Tipsheet

Beto Gives Us His Marginal Legal Advice On AR-15s – And It's A Doozy

Beth Baumann
Beth Baumann  |  September 15, 2019 1:12 PM

Ever since 2020 presidential candidate Beto O'Rourke made it very clear during the Democratic debate that he would implement a mandatory confiscation of AR-15s, the most popular sporting rifle in America, he has continually doubled down. 

During an interview with NBC's Chuck Todd, O'Rourke was forced to defend the Constitutionality of what he said. 

"What is your interpretation of what the Second Amendment allows and what the Second Amendment does not allow?" Todd asked.

"I'll put it this way. This is something that we’re able to do through the Commerce Clause and this is something that is not prevented from, wouldn’t prevent the United States from doing by the Second Amendment. So this is constitutionally sound," O'Rourke explained."This is absolutely necessary if we care about the lives of our fellow Americans."

Once again, he referenced a conversation with gun owners that took place at an Arkansas gun show, as a reason that his proposal is "constitutionally sound."

Recommended

Of Course NYT Mocks the Virgin Mary Rebecca Downs
Since When Did We Republicans Start Being Against Punishing Criminals? Kurt Schlichter

He claimed those who own AR-15s approached him and said, "'I own one of these guns, don’t need it to hunt, don’t need it for self-defense. This is the right thing to do, I would gladly give it up because I also have kids who are in school and I fear for their safety or I have grandkids and want to make sure that this country is safe for them.'"

"So not only is this constitutionally sound, I think there’s support beyond the Democratic Party to include Republicans, independents, gun owners, and non-gun owners alike to do the right thing," O'Rourke said.

Beto needs a reality check. He doesn't seem to understand the difference between wanting something and actually having it. He can want a mandatory confiscation of AR-15s because "it's the right thing to do" but that doesn't mean that it's constitutionally sound. Just because he believes this policy proposal should become a reality doesn't mean what he's saying is legal. 

He's naive if he thinks every single person is going to willingly turn in their guns. The Founding Fathers protected the right to keep and bear arms because they knew an armed society was a controlled society. They wanted to protect the people and keep the government from becoming tyrannical. Beto's plan is a step in the direction we were warned about.