New Yorkers surrendered thousands of firearms to the State over the weekend in exchange for gift cards ranging from $25 to $500 at a statewide, no-questions-asked &#8220;landmark event&#8221; coordinated by the attorney general&#8217;s office.
New York State Attorney General Letitia James said officials collected more than 3,000 guns at nine buyback locations throughout the state, <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/US/3000-guns-surrendered-new-york-day-exchange-gift/story?id=98967589">ABC</a> reported. Authorities did not ask for any personal information of those giving up their guns, including names, addresses, or proof of ownership.
&#8220;Gun violence has caused so many avoidable tragedies and robbed us of so many innocent New Yorkers,&#8221; James said in a news release.
According to the news outlet, gun owners who turned in their firearms were awarded $500 gift cards for turning in rifles, handguns, and untraceable &#8220;ghost guns.&#8221; Additional handguns surrendered received an extra $150 gift card. Participants also received $25 and $75 cards for non-working, antique, or 3D-printed replica rifles and shotguns.
Syracuse authorities reported the crime rate skyrocketed up to 133% homicides in the first quarter of 2023 compared to the same time frame last year.
Residents in the central city of New York reportedly turned in 751 firearms.
&#8220;Every gun that we removed out of Syracuse homes and off the streets is a potential tragedy averted and another step in protecting communities throughout New York state,&#8221; James said.
At a news conference, Syracuse Mayor Ben Walsh of the Independence Party of New York blamed the rise in crime on gun ownership expansion, condemning federal and state officials nationwide for &#8220;abdicating their responsibility&#8221; to sell and handle firearms safely.
&#8220;There are too many damn guns in this country. They&#8217;re everywhere. And we have too many states that are abdicating their responsibility to ensure that guns are being sold safely,&#8221; Walsh said at the news conference. &#8220;And our federal government is abdicating their responsibility to ensure that guns are being handled safely.&#8221;
Walsh said the authorities seized and removed 76 guns from the community this year compared to 55 at the same point in 2022.
Some 90% of the guns seized by police are from out of state, he said.
Brooklyn District Attorney Eric Gonzalez told <a href="https://abc7ny.com/nyc-guns-brooklyn-gun-buyback/13196456/">local media</a> authorities received 90 guns. Other sites in the Bronx and at the Attorney General&#8217;s regional office in Suffolk County also collected firearms previously owned by residents exercising their constitutional rights.
Retired law enforcement from Newfane Arnie Jonathan reportedly exchanged his father&#8217;s gun at an event at St. John&#8217;s African Methodist Episcopal Church in Niagara Falls, which received 505 guns in three hours.
Jonathan told <a href="https://buffalonews.com/news/local/ny-attorney-generals-gun-buyback-event-recovers-500-guns-in-niagara-falls/article_b31b2bc4-e6a7-11ed-a335-ff8a0f34644d.html">local media</a> that he wasn&#8217;t sure if turning in a gun was &#8220;good or bad.&#8221;
&#8220;I&#8217;m between whether it&#8217;s good or bad,&#8221; Jonathan said. &#8220;These aren&#8217;t the people they need to worry about here. We&#8217;re just getting some gift cards that will make our lives a little bit easier next week.&#8221;
Jonathan added that those who turned in their firearm likely wouldn&#8217;t use them for violence, expressing further concern that some would regret their decision if they were in a dangerous situation.
&#8220;The scary part is that there&#8217;s this many people here right now,&#8221; he said. &#8220;You know how much there is out there that isn&#8217;t being turned in?&#8221;
Pew Research <a href="https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2022/08/30/gun-buybacks-are-popular-but-are-they-effective">reported</a> cities across America have run gun buyback programs since the 1970s.

A gun buyback event held in Brooklyn

Guns For Gift Cards: New Yorkers Surrendered 3,000 Firearms To State Gov. For Cash

2nd Amendment

Gun Buybacks

Gun Control

Letitia James

New York

Since a ban on numerous firearms took effect in May 2020, Canadians have only turned in 160 to the government  &#8212; a stunningly tiny number, considering the original government estimation of there to be some 90,000 to 105,000 outlawed firearms in Canada.
&#8220;Only 160 firearms that the Liberal government prohibited more than a year and a half ago have been deactivated or surrendered, according to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP),&#8221; iPolitics <a href="https://ipolitics.ca/2021/12/24/most-owners-are-holding-onto-their-banned-weapons-before-buyout/">reported</a> Friday.
“The Canadian Firearms Program (CFP) can confirm that, as of Dec. 9, 2021, 18 firearms (formerly classified as restricted) affected by the May 1, 2020, Order in Council (OIC) have been deactivated,” RCMP headquarters spokeswoman Sgt. Caroline Duval told iPolitics.
“In addition, there have been 142 OIC-affected firearms recorded as surrendered to a public agency for destruction since May 1, 2020,&#8221; she added.
The RCMP seemed to suggest Canadians are merely waiting for a long-promised gun buyback to be created by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau before complying.
“If an individual or business were to relinquish a newly prohibited firearm or device before the implementation of the buyback program, they won’t be eligible for compensation once the program is announced,” RCMP told iPolitics last week. “Government officials are currently in the process of refining requirements and developing program design and implementation options for a buyback program.&#8221;
A <a href="https://thereload.com/canadians-arent-turning-in-their-guns/">report</a> from The Reload cited numerous issues with Canada&#8217;s plan to collect now-outlawed legally purchased firearms from citizens, noting of gun owners&#8217; general &#8220;hesitancy&#8221; to hand them in (emphasis added):
<blockquote>The announcement comes as the April 2022 deadline for the “assault weapon” confiscation order rapidly approaches. The Canadian government’s plan to collect the affected weapons has been rife with problems since it was announced. Consulting fees and enforcement planning have resulted in a bloated budget before even a single weapon has been “bought back,” and a concrete plan for the buyback program is yet to be finalized. It now appears affected gun owners are hesitant to give up their guns. &#8230; With such a low rate of gun owners relinquishing their weapons up to this point, further doubt has been cast on the feasibility of making gun owners comply by the April 30, 2022 deadline.</blockquote>
&#8220;If a significant number do not turn in their guns over the next four months, the government will have to decide whether to take criminal action against Canadian gun owners for keeping guns they legally purchased,&#8221; The Reload added.
In the U.S., prominent Democratic politicians have not shied away from their support for gun bans and buyback programs. Notably, Vice President Kamala Harris, while running in the 2020 Democratic presidential primary, &#8220;explicitly advocate[d] for the confiscation of what she estimated to be tens of millions of legally owned firearms,&#8221; The Washington Free Beacon <a href="https://freebeacon.com/elections/kamala-harris-brings-gun-confiscation-support-to-dem-presidential-ticket/">reported</a>.
&#8220;We have to have a buyback program and I support a mandatory gun buyback program,&#8221; Harris said at an event in October 2020. &#8220;It’s got to be smart. We&#8217;ve got to do it the right way but there are five million [assault weapons] at least, some estimate as many as 10 million, and we’re going to have to have smart public policy that’s about taking those off the streets but doing it the right way.&#8221;

