Vice President Kamala Harris’ far-leftist niece, Meena Harris, is facing derision and mockery for a self-own tweet she posted in response to the Uvalde mass shooting.
In a tweet posted early Tuesday evening, around the time that word of the shooting began going viral, she claimed that it’s “easier to get a gun than baby formula.”
Look:
easier to get a gun than baby formula
— Meena Harris (@meena) May 24, 2022
While the tweet earned her nearly 200,000 likes from adoring Biden administration sycophants, it also attracted derision from those who believe that blame for the baby formula shortage lies with the Biden administration — meaning, in other words, that it lies in part with Harris’ own aunt. Not to mention every other Democrat in power.
Look:
Does she not realize this is a self-own? https://t.co/I1258V4eNg
— Jay (@OneFineJay) May 24, 2022
Your auntie literally is the Vice President
— W. E. B. Du Bronx (@daeequan) May 24, 2022
Yep and remind me who controls the presidency, the house, and senate?
— JdsJackets (@jdsjackets) May 24, 2022
Maybe you should tell your aunt to do something about both those things….
— Odilia (@odeelz) May 25, 2022
Why don’t democrats do something about it? They are in charge of everything.
— Michael Donnellan (@fridgemover) May 25, 2022
You have a point. Never thought I’d see that in America but then again this is Joe Biden’s America
— Clockwork Angels (@randomu84249195) May 25, 2022
But just to be clear, Harris did not actually have a point. Guns are in no way, shape, or form easier to purchase than baby formula.
While it’s true America’s currently experiencing a nationwide shortage of baby formula, this fact is entirely separate from the accessibility debate.
If there were no shortage, any man, woman, or even teen could walk into a store right now and purchase baby formula, no questions asked.
For purchasing a gun, on the other hand, a bevy of rules apply. For one, only those 21 and older may purchase a handgun. As for a rifle, the minimum age required for purchasing one is either 18 or 21, depending on the state.
But that’s just rule one. To obtain a handgun, you need a license. To purchase any weapon, you need to pass a background check. The rules go on and on and on.
How did the background check for the purchase of that baby formula go, you pass? How many days do you have to wait before you can pick up that formula?
Oh wait, silly me 🤦🏼♂️. You don’t have to do all that to buy ANYTHING ELSE BUT A GUN…
So yes, it most certainly is a lie.
— Lord_Antagonist (@antagonist_lord) May 25, 2022
Damn, since when did we need to fillout forms & wait for up to 3days government approval for baby formula? Do you get alerted when you buy multiple formula containers too?
— Jose Smith (@babayaga947) May 25, 2022
Right. You can walk inside of Kroger and buy guns freely. Citizens will need a background check for baby formula 🤷🏿♂️
— Tavin (@Tavininfo) May 24, 2022
Lmao have you ever tried getting a gun? You don’t need a license or background check to get formula
— Professor Mikey (@ProfesseurMikey) May 25, 2022
Last time I checked, I couldn’t just walk into a pharmacy and buy a gun.
— Devon Gardner (@Devon_Gardner94) May 24, 2022
Meena’s tweet was posted hours after Salvador Ramos, an 18-year-old man, reportedly opened fire at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, killing 20+ people, including over a dozen children and at least two teachers.
As news of the shooting began going viral late Tuesday afternoon, members of the left started demanding gun control again, much as they always do following a mass shooting that can’t be blamed on white people.
The going theory on the left is that the Uvalde mass shooting — and in fact every mass shooting in American history — could have been prevented with tougher gun laws. But critics say this belief is false.
Here’s how conservative commentator Ben Shapiro put it: “The Texas shooter violated a multiplicity of gun laws. The suggestion that more gun laws would have prevented this act of unspeakable evil is unsupported, and the implication that those who oppose such laws are somehow in favor of mass shootings is morally reprehensible.”
The Texas shooter violated a multiplicity of gun laws. The suggestion that more gun laws would have prevented this act of unspeakable evil is unsupported, and the implication that those who oppose such laws are somehow in favor of mass shootings is morally reprehensible.
— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) May 25, 2022
While it’s unclear if this viewpoint is 100 percent accurate vis-a-vis the latest mass shooting — too many details remain unclear at the moment — it’s been demonstrated to be accurate in most shootings, period.
Indeed, a study published by the Department of Justice in 2019 found that of the 287,400 criminals locked up in 2016 for criminal offenses involving weapons, over 90 percent of them had obtained the weapons illegally.
So how would even more gun laws have made a difference then — and how would they make any difference now?
- Medicaid divides House, snares up Trump’s budget bill - February 19, 2025
- Top 7 moments of Trump and Musk’s candid Hannity interview - February 19, 2025
- Juan Williams leans into race baiting core with latest Hill piece: ‘Trump’s idea of competence — only white men need apply’ - February 18, 2025
Comment
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.