Yet, on the First Amendment, Harris previously called for government “oversight or regulation” of social media to stop what she calls misinformation. In 2022, her vice-presidential nominee, Gov. Tim Walz, claimed: “There’s no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech.”

On gun ownership, Harris went so far as claiming: “I am in favor of the Second Amendment, I don’t believe that we should be taking anyone’s guns away.”

Reassuring, but Harris’ emphatic past support for gun control is consistent and legion. Let’s look at her record. She claimed during her 2020 presidential campaign, “I support a mandatory buyback program.” When pressed about Joe Biden’s claim at the time that she couldn’t ban assault weapons with an executive order, Harris enthusiastically responded, “Hey, Joe, rather than saying ‘No, we can’t,’ let’s say ‘Yes, we can.’”

But this is nothing new. Harris has strongly advocated for gun control for years. As San Francisco’s District Attorney, she declared, “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.”

She even supports warrantless searches, raising concerns she also doesn’t want to be bothered by the Fourth Amendment.

In a 2008 amicus brief, Harris argued that a complete ban on all handguns is constitutional. She even said there is no individual right to self-defense.

The Biden-Harris administration has been the most anti-self defense administration to date, shutting down thousands of gun dealers by mid-2022 due to minor paperwork errors. They renewed Obama’s Operation Choke Point to cut off financial resources for gun manufacturers and dealers; the companies that remained had to grapple with increased costs. The Biden-Harris administration has also established a national gun registry.

If Kamala Harris becomes president, she will push for even more restrictions. The new Office of Gun Violence Prevention is “overseen” by Harris, which coordinates the administration’s gun control initiatives. The office oversaw a recently released U.S. Surgeon General report that fails to mention a single benefit of gun ownership.

The OGVP was instrumental in implementing the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, introducing complex rules that classify many gun owners as firearms dealers. If you sell a gun to a friend once and discuss selling a second one to anyone, you must first become a licensed dealer. If you sell one gun and keep a record of the transaction, you are also required to first become licensed.

Many BCSA rules are vague, giving the government discretion to arbitrarily label individuals as dealers.

Under Harris’ leadership, the OGVP pushed for lawsuits against gun makers and sellers whenever criminals use their guns. She also pushed to ban semi-automatic “assault” weapons, and require background checks on all private gun transfers.

By early 2022, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives had developed a digital database containing nearly a billion firearms transactions.

U.S. Reps. Jim Jordan and Thomas Massie found that Bank of America provided the FBI with credit card data for firearms purchases without even requiring a warrant or probable cause.

With a national gun registry in place, officials can now easily identify legal gun owners. Harris’ past threats to confiscate guns become much more likely to succeed.

Gun control has already taken center stage in Harris’ campaign. Harris made gun control a key topic in her first event in Wisconsin and again at a gathering of the American Federation of Teachers.

It isn’t just that Democrats want to regulate every part of our lives, but the real threat to the First, Second, and Fourth Amendments to the Bill of Rights are at risk from Harris. Those freedoms are endangered if she wins.

About the Author

John R. Lott Jr. is president of the Crime Prevention Research Center. He served as senior adviser for research and statistics in the Office of Justice Programs and the Office of Legal Policy at the Justice Department.

The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) checks the background of illegal aliens they have in custody. But, the administration’s letter to Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-TX) shows that as of July 21, 2024, ICE let 435,719 convicted criminals and 226,847 people with pending criminal charges in their home countries into the U.S.

Of those cleared by ICE, 13,099 have convictions for homicide, and another 1,845 were facing criminal charges. Some 9,461 have convictions for sex offenses (not including assault or commercialized sex), and 2,659 face pending charges. The convictions include other crimes such as assault (62,231), robbery (10,031), sexual assault (15,811), weapons offenses (13,423), and dangerous drugs (56,533).

About 7.4 million noncitizens are in the “national docket data,” so 662,776 is 9% of the total, and if one extrapolates the numbers to the homicide rate in this country, it strongly indicates that the government is letting migrants into this country who commit murder at a rate 50% higher than the rest of the U.S. population.

And these numbers clearly underestimate the crime rate of these noncitizens. The noncitizens in the “national docket data” turned themselves in to border agents for processing or were caught. Those who don’t turn themselves in are obviously far more likely to have something to hide from those doing the processing, so-called “gotaways,” who are observed illegally entering the U.S. but not caught or turned back.

These figures coincide with other data from the Arizona prison system and show illegal aliens commit crime at much higher rates than Americans or legal immigrants.

Under the Remain-in-Mexico policy, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) did background checks on immigrants’ cases, including contacting the country that the immigrant is from before they are approved to come to the U.S.

ICE agents cannot access the same databases to check on the immigrants, and they didn’t contact the immigrant’s home country. Plus, the massive inflow of immigrants has overwhelmed the system. The Deputy Director for ICE blames the “enormous workload”  agents face, so they haven’t been able to do even the limited background checks they are doing. There are so many coming in that the government can’t house these immigrants until their backgrounds are properly checked.

ICE processed these criminals as they entered the country, but it didn’t identify them as criminals, so it released them into the country. Now, they are just walking around freely in the United States, and no one knows where they are.

It took over six months for the Biden administration to finally respond to a congressional request for these numbers. The deputy director for ICE “apologized” for the delay.

As bad as these numbers are, the reality may be even worse. The Biden-Harris administration is cooking the books to make the border crisis not look as bad as it is. For example, in mid-September, retired San Diego Border Patrol Chief Patrol Agent Aaron Heitke testified how the Biden-Harris administration ordered him not to publicize the arrests of illegal border crossers identified as having ties to terrorism.

Democrats quickly pointed out that some of these criminals came in before the Biden administration. But the administration’s letter to Rep. Tony Gonzales, a Texas Republican, didn’t provide a breakdown of how many came through under Biden-Harris. The administration policy, with its limited background checks and overwhelmed agents, has a much higher error rate compared to Trump’s Remain-in-Mexico approach. Background checks are ineffective if officials don’t even contact the immigrant’s home country.

Even if illegal immigrants weren’t committing crimes at higher rates than the general population, the American people have a right to expect those entering this country to be screened in order to prevent more murderers, rapists, drug dealers, and thieves from entering the country. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris have the authority to call for expedited extradition for criminal illegal aliens in the U.S., but they have only moved to make extradition more difficult.