AR-15

Hardly Any Canadians Have Turned In Their Now-Outlawed Firearms To The Government

Canada

Guns

On November 24, 2019, Michael Rubens Bloomberg announced his formal entrance into the Democratic Party&#8217;s 2020 presidential primary. To date, he is the latest candidate to enter the primary field.
Michael Bloomberg served three full terms as mayor of New York City, from 2002 through the end of 2013. He was New York City&#8217;s mayoral successor of the failed 2008 Republican presidential candidate and current private attorney for President Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani. Bloomberg is also the co-founder, CEO, and majority owner of financial services conglomerate Bloomberg L.P., which is perhaps best known for its flagship Bloomberg Terminal hardware. As of November 2019, Bloomberg&#8217;s net worth was <a href="https://www.forbes.com/profile/michael-bloomberg">estimated</a> at $58 billion dollars, which makes him one of the wealthiest individuals in the world. He has been a prolific donator to various charitable and political causes.
Born in Boston in 1942, Bloomberg has degrees from Johns Hopkins University and Harvard Business School. A registered Democrat earlier in his career, Bloomberg actually ran for and successfully sought the New York City mayoralty office as a registered Republican before re-registering as an independent in the midst of his second mayoral term. He re-registered as a Democrat in 2018. Since joining the 2020 Democratic Party presidential primary field, Bloomberg News — an international news outlet operating as a legal subsidiary of Bloomberg L.P. — has <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/bloomberg-news-wont-investigate-bloomberg-democrats-its-journalists-go-to-work-on-bloombergs-campaign">announced</a> that it will not journalistically investigate Bloomberg or his fellow 2020 Democratic Party primary campaign rivals.
Electoral History: Bloomberg&#8217;s only experience in elected office is his three terms as New York City mayor. In 2001, shortly following the 9/11 jihadist attacks, Bloomberg sought to replace outgoing Mayor Rudy Giuliani as a fellow Republican and defeated his Democratic opponent, Mark Green, by a 50.3%–47.9% margin. In 2005, Bloomberg once again ran as a Republican and was re-elected by a nearly 20-point margin over his opponent, Fernando Ferrer. In 2009, after having successfully lobbied the New York City Council to change its mayoral two-term limit to a three-term limit, Bloomberg was narrowly elected to a third mayoral term while running as a Republican Party-endorsed registered independent.
On The Issues: Bloomberg&#8217;s general political profile is that of a fiscal and national security centrist, although he positions himself far to the left on social issues — with his <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/05/bloomberg-unveils-expansive-gun-control-plan-076376">anti-gun advocacy</a> perhaps emerging as the political issue with which he has become most closely identified. The latter stages of Bloomberg&#8217;s mayoral tenure were marked by odd flirtations with nanny state-style progressive governance, with the infamous <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2013/03/11/the-new-york-city-soda-ban-explained/">&#8220;soda ban&#8221;</a> as the most prominent example. Furthermore, in terms of hot-button leftist issues, Bloomberg&#8217;s current 2020 presidential campaign is aggressively <a href="https://www.mikebloomberg.com/policies/international-climate-priorities">advertising</a> his commitment to combatting global warming. But on bread-and-butter issues pertaining to fiscal prudence and foreign policy — perhaps especially with respect to Israel and the Middle East — Bloomberg is generally <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-michael-bloomberg-would-have-no-chance-at-the-democratic-presidential-nomination">far more centrist</a> than most of his other primary opponents.
Constitution: Bloomberg&#8217;s career in the financial services industry and his tenure as New York City mayor provide little in the way of concrete guidance as to what he may believe about constitutional interpretation and judicial philosophy. However, following the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing, Bloomberg expressed support for &#8220;chang[ing]&#8221; prevailing constitutional jurisprudence so as to allow for easier mass domestic surveillance. His far-left stances on most cultural issues might also portend a belief in leftist &#8220;living constitutionalism.&#8221; Similarly, his nanny state governing proclivities likely augur in favor of an expansive view of the Constitution&#8217;s Commerce Clause — a provision that has justified decades of progressive economic regulatory overreach, going back to the New Deal.
Economy: Bloomberg has self-described as a fiscal conservative, pointing to his balancing New York City&#8217;s budget as his most supportive data point. Bloomberg may indeed be fiscally conservative to the extent fiscal conservatism means cutting deficits and balancing budgets, but his mayoral tenure and public statements also evince a willingness to raise various taxes toward achieving those ends. Bloomberg is also a firm proponent of free trade and opponent of protectionist policies. Out of all the 2020 Democratic presidential candidates, it is possible that no one better personifies the decades-long post-Reagan/Clinton bipartisan neoliberal economic consensus than Bloomberg.
Health Care: Bloomberg&#8217;s nanny state governing tendencies, as best seen with the now-infamous &#8220;soda ban,&#8221; are perhaps most evident in the health care context. Despite his self-identification as a fiscal conservative, then, Bloomberg has long demonstrated a willingness to extend the reach of government to regulate both health care and the health of those citizens under his governing watch. His 2020 presidential campaign now <a href="https://www.mikebloomberg.com/getting-stuff-done">emphasizes</a> the pursuit of universal health care, and how &#8220;expanding Obamacare and Medicare is the best way to achieve universal coverage.&#8221;
Immigration: Bloomberg has previously been very critical of border hawks who call for deportations of illegal aliens, suggesting a personal view that mass amnesty is proper. To that end, he was supportive of the U.S. Senate&#8217;s failed 2007 &#8220;comprehensive immigration reform&#8221; push, which included amnesty for millions of illegal aliens as one of its underlying goals. As mayor of New York City, Bloomberg was fairly lax on immigration enforcement and largely shirked meaningful steps to crack down on illegal immigration plaguing the city. His current campaign <a href="https://www.mikebloomberg.com/getting-stuff-done">website</a> hails Bloomberg&#8217;s erstwhile formation of &#8220;pro-immigration organization New American Economy,&#8221; and he is generally seen as a staunch advocate of large-scale legal immigration.
Foreign Policy: Bloomberg assumed the New York City mayoralty in the near-term aftermath of the 9/11 jihadist attacks, and he is generally considered to be more hawkish on foreign policy and national security matters than most of his 2020 Democratic presidential rivals. He previously supported the PATRIOT Act, was an initial supporter of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and publicly endorsed President George W. Bush&#8217;s re-election campaign at the New York City-hosted Republican National Convention in 2004. Bloomberg is much more pro-Israel than most of his 2020 Democratic rivals: In 2014, when President Barack Obama oversaw a temporary <a href="https://thehill.com/policy/transportation/213288-obama-defends-israel-flight-ban">U.S. flight ban</a> to Israel amidst the jihadist rocket fire that rained down on the Jewish state that summer from the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-israel-must-destroy-hamas-once-and-all-josh-hammer">Hamas</a>-controlled Gaza Strip, Bloomberg personally <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2014-07-23/why-i-flew-to-israel">flew to Israel</a> solely to demonstrate to his fellow Americans that it was safe to do so. In September 2019, Bloomberg conducted an odd interview on the issue of China, in which he <a href="http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/12/michael-bloomberg-china-pbs-climate-xi-dictator.html">defended</a> Chinese Communist Party strongman Xi Jinping against charges that he is a &#8220;dictator.&#8221;
Abortion: Bloomberg is emphatically pro-abortion.
Guns: Bloomberg&#8217;s anti-gun advocacy is perhaps the single most defining issue of his recent private citizen activism — and perhaps the single most defining issue of his 2020 presidential bid. He is very closely affiliated with and has <a href="https://everytown.org/press/new-gun-violence-prevention-group-everytown-for-gun-safety-unites-mayors-moms-and-millions-of-americans-on-new-paths-to-victory-state-capitols-corporate-responsibility-voter-activation/">helped</a> <a href="https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/amberjamieson/bloomberg-gun-violence-moms-demand-action-volunteers">fund</a> Everytown for Gun Safety and Moms Demand Action, which are both groups deeply hostile to Second Amendment rights. He also co-founded Mayors Against Illegal Guns while he was mayor of New York City. Bloomberg supports <a href="https://www.mikebloomberg.com/policies/gun-safety">“universal” background checks</a>, which often serve as a rhetorical euphemism for the government serving as an intermediary in all private firearms transfers. Bloomberg believes that every gun owner should need a permit before making a gun purchase. He <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/cory-booker-wants-a-ban-on-assault-weapons-and-yes-it-means-putting-gun-owners-in-jail" data-reader-unique-id="49">supports a ban</a> on the undefinable sub-class of firearms referred to as so-called “assault weapons” — a line of thought that, if taken to its logical conclusion, could <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/42837/hammer-kamala-harriss-flirtation-banning-all-semi-josh-hammer" data-reader-unique-id="50">lead to the banning of all semi-automatic firearms in America</a>.

