Washington, DC — One of the U.S. Senate’s leading gun control advocates, California Democratic Senator Kamala Harris, cost taxpayers tens of thousands for her to have armed security throughout the state of California.
According to NBC 4, armed officers from the Los Angeles Police Department traveled all over the California, including multiple trips where they flew from Los Angeles to San Francisco, to provide taxpayer-funded security for Senator Harris.
Armed, plain-clothes LAPD officers were dispatched to California cities outside of Los Angeles at least a dozen times to provide security for U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris at public events, media appearances, and a party.
POLL QUESTION: Do You Support National Reciprocity? CLICK HERE TO CAST YOUR VOTE
LA taxpayers paid for airline tickets, hotel stays, car rentals, and meals, according to detailed expense reports obtained by NBC News. The total cost of the trips, not including the officers’ overtime, topped $28,000.
Between January 2017 and July 2018 the records show LAPD officers flew to San Francisco at least seven times, including a trip in April 2017, when Harris gave TV interviews, a trip in March 2018 for a speech at a YMCA event, and a visit in June 2018, to escort Harris to the San Francisco Pride parade, where LAPD officers were visible in video and pictures captured along the parade route.
Ironically, Harris stopped using taxpayer dollars to pay for Los Angeles Police Department security after a lawsuit was filed demanding records related to taxpayer-funded security of rumored Democrat Presidential candidate, and Los Angeles mayor, Gil Garcetti:
The decision to end the out-of-town security program for Harris was made around the time the Los Angeles Times filed a lawsuit that demanded Mayor Eric Garcetti turn over records detailing the taxpayer expense of his own security detail during his extensive out-of-state travels, after both City Hall and the LAPD refused to release the documents through a routine California Public Records Act request.
POLL QUESTION: Do You Support National Reciprocity? CLICK HERE TO CAST YOUR VOTE
Harris’ hypocrisy is on full display when it comes to armed security.
After all, in 2014, she argued to overturn a ruling in California that reinforced the notion that one could carry a firearm on their person for self-defense.
Harris and other radicals worked to overturn the 2-1 decision, and ultimately won in 2016, arguing that individuals did not have to carry firearms concealed in public.
Here’s the reporting on that from America’s First Freedom:
On Feb. 13, 2014, the San Francisco Chronicle reported that the three-judge panel ruled against the “good cause” requirement by a vote of 2-1. And Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain’s majority opinion emphasized “the right to bear arms includes the right to carry an operable arm outside the home for the lawful purpose of self-defense.” Harris and other gun control proponents quickly swung into action, asking the 9th Circuit to hear the case en banc, thereby giving the court a chance to reverse its own decision.
The court agreed to rehear the case, and on June 9, 2016, ruled in favor of the “good cause” requirement, effectively ruling against any inherent, fundamental right to carry a gun concealed on one’s person for self-defense. In fact, Judge William Fletcher wrote the majority opinion, saying, “We hold that the Second Amendment does not preserve or protect a right of a member of the general public to carry concealed firearms in public.”
POLL QUESTION: Do You Support National Reciprocity? CLICK HERE TO CAST YOUR VOTE
Harris ignorance was on full display this past week in the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing for the Supreme Court nomination of President Trump’s nominee, Brett Kavanaugh.
In a desperate attempt “out do” another 2020 Democrat Presidential candidate, Cory Booker, Harris worked to play “gotcha” with Mr. Kavanaugh.
But it was to no avail, as Kavanaugh’s calm, cool, collected manor appeared to have won the week.
This isn’t the last we’ve heard from Harris.
We now know she has no problem using taxpayer dollars to pay for her armed security, while at the same time attacking your right to carry a firearm to protect yourself and your family.
POLL QUESTION: Do You Support National Reciprocity? CLICK HERE TO CAST YOUR VOTE