“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.”
“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.”
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.
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.
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
According to SCOTUS, anything the President does could be immune to prosecution, including shooting someone, intruder or otherwise.
Not anything, it’s only shit the SCOTUS deems as “an official act”, so it can be open to interpretation based off the politics of the Supreme Court justices.
What if the person breaking into Kamala’s house is Clarence Thomas?
That’s one fewer fascist on the deciding committee, then.
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.