Michael Bloomberg

Where Does Michael Bloomberg Stand On The Issues? Here’s Everything You Need To Know.

2020 Election

Abortion

Constitution

Democratic Party

Economy

Foreign Policy

Health Care

ABC&#8217;s &#8220;The View&#8221; co-host Joy Behar suggested on Monday that Democrats should wait until they are elected into public office before they reveal to the American people their true political intentions.
&#8220;They should not tell everything they&#8217;re going to do,&#8221; Behar said. &#8220;Like if you are going to take people&#8217;s guns away, wait until you get elected and then take the guns away. Don&#8217;t tell them ahead of time.&#8221;
&#8220;That&#8217;s what people like me think you&#8217;re going to do,&#8221; co-host Meghan McCain swiftly responded.
Behar&#8217;s remarks arose during a segment where the panel was discussing former Rep. Beto O&#8217;Rourke&#8217;s (D-TX) decision to end his presidential campaign and drop out of the race for the Democratic nomination.
O&#8217;Rourke, who was initially hesitant to reveal where he stood on a host of issues in the onset of his presidential run, pivoted to the far-left after relaunching his campaign over the summer. Most notably, the former Texas lawmaker was the first major 2020 Democratic presidential candidate to call for a nationwide mandatory gun confiscation program for all so-called &#8220;assault weapons.&#8221;
The proposal has been a divisive topic for the Democratic Party. While O&#8217;Rourke&#8217;s declaration that &#8220;Hell, yes, we&#8217;re going to take away your AR-15 [and] your AK-47&#8221; has received massive applause from his left-wing supporters, many Democratic lawmakers have since been distancing themselves. Democrats, including those in leadership, have largely been sounding the alarm that such an anti-Second Amendment idea will backfire and simply fire up the Republican base.
&#8220;Beto, when my husband told me he got out of the race, I think he&#8217;s actually like a beta test for why going so national and being beloved by the media is so dangerous,&#8221; McCain said before noting that the former Texas lawmaker generated a massive war chest while running to unseat Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) during the 2018 election cycle. Accordingly, he received more campaign contributions in one quarter than any Senate candidate in American history, ultimately ending up with approximately $80 million.
McCain also noted that O&#8217;Rourke drew national media attention and fawning coverage prior to his entry into the race, including comparisons to former President Barack Obama. O&#8217;Rourke subsequently hired a host of Obama&#8217;s previous staffers to work on his 2020 campaign.
O’Rourke’s demand to seize millions of firearms from law-abiding American citizens came as his presidential candidacy had been struggling to gain traction. Both his fundraising and polling numbers were relatively stagnant over the last two quarters despite relaunching his campaign for a third time in August. O&#8217;Rourke had not broken 5% support in any nationwide polls since April 2019, and when he ended his bid for the presidency, he was receiving less than 2.% of the vote on average, according to <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html">Real Clear Politics</a>.
&#8220;He also made some statements about religious institutions get their tax status removed from them because they didn&#8217;t support same-sex marriage,&#8221; McCain continued. &#8220;So he did a lot of, like, battleground culture war, and he ran as the most left, most woke candidate and look where he ended.&#8221;

