. Fascism is real long, long before then.
What scares me lately is, since Biden, the Blue MAGA insurgency in the Democrats are going ham as well. I don't really think America needs a conservative party, but we're about to have two revolutionary parties, both worse than the present. Hell, maybe we already do and it's just hard to tell how much it's changed while the changes are still happening.
I did not expect Kamala to run to the right of Biden. I had zero expectations and I'm still let down
I'm not surprised. Biden's the sacrificial lamb who will take the majority of the PR hit for the genocide, but people who are actually on the left have wisened up to their tricks. They'll go for votes from people who aren't educated enough to know better. And those people are right wing.
This would have been unthinkable in the Hillary or even Biden era, right?
I think so too. But Biden's like ancient history now. Libs must love Kamala's gun comment and think it's a "pragmatic" move by her to appeal to republicans and republicans in swing states in particular.
funny how they hated Bernie for his gun position and frequently brought it up to smear him.
The identity politics angle must also be a part of it, I think.
Actual segregationist Joe Biden couldn't really get away with betting on this kind of rhetoric, but Kamala being both non-white and a woman gets into the gray zone where she has plausible deniability of not just directly appealing to the vivid fantasies of legal murder demographic.
Biden couldn't really get away with betting on this kind of rhetoric... Kamala being both non-white and a woman gets into the gray zone
---
Edit 1
I agree. But imagine an alternate universe where Biden's VP was a white guy. After Biden dropped out even that VP could use Death Wish-style messaging and get away with it. The lib Overton window keeps on lurching more and more to the right and the libs are fine with it.
Edit 2
My comment turned into total mess so I started all over again.
‘They’re Getting Shot,’ Kamala Harris Warns Home Intruders, Burglars, Litterbugs, Slow Walkers
FARMINGTON HILLS, MI—Discussing the Second Amendment with Oprah Winfrey at a Michigan town hall last night, Vice President Kamala Harris admitted she may have gotten too comfortable when she remarked that any home intruders, burglars, litterbugs, or slow walkers near her house could expect to be shot. “If somebody breaks into my house, knocks on my door to sell me something, or leaves their dog’s waste on my lawn, they’re getting shot,” the Democratic presidential nominee said in an attempt to bridge the gap with conservative gun owners in the swing state, drawing applause as she pantomimed looking through a rifle scope at the audience and then mimicked the sound of gunfire. “If you trespass onto my property or take my plate away from the table before I’m finished eating, I’m going to take you out, as is my right as an American citizen. Let this serve as a warning to anyone who steals my mail, runs down the airplane aisle to deboard before it’s their turn, or talks too loudly in a movie theater—these things upset me, and I’m not afraid to defend myself accordingly. Also goes for drivers who don’t signal, heavy mouth-breathers, or if I just don’t like your face. Boom.” Later in the interview, Harris drew a gun from inside her jacket and fired a warning shot into the air after someone in the audience answered a call on speakerphone.
Definitely a weird way to pander to the right, but whatever.
The thing is, I can sort of agree? If someone breaks into my home at night while I am asleep, I'm not going to stop and ask questions about their intentions. I will assume they are here to do me and mine harm, and I will react accordingly, which very likely means shooting them. Breaking into someone's home at 3am is very different from trying to rifle through the shit in their car. But fantasizing about it on Oprah is fucking crazy, even for a politician.
It's too bad that warning shots aren't legal
Warning shots are not inherently illegal. . It is a myth that they are.
Where there is a credible, criminal, imminent, threat of death or grievous bodily harm, you are allowed to use any level of force, up to and including lethal force, necessary to stop that threat. Your lawyer will be telling the police, the prosecutor, and if necessary, the judge and a jury that you faced such a threat, and you used a degree of force you reasonably believed necessary to stop that threat. Your lawyer will explain that you didn't think any lesser use of force would have convinced them to stop, and the fact that they did stop is evidence that additional force was not necessary.
The prosecutor could potentially argue the threat wasn't sufficiently imminent, but that doesn't mean a jury will believe it.
If you do shoot the attacker, the prosecutor can feasibly argue that a lesser use of force, such as a warning shot, would have convinced the attacker to stop and run, and that your ahooting him was unnecessary. Again, though, that doesn't mean a jury will believe it.
What you don't want to do is start telling the police your whole life story. Make your complaint against the attacker, don't tell them shit about what you did, and lawyer up.
Yeah, preparing to react with violence if some stranger comes into your home unannounced is not the crazy thing a lot of leftists like to claim it is. Desiring safety and security in you living space is a basic animal instinct. But I'd rather just the person get scared and run, since I'm not exactly willing to kill someone over my pc.
Killing in self-defense isn't a bizarre reaction, but hanging on discussing such scenarios, bringing them up unnecessarily, fantasizing about them, these are pathological behaviors that suggest using the extremity of the situation as a moral pretext for getting off on murdering someone (especially a dirty poor)
Home invasion robberies are three times more common than house fires. I bet you have smoke detectors and fire extinguishers, and you've thought about how to keep yourself, your family, and your property safe from fires.
