Harris in 2007: We Could ‘Walk’ Into Legal Gun Owners’ Homes for Storage Checks
“We’re going to require responsible behaviors among everybody in the community…”
As San Francisco’s district attorney, Kamala Harris helped enact a gun law allowing police to visit a legal gun owner’s home and monitor their gun storage situation.
Harris told reporters in May 2007:
We’re going to require responsible behaviors among everybody in the community, and just because you legally possess a gun in the sanctity of your locked home doesn’t mean that we’re not going to walk into that home and check to see if you’re being responsible and safe in the way you conduct your affairs.
“Just because you LEGALLY possess a gun in the sanctity of your locked home doesn't mean that we're not going to walk into that home and check to see if you're being responsible.”
This is rather consistent with how Harris viewed various rights as CA AG.
— AG (@AGHamilton29) September 18, 2024
Then-San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom signed the bill into law a few months later.
The officials included “other gun control provisions, including a new requirement for legal gun distributors to submit an inventory to the chief of police every six months, and a ban on possessing guns – even legally – in public housing.”
Newsom boasted: “San Francisco now has the strictest anti-gun laws in the county.”
Harris described the legislation:
During the May 2007 press conference discussing the safe-storage bill, Harris said the new measure was about legislating “our values” in an attempt to “encourage certain kinds of behavior.”
“When we create laws, it’s not only about creating an opportunity, if you will, to prosecute someone for committing a crime, but more importantly, when we legislate our values, it’s about trying to encourage certain types of behavior,” she said at the time.
At the debate, Harris claimed she owned guns to sound more moderate about gun policies despite previously saying her “values have not changed.”
In 2019, during her brief presidential run, Harris called mandatory gun buybacks a “good idea.”
We’ve seen her VP and personal X accounts call for a ban on “assault weapons,” which we know is code for non-handguns.
I dare her to even try to take my AR. As a handicapped woman, the AR is perfect.
Actually, it’s a perfect gun for any female. It’s light with little recoil, allowing for perfect aim and precision shooting.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
How can one person be so wrong about what they are allowed to do and still not be in violation of basic Constitutional rights?
There is no question that the alphabet agencies and local law enfarcement agencies will Follow Orders.
Depends on the locality and who the elected Sheriff is who the elected District/Circuit Judge is and who the elected County Prosecutor is.
Unfortunately you are probably correct about the Feds and spot on about many State and large municipality gov’t attitudes and actions.
That depends on where you’re talking about. I don’t expect the feds would even think about doing something like that where I live. First of all the sheriff would throw their asses in jail for trespassing at the first call. Secondly they get shot from about six directions if they tried. Unless they bring an army they ain’t doing jack
It’s actually quite simple. 2007 was before Heller, so she probably blithely accepted what had been the scholarly consensus when she was in law school, that “the people” in the 2nd amendment meant the states, and the right it protected was the states’ right to have their own militia.
It’s hard to believe that such an ahistorical and illogical theory could ever have been held by anyone, but many or most of us remember a time when that was absolutely the consensus view, and the historically correct view was regarded as some kind of troglodyte nut case theory akin to “sovereign citizens”, or the gold-fringe theory.
One need only look at the record of the debates at the convention that adopted the Hawaii constitution before statehood, and the convention about 10 years later to revise it, at both of which this theory was stated and taken for granted as the undisputed truth.
So she probably never questioned it until Heller came down, and even after that she was probably convinced that it was correct and Heller was an activist and deliberately dishonest decision. After McDonald she probably still held that view, and in all likelihood she still holds it after Bruen. But in 2007 she’d probably never even heard it questioned, and was unaware that anyone seriously disagreed with it.
As for the fourth amendment, if the second amendment doesn’t guarantee a right to keep and bear arms, then a permit to own a gun is a favor from the state, as a condition of which it can demand that you waive your fourth amendment rights. If you want us to allow you to own a gun, you must consent to our searching your home. If you don’t want to do that, no permit.
But she’s only incidentally wrong on the Second Amendment here.
She’s absolutely massacring the Fourth, pre/post-Heller doesn’t matter.
No, she isn’t. See above. If we accept the false premise that a permit to own a gun is a favor that the government is doing for you, then the government can attach conditions to that favor, including waiver of fourth amendment rights.
The reason the government can’t actually do that is because the second amendment affirms that gun ownership is a right, so the government can’t attach conditions to it.
It’s not a matter of being wrong or of violating the Constitution. Harris simply doesn’t believe there are any limits to power. The idea that the police aren’t allowed to walk in to your home doesn’t even occur to her.
She is too stupid to realize that the 2nd Amendment is in place precisely to prevent this sort of thing.
The question is: will all of the cold-dead-hands / NRA sticker on the “four by” / Texas Braggart types walk the walk, or will they cave in like Good Germans?
And the 4th Amendment as well. I’m a couple months older than she is, probably went to law school at the same time, mid 20s. Now then there wasn’t much taught about the Second Amendment, but in both Constitutional law and Criminal law, the basic, required courses, the Fourth was taught. And wanting to become a prosecutor, she should have taken more courses on the finer point of the Fourth. And yet she still wanted to basically ignore it? That is a marxist viewpoint, that the Bill of Rights was merely suggestions. See also, Woodrow Wilson.
They can certainly walk into the sanctity of my home.
Walking out again might present a bit of a problem.
Their rhetoric and actions in office show that Democrats aren’t concerned about criminals with guns, it’s the armed law-abiding citizens they need to punish.
The “I own a gun” is usually the Joe Biden Special shotgun or, as AG/Senator, extended privileges mere commoners can’t comprehend. California now passed a law requiring state certified lock boxes/safes for storing firearms. So how do they know what you have unless they can verify it in place? After all, it is a matter of “public safety”.
Sen. Jay Rockefeller once pointed out that he was a gun owner also, and that his AR-15 was in his closet at home…. in D.C.!!
TBF, this was before Bruen. But since she’s undoubtedly never discomfited a single brain cell since at least that long ago, I’m sure she still believes it now.
“The important thing is, my values haven’t changed.”
Not just before Bruen, but before Heller.
First of all, who is this “we”?
Secondly, the law school that gave her her JD needs to be have its accreditation revoked and the entire campus be razed to make room for a prison.
This is one of the most offensive things any public American official could possibly say.
Yes, in violation of the 4th amendment and (because of the alleged reason for the “walk in”) the 2nd amendment. And this person claims to have a law degree?
If you want true tyranny, vote Harris/Walz.
And you thought Biden was bad.
Walking into the sanctity of a locked home sounds like an oxymoron to me.
Sounds like a clear-cut case of self defense.
Ultimately, you only have the rights you can defend.
This is something the Trump campaign should have found and started posting online without any commentary months ago.
I suspect we’ll be seeing that clip in a Trump ad.
How many people wouldn’t mind having everyone else’s home ransacked for the common good?
People who possess at least a modicum of intelligence will realize that it’s not just everyone else’s home.
Liberals, this is dictatorial. Also, tell me how harassing law-abiding citizens is going to stop lawbreakers from doing what they do.
In Japan, the police can enter any home as they wish and do a complete investigation for whatever reason.
If the Japanese want to be slaves that’s their business
Japanese society is grounded in deference to authority. The United States was born of a completely different attitude. We are supposed to be different from the rest of the world, yet our politicians and government are trying to make us like the rest of the world. They are trying to remove from the United States that which makes the country “America” and us “Americans.”
EXACTLY!!!!! (as regards the dems/left)
The US is unique in so many ways and the dems absolutely hate that. It drives them crazy – crazier than they naturally are, which is pretty friggin crazy.
Including filling it full of people who never had that attitude.
hmmmm, I think I’m calling BS on her “I’m a gun owner too” claim. I’m gonna need a reporter to ask Kamela what firearms she owns by brand and caliber, where her firearms are stored and how often she practices to ensure competence and safe handling. Probably a copy of her registration/permits too – California and/or DC.
She lied about working at Micky D’s, pretty sure she thinks she can lie about anything to pretend to be “one of us”.
Exactly. No chance she could tell us three things about “her” gun and I’ll spot her its color and that it makes loud bangs when fired.
We don’t actually know that she lied about McDonalds, but we don’t know that she didn’t. In this case I would suspect that if she is telling the truth about owning a gun, she probably bought it recently and has never fired it. And keeps it not only unloaded but disassembled, in a locked safe located in a cellar with no lights or stairs, stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.”