ABC’s “The View” – Season 22

Joy Behar Suggests That Democrats Shouldn’t Warn Americans ‘Ahead Of Time’ Before Taking Their Guns

Beto O'Rourke

Joy Behar

The View

Former Rep. Beto O&#8217;Rourke (D-TX) seemingly walked back his rallying cries for the government to seize all so-called &#8220;assault weapons&#8221; from law abiding citizens after he was questioned on Friday about using an AR-15 to go hunting.
&#8220;Perhaps a way to address a legitimate concern or need is to ensure that those who have or want to use an AR-15 are able to keep it at a hunting club or at a gun range so that there is some control and safeguards still placed on that firearm,&#8221; O&#8217;Rourke told a group of high school students during a campaign stop in Des Moines, Iowa.
The Democratic presidential hopeful&#8217;s response came after one of the students approached O&#8217;Rourke about the efficiency of using an AR-15 to hunt certain animals such as deer. The student put forth that using less &#8220;efficient&#8221; firearms could prolong the hunted animal&#8217;s suffering or even spoil the meat that would otherwise be consumed.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
A student in Des Moines today told <a href="https://twitter.com/BetoORourke?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@BetoORourke</a> that he hunts using an AR-15, arguing it&#39;s less painful for the animal. 
O&#39;Rourke said maybe those who want to use an AR-15 to hunt &quot;could keep it at a hunting club or at a gun range,&quot; &amp; committed to listening to all points of view <a href="https://t.co/RqGuqtdHEE">pic.twitter.com/RqGuqtdHEE</a>
&mdash; Maura Barrett (@MauraBarrettNBC) <a href="https://twitter.com/MauraBarrettNBC/status/1187805309210910722?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 25, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
&#8220;This is the first time that I&#8217;ve heard the case made for using an AR-15 to hunt deer,&#8221; O&#8217;Rourke replied. &#8220;I&#8217;ve heard feral hogs in Texas, which are a real problem on a lot of ranches and farms in my home state.&#8221;
The former Texas lawmaker was the first major 2020 Democratic presidential candidate to call for a nationwide gun confiscation program for all &#8220;assault weapons.&#8221; However, he has been notably vague about many aspects of the plan, including how much it would cost, how it would be enforced, or even what constitutes an &#8220;assault weapon.&#8221;
The proposal has been a divisive topic for the Democratic Party. While O&#8217;Rourke&#8217;s declaration that &#8220;hell yes, we&#8217;re going to take away your AR-15 [and] your AK-47&#8221; has received massive applause from his left-wing supporters, many Democratic lawmakers have since been distancing themselves. Democrats, including those in leadership, have largely been sounding the alarm that such an anti-Second Amendment idea will backfire and simply fire up the Republican base.
Regardless, O&#8217;Rourke has touted the bipartisan disapproval as a signal that the former congressman is being authentic, proclaiming that &#8220;it shows me we are doing something right.&#8221;
O&#8217;Rourke&#8217;s demand for a nationwide gun grab comes as his presidential candidacy has been struggling to gain traction. Both his fundraising and polling numbers have been relatively stagnant over the past two quarters despite relaunching his campaign for a third time in August. O&#8217;Rourke has not broken 5% support since April 2019, and as of publication is receiving less than 3% of the vote on average, according to <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html">Real Clear Politics</a>.
&#8220;This is why I&#8217;m here. I want to listen to those who feel perhaps differently than I do, include your point of view and ideas in whatever becomes the final piece of legislation or the law that we adopt,&#8221; O&#8217;Rourke told the student. “But we have to make sure that ultimately we take some action to save the lives of those who are being taken and then to protect against the kind of fear these acts of terror are inspiring.&#8221;

Beto O’Rourke Begins First Campaign Swing In Iowa As A Presidential Candidate

WATCH: Beto Backs Off Confiscating AR-15s: ‘Keep It At A Hunting Club’

