Well, hats off to Robert Francis O’Rourke, you managed to stay alive in the media for another week. The former Democratic congressman said in the most recent Democratic debate that he is willing to confiscate people’s guns to prevent mass shootings. It’s now all out there in the open. The Democratic Party, which has been anti-gun for years and been covertly pushing an agenda to destroy the Second Amendment, finally came out and announced it publicly. They’ve walked on eggshells on this issue because they know it drives GOP voters to the polls and Independent voters away from them. It already cost them the 2000 election. But in the Obama years, we heard phrases like “common-sense gun control,” “the Australian mode,” and the former president himself even used the United Kingdom as an example of nation’s that he thought had good gun laws. Yeah, both of those nations enacted bans and confiscatory measures to enforce their laws. Laws that would be unconstitutional. We know if you give the anti-gun Left an inch, they’ll take several hundred miles. Not here.
With the recent spate of mass shootings in El Paso and Dayton, anti-gun fever has kicked up again. Robert Francis decided he wanted to make a play to corner the anti-gun wingnut vote. Oh, you might know this clown better by his culturally appropriated nickname, Beto, but that’s for another time. Some Democrats are gung-ho about the idea because they hate guns, gun owners, rural voters, and Republicans. In war, this is the correct mindset. To destroy one’s enemy completely, you must strip him of his cultural identity. Guns are very much ingrained in American society. Liberals want to upend that because they’ve taken an explicit anti-American tone in recent election cycles. Conservatives retaliate with stricter laws on abortion because baby-killing is a tradition that’s cherished by the Left.
And then, there are Democrats who think Beto’s antics will set back gun control years, creating endless political ammunition by the GOP and others to clip Democratic attempts at confiscating law-abiding citizen’s private property. Rep. Vicente Gonzalez (D-TX) was on CNN, where he threw cold water on the gun confiscation proposal, though said he was for stronger background checks. That appears to be the main battleground. Gonzalez is a gun owner. He said he bought a shotgun at a gun show and didn’t undergo a background check. Whether this happened is unknown, but it’s also not an illegal transaction. It’s a private sale, which like mass shootings, are rare and not the cause for these tragedies.
Gonzalez says he wants universal background checks and closing of gun show loopholes. The issue here is that federally licensed firearms dealers still have to run background checks at these gun shows or anywhere where they can make a transfer. That’s why it’s a myth to say there’s a gun show loophole. As for the shotgun transfer that Gonzalez undertook, that’s a private sale. Those are still legal, so no loophole.
He also wants to get at the root as to why we have these shootings, which again, are still rare, violent crime is still at historic lows, and the country is not a shooting gallery. Like most Democrats, Gonzales peddled an exaggeration, but there could be common ground since he seems to want answers that go beyond ‘guns are scary,’ which is the default position of the Left.