Bill Maher is one of the few voices on the left I’m willing to take seriously. He’s willing to say things that will bother his audience because he thinks they need saying, so when I disagree with him, I can at least accept that it’s not him playing team sports. He actually believes that.
And, over the years, he’s been a bit more sensible with regard to the Second Amendment than most of his non-right-leaning guests, though he’s been far from perfect.
Over the weekend, the Real Time host had Ro Khanna on, which I’ll try and forgive him for, if for no other reason than for this exchange:
Bill Maher confronts Ro Khanna over California’s “ridiculous” gun laws.
Maher caught Khanna off guard when he revealed he wanted a gun — but complained it makes “no sense” to own one in California, because “you might be the one to go to jail” for using it.
Khanna tried to sound… pic.twitter.com/cf0nmkcINf
— The Vigilant Fox 🦊 (@VigilantFox) June 20, 2026
MAHER: “What does the panel think of the Supreme Court ruling that habitual marijuana users can’t be banned from owning guns? Now you have my attention… That’s awesome. That’s fair. I want guns and I can’t have them because I don’t, because it’s illegal.”
KHANNA: “You don’t strike me as a gun guy. You would want guns?”
MAHER: “Of course!”
KHANNA: “Okay, I didn’t know that.”
MAHER: “Why wouldn’t you want a gun?”
KHANNA: “I don’t know. I mean, I don’t have a gun, but I mean, I respect the Second Amendment. I just, I wouldn’t have thought that you had guns.”
MAHER: “I mean, I don’t because of that! But yes. I mean, I can’t expect the police to be everywhere like that… And of course, another complaint I would have about California is it almost makes no sense to have one because you almost can’t use it! Because if you do, you might be the one to go to jail. I mean, you can shoot an intruder in your house, but you better do it exactly right. He better be in your bedroom facing you… You shoot him on the lawn, you’re going to go to jail. I mean, that’s kind of ridiculous, isn’t it?”
KHANNA: “I’m for investing in police. I’m for having public safety. I don’t think the answer to crime should be everyone takes justice into their own hands.”
MAHER: “Even if there’s somebody in your house?!”
KHANNA: “Well, of course, if they’re in the house. Self-defense.”
MAHER: “Well, that’s what we’re talking about.”
Maher made a logical case, talking about the legitimate concerns in California. What’s funny is that, in the books, there is no “duty to retreat” law anywhere. You’re not required to try to run away under state law, but there’s also no protection if you use lethal force in self-defense unless there’s absolutely no way to twist things into you being in the wrong. Khanna, though, immediately tried to make it out like Maher is talking about everyone becoming The Punisher and just wasting criminals in the streets.
That’s not remotely what anyone is talking about, if for no other reason than it’s almost impossible for someone to appoint themselves judge, jury, and executioner and actually get it right as to who is guilty and who is innocent.
Maher’s question to Khanna, though, I think, is fascinating. “Why wouldn’t you want a gun?”
Why, indeed?
A city like Los Angeles had a homicide rate of 5.9 per 100,000 residents in 2025, which was significantly higher than the 4.0 to 4.2 per capita rate for the nation as a whole. That doesn’t get into armed robberies, rape, aggravated assault, and other serious violent crimes that would warrant the use of lethal force in self-defense.
Why wouldn’t you want a gun?
Unfortunately, this is California, and people like Khanna have made it as difficult as possible not just to buy a gun but, as Maher notes, to use one in self-defense.
Editor’s Note: The radical Left will stop at nothing to enact their radical gun control agenda and strip us of our Second Amendment rights.
Help us continue to report on and expose the Democrats’ gun control policies and schemes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Read the full article here
