web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu
Westlake Legal Group > Posts tagged "buyback"

Booker to Buttigieg: Calling a Buyback Program ‘Confiscation’ is Doing the NRA’s Work for Them. So is Saying That

Westlake Legal Group cory-booker-AP-620x446 Booker to Buttigieg: Calling a Buyback Program ‘Confiscation’ is Doing the NRA’s Work for Them. So is Saying That washington D.C. Uncategorized Pete Buttigieg Guns gun control Government Front Page Stories elections Cory Booker confiscation Campaigns buyback Beto O'Rourke Allow Media Exception 2nd Amendment 2020

U.S. Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., speaks on behalf of Democrat Mike Espy, unseen, and his race in a special election to fill the final two years of a term started by Mississippi Republican Thad Cochran, in Jackson, Miss., Friday, July 20, 2018. Republican Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith was appointed to temporarily succeed Cochran, and she is running for the seat. (AP Photo/Rogelio V. Solis)

 

 

The NRA defends gun rights, and guns prevent crime. Guns are also employed in crime, but how else might one stop that crime, if not with guns?

Yet, the National Rifle Association’s gone from a somewhat neutrally-perceived organization to the Essence of Evil. When and how did this become an accepted idea?

Word on the woke street seems to be the 2nd Amendment advocacy group is a devilchild, and I’d be willing to bet many believe that but don’t know why.

As I covered previously, 2020 hopeful Pete Puttigieg recently decried Beto O’rourke’s promise to steal America’s most-popular hunting rifles from the homes of its citizens (here).

Cory Booker didn’t like that, so he came up with a neat idea: Just say it isn’t what it is.

Presto-change-O.

Good as new-O.

Mayor Pete referred to the Beto’s plan as “confiscation,” and aspiring physical assaulter Cory used Twitter to revolt against the meaning of words:

“Calling buyback programs “confiscation” is doing the NRA’s work for them, @PeteButtigieg—and they don’t need our help.”

I hate to do this, but I will anyway — I’ll say what you already know:

1. It isn’t a “buyback” program because, given that we are not a socialist country, the government doesn’t own all products and means of production. You cannot “buy back” that which you did not sell.

2. “Buy” denotes a mutual transaction; confiscation does not. I’d love to “buy” the Knight Rider car for $20. Sadly, I will — at some point in my life — be forced to confiscate it. The joyride will be bliss, until KITT ignores me and I’m taken to jail in my black leather jacket.

And I could possibly find myself sitting next to a certain punk rocker who apparently’s got an itch to steal guns that he’s psyched to scratch.

A guy who didn’t much appreciate Pete’s putdown.

Here’s what Beto had to say earlier this month:

“I think [Pete] represents a kind of politics that is focused on poll-testing, and focus group-driving, and triangulating, and listening to consultants before you arrive at a position. I think our politics has to be about doing the right thing and saying the right thing.”

As reported by The Daily Wire, this isn’t Cory’s first time to defend forcibly taking firearms. Following September’s Democratic debate, he laid it out for reporters:

“You have to set up a system that is mandatory, you have to set up a system to pull them off, but this idea, this imagery that the fear-mongers and demagogues try to say of somehow armed police officers showing up and confiscating weapons — that’s the fear-mongering. And people trying to obscure and make people forget what we have done before as a nation with machine guns, what other nations have done with assault rifles.”

Of course, there are no “assault rifles” in this case, but hunting rifles that look particularly scary, in the same way that a black widow looks more menacing that a grandaddy long legs.

But no matter what you call it, they’re spinning a web of confiscation.

“Look, I hate when Democrats use the language that Republicans try to use to scare people away, as opposed to sort of the pragmatism and practicality of this.”

Said the spider to the fly.

-ALEX

 

Relevant RedState links in this article: here and here.

See 3 more pieces from me:

Cory Booker Makes A Fool Of Himself, Refuses To Accepts Trump’s Condemnation Of White Supremacy

Buttigieg’s Brother-In-Law Says Pete Needs To Repent For Using The Bible To Justify Abortion

Antifa Lunges For Idiot Supremacy – Interrupts An ‘Ending Racism’ Event And Calls A Black Man A White Racist

Find all my RedState work here.

And please follow Alex Parker on Twitter and Facebook.

Thank you for reading! Please sound off in the Comments section below. 