Planning and preparing for an emergency event three times more likely than a fire is not "pathological", nor is it indicative of some moral failing.
There were people who denigrated others for choosing to wear seatbelts in their cars, or helmets on their motorcycles or PPE on their jobs. You sound like one of them. Do better.
You're scolding me over a complete distortion of the facts. The vast, vast majority of home invasions are intended to be while no one is home, so you will have no cause to shoot someone because either you aren't there (this is most likely) or you are there and you will scare them off with a threat (if not your mere presence). Cheshire Home Invasion situations are so rare that there's a reason many people outside of Connecticut know its name, because this scenario of sub-human sickos aiming to break in while your family is home and murder you happens less often than people getting struck by lightning.
Fantasizing about shooting people is pathological. Do better.
lmfao idiot. you still wearing a mask for covid big boy. please talk to me more about being denigrated for taking health and safety seriously. do it. I dare you.
Every time I get COVID, certainly. It's the responsible, civic-minded thing to do.
Wrong answer! You can be an asymptomatic carrier at any point while Covid is still hanging around the general public, and especially while no one is taking mitigation seriously, you caring guy, you! You should be wearing a respirator any time you will be away from your home. You should be wearing one any time you would be in public, not just while you are sick, until Covid is gone; extinct, or cured. If you actually cared, you would know this. But of course! You’re a regular Semmelweis, only instead of being hanged for washing hands you’re at the stake for shooting and killing people. Of course you care!
May we never meet.
Respirators do not filter their exhaust. They protect the individual wearing the respirator. They do not protect the public. With one exception, your advice is nonsensical.
May we never meet.
I wholeheartedly agree.
Oh, no disagreement there. I ain't fantasizing that, nor is that a worry for most folks, even those living in rougher sides of town. The only people wanting to do any killing are these rich fucks.
But I'd rather just the person get scared and run, since I'm not exactly willing to kill someone over my pc.
Agreed, but you have no direct control over that. The decision to get scared and run is theirs, not yours.
Just because it's "not crazy" and based in some basic animal instinct doesn't mean we have to entertain it or that it's not something that extremely easily leads to reactionary violence.
We literally the slope this leads down in people gunning down strangers at the door bell or literally in the drive in just approaching the house.
Or you can be like Breonna Taylor and end up riddled with bullets because it turns out it's not a burglar, it's the police doing a no-knock raid.
I mean that's gonna happen whether I'm armed or not in that case
Used to break into homes. I was prepared for violence. You're just wrong.
Anyone coming into your house on purpose at night is willing to hurt you. Giving them the chance and trying to be the nice guy by telling them your armed just announces where you are.
Take your family into one room and guard the door with your gun pointed at it, announce you are armed, and wait for them to leave.
The strongest doors in your house are the exterior doors. Those are the doors I'm going to be behind.
Anyone willing to come through the tough exterior doors into an occupied structure can be reasonably presumed to be willing to go through a cardboard-thin interior door into an occupied room.
Waiting for them to break down the door demonstrates I value their lives much more than they do. I'm not giving up the most defensible position in my own home to doubly prove that fact.
I'm not giving up the most defensible position in my own home
Who the fuck thinks like this?
What kind of moron charges a door when they know there's people with a guns behind it?
Exactly. Why are they assuming there are no guns behind the heavy front door, and the only guns are behind the thin bedroom doors? What kind of moron do they have to be?
You're just trying to create scenarios where you get to shoot someone lmao
The scenario I "created" is functionally identical to the scenario the parent comment created. I simply clarified that relying on a weak interior door is monumentally stupid when a tough exterior door is available. You know it, I know it, everyone reading along knows it.
Why do you believe people break into homes in the first place? What could possibly cause people to be so desperate 🤔
If you could answer that question, you could keep 1.1 million people from trying to commit suicide every year.
The answer is Capitalism.
Speaking of suicides, why is the suicide rate in the US so much higher than in China, Cuba, and the DPRK?
I've got my popcorn. I'm excited to hear how I am singlehandedly increasing the suicide rate.
If they find out after entering people are awake and armed, they're bailing out.
Better for them to "bail out" before coming through the front door. They won't even catch a charge if they do that.
Clearly, we aren't talking about the kind of people who "bail out", so I'll invite you to think on that a moment.
I was raised by gun people and brain poisoned from a very young age and now, years later, I still have to consciously remind my brain sometimes that my phone or laptop isn't worth more than someone's life.
I hate that growing up in this country made my default state a violent, terrified, antisocial mess that needed hard work to change into something resembling a normal human.
Very few burglaries are done in the middle of the night while the residents are home. Unless the burglar is very stupid they're gonna burgle when everyone's at work or on vacation etc. So in the extremely rare case that someone does break in at 3AM while you're sleeping, I wouldn't necessarily assume it's definitely a robbery.
This isn't to defend Kamala, I hate people who fantasize about implausible scenarios where they get to lawfully shoot somebody. A security system would likely deter any home invader regardless of their intentions.