Former Rep. Beto O&#8217;Rourke (D-TX) revealed on Friday that if he is elected to the office of the presidency, he will authorize a surcharge on companies that manufacture firearms in order to fund his proposed federally mandated gun confiscation plan.
&#8220;I think a mandatory buyback can be financed with a surcharge that would be paid by gun manufacturers,&#8221; O&#8217;Rourke told <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/video/beto-orourke-talks-gun-and-opioid-plans/">CBS News</a> reporter Tim Perry. &#8220;Those who are making the AR-15s and AK-47s, and continue to sell them into our communities despite the terror that they have inspired and the lives that they have taken.&#8221;
&#8220;I think this is the right way to fund a mandatory buyback, without imposing any new taxes on our fellow Americans,&#8221; he added.
The former congressman has faced widespread criticism for demanding that the federal government seize millions of firearms from law-abiding citizens. However, he has also been notably vague about many aspects of the proposed government-run program, including how much it would cost American taxpayers.
O&#8217;Rourke was the first major 2020 Democratic presidential candidate to endorse a nationwide gun confiscation program for so-called &#8220;assault weapons,&#8221; but a host of his primary challengers have since followed suit, including Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Kamala Harris (D-CA), and Cory Booker (D-NJ). To date, none of the candidates have provided a clear definition of what they believe constitutes an &#8220;assault weapon.&#8221;
While O&#8217;Rourke has stated that his proposal would not require law enforcement officers to go door-to-door to confiscate weapons, he has yet to explain how the law would be enforced in the event that Americans refuse to voluntarily turn over their own firearms to the government.
Perry pressed O&#8217;Rourke further on whether the plan is too &#8220;retroactive&#8221; given that he would not be proactively taking firearms off the street.
&#8220;If we&#8217;re able to pass mandatory buybacks, if I&#8217;m able to sign that into law, then I fully expect our fellow Americans to turn in their AR-15s and their AK-47s,&#8221; O&#8217;Rourke replied. &#8220;For anyone who does not and is caught in possession or seen in possession of one of these weapons of war, one of these instruments of terror, that weapon will be taken from them, and they will be fined.”
&#8220;And if they should persist in continuing to use and to buy these weapons, there will be other consequences in the criminal code,&#8221; he added without elaborating.
The Democratic presidential hopeful&#8217;s gun confiscation plan is so radical that even members of his own party have been distancing themselves from it. Many Democrats, including those in leadership, have been sounding the alarm that such an anti-Second Amendment idea will backfire and simply fire up the Republican base.
O&#8217;Rourke, however, has touted the bipartisan condemnation as a signal that the former Texas lawmaker is being authentic.
&#8220;It shows me we are doing something right,&#8221; O&#8217;Rourke told reporters when asked about both President Donald Trump and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer&#8217;s disapproval.
O&#8217;Rourke has repeatedly claimed that he is not &#8220;talking about confiscating anybody&#8217;s guns.&#8221; <a href="https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2019/oct/21/beto-orourke/despite-his-claim-presidential-candidate-beto-orou/">PolitiFact</a>, the left-leaning fact check site, has rated that claim as &#8220;false.&#8221;

Democratic Presidential Candidates Discuss LGBTQ Issues At Human Rights Campaign Foundation Forum

Beto O’Rourke Suggests That Gun Manufacturers Will Finance His Gun Confiscation Plan

Former Rep. Beto O&#8217;Rourke (D-TX) explained on Wednesday that while handguns are responsible for the overwhelming majority of firearms deaths, he still only wants to take away so-called &#8220;assault weapons&#8221; from American citizens.
&#8220;First of all, there&#8217;s a significant difference between a handgun and an AR-15,&#8221; O&#8217;Rourke told MSNBC&#8217;s Willie Geist when confronted with the data. &#8220;If you talk to or listen to trauma surgeons, as I have, and they describe the wounds from those weapons of war, they expel all their kinetic energy inside of you. They just destroy your organs, cause you to bleed to death, very different from what a handgun will do. And there&#8217;s a legitimate use for a handgun, to protect yourself in your home.&#8221;
The former Texas congressman has long advocated for strict gun control measures, such as requiring universal background checks, opposing concealed carry reciprocity, and banning &#8220;assault weapons.&#8221; However, his anti-gun stance has become even more radical since he began seeking the Democratic nomination for the presidency.
After facing mounting pressure to drop out of the presidential race, O&#8217;Rourke instead re-launched his campaign in August with a primary focus on his anti-gun platform. Days later, he called for the federal government to seize millions of firearms from law-abiding American citizens, but he has yet to clarify precisely which firearms should be confiscated.
Geist questioned O&#8217;Rourke on why he is not calling for law enforcement to go door-to-door in high crime areas like Chicago, in order to help prevent gun-related violence.
&#8220;The answer to that challenge is making sure that we have true universal background checks, close all of the loopholes, and in the Chicago example, and I&#8217;ve talked to people in Chicago about this, you cannot have selective enforcement of those background checks because while you may have them in Chicago, if you don&#8217;t have them in Indiana or in bordering states, people are going to buy guns in those places and bring them into Chicago,&#8221; O&#8217;Rourke replied. &#8220;We need a national system of universal background checks and it must be complemented with red-flag laws so that if someone is displaying a tendency towards harming themselves, in a country that loses 22,000 people to gun suicides, or harming somebody else, then we take that weapon from them through due process before it is too late.&#8221;
After Geist pressed O&#8217;Rourke further on why, if 70% of gun violence is coming from handguns, not just &#8220;go all the way&#8221; and confiscate those as well.
&#8220;Because I don&#8217;t think that&#8217;s the right thing to do,&#8221; O&#8217;Rourke answered. &#8220;I don&#8217;t think that&#8217;s constitutional.&#8221;
He subsequently cited Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia&#8217;s landmark 2008 opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller, which held that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual&#8217;s right to possess a firearm, unconnected with service in a militia. While O&#8217;Rourke stated that Scalia noted some limits to the Second Amendment, the Democratic contender refrained from acknowledging what they are.
&#8220;When the Second Amendment was ratified and adopted, it took you three minutes to reload your musket. I don&#8217;t know that the Founding Fathers could have envisioned the kind of carnage that could be produced with one of these weapons,&#8221; O&#8217;Rourke said. &#8220;No civilian should own them. And I hope you all acknowledge this, every candidate on that stage is for an assault weapons ban.&#8221;
&#8220;So, if the logic is that those weapons are too dangerous to sell and then you knowledge that there are 16 million of them out there, you have to do something about the number of weapons that are out there,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;And my plan is the clearest, it is the boldest, and to your point, it is politically difficult, it may not poll well, it may not be politically convenient, but it&#8217;s important if we&#8217;re going to save the lives of our fellow Americans.&#8221;

Democratic Presidential Candidates Participate In Fourth Debate In Ohio

Beto O’Rourke Tries To Explain Why He Isn’t Calling For The Government To Confiscate Handguns

Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) criticized his Democratic primary rival, South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg, on Monday after Buttigieg referred to a federally mandated gun buyback program as a form of &#8220;confiscation.&#8221;
&#8220;Calling buyback programs &#8216;confiscation&#8217; is doing the NRA&#8217;s work for them, [Buttigieg] &#8212; and they don&#8217;t need our help,&#8221; Booker said, referring to the pro-Second Amendment organization, the National Rifle Association (NRA).
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Calling buyback programs &quot;confiscation&quot; is doing the NRA&#39;s work for them, <a href="https://twitter.com/PeteButtigieg?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@PeteButtigieg</a>—and they don&#39;t need our help. <a href="https://t.co/eshiBU7PIg">https://t.co/eshiBU7PIg</a>
&mdash; Cory Booker (@CoryBooker) <a href="https://twitter.com/CoryBooker/status/1183780451439263744?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 14, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Booker&#8217;s remarks come as Buttigieg and former Rep. Beto O&#8217;Rourke (D-TX) have been butting heads over the former congressman&#8217;s demand to seize millions of firearms from law-abiding citizens through a mandatory gun buyback program.
Democratic lawmakers have long been defending their gun control agenda against claims that the party wants to take away Americans&#8217; firearms. Accordingly, Buttigieg slammed O&#8217;Rourke&#8217;s divisive rallying cries as playing directly into the hands of the Republican Party.
O&#8217;Rourke was the first major 2020 Democratic candidate to endorse a government-run gun confiscation program for so-called &#8220;assault weapons,&#8221; but a few of his primary challengers, including Booker, have since followed suit. To date, none of the candidates have provided a clear definition of what constitutes an &#8220;assault weapon&#8221; or details on how they plan to carry out the actual buyback program.
O&#8217;Rourke has touted both Republican and Democratic disapproval of the program, stating that &#8220;it shows me we are doing something right.&#8221; But the presidential hopeful has also taken particular offense to Buttigieg&#8217;s condemnation.
&#8220;I was really offended by those comments,&#8221; O&#8217;Rourke said earlier in October. &#8220;I think [Buttigieg] 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.&#8221;
&#8220;This is a policy disagreement and it is about governing,&#8221; Buttigieg later responded to O&#8217;Rourke&#8217;s comments. &#8220;I get it, I mean he needs to pick a fight in order to stay relevant, but this is about a different of opinion on policy and my focus right now is getting something done.&#8221;
This is not the first time, however, that Booker has been especially critical of describing his proposed gun confiscation program as &#8220;confiscation.&#8221; Following the Democratic National Committee&#8217;s (DNC) presidential debate in September, he told reporters that while he supports the federal government seizing certain firearms from American citizens, opponents who portray the program as gun confiscation are using fear to paint a narrative.
&#8220;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 &#8212; that&#8217;s the fear-mongering,&#8221; Booker said at the time. &#8220;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.&#8221;
&#8220;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,&#8221; he later added.

Democratic Presidential Candidates Participate In Third Debate In Houston

Booker Accuses Buttigieg Of ‘Doing The NRA’s Work For Them’

Cory Booker

Pete Buttigieg

At yet another CNN town hall event for Democratic Party presidential hopefuls, former Rep. Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke (D-TX) once again peeled back the Democratic National Committee&#8217;s carefully crafted veneer of political centrism to reveal what the Left really thinks about bedrock American principles.
For weeks, O’Rourke has been touring the country to tell us all about his plan to take away America’s guns. Rather than embrace the importance of this Second Amendment freedom, O’Rourke continually doubles down, often invoking words you can’t say on television to emphasize his seriousness that, under his hypothetical administration, the American government will forcefully disarm its own citizens.
This has pushed some on the Left to turn their metaphorical guns on O’Rourke. These tepid rebukes of the erstwhile wunderkind who nearly toppled Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) sound more like, “Hey, don’t tell everyone what we really think.”
Having staked his position on the Second Amendment Thursday night, Robert Francis O’Rourke turned his attention to the First Amendment. Sagging in the polls, O’Rourke stood opposite CNN’s Don Lemon as Lemon read from one of O’Rourke’s plans. All the longshot presidential hopefuls have a plan, it seems. And every plan is fine-tuned for a niche audience. This was a plan for the LGBTQ+ community.
Lemon noted that O’Rourke’s plan praised freedom of religion as a fundamental right, but one that “should not be used to discriminate.” With that setup, Lemon asked, “Do you think religious institutions, like colleges, churches, charities, should they lose their tax exempt status if they oppose same-sex marriage?”
At this point, everyone in the audience knew what O’Rourke’s answer really was. But they also knew what he had to say if he was going to turn the corner after the primary to gain traction in a general election. True to himself, O’Rourke wasted no time in casting off the shackles of centrism. He told the world what the Left really believes.
“Yes,” O’Rourke says, “There can be no reward, no benefit, no tax break for any one or any institution, any organization in America that denies the full human rights and the full civil rights of every single one of us.”
Perhaps O’Rourke came to that conclusion after a discussion with someone in a Buc-ee&#8217;s bathroom. Perhaps it is what he has always thought. Perhaps he tested the answer in focus groups and has plans to double down on his answer in the coming days on the campaign trail.
Whatever the reason, O’Rourke’s answer is revealing for its honesty. While the Obama administration prosecuted nuns over birth control, it at least spoke in platitudes about “freedom to worship.” Celibate nuns may have to pay for birth control, but at least they are afforded a modicum of freedom to practice the worshipful elements of their religion.
Not so for O’Rourke. If a religious entity — religious colleges, charities motivated by religion, and churches adhering to two millennia of doctrine — disagrees with O’Rourke, it forfeits its tax exemption.
That’s a far cry from former Justice Anthony Kennedy’s promise in Obergefell v. Hodges, which emphasized “that religions, and those who adhere to religious doctrines, may continue to advocate with utmost sincere conviction” their religious beliefs regarding human sexuality. Indeed, Kennedy promised that “[t]he First Amendment ensures that religious organizations and persons are given proper protection as they seek to teach the principles that are so fulfilling and so central to their lives and faiths.”
Yet under an O’Rourke administration, Kennedy’s promise is only fulfilled when organized religion pays its own freight. Thus, Catholic hospitals, Muslim charities, evangelical soup kitchens, and Orthodox Jewish synagogues might manage to continue their good deeds, but only at a taxable rate. They must hope that their former donors are motivated more by the mission than by the tax incentives that have fueled the billions of dollars of charity that Americans have spread around the globe through religious organizations — charity that has relieved the American government from having to address it on its own.
O’Rourke’s plan has the high hurdle of a body of case law that makes it illegal for the government to deprive citizens of a protected right based upon the viewpoint of the citizen — but that’s not his point. O&#8217;Rourke knows that. Everyone knows that. Just like everyone knows O’Rourke has no legitimate path to presidential victory.
Rather, O’Rourke’s purpose is to expand the borders of the increasingly far-left Democratic Party. If a “churches lose their tax exemption” O’Rourke plan is too much. Then Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) “use [of] the Department of Justice to go after schools” plan is made more palatable and a Warren “pass the Equality Act” plan is practically mainstream. And so the entire political machine lurches just a little further to the left — comfortably on the road to total government control.
O’Rourke will not win the presidency. But he is not supposed to. Laugh, if you must, about his trademark flapping arms and insatiable desire to address crowds while standing on tabletops, but take with deadly seriousness his ability to say what his party is increasingly thinking.
&nbsp;
Jeremy Dys (<a href="https://twitter.com/jeremydys">@JeremyDys</a>) is Special Counsel for Litigation and Communications for First Liberty Institute, a non-profit law firm dedicated to defending religious freedom for all Americans. Read more at <a href="https://firstliberty.org">FirstLiberty.org</a>.