The post Booker to Buttigieg: Calling a Buyback Program ‘Confiscation’ is Doing the NRA’s Work for Them. So is Saying That appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group cory-booker-AP-300x216 Booker to Buttigieg: Calling a Buyback Program ‘Confiscation’ is Doing the NRA’s Work for Them. So is Saying That washington D.C. Uncategorized Pete Buttigieg Guns gun control Government Front Page Stories elections Cory Booker confiscation Campaigns buyback Beto O'Rourke Allow Media Exception 2nd Amendment 2020  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Prime Minister Blackface: It’s time to ban assault rifles

Westlake Legal Group t-11 Prime Minister Blackface: It’s time to ban assault rifles weapons The Blog military Justin Trudeau handguns Guns Canada buyback blackface ban assault ar-15

A Twitter pal reminds me that scapegoating gun-rights advocates was also the distraction favored by Harvey Weinstein when his own personal scandal exploded in the media two years ago.

The difference being that Weinstein didn’t have the power of the state behind him like the Canadian Al Jolson here does.

Justin Trudeau didn’t have the good sense not to dress up as a grotesque caricature of dark-skinned people, ergo law-abiding people in his country need to lose some freedom. That’s how Canadian politics works, apparently. It’s not just a ban on assault rifles that his Liberal government is promising either: They pledge to implement a buyback program with a two-year amnesty to take assault rifles out of circulation, and they’re going to hand local governments more power to ban *handguns* too.

What happens if a fourth photo of Trudeau in blackface emerges? Total federal ban on all firearms, I thinking.

There’s nothing like a Second Amendment in Canada, of course, so the government is free to go as far as it likes. “Firearm ownership in this country is a privilege,” said the Liberal Party’s chief spokesman on gun control to the CBC. “It’s a privilege earned by people who would adhere to our laws and our regulations. And if they don’t adhere to our laws and regulations, they lose that privilege.” There are gun-rights groups too, of course, and they’re pissed off and vowing to punish Trudeau in next month’s elections: “This is a really important time for gun owners. It has never been more true than it is right now. This is it.” Is it, though? Canadians were polled on gun control back in May. Result:

A new Angus Reid Institute public survey study suggests six out of ten Canadians want an outright ban on handguns in this country.

The support rises to three-quarters of Canadians when it comes to a ban on assault weapons.

“Assault weapons both in Canada and especially in the United States are associated with some pretty terrible crimes, some really profound tragedies and so I think we do see a greater level of support for a ban in that regard,” said Angus Reid Institute executive director Shachi Kurl.

The silver lining for Canadian gun owners is that while polling in the U.S. also often shows majority support for an assault-weapons ban, the majority that’s in favor tends to be far less motivated by the issue than the minority that’s opposed. Right now Trudeau’s party remains favored to win the most seats in next month’s election, although the odds of that happening dropped from 69 percent to 60 overnight after his little make-up snafu emerged. (It’s back up to 63 today). Clearly he thinks the gun issue is a winner on balance for his side, if only by giving Canadian liberals a reason to stick with him during a moment of doubt. Essentially he’s making the same pitch to his own base here as Trump makes to the right in the U.S.: However personally dubious you may find him, remember that he’s your best chance for getting the policies you support enacted. “Thoughts and prayers aren’t going to cut it,” said Trudeau at today’s presser, echoing a favorite point of American gun-grabbers after a mass shooting. He’s signaling his virtue to the left in the most conspicuous way he can after giving them a moment of real doubt yesterday.

Exit question: Has he explained yet why he chose the *darkest shade of black imaginable* for that Aladdin get-up he put together in 2001? If he was resolved to darken his skin for the role for whatever weird reason, you would think he would have tried to mitigate objections to it by choosing subtlety. “Gimme the lightest brown foundation you have. I’m talking ‘coffee with a half cup of creamer in it.’” Instead he appears to have told the make-up people, “One word: Tar.” What the hell?

The post Prime Minister Blackface: It’s time to ban assault rifles appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group t-11-300x159 Prime Minister Blackface: It’s time to ban assault rifles weapons The Blog military Justin Trudeau handguns Guns Canada buyback blackface ban assault ar-15  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Schumer lies: I don’t know of a single Democrat who supports Beto O’Rourke on gun confiscation

Westlake Legal Group cs Schumer lies: I don’t know of a single Democrat who supports Beto O’Rourke on gun confiscation The Blog schumer mandatory kamala harris gun democrats Cory Booker confiscation buyback ar-15

He doesn’t know Kamala Harris or Cory Booker, both of whom support O’Rourke’s gun-grabber fantasy?