I dont know the right way to handle this, but announcing your position is a good way to end up shot yourself.
Which don't even happen that often.
I swear middle America is a bunch of cowards
I think you are confusing yourself by thinking of a typical burglary - I.e. a burglary where the burglar has done what they can to make sure people aren’t home (e.g. struck during work hours, saw the mail piling up and came when the person was on vacation, etc.)
But that’s not the situation being contemplated here. The OP specified a nighttime break in. This is the opposite of your standard burglar - they’ve struck when people are the MOST likely to be home.
Of this subset, what percentage have doing something bad to you in mind? Or more to the point, at what % are you morally obligated to not take actions against them? Let’s say 49% of the time does the nighttime breakin burglar actually intend you physical harm. Do you have to eat it at those numbers? (I’m asking genuinely, since you seem to have a strong moral intuition here. From your other post, you said you couldn’t put a value on human life, so the only other value I have here is the resident’s life. In the 49/51 example, since it’s more likely than not that there’s no harm intended, this maximizes the amount of lives).
You just want an excuse to legally murder someone.
There will be no excuse for the terror
But we're not arguing about homicide by magic spell here, this is a pretty specific and extremely spotlighted type of crime, the only reason to conjure coinflip percentages out of thin air is to entice specific sentiment, fascist sentiment in this case.
"take what you want and leave" just generously assumes that what they want isn't to hurt you
Why should that change when the TV gets moved to your house
Stores have insurance for shit, how many people have "burglar coverage"? Most people don't have infinite wealth to just let walk out their front door
"take what you want and leave" just generously assumes that what they want isn't to hurt you
It's not generous to assume what is easily the most plausible interpretation. Unless it's like a gang hit or something (including by cops), who the fuck wants to brutalize an entire family? That happened one time in Cheshire, CT and conservatives the whole country over have been milking it for a decade and a half.
how many people have "burglar coverage"?
lol
Even if theynare putting a price tag on it, they are only making an "offer" on a home invader's life. It is entirely up to the home invader as to whether they want to "accept" that offer.
burglars typically get the fuck out if they learn someone is home, if they stick around after a warning they're far more likely to be dangerous.
Crunch the numbers then big man, how more likely is far more likely here.
idk if someone is going to do harm to me, I don't care about the sanctity of their life
The only difference between the bourgeois exploiting me and some shithead stealing from me is one is a class traitor
Comrade Beanis here made it explicitly clear that shooting someone in defense of your and your family's actual safety is legitimate. That's the whole point of the "point the gun at the door" thing.
the thing is yall don't consider taking my shit to be doing harm to me, someone living paycheck to paycheck who would never be able to replace any of it in a reasonable time frame, and you're fucking wrong
like are you really so incapable of conceiving "harm" to a person beyond just bodily harm? Like if I come steal all your fucking food and you starve to death, it's fine because I didn't assault you? Literally fucking social murder, but it's fine because uhhhh burglary is cool and good? Christ in fucking heaven, stop arguing with me about thisIf you have a house, you should have insurance. If you have an apartment and lock your door, it's extremely unlikely someone is going to loot it because apartments are just bad targets (and low-rent ones are typically going to have much less in them worth stealing).
No one is going to break into your domicile to steal loaves of bread, and even if they did, they'd need to come back on a regular basis and also rob the local soup kitchen(s) for it to be remotely viable that you starve even in this Twilight Zone scenario.
The massive assumption here being that by default they will do harm to you, this is true crime brain.
"Stealing my shit" is doing me harm because I am a poor person who can't just magic a new life out of nothing. I have no fucking sympathy for anyone who tries to steal from me, sorry. And idk but i'm not going to trust renters insurance to just go "oh, someone stole all your shit? here's the full value of it" 🤷♂️
You know what else is really valuable that is easy to steal? Guns
yeah i don't have a gun which is why any burglar attempting to take my shit will face the sword
If you are one of the 376/100000 (0.37%) to even be burglarized in the first place:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1238258/burglary-rate-country/
if y'all gonna be all "this is reactionary" i'm gonna say this is some Ultra shit, "the only acceptable response to burglary is to hide in your room, otherwise you're a chud" and going all
about it
Literally every homeowner in the US that hasn’t paid off their home (read: most of them) have homeowners insurance, which has theft and burglary provisions. A good many have renters insurance, too.
Is this a potential eventuality you should be preparing for, though?
Is it a rational thing to fear based on evidence, or is it driven by reactionary fearmongering?
I'm sure it happens more often than never, but the level of fear Americans have about it is almost definitely rooted in that "savages coming for your women" white settler shit.
This oprah thing was so full of pandering to republicans. Is oprah republican now or something?
Oprah gave several right wing grifters their big breaks, like Doctor Oz and Rhonda Byrne (the author of The Secret)
I assume she considers herself "pragmatic" so that would make her a pragmatic democrat which is effectively always means republican.
She is also a massively wealthy capital owner. Even if she isn't a registered republican she wants the status quo to protect her own interests.
