You already know that Beto O'Rourke called for gun confiscation at last week's Democratic debate, eliciting loud cheers from the crowd. You likely already know that a number of fellow 2020 Democrats, including Senators Cory Booker and Kamala Harris have embraced Beto's call, officially expanding the Overton Window of liberal-left politics to include outright confiscation. If you're aware of both of these things, then congratulations, you know more than Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer knows -- or, rather, what he's pretending to know:
Asked about @realDonaldTrump blaming @BetoORourke's gun removal comments for making it harder to pass gun control, @SenSchumer says: "I don’t know of any other Democrat who agrees with Beto O’Rourke, but it’s no excuse not to go forward."
— Justin Murphy (@CitizenMurphy) September 18, 2019
Schumer is spinning that Beto is alone in his confiscatory designs because he intuitively understands that the mainstreaming of this perception of the Democratic Party writ large could be a very serious political problem. Better to minimize this push as the desperation of a flailing former Congressman than a growing movement within the party. Over to you, Joe Manchin:
Asked if @BetoORourke's gun policy is hurting negotiations on a gun bill, @Sen_JoeManchin said "Beto’s one human being, he gave his own opinion...I can tell you one thing: Beto O’Rourke is not taking my guns away from me. You tell Beto that, ok?"
— Frank Thorp V (@frankthorp) September 18, 2019
Allahpundit notes that "assault weapon" confiscation -- creepily and inaccurately euphemized as "mandatory buybacks" -- is not as unpopular as some gun owners may hope. Then again, if the polling asked about government officials confiscating the most popular rifle in America, which is the reality of Beto et al's idea, the numbers would likely look rather different. Also, constitutionality is not determined by public opinion. Beto, meanwhile, is assuring gun owners that he's only talking about taking "weapons of war" away from people, not firearms used for hunting or self defense:
.@BetoORourke on his gun confiscation plan: Talking “exclusively” about “weapons of war,” not “firearms used for hunting and self defense” pic.twitter.com/JCnlX6I14F
— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) September 19, 2019
He's lying, Second Amendment supporters will retort, with good reason. After all, Beto just last year, told Texans that he had no interest in taking their AR-15's. Now its the centerpiece of his campaign. If the precedent for confiscation is established, it's only a matter of time until the "public health crisis" of gun violence (statistical reality aside) is used to justify confiscating other guns, including by far the most deadly type of firearm in America: Handguns. Critics will scream 'slippery slope,' and they'll be right to do so. This is also a good point about poisoning the well of potential trust or cooperation:
At a time when Dem candidates are openly advocating gun confiscation, de facto registration is an especially difficult sell. https://t.co/h61vTelbDT
— Philip Klein (@philipaklein) September 18, 2019
When Trump says "Dummy Beto's" little outburst was a setback for any reasonable compromise, he's correct. As for Trump's plan on guns, there have been rumors, speculation, and denials about what he might be willing to support in terms of new regulations or restrictions. What's the truth? It seems that unsettled issue remains, well, a moving target:
Just asked @SteveScalise if he’s seen any gun policy proposal from the WH, based on rumors/document floating around today. Answer: “I have not seen anything formal” from POTUS, reiterates opposition to Pelosi/Schumer bill. @GuyBensonShow
— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) September 18, 2019