I mean, they’ve been in the room during Senate Democratic caucus meetings for years now.

Between their mid-single-digit presidential polling and their frequent absences from the chamber to campaign, I suppose it’s understandable that they’d slip Schumer’s mind. Or … is he deliberately misleading the public about this because he knows O’Rourke’s “take the guns” plea is a political calamity for gun-control and for the party?

When he says “any other Democrat,” does he mean any other Democrat *in Congress* or any other Democrat anywhere? Because each of those claims is a lie even if you exclude Booker and Harris. The Squad hasn’t spoken up about Beto’s plan yet, likely because they don’t want to risk giving his candidacy a boost with progressives that might undermine Bernie or Warren, but I’d bet good money that they’re all aboard with a mandatory buyback. How could they not be? Their politics is to take the maximalist left-wing position on every issue. That’s what Beto did.

If Schumer meant Democratic voters generally, well…

Westlake Legal Group w-5 Schumer lies: I don’t know of a single Democrat who supports Beto O’Rourke on gun confiscation The Blog schumer mandatory kamala harris gun democrats Cory Booker confiscation buyback ar-15

Supporting confiscation is a safe-ish issue in very blue jurisdictions. In a national campaign with a purplish electorate, it’s not so safe, as O’Rourke is discovering. In a red state it’s political poison, of course, which explains why Joe Manchin from West Virginia sounds like he wants to fight Beto:

“Beto’s one human being,” Manchin said. “He gave his own opinion, OK? I think it was very harmful to make it look like all the Democrats. I can tell you one thing: Beto O’Rourke’s not taking my guns away from me. You tell Beto that OK?”

Eh. If Beto’s stunt at last week’s debate didn’t kill off the gun-control talks in Congress, Trump’s squeamishness about committing to anything would have. The Times has an update on that mysterious background-check proposal Bill Barr was shopping around on Capitol Hill yesterday. It came from the White House, yet Trump aides were adamant in telling reporters that the president hadn’t signed off on it or anything else. It was, in other words, a pure trial balloon, likely aimed at gauging how the right-most side of the Republican caucus would react to it. Answer: Not well.

Republicans who favor gun rights said they wanted more specifics, and several said it was pointless to even talk about Mr. Barr’s plan at this point. As the nation’s chief law enforcement officer, the attorney general will be a central figure in the debate over gun legislation, but senators agree that the president will have the final say.

“My question was: ‘Where is the president on this?’ And I asked this question directly: ‘Is this something the president supports?’ And they didn’t have an answer for that,” said Senator Josh Hawley, Republican of Missouri, who met with Mr. Barr on Tuesday evening. “That’s an important piece. If the president doesn’t support it, then there’s no point.”

And Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas, who also met with Mr. Barr on Tuesday evening, warned against any legislation that “raised the specter of confiscation” and said he was not interested in a bill that would “restrict the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens.”

So, yeah, it’s not happening. Trump could almost certainly get the bill passed over Hawley’s and Cruz’s objections if he endorsed it but then he’d have other prominent Republican pols to his right on a nuclear-hot cultural issue. And that’s an uncomfortable place for President Populist to be.

Here’s Beto yesterday on CNN doing a little damage control by emphasizing that only “weapons of war” would be confiscated under his administration, not weapons designed for self-defense. That plan would last about five seconds after it was implemented, of course, as Democrats quickly realized that confiscating assault rifles will do next to nothing to reduce total gun violence in the United States.

