Beto O'Rourke Says He'll Send Cops Door-To-Door To Confiscate AR-15s

This would be unconstitutional.

 

And what would be the purpose other than to require people to pay money and be put on a confiscation list?

 

Well, you can pretend that cause it's the Republican wet dream - but the truth is that Beto has under 2% support among Democrats and it's been dropping. The dude is a joke. Plenty of Democrats own guns - they aren't going to support a gun grab. Banning future gun sales of some types- yes. Showing up at your door to take them - no.

 

Well I'll wait until I hear a strong defense of the second amendment and the right to own firearms from the other Democratic candidates before I sign off on your opinion.

 

What has been dropping for Beto O'Rourke is the public support of those who are willing to support the message he is presenting to the voting public. Even after so long, the liberal democrat party realizes talk of firearm-related restrictions is a guaranteed way to lose elections. Because of his honesty, they have little choice except to publicly distance themselves in order to avoid being associated with him.

It is all a matter of political maneuvering. They still agree with and support the message and position of Beto O'Rourke, but they cannot honestly state such without risking their own campaigns as a result.

 

I do hope Beto enjoys his loss of the campaign and probably the loss of his mayoral position.

 

Sure he is a joke, now, but things change and this is proof that a certain segment of the population agree with him. I've heard from more than a few gun owning Dems that would have no problem with certain gun bans. They just never believe their hunting rifle or shotgun will be included. 20 years ago how many people supported gay marriage, yet here we are. Everything could change over a single horrific event.

 

Beto has no position in government at this time. He was in the U.S. House of Representatives before he ran against Cruz, but he has no current position. He will just have to go home and enjoy the fruits of his father-in-law's labor.

 

What he has become is a poster child representing articulating the hidden agenda the Left has been attempting conceal for years... a good strategy by the Left, one endorsed for them by conservative gun owning voters for 2020.

 

And that pretty much sinks his chances for further political aspirations. One of the main reasons why gun control legislation has passed Congress in the last 50 years is that weapons that were legally purchased and/or registered prior to any future sales ban were exempt from the law. What O'Rourke has done is feed right into the NRA/gun manufacturers/sellers propaganda against any gun control legislation. Bad move on his part and totally against the spirit and intent of the Constitution.

 

Yup, as I've said before here in blue state NM when the new Dem governor passed a universal background check law, almost all the county sheriffs stated they would not enforce it, let alone gun confiscation.

How is Beto going to know what I have, and what is going to prevent me from saying I sold it in a private sale a few years ago or had it stolen? We can't round up 11 million illegals but we can go door to door and seize property from 22 million citizens who believe their 2A rights are being taken away? You'd see a bloodbath bigger than the next 20 mass shootings from both civilians and law enforcement.

I have no idea why any gun owner would vote Democrat. Beto is simply stating what other Democrats think.

 

Oh, come on now.... gun owners will willingly give up their guns for the New Green Deal and vote Democrats in droves, particularly after the senate convicts Trump after impeachment. Beto is a smart fellow, he knows a good strategy when he sees it.

 

Not all gun control advocates agree with O'Rourke.

“ 'Hell yes, we're going to take your AR-15, your AK-47.'

"That was former Rep. Beto O’Rourke of Texas at the Democratic debate in Houston in September, underscoring his commitment to a new gun policy idea. He wanted not only to ban the sale of new assault weapons but also to impose a mandatory government buyback of the assault weapons already in private hands. Sens. Cory Booker of New Jersey and Kamala Harris of California support that idea as well....

"Gun confiscation is the wrong battle for the gun violence prevention movement to fight. We are winning the gun debate for the first time in a quarter century. Voters are sickened by the toll of gun violence. They are tired of their kids doing active shooter drills in school. They are disgusted by the empty 'thoughts and prayers' of the National Rifle Association and its allies. And they are demanding action....

"But we are in danger of forfeiting those gains if we change the subject. If we go beyond what we know will work and try to do things that strike voters (and an increasingly hostile Supreme Court) as too far, we will lose. And the NRA will win."
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opin...ol-progress-2020-democrats-column/4009559002/

Since Parkland I have seen gun control advocates become emboldened. They are rightfully calling out the NRA for standing in the way of lives being saved. However, it's important to be realistic about what can be accomplished.

If a buyback worked it would be because people were voluntarily complying with the law. That's what happened in Australia. O'Rourke says that he has personally spoken with gun owners who say that they would gladly give up their AR-15's and AK-47's in order to make America a safer place. Going door to door and searching people's homes for such weapons really wouldn't be practical.