Beto O’Rourke CNN town hall

DYS: Beto O’Rourke’s ‘Liberty’ Is No Liberty At All

Don Lemon

First Amendment

Leftism

Former Rep. Beto O&#8217;Rourke (D-TX) was confronted on Sunday for promoting immigration policies that would allow for illegal immigrants to bypass United States legal requirements to lawfully reside in the country.
&#8220;Robert, I noticed that you pander a lot to the illegal aliens and encouraging illegal immigration,&#8221; a woman told O&#8217;Rourke during a rally in Phoenix, Arizona. &#8220;We are a nation of laws and I just think it&#8217;s a slap in the face to every legal immigrant who has waited, and paid, and played by the rules to immigrate to this country legally and who have respected our country, our land, our citizens, our laws, and who have gone through the process to come here legally.&#8221;
&#8220;To just say everybody is welcome here, you all get free stuff, and just come on over the border is again, a slap in the face to every legal immigrant, like my mother, who has come here legally,&#8221; the woman continued amid a crowd of boos.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
A woman told me undocumented immigrants are a &quot;slap in the face&quot; to &quot;legal immigrants.&quot;
I told her it&#39;s a slap in the face to lock kids in cages.
Immigrants pose no threat to her. And we need to call people out for saying they do. <a href="https://t.co/cpnE9PGBvF">pic.twitter.com/cpnE9PGBvF</a>
&mdash; Beto O&#39;Rourke (@BetoORourke) <a href="https://twitter.com/BetoORourke/status/1180994229516025857?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 6, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
While O&#8217;Rourke has claimed that he does not support an open-borders immigration system or decriminalizing illegal border crossings, he has also advocated for giving citizenship to nearly 20 million illegal immigrants currently residing in the United States. He further opposes incarcerating individuals who illegally cross over the border.
O&#8217;Rourke has long argued against a physical barrier on the U.S.-Mexico border and introduced a proposal in May that would immediately suspend border wall construction, as well as prevent any future budgets from funding construction or repairs.
During his failed bid to unseat Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), O&#8217;Rourke stated that the way to improve safety and security along the border is to &#8220;ensure that we are maximizing the potential from everyone&#8221; and &#8220;treating each other with respect and dignity.&#8221;
&#8220;On this much we can agree: that there should be a safe, legal, orderly, quick path to come here to join family, to work a job, to be able to go to school, to flee persecution, or in some countries like Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, certain death,&#8221; O&#8217;Rourke replied to the woman. &#8220;I want to work with you to make sure that our immigration laws and our asylum laws achieve that purpose.&#8221;
&#8220;But what is a slap in the face to my conscience and the best traditions of this country is taking kids from their parents and putting them in cages,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;We, in this country, have lost the lives of seven children in our custody and in our care.&#8221;
&#8220;If immigration is a problem, it is the best possible problem that this country could have. I want those asylum seekers here in this country. I want us to live according to our conscience, to our laws, to our commitments, and to the best, boldest, brightest future we could possibly have,&#8221; O&#8217;Rourke added. &#8220;Those immigrants pose no threat to you, nor to me; stop trafficking in these lies.&#8221;
The Arizona woman also confronted O&#8217;Rourke over his declaration that if he becomes president, the federal government will seize millions of firearms from law-abiding American citizens.
&#8220;Hands off our guns, Beto,&#8221; she told him. &#8220;You&#8217;re not getting our guns. The AR-15 is no more deadly than my Ruger .45.&#8221;
O&#8217;Rourke did not address her statement on firearms.

Democratic Presidential Candidates Attend Gun Violence Forum  In Las Vegas

WATCH: Beto O’Rourke Is Confronted Promoting Illegal Immigration: ‘It’s A Slap In The Face’

Former Rep. Beto O&#8217;Rourke (D-TX) slammed his 2020 Democratic Party presidential primary challenger South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg on Wednesday for criticizing O&#8217;Rourke&#8217;s signature policy proposal.
&#8220;What Pete has been saying is that a mandatory buyback is the shiny object that is distracting us,&#8221; O&#8217;Rourke told reporters after participating in a gun safety forum in Las Vegas, Nevada.
&#8220;How in the world can you say that?&#8221; he continued. &#8220;How in the world can you say that to March for Our Lives? How can you say that to survivors of mass shootings across this country? How can you say that to the majority of hispanics in America, certainly in Texas who fear that they will be the victims of a mass shooting inspired by racism and hatred that&#8217;s been welcomed into the open by this president and has been armed with weapons of war?&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
How could you call mandatory buybacks a “shiny object” in front of March For Our Lives? <a href="https://t.co/wSg6ItQT2K">pic.twitter.com/wSg6ItQT2K</a>
&mdash; Beto O&#39;Rourke (@BetoORourke) <a href="https://twitter.com/BetoORourke/status/1179552179490676736?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 3, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
O&#8217;Rourke&#8217;s remarks were in reference to comments Buttigieg first made in September during an appearance on CNN. At the time, Buttigieg criticized O&#8217;Rourke&#8217;s calls for the federal government to seize millions of firearms from law-abiding American citizens, and noted that the proposal was playing right into the hands of Republicans.
&#8220;Look, right now, we have an amazing moment right here on our hands,&#8221; Buttigieg told CNN host Jake Tapper. &#8220;We have agreement among the American people for not just universal background checks but we have a majority in favor of red flag laws, high-capacity magazines, banning the new sale of assault weapons.&#8221;
&#8220;This is a golden moment to finally do something because we&#8217;ve been arguing about this for as long as I&#8217;ve been alive,&#8221; he added.
O&#8217;Rourke&#8217;s demand for a nationwide gun grab comes as he has been facing mounting pressure to drop out of the presidential race. Instead of ending his campaign, he re-branded it for a third time in August with a primary focus on expanding his anti-Second Amendment platform.
The former Texas lawmaker was the first major 2020 Democratic candidate to endorse a federally mandated gun confiscation program for so-called &#8220;assault weapons,&#8221; but a host of his primary challengers have since followed suit. To date, none of the candidates advocating for a mandatory buyback program have defined what constitutes an &#8220;assault weapon.&#8221;
However, the proposal has been a divisive topic for the Democratic Party. While O&#8217;Rourke&#8217;s declaration that &#8220;hell yes, we&#8217;re going to take away your AR-15 [and] your AK-47&#8221; has received massive applause from his left-wing supporters, many Democratic lawmakers have since been distancing themselves from the rallying cries.
O&#8217;Rourke has touted both Republican and Democratic disapproval of the program, stating that, &#8220;it shows me we are doing something right.&#8221; But the former congressman has also taken particular offense to Buttigieg&#8217;s condemnation.
&#8220;I was really offended by those comments,&#8221; O&#8217;Rourke said. &#8220;I think [Buttigieg] 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.&#8221;

Presidential Candidate Beto O’Rourke In Los Angeles

WATCH: Beto O’Rourke Lashes Out At Mayor Pete Over Gun Seizure Remarks: I’m ‘Offended’

Second Amendment

Democratic presidential candidate Beto O&#8217;Rourke recently opened up about the attacks he faced over his demand for a nationwide gun confiscation program, stating that he took pride in condemnation from not only President Donald Trump, but also from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.
&#8220;It shows me we are doing something right,&#8221; O&#8217;Rourke told reporters Thursday while visiting a marijuana dispensary in Oakland, California, on Thursday. The former Texas congressman further noted that because Schumer, a member of his own party, launched the attack, it signaled that O’Rourke was being authentic.
However, O&#8217;Rourke&#8217;s calls for the government to seize firearms from millions of law-abiding citizens have been a divisive topic for the Democratic Party. While his declaration received massive applause from the left-wing crowd at the last Democratic National Committee (DNC) primary debate, many Democratic lawmakers have since been distancing themselves from the rallying cries.
Schumer brushed off O&#8217;Rourke&#8217;s gun confiscation plan on Wednesday, telling reporters that he doesn&#8217;t &#8220;know of any other Democrat who agrees&#8221; with the proposal.
&#8220;Ask Chuck Schumer what he&#8217;s been able to get done,&#8221; O’Rourke responded to Schumer&#8217;s dismissal, in comments reported by <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/beto-orourke-says-senates-top-democrat-has-accomplished-absolutely-nothing-on-gun-control/2019/09/20/ced58c92-db93-11e9-a688-303693fb4b0b_story.html">The Washington Post</a>. &#8220;We still don&#8217;t have [universal] background checks. Didn&#8217;t have them when he was in the majority either. So, you know, the game that he&#8217;s played, the politics that he&#8217;s pursued have give us absolutely nothing. And have produced a situation where we lose nearly 40,000 of our fellow Americans every year.&#8221;
&#8220;What [Schumer] may not know, but what I hear loud and clear, because I&#8217;m traveling the country listening to my fellow Americans, is that the people are there,&#8221; he added.
While Schumer has largely remained silent on the issue after his initial remarks to reporters, O&#8217;Rourke has continued to defend himself against the Senate&#8217;s top Democrat. O&#8217;Rourke&#8217;s presidential campaign swiftly sent out fundraising emails illustrating the popularity of a nationwide gun-grab among Democrats, and O&#8217;Rourke tweeted his case to the minority leader multiple times.
Despite Schumer&#8217;s dismissal of the proposal, he has been a long-time advocate of strict gun reforms. While serving in the House of Representatives in the 1990s, he authored both the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act and the federal assault weapons ban. Following a recent slew of deadly mass shootings over the summer, Schumer has been urging Congress and the White House to enact an expansive package of gun control legislation that includes universal background checks and red flag laws.
&#8220;Over the last five weeks, I&#8217;ve just been focused on saying what&#8217;s on my mind, being myself,&#8221; O’Rourke told <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/23/us/politics/beto-orourke-guns-2020.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share">The New York Times</a> on Monday. &#8220;And not really in the slightest being interested in polls, or how things poll, or what you&#8217;re supposed to say.&#8221;
O&#8217;Rourke&#8217;s campaign, however, has struggled to gain traction and his polling numbers have stalled out in the low single-digits.
After facing mounting pressure to drop out of the race in August, the Democratic presidential hopeful instead re-launched his campaign with a new-found calling to promulgate anti-Second Amendment policies in an attempt to prevent further gun crime.
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/52052/hell-no-youre-not-mom-rips-beto-his-face-over-gun-ryan-saavedra">‘HELL NO, YOU’RE NOT!’: Mom Rips Beto To His Face Over Gun Confiscation Plan</a>

Beto O’Rourke

Beto Basks In Democratic Leader’s Condemnation: ‘It Shows Me We’re Doing Something Right’

Charles Schumer

Menu