The post Schumer lies: I don’t know of a single Democrat who supports Beto O’Rourke on gun confiscation appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group cs-300x153 Schumer lies: I don’t know of a single Democrat who supports Beto O’Rourke on gun confiscation The Blog schumer mandatory kamala harris gun democrats Cory Booker confiscation buyback ar-15  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

First post-debate poll: No bounce for Beto O’Rourke after call for gun confiscation

Westlake Legal Group b-11 First post-debate poll: No bounce for Beto O’Rourke after call for gun confiscation The Blog morning consult gun confiscation buyback buttigieg biden Beto O'Rourke Andrew Yang

I’ve been in suspense since Thursday night wondering how his call to take everyone’s AR-15 would play with the Democratic base. There’s nothing that might singlehandedly place a struggling candidate on voters’ radar like a passionate call for radicalism on one of the left’s top cultural priorities. Especially since Beto has the field more or less to himself in staking out this position. This isn’t a “Medicare for All” scenario in which one candidate (Bernie Sanders) calls for a bold policy stroke and the competition immediately begins lining up behind him to try to capitalize on the idea’s popularity with progressives. Even a rival as left-wing as Pete Buttigieg wanted no part of O’Rourke’s mandatory buyback scheme. Kamala Harris and Cory Booker have endorsed it, granted, but nearly 100 percent of the political and media energy behind the idea is coming from Beto.

Is this the gimmick that would finally spring him into the second tier in polling, at least?

Why, no, per Morning Consult:

Westlake Legal Group g-2 First post-debate poll: No bounce for Beto O’Rourke after call for gun confiscation The Blog morning consult gun confiscation buyback buttigieg biden Beto O'Rourke Andrew Yang

Four percent is a whisker better than O’Rourke has done in most polls lately, although he was at five percent in a CNN poll taken last week before the debate. His polling average has barely moved after this new result, from 2.8 percent yesterday to 3.0 percent today. The good news for Beto fans, I guess, is that the polling for the entire field apart from the top three is now such relentless garbage that he’s essentially tied for fourth place — along with everyone else. If the next few polls do show him with a modest bounce (e.g., he rises to seven or eight percent), that might be enough to land him by himself in the de facto second tier. And once that happens, the media is destined to start writing pieces about how *maybe* Beto’s poised for a big bounce if, say, Biden falters or whatever.

But for now? The gun-grabbing, the feel-my-passion profanity, it’s all added up to essentially nothing.

Another minor surprise here: Andrew Yang has also seen no movement in the polls despite his own newsy gimmick at the debate, announcing a $12,000 giveaway as a simulacrum of Universal Basic Income to 10 lucky entrants in his new contest. That was a shrewd stunt to help him expand his email list enormously, creating a new supply of potential donors, but I thought that Yang being onstage with the top tier and doing something flashy to promote UBI might get him a closer look from undecideds as the normal “un-politician” guy in the race. Nope. Three percent here, which is where he is in most polls.

As for the top tier, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren continue to duck each other but that may change soon. The Working Families Party, a lefty outfit that backed Sanders in 2016, endorsed Warren today; Berniebros are mad, alleging that the small group of national committee leaders may have handed the endorsement to her over the wishes of the party’s rank-and-file. (The party won’t release vote totals.) As we get closer to Iowa, pressure will build on the left for undecideds to choose one or the other in order to clarify who the consensus progressive choice is. It’d be unimaginable to the DSA crowd to have Biden win the early states narrowly because the left ends up split equally between Sanders and Warren.

One more note on Beto’s gun ploy. Trump is holding a rally in New Mexico tonight, seemingly a strange place for a Republican president to be. He lost the state by eight points in 2016; his approval rating there is now -13; both of its U.S. senators are Democrats; the governor is a Democrat; both houses of the state legislature are controlled by Democrats. What’s he doing there? Well, New Mexico is a better candidate than most other blue states to flip next fall. It’s still a long longshot, but between the libertarians who broke for Gary Johnson in 2016, the somewhat conservative trend among New Mexico Democrats, and the low cost involved to campaign in the state, it’s worth a little effort since it could potentially deliver a second term for Trump if he can turn it red. And there’s an X factor: New Mexico has an extremely high rate of gun ownership at nearly 50 percent, good for seventh among the 50 states. If Beto’s confiscation plan turns into a liability for Dems, odds are the effect would be outsized in New Mexico. Trump’s trying to take advantage. No doubt O’Rourke will be mentioned from the podium tonight.

The post First post-debate poll: No bounce for Beto O’Rourke after call for gun confiscation appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group b-11-300x153 First post-debate poll: No bounce for Beto O’Rourke after call for gun confiscation The Blog morning consult gun confiscation buyback buttigieg biden Beto O'Rourke Andrew Yang  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Beto O’Rourke: Police wouldn’t go door to door to confiscate guns under my plan

Westlake Legal Group bo-2 Beto O’Rourke: Police wouldn’t go door to door to confiscate guns under my plan The Blog police MSNBC mandatory Joy Reid gun confiscation buyback Beto O'Rourke ar-15 all in

The money quote: “Much like we don’t go door-to-door to enforce almost any law in the United States, in fact I don’t think we do that for any law in the United States, this would not be something that we would do.” Presumably he’d treat an assault rifle like any other form of contraband. No one will come looking for it, but if you’re caught with it in your possession, you’re cooked.

