What did you think of Beto O'Rourke's idea of confiscating AK-47s and AR-15s?

[kentuck]

I admired his passion. I think he may have touched a nerve with the voting public?

But, many people are uncomfortable with the word "confiscate". I think the questioner may have set him up with that terminology. It was the wrong word to use, in my opinion.

However, the fact remains. We need to get AK-47s and AR-15s off our streets and out of the hands of dangerous people. They are weapons of war.

We need to ban the sale of these types of weapons, I would agree. If anyone is caught carrying one in the public square, they should lose that weapon immediately. There might be a process for them to get it back but it should be very difficult. This would be a prime instance where the government would likely offer a "buyback", in my opinion.

I was impressed with Beto.

(moved from GD)

[world wide wally]

1. It had to be said sooner or later.

[HerbChestnut]

2. Agreed.

[dalton99a]

3. Wounds From Military-Style Rifles? 'A Ghastly Thing to See'

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/04/health/parkland-shooting-victims-ar15.html

Wounds From Military-Style Rifles? ‘A Ghastly Thing to See’
Trauma surgeons tell what it is really like to try to repair such devastating injuries. “Bones are exploded, soft tissue is absolutely destroyed,” one said.
By Gina Kolata and C. J. Chivers
March 4, 2018


Left, an X-ray of a leg showing a bullet wound delivered by an assault rifle used in combat. Right, an X-ray of a leg that sustained a bullet wound from a low-energy bullet, inflicted by a weapon like a handgun in Philadelphia. (Dr. Jeremy W. Cannon)

Perhaps no one knows the devastating wounds inflicted by assault-style rifles better than the trauma surgeons who struggle to repair them. The doctors say they are haunted by their experiences confronting injuries so dire they struggle to find words to describe them.

At a high school in Parkland, Fla., 17 people were recently killed with just such a weapon — a semiautomatic AR-15. It was legal there for Nikolas Cruz, 19, the suspect in the shooting, to buy a civilian version of the military’s standard rifle, while he would have had to be 21 to buy a less powerful and accurate handgun.

Many factors determine the severity of a wound, including a bullet’s mass, velocity and composition, and where it strikes. The AR-15, like the M4 and M16 rifles issued to American soldiers, shoots lightweight, high-speed bullets that can cause grievous bone and soft tissue wounds, in part by turning sideways, or “yawing,” when they hit a person. Surgeons say the weapons produce the same sort of horrific injuries seen on battlefields.

Civilian owners of military-style weapons can also buy soft-nosed or hollow-point ammunition, often used for hunting, that lacks a full metal jacket and can expand and fragment on impact. Such bullets, which can cause wider wound channels, are proscribed in most military use.

A radiologist at the hospital that treated victims of the Parkland attack wrote in The Atlantic about a surgeon there who “opened a young victim in the operating room and found only shreds of the organ that had been hit.”

What follows are the recollections of five trauma surgeons. Three of them served in the military, and they emphasized that their opinions are their own and do not represent those of the armed forces. One has treated civilian victims of such weapons in American cities. And a pediatric surgeon treated victims of a Texas church shooting last year.


An X-ray of a rifle bullet wound to an arm. (Dr. Jeremy W. Cannon)

[bdamomma]

28. I think our Congress

should view these and what happens when defenseless people are disseminated by weapons used for war only.

No doctor can fix that. No other country has the amount of guns we do.

[Haggis for Breakfast]

43. I think Congress should be shown EXACTLY what

first responders see - ALL OF IT - pools of blood, splattered brains, open body wounds with internal organs hanