Kamala Harris went to Buffalo on Saturday to address an event for Ruth Whitfield, who was killed in the Tops Market shooting two weeks ago. Ruth Whitfield was the woman who visited her husband at his nursing home and did it daily — when she then went to the market to purchase something to eat on the way back home.
It's great that Harris attended. However, during the event, Harris mentioned many issues to “hate.”
“There's a through line, what happened here in Buffalo, in Texas, in Atlanta, in Orlando, what happened at the synagogues. So this is a moment that requires all good people who are loving people to just say we will not stand for this,” she added.
“Enough is enough. We will come together based on what we all know we have in common and we will not let those people who are motivated by hate separate us or make us feel fear,” she stated.
The congregation was informed, “We are strong in our belief about what is right and our determination to act, to ensure that we protect all those who deserve to be protected, that we see all those who deserve to be seen, that we hear the voices of the people and that we rise up in solidarity to speak out against this and to speak to our better angels.”
However, they aren't the same even though she claims that they are. If you don't know better and you think that she is saying that they are all white supremacist or hate crime crimes because of her words, that's not the case. Uvalde is an example. That shooter is a villain and this could have been “hate” in the sense that he was able to kill many people. However, it was not due to religion, race, or anything else related to that, as we can tell. Biden was also unclear regarding this when he spoke during his speech in Delaware on Saturday.
Harris continued to use these kinds of words in her remarks following the ceremony, when she demanded an assault weapon ban.
Harris said that there had been “200 mass shootings” this year to date.
“When we're looking at an epidemic of hate, where people are being targeted, just because of who they are,” she added. “We all have to stand back and say, wait, enough is enough. A harm against anyone is a harm against all of us. No one should be left to fight alone. We've got to deal with this.”
“We have to deal with it in a number of ways,” she added. “I went through it even at the church, you look at it, from Buffalo, to what's happened – the babies, and the teacher that's been killed in Texas. The funerals haven't even really begun in terms of mourning that loss.”
“We're looking at, on the heels of Atlanta, just a year ago, Orlando, the Tree of Life,” she said. “We have to agree that if we are to be strong as a nation, we must stand strong, identifying our diversity as our unity. Anyone who's trying to break that down is hurting us as a country and as individuals who should identify as one, as a country, as Americans.”
Again, she's suggesting it's in fact all “hate crimes” having to be related to “diversity” or people being targeted due to “who they are.” This isn't an isolated alteration from Uvalde to Orlando for instance, and it's a distortion that applies to many mass shootings. The 200 number is unclear.
However, Harris continued, saying “We are not sitting around, waiting to figure out what the solution looks like.”
“We're not looking for a vaccine. We know what works on this. It includes: let's have an assault weapons ban.”
“You know what an assault weapon is? You know how it's designed? It's designed for a specific purpose,” she explained. “To kill a lot of human beings quickly. An assault weapon is a weapon of war. With no place, no place in a civil society.”
“Background checks,” she added. “Why should anyone be able to buy a weapon that can kill other human beings without at least knowing, ‘hey, has that person committed a violent crime before?' Are they a threat to them or others? That's reasonable. That's just reasonable.”
“We do that so you have to have a license to drive a car. You have to be of a certain age to buy a six pack. We are a society that is governed by rules, most of which were designed, those rules, at the very height of the purpose, to prevent against harm, to promote safety, and to have a common order that we all agree in civilized society, that we should agree to… There will be safety, and we can prevent chaos.”
The issue lies in the fact that an assault weapon ban did not work and The New York Times admits it.
“The law that barred the sale of assault weapons from 1994 to 2004 made little difference,” Lois Beckett was a reporter on behalf of The New York Times years back:
“It's been discovered that huge terrifying military rifles do not kill the majority of 11,000 Americans who are killed with guns each year. Little handguns do.”
“In 2012, just 322 people were killed using any type of firearm, F.B.I. figures show.”
[…]
“Should it be renewed, the ban's effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement,” an Department of Justice-funded study concluded.
Furthermore, an AR-15 isn't a weapon of assault, and isn't a weapon for war. The shooters of Uvalde and Buffalo both cleared background checks. So what is she telling us that is going to prevent anything?
That's the problem. There's lots of talk about gun control, but there aren't many that can offer solutions. Democrats aren't interested in discussing school security or other issues. Senate Minority Speaker Chuck Schumer (D-NY) shut down the school security bill. Why would you do this in the event that you are trying to tackle the issue? Because they are interested in discussing what they want to be the case: gun control.
