Posted on 09/14/2019 4:33:07 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Former Rep. Beto O'Rourke of Texas has made his position on assault weapons crystal clear. "Hell, yes, we're going to take your AR-15, your AK-47," O'Rourke said during Thursday's Democratic presidential debate. "We're not going to allow it to be used against our fellow Americans anymore."
To accomplish this, O'Rourke has proposed a mandatory confiscation of these guns whereby individuals would be compensated for their firearms.
Beyond the thorny politics of this proposal, it raises clear legal and logistical questions, including whether a president has the authority to confiscate people's guns.
Facts First: A president could not issue a blanket confiscation of so-called assault weapons, but they could work with Congress to pass such a law. Constitutionally speaking, that law would likely run into some significant legal trouble.
First, some basic facts. The National Rifle Association has estimated that there are somewhere between 8.5 million and 15 million assault rifles in the US, the organization told McClatchy in 2018. That's about 2% to 4% of all the estimated guns in the US, but it's unclear how many guns would ultimately fall under an assault weapons confiscation.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
He could try though the law of unintended consequences would be most unkind.
I didn’t read past the title, but I think the answer is no? Right?
All the Democratic candidates support it.
Newsome/O”Rourke 2024 is a possibility though. The wheel will turn.
Someone needs to confiscate the liquor bottle out of fake Mexican Beto’s hands..honestly, I dont give much credibility to an alcoholic running for President
Even if he were somehow able to finagle some bs legal authority, he still would not be able to confiscate them.
And most cops wouldn’t help him go door to door.
States have no problems passing gun bans and enforcing gun confiscations, as New York City demonstrated some years back.
And Presidents are able to get states to do things by dangling federal funds in front of them. If a President could not do it directly, he could do it indirectly.
He could also do things to stop manufacture of ammo. Yeah, a Dem President could make things grim.
“...All the Democratic candidates support it....”
No surprise there. The POTUS has ripped the mask off em revealing that they’re all hard-core, full-blown communists that are hellbent on destroying our nation as we now know it. They are outright communists looking to start a fight. They should be careful what they wish for.
Article claims that the AWB of ‘94 banned the manufacture of assault rifles. BS.
It took awhile to get there, but all the nutcases the left released from the mental institutions in the sixties upon the populace have become the majority in the Democrat party.
Our President is correct. It IS a mental illness problem.
There might be what he could do legally, and then there is what he could do in reality.
I know I wouldn’t want to knock on the door of someone who didn’t want to give up their weapon.
Wanna talk about bloodshed? This jerk is promoting a civil war.
During his second term, DJT will Make Mental Institutions Great Again, with the help of a few more SCOTUS appointments.
Everyone should check their guns to see which ones are not on any “Feds” list and which ones are.
They know I have three CMP rifles.
Would Beto be taking that, too?
As an example and photo-op, I would like him to do several confiscations in person.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.