 

Totally incorrect, they, the GCA's are ignoring the problem while addressing the symptom, guns are not the problem, violent people are, however to solve that problem rubs against everything the liberals support and GCA's are mostly liberal.

Example.

Too many people of color killing each other, ban guns.

Young men filled with rage, who go to a school and kill the bullies that picked on them or the girls that dissed them, ban guns.

Couples married or not, that cannot resolve their problems and one shoots the other, ban guns.

Do you notice a pattern here?

Too many people, some good intended, but not understanding the actual problem, but blindly following those with a GCA political agenda are not solving the problem, but they are truly making it worse.

I have used this example before but will post it again, banning guns is akin to prescribing pain meds to cure cancer, it doesn't cure the disease, but the patient feels better while still dying from the disease.

Therefore the problem is not solved, nor is actually addressed, but rights are destroyed, and law abiding people become scapegoats for the criminal actions of those the GCA's fail to address.

By their actions. or should I say lack of actions about the real issue, the GCA's are some of the truly sickest people within our society.

Should anyone have a doubt of that just look at their history, they use death to promote their anti-gun cause while totally ignoring the backstory of what lead up to the incidence.

All they care about is death, especially when is involves children, any thinking person after reading some of their posts will recognize that to be their common line.

 

The only reason they are not agreeing with Beto O'Rourke, is due to knowing that such would serve to undermine their claims that they are more reasonable. They agree with what he is saying, but cannot admit to such without jeopardizing their entire movement and being alienated. Beto O'Rourke is unique amongst them as he was willing to tell the full, absolute truth in an outright, upfront manner, rather than hiding behind soft, ambiguous language and terms.

 

Police Leaders Call Out Beto's Gun Confiscation Plan.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-call-out-betos-gun-confiscation-plan.563367/

 

If Beto is really committed here, the thing for him to do would be to make this arms collection in person. He could try that now; sort of like taking a poll to see how many agree.
He should just go door to door and tell the residents he's there to take their guns.

Candidates on the left continue to get more desperate to find a winning narrative. Since they can't go to the old standby of the economy, they going through more and more extreme ideas hoping to gather support.
As the ideas get crazier- their chances diminish, yet nobody seems to want to pull back to rationality.

Beto needs to disarm the criminals and the violent people who prey on the general public- not the other way around. But then, gun control proposals and common sense have no connection. No logic involved in their fear or their "solutions". Worse- their solutions would actually make matters worse. You can't get much dumber than to support that.

 

Re:

No, what O'Rourke has done is precisely confirm that the NRA's "propaganda" is not propaganda at all. It's the truth.


First they came for the "assault weapons", and I did not speak out—

Because I did not own an "assault weapon".

Then they came for the handguns, and I did not speak out—

Because I did not own a handgun.

Then they came for the rifles and I did not speak out—

Because I did not own a rifle

Then they came for my grandfather's old shotgun —and then I learned what "common sense" gun control "for the children" really meant.



(Apologies to Martin Niemöller)

 

The image caused a LOL.

Beto is just stoner enough to accept the distinction democrats make between "military assault rifles" (AR's) and all sporting semi-automatics. There is no difference functionally, just costmetically, and a ban on AR's is a ban on all semi-automatics, merely awaiting a one or two word tweak of law democrats apparently contemplate, if they contemplate it, which they don't because they don't ever really think about anything they do.

The only practical course to take within the parameters of the Constitution is universal firearms carry -- either open or, I would advocate, concealed.

 

Agreed- but with the prohibition of people with criminal histories and mental instability.

 

Well sure, if you can keep politics out of it, and I don't think you can. Mental evaluations are highly susceptible to the political persuasion of the evaluator. It is a very treacherous path, IMHO, especially in view of the basic fact no one is questioning or looking at, being the role prescription drugs play in gun violence. It is a factor about 100% of the time.

 

I don't think we can keep politics out of anything with any degree of success. I'm speaking objective- not something that we are likely to achieve. Be nice if we could focus on real answers and get better at things. Perfect isn't a viable option .

 

"I think there would be a visit by law enforcement to recover that firearm and to make sure that it is purchased - bought back - so that it cannot potentially be used against somebody else."

I dunno', maybe you read that differently...

 

Those people are already banned from legally owning firearms since they are clearly mentally incompetent