But I don’t know that he’s thought that far on the subject. He keeps coming back to the point that he has faith that Americans will comply with the law after it’s passed and surrender their AR-15s without a fuss, which is sweet and all but unrealistic. Some will comply. Most, perhaps. Not all. What happens one day when a cop pulls some guy over for speeding, sees that he has an AR-15 in the backseat, demands it, and the guy says no? If a shootout follows, how many cops nationwide will want to risk confronting people about their guns after that? Conversely, how many gun-control fans will begin demanding a more aggressive effort to seize contraband AR-15s than just waiting around and hoping owners hand them over?

Another hypothetical: There are so many assault rifles in circulation that it’s a fait accompli some will be used to carry out new mass shootings even after a buyback plan takes effect. What’s the political fallout from that when it happens? Gun-rights advocates will say, “See? We told you the buyback wouldn’t end mass murder.” Gun-grabbers will say, “See? We told you the policy of asking people nicely to give up their guns wouldn’t work.” What then?

To make the hypothetical extra zesty, imagine that a mass shooter turns out to hail from a rural area in a red state where local cops have effectively decided that they won’t enforce the buyback. Reporters sniff around and find out that no one caught with an AR-15 is being arrested by the sheriff’s office as a matter of policy. What’s the White House’s reaction to that? Does President Beto call for quadrupling the size of the ATF and sending agents out into those rural areas to compel compliance?

I think it’d end up like Prohibition, which is … not known as one of America’s shining policy successes.

Watch to the end of the clip below and you’ll see that he’s asked about Chris Coons’s criticism that Beto has set back the gun-control movement by pushing such a radical idea. I’m not a radical, O’Rourke insists, I’m where most Democrats are on this issue and it’s time our leaders in Congress caught up. Is he right? Some Dems agree with Coons that mainstreaming the idea of a buyback does the party more harm than good

By all accounts, Trump needs to run up the score in rural areas to win reelection next year. The 2020 outcome is expected to depend heavily on a trio of Rust Belt states — Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — that have large numbers of rural voters, many of whom are gun-owners or sympathetic to owners on this issue. And Democrats’ hope of winning control of the Senate rests on states with high rates of gun ownership, like Arizona and Texas…

“The lines like, ‘We’re gonna come and take your AR-15,’ just play into the fears that the NRA has been stoking, and a proposal like that is just going to make rural Iowa and I think probably rural areas elsewhere more red,” [Democrat Warren] Varley said. “I think that’s just a bridge too far for most rural folks, and it conjures up images of the government coming in and invading your home and images of big government trampling over the rights of individuals.”

…but then again, polls like this keep trickling out:

Westlake Legal Group y Beto O’Rourke: Police wouldn’t go door to door to confiscate guns under my plan The Blog police MSNBC mandatory Joy Reid gun confiscation buyback Beto O'Rourke ar-15 all in

Sixty-three percent of Democrats claim that it’s “mostly accurate” to describe the NRA as a domestic terrorist organization. Yesterday I flagged a WaPo poll from earlier this week that showed 74 percent of Democrats(!) favor a mandatory buyback. Last year after the Parkland massacre, one poll found 74 percent of Dems in favor of banning all semiautomatic rifles (not just “assault rifles”) while another found 82 percent support for banning all semiautomatics. Not just rifles — all semiautomatics.

They’re pretty farking radical. Which is not to say that Coons et al. are wrong: Getting crazy with the gun-control cheez whiz may play spectacularly well in California, say, while killing Democrats in Michigan. Guess which state is more important next fall.

Exit question via Drew McCoy: Isn’t Beto giving away the game here by stressing his belief that Americans will comply voluntarily with the law? People willing to surrender their weapons upon a lawful demand by the feds are by definition “law-abiding.” If you’re worried about mass shootings but unwilling to go door to door to look for assault rifles, it’s inevitable that virtually all of the people whom you end up disarming are people whom you didn’t need to worry about in the first place.