Government has no right to know if, how, when, or where you are exercising any of your rights. Once the “if” is breached, the others come under assault.
That’s Japan, a country that has an emperor. It probably has no constitution with rights enshrined in it. It is also a country where if a Japanese person is harmed or killed in an accident they caused involving a foreigner, it is the foreigner’s fault.
This was a reply to alaskabob at 2:26 PM.
The USSR had citizens’ rights in its “constitution.” They weren’t worth the ink they were printed with. They’re trying to do the same thing here.
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1936/12/05.htm
See: Chapter X : Fundamental Rights and Duties of Citizens
If you don’t have a warrant, you’re not going to enter my home without repercussions.
In 2013 SWAT terms conducted massive warrantless searches in Watertown MA looking for the Boston marathon bomber. The justification: the exigent circumstances exception to 4A. However those searches don’t seem to qualify. Not in hot pursuit. No destruction of evidence danger. They just did it. So the security organs can always find excuse. Judges will generally favor the government as they themselves are government employees.
Don’t expect 2A or 4A to stop a determined government. What are you going to do about it? Let me quote from Solzhenitsyn:
“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?… The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If…if…We didn’t love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation…. We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”
We are watching the US Constitution slip away before our very eyes. Erwin Chemerinsky, the dean of UC Berkeley law school said:
“Although the causes are complex, many of today’s problems can be traced back to choices made in drafting the Constitution, choices that are increasingly haunting us. After 200 years, it is time to begin thinking of drafting a new Constitution to create a more effective, more democratic government.”
Yes he wants to throw away the Constitution. The dean of a major law school.
And, best of all, even with all of the illegal police actions – the illegal searches and the illegal mass house arrests – the cops and feds were complete and utter failures. They couldn’t do anything. They let the bombers escape from them, even as they had them surrounded, and after the one killed his own brother by running over him with the SUV, the surviving Tsarnaev disappeared into the night … only to be discovered, eventually, by a local homeowner who was breaking the illegal and idiotic mass house arrest orders and went into his own yard to have a cigarette, when he noticed the escaped Tsarnaev dirtbag hiding in his boat.
The cops were all complete and utter failures in that. They captured no one. They killed no one. The only people they managed to round up and imprison were the entire civilian population. The one Tsarnaev killed his brother and the a civilian “disobeying” the illegal order found him. And no police officials and no city or state officials were ever held liable for their illegal actions.
good post
b/c people live in fear of the government
the “it cant happen here” crowd is always defeated by reality
Don’t forget the “…and then the police filled the boat where Tsarnaev was hiding full of holes, still not killing him, and wound up taking the boat.” It is/was displayed at FBI headquarters in DC as an example of… not quite sure, but at least generous donors gave the boat owner enough money to replace it at the time.
And not a single homeowner told the cops to show a warrant or get bent.
Liberty dies in laches.
Real liberty is this.
“Newsom boasted: “San Francisco now has the strictest anti-gun laws in the county.”
And, entirely as we told them it would, “gun violence” soared even higher.
lefty wants the gun violence
they drop gun charges against their people
ALLLLLLL THE TIME
That’s the “Royal” we, she’s not about to try and walk into homes to do gun inspections herself.
Bitch, PLEASE.
“’creating an opportunity, if you will, to prosecute someone for committing a crime…,’ she said at the time.” !!! The 2nd part of the quote from DA Kamala Harris in 2007 totally explains what Vice President Kamala Harris is talking about now (in 2024) when she mentions over and over that she is creating an “Opportunity Economy”. She gave us her definition of “creating an opportunity” way back in 2007. It’s all about “creating an opportunity … to prosecute someone for committing a crime.” In an Opportunity Economy, the crime to be prosecuted is not paying your fair share of taxes. This explains the need for 86,000 new IRS agents, and why the Internal Revenue Service has been stocking up on weapons, ammunition and combat gear to the tune of $10 million since 2020 (according to the NYPost, May 2, 2023)!
“It’s all about “creating an opportunity … to prosecute someone for committing a crime.”
Who writes her speeches — Ayn Rand?
Somehow I really doubt that any local law enforcement who ‘just walks into’ Harris’s California home to inspect her admitted handgun will find themselves greeted warmly by the USSS and escorted to the device in question.