Kamala Harris owns a gun, but she justifies it because it’s only for personal protection.
So why is she so hot to trot to take away our weapons that are highly suitable for personal protection?
Under her watch thousands of law abiding Californians were prevented from purchasing any number of rifles and pistols for the most absurd reasons. Even some of the pre-existing (before the law changed) weapons have been deemed illegal for the most arbitrary reasons you could imagine.
What do I mean by arbitrary? Okay, for example if your old semi-auto rifle has a bayonet lug on it…it’s an assault weapon. I suppose this is to stop the bayoneting going on around the state, but if not, then it was an arbitrary law passed for the sole purpose of taking away your gun using a scare tactic.
But, did it accomplish it’s mission of reducing gun violence? Nah, but never mind that. This was always about seizing guns and any excuse was good enough.