The post Beto O’Rourke: Police wouldn’t go door to door to confiscate guns under my plan appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group bo-2-300x159 Beto O’Rourke: Police wouldn’t go door to door to confiscate guns under my plan The Blog police MSNBC mandatory Joy Reid gun confiscation buyback Beto O'Rourke ar-15 all in  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

O’Rourke: I think Americans would voluntarily comply with a mandatory assault weapons buyback program

Westlake Legal Group bo-1 O’Rourke: I think Americans would voluntarily comply with a mandatory assault weapons buyback program The Blog mandatory kamala harris democrat comply buyback Beto O'Rourke

Via the Examiner, he’s part of a trend: Kamala Harris and Cory Booker have also endorsed this draconian idea, which has zero chance of passing the Senate unless and until Democrats (1) win a majority, (2) eliminate the filibuster, and (3) decide that all of the members of their caucus from red states, like Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, are expendable (or that their votes aren’t needed for passage).

It’s great low-calorie virtue-signaling material for struggling Democratic candidates, though. “My wimpy rivals only want to ban assault-weapons sales. A true anti-gun crusade starts a la Australia and New Zealand, by taking weapons that are already in circulation off the streets.”

I’d be keen to see a test vote on mandatory buybacks in the House, in fact, as I’m not sure Dems could pass a bill like that there even with their current majority. The freshmen who ousted Republicans in purple districts last fall would panic, caught in a vise between progressives who want aggressive action and Republican voters who are suspicious of their “moderate” credentials. For just that reason, I assume there’s nothing that could convince Pelosi to put such a bill on the floor, no matter how good it might make lefties feel to get everyone on record.

If you believe WaPo’s latest polling, a majority of the country now supports a buyback program, i.e. confiscation, of assault weapons:

Westlake Legal Group w-1 O’Rourke: I think Americans would voluntarily comply with a mandatory assault weapons buyback program The Blog mandatory kamala harris democrat comply buyback Beto O'Rourke

Supposedly 31 percent of Republicans are on board with a buyback. But note: When Quinnipiac recently polled the idea, it found a mere 18 percent of Republicans in favor and the public split 46/49 against it overall. A new poll from Monmouth out within the last hour finds support for buybacks at just 43/53 nationally and 22/74 among Republicans.

We could sit here and speculate about why, analyzing the partisan samples in each polls or the wording of the question, but it’s not worth the bother. A buyback isn’t happening anytime soon; beyond its cheap stump-speech value to 2020 Dem hopefuls, it’s useful to gun-grabbers chiefly as a way to try to condition the public to accept less aggressive gun-control measures as “compromise” ideas. Right now, according to WaPo, 56 percent of Americans support an assault-weapons ban, including 33 percent of Republicans. (Quinnipiac actually had GOP support at 37 percent.) If Democrats start negotiations in 2021 with a big “ask” — mandatory buyback! — it’ll seem less unreasonable to some righties when they “retreat” and offer a ban on future assault-weapons sales instead.

It may play out the same way on health care, with the next Democratic administration “settling” for adding a public option to ObamaCare after preparing the political battlespace with years of chatter about Medicare for All.

As for Beto’s point here that police wouldn’t go door to door to enforce his buyback program, doubtless that’s true. Cops don’t have the resources to conduct house to house searches of literally everyone, never mind the danger they’d face when they inevitably encountered people who adamantly refuse to turn over their weapons. The way this would be enforced, I assume, is the way drug-possession laws are enforced: The cops aren’t going to knock on the door randomly and ask to look around to see if you have drugs, but if they’re searching your property for some other reason and discover drugs, you’re in trouble. Same with assault weapons. President Beto could offer people a certain amount of compensation if they want to hand in their weapons voluntarily and, if they don’t, threaten them with a 10-year prison sentence should those weapons be found in the course of other police business. Most guns would remain in circulation (just like in New Zealand!) but they couldn’t be brought to ranges or gun shows anymore without fear of arrest. They’d be contraband.

The post O’Rourke: I think Americans would voluntarily comply with a mandatory assault weapons buyback program appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group bo-1-300x159 O’Rourke: I think Americans would voluntarily comply with a mandatory assault weapons buyback program The Blog mandatory kamala harris democrat comply buyback Beto O'Rourke  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com