“If somebody breaks into my house, they’re getting shot,” she said, laughing. “I probably should not have said that. My staff will deal with that later.”

  • Worstdriver@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Well, better than the time someone broke into the home of the Canadian Prime Minister (Jean Chretien at the time) and his wife held off the intruder with a soapstone carving…

    • Worstdriver@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 hours ago

      How so? Explain please, cause I’m not understanding the connection. (Yes, I’m both non-American and an idiot)

  • ATDA@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 hours ago

    When I think about it

    Instead of a debate let’s go to a range and do a little target shooting.

    Watching Trump fumble around, hit nothing, getting smoked by a woman.

    Sounds like a lot of fucking fun to watch.

    Oh wait we already saw that lolololol.

    • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 hours ago

      …Then pit both of them against someone that goes to a monthly IDPA or USPSA match.

      (My point is, if you want to be able to use a gun when you’re under a lot of pressure to perform well, you gotta practice under pressure too.)

  • Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 hours ago

    And then you get shot when it turns out to be the police raiding your home unannounced because they got the address wrong again.

  • Draedron@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 hours ago

    America is so fucked. Both parties dont give af about the gun problem. Just one side cares a bit less than the other

    • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 hours ago

      The “gun problem” is really an issue with shit like social services and safety nets, not guns per se.

      If you talk to a criminal defense attorney and ask what the gov’t could do that would see the biggest drop in gun crime, most of them will answer without hesitation: end the war on drugs. If you decriminalize and legalize drugs, you end fights over money and territory in a single fell swoop, because you don’t see convenience stores shooting each other up, do you?

    • MoogleMaestro@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 hours ago

      I mean, I don’t think we need to worry about people getting shot during an unannounced in home break in.

      We need to worry about people being shot randomly in the street for no reason, or guns being in the hands of people who are mentally deranged. Those are very different things imo.

    • Kayday@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Context is important, since the person saying this has a security detail and holds office where the threat of violence against them is real.

  • EtherWhack@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 hours ago

    She forgot the “a” in her statement. Any intruder in her house is gonna get a COVID vaccination.

  • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    20 hours ago

    These idiots filmed themselves trying to overthrow the government. They’ll taking this as a dare/challenge

  • taiyang@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    20 hours ago

    I like this for some reason. Maybe even more if she slipped and said “fuckin’ shot” maybe because it’s Oprah.

    Weird that the whole “I probably shouldn’t say that” is a very Trump like thing to say, but those types of comments have a lot of power with people so more power to her.

    • lennybird@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 hours ago

      It was an authentic moment and people love that. I watched it live and was like dayum.

      I’ve done a shit ton of research and writing on the topic of firearm regulation. I grew up with them as well. I am absolutely for very strict firearm regulation… However: I think it’s time democrats pivot on this to root causes: education, Healthcare, and societal stressors. The electorate just isn’t there yet, and it will probably take another 2 decades at least before the boomers die off and any movement can be made.

      • taiyang@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 hours ago

        I’m not even sure if the electorate is in a place to address issues in education and healthcare, haha. But unfortunately I agree; I think Dems are right because it’s clear other nations don’t have this problem (even with their same unhappy societies) but making only incremental gains with gun control shows that it can’t be done right now.

        But I wouldn’t necessarily go with root causes as first priority. If they could fix election issues like gerrymandering and the electrical college, urban centers would have a fair say and might push harder on gun regulation when voices are heard on equal level. If I had a majority, that’s what I’d hit first to make the rest easier.

        • lennybird@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 hours ago

          Wholly agree! Campaign Finance / Election Reform is my #1 issue and I’ve been advocating for this to be the single issue vote we all get behind. It truly is the root of nearly every other issue and complaint we have.

  • shalafi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    21 hours ago

    Yes, if you come in my home forcefully, I’ll do my best to kill you. That is a line one does not cross, especially not with my wife and children in the house. Bullshit outside is a call to 911, see what happens.

    Sure, maybe it’s some drunk or kid at the wrong home. That’s why you take a breath and identify the target and situation. If you’re too fucking panicky to do that, give up your weapons, you do not deserve them.

    Gun laws are mostly counter-productive and racist, but I’d go for a simple “use of force” test before one’s initial purchase. If you watch GunTubers, you’ll get sane takes, often straight legal advice from lawyers. If you talk to individuals, Jesus, what these people think is lawful and moral… And if you can’t be arsed to do your fucking homework before bringing death into the equation, give up your fucking guns.

    And don’t fuck with me on this unless you’ve suffered a home invasion. Ever had hoods break in and rob you at knife point on Christmas Eve? Ever had a bear wander in your home on Christmas Eve? (Wow, now that I say that out loud… weird. Maybe I should not stay home on the 24th. OK, the wolf hybrid cruised in one summer night, but I knew him. Still got me to draw. 🙄)

    • TechLich@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 hours ago

      I feel like this a cultural thing because that sounds wild to me.

      The penalty for burglary where I am is not death, nor am I a judge or executioner.

      We’ve been broken into a lot and it’s usually just some poor asshole who wants to steal things to buy meth. It’s horrible and scary and feels like a massive violation but shooting someone in that scenario just feels like straight up murder.

      • FrostyTheDoo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        15 hours ago

        When someone breaks into your home you don’t have much of an opportunity to figure out why. Many times the reason is not to steal things and buy meth. Sometimes it’s to hurt, rape, or kidnap someone. Why take that chance?

        You might be picturing someone slowly walking up and executing a pleading, weaponless burglar in cold blood. In reality these things happen with mere seconds to make a decision about the safety of you and your family. Again, Why take the chance?

        If you’re breaking into a house, getting shot is a calculated risk you have chosen to take. If it happens, it’s only your fault. You had the choice to not put yourself or anyone else in harm’s way, and you chose the other option.

        • friend_of_satan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          14 hours ago

          When someone breaks into your home you don’t have much of an opportunity to figure out why.

          My thoughts exactly. “In Cold Blood” by Truman Capote is a true story about burglars who came to steal and ended up murdering a while family. Awful thing to experience. Great book though.

          • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            12 hours ago

            The bigger problem is that people who buy guns for home defense are acting emotionally, not logically. The cold hard statistical truth is that if you own a firearm, it is most likely to be used by yourself or one of your family members to commit suicide, or to be the cause of a fatal accident, than it is to be used in self defense.

            People have this deeply flawed belief about suicide that if someone wants to do it, they’ll find a way. But that isn’t how suicide actually works. Most actual suicides are spur-of-the moment things. And giving someone access, in their, home, to a quick and usually painless method of ending their own life serves to massively increase the risk of suicide. Everyone has bad days. Everyone who lives long enough and isn’t a psychopath will experience deep sorrow. In a drunken sorrow on the night after a bad breakup or the death of a close relative? It doesn’t take much for people to be vulnerable to the call of the void.

            Yes, break-ins are scary. But the truth is, most thieves try NOT to break in when someone is home. And home invasions for rape, murder, or kidnapping are even rarer. There are a lot of scary things in this world, but you shouldn’t let that fear control your behavior. Rabies is a damn terrible thing, but it would be incredibly irrational to avoid going on a hike just due the risk of encountering a rabid wild animal.

            In the US at least, if you own a gun, it is far, far likelier that that weapon will be used to end your life or life of one of your family members than it will end be used in self defense.

            This is why I do not own a firearm. Yes, home invasions are terrifying. But if you own a weapon for the sake of home defense, you are letting your emotions and fear control your life. The simple statistical fact is that, on the net, buying a gun lowers your average expected lifespan.

            • shalafi@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 hours ago

              All of those reasons are why I never owned a gun until I was 39, didn’t really get into the thing until I was 49. A younger me would have surely done something stupid or killed myself, purposefully or on accident.

              you are letting your emotions and fear control your life

              After the armed robbery, yeah, PTSD, glad I didn’t have a gun after that. My much older roommate had a pistol, kept his eye on the situation and decided it not worth the legal hassle of shooting them. And keep my story in mind. I’ve had a black bear and a giant wolf-hybrid wander in.

              Having said all that, I don’t keep a gun in my desk and on my nightstand out of fear. Same reason I carry in the woods and on the rivers and creeks, because I can. Let’s drop the fearful gun-nut thing. Yes, they exist, but for the vast majority of us guns are like any other safety tool. (Plus, we like to shoot!)

              I have a fire extinguisher at home and at camp. I don’t fear fire. I carry a med-kit on me when hiking or on the water. No particular fear of being wounded. Among other safety items I carry a compass, fire starters, GPS, 2 knives, 2 flashlights, paracord, first-aid gear and medicines. Do I need those things? Rarely for safety reasons, but better to have than not have if needed.

    • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 hours ago

      I’m close on this.

      I’m a responsible gun owner, but there are a LOT of crazy ammosexuals out there who aren’t safe to let carry.

      If someone tries to enter your house though, that’s a red line.

    • TommySoda@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      21 hours ago

      These downvotes seem a little excessive. You’re making some good points about guns and how people should handle them.

  • fubarx@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    22 hours ago

    What are we going to do with all those Louisville Sluggers, sitting in the hallway closet?

  • zephorah@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Kamala Harris is Vice President of the United States of America and the POTUS is mentally compromised. If she shoots anyone while under threat, which a break in would suggest, she’ll just get a nod and probably even keep her handgun.

    If/when she is POTUS she’ll have immunity, per SCOTUS.

    • trafficnab@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      20 hours ago

      Shooting people isn’t a constitutionally enumerated right of the office of the president

      She’d have to order one of her executive employees to do it

      • zephorah@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 hours ago

        I don’t think POTUS or VPOTUS, even pre SCOTUS insane decision on presidential immunity, would be prosecuted for standing ground or engaging would be castle law, even in a state without either. I don’t think any of those offices would be held to duty to retreat either, and rightly so.

      • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        17 hours ago

        According to SCOTUS, anything the President does could be immune to prosecution, including shooting someone, intruder or otherwise.

    • taiyang@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      20 hours ago

      You don’t need to be POTUS to be found innocent in most states. Many have stand your ground rules, and many more at least have self defense rules.

      Granted in her case, she has secret service so it’s a moot point.

  • qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Reminds me of that West Wing episode where he “accidentally” makes an offensive gun analogy comment; Harris doesn’t really alienate any supporters here, and she appeals to the undecided gun crowd voters. As a bonus, she’s “telling it like it is” for folks who are self-described as being “fed up with PC culture.”

    • MirthfulAlembic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Your bonus point is depressingly significant. The number of people I’ve heard say something like, “I don’t like x, y, z about Trump, but I like that he speaks his mind and tells it like it is in his opinion” drives me crazy. When did it become admirable to be an unfiltered boor?

    • Vanon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Agreed. I thought it was one of the best things out of her mouth at the event (which was surprisingly well done, worth a watch). I think people want to see more honest, unprepared remarks from her (she’s been really staying on message). But I doubt there will be many more events like this with hosts like Oprah, who is quite skilled at producing these moments.

      • Billiam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        20 hours ago

        It was then, too.

        The Republicans as portrayed in The West Wing were far more sane than even the GOP at the time. Remember, the show first aired shortly after the GOP impeached Clinton for a blowjob because they couldn’t find any evidence of impropriety in the Whitewater deal.

        • the_crotch@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 hours ago

          He wasn’t impeached for a blowjob. He was impeached for perjuring himself while the defendant in a sexual harassment inquiry. The blowjob is just the thing he lied about.

        • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          15 hours ago

          I can’t even make myself rewatch it because the “scandals” that are at the core of most episodes are so mundane and plebian it just descends into a farce.

          Hell, even the many scenes when they treat the Whitehouse as a kind of civic holy ground just don’t work now. I just can’t buy it after 4 years of that lunatic sitting behind the constitution desk.

          • Billiam@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            12 hours ago

            Time has changed the show from “an idealized depiction of a Democratic White House” to “an idealized depiction of a functioning government not hampered by an irrational party comprised of insane ideologues and traitors.”

        • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 hours ago

          Yeah but Republicans weren’t all properly cartoonishly evil at that point, we had senators like McCain and others, and if you started to talk about how the nazis were actually just misunderstood they’d kick your ass out of the party.