The Bruen decision is probably the closest thing you're going to find to a compromise on gun rights. It argues that if a gun control law dated from the time of the nation's founding or just after, then it's clearly a law the Founding Fathers believed didn't infringe on people's right to keep and bear arms. While I don't think any law restricting guns fails to infringe, I can at least accept the argument.

Vice President Kamala Harris, however, is someone whose history suggests she's anything but a fan of our Second Amendment rights. She's favored bans against handguns and assault weapons and even violating people's Fourth Amendment rights simply because they own firearms.

So it's kind of hilarious to see how the media talks about her walking a thin line between favoring gun control and supporting the Second Amendment.

Vice President Kamala Harris called for stricter gun control laws during Thursday's gun violence event at the White House.

"I believe we need to reinstate the assault weapons ban, universal background checks, safe storage laws and red flag laws," said Harris.

On the campaign trail, Harris is branding herself as a pro-Second Amendment gun owner.

Critics point out Harris supported banning handguns earlier in her career. In 2005 while serving as District Attorney of San Francisco, Harris sponsored Proposition H which banned San Francisco residents from buying, owning, and even possessing handguns.

A state court struck down the law before it took effect.

I like how they claim she wanted to do this early in her career.

It was just 2019 when she talked about mandatory buybacks as part of an assault weapon ban. She was running for president at the time. Generally, that's not early in someone's political career and it most definitely wasn't for her.

Further, she was the district attorney of San Francisco when she wanted that handgun ban, as the article notes. That might have been her first political office, but it's one where you should at least have some rudimentary understanding of the law, including the Constitution.

See, Kamala Harris is trying to lie to people about supporting the Second Amendment. She has a handgun? So what? A lot of people own handguns. That doesn't mean they're remotely interested in protecting anyone's gun rights. 

Harris knows that her guns won't be taken from her no matter what laws are passed. She's connected. She'll be an exception no matter what laws come on the books because there's always an exception. 

You and I, however, won't be so lucky.

The media would have you believe she's walking some kind of tightrope between gun reform and gun rights. Yet as Cam noted earlier this week, this is just the media trying to gaslight the American people. Why else claim that her desire to ban guns was "early in her career" when she was doing the same thing just four years ago?

The difference in their minds is that so-called assault weapons are different. Never you mind that they're the most popular model of rifle in America, they're just different, so there's a huge gulf between her previous gun ban efforts and her latest, so the latest don't count as a bad thing.

Here's the thing, they can keep trying to say she's pro-Second Amendment, but every little bit of gun control she supports shows that to be a lie being pushed by a compliant media, especially when there's no reason to believe she'd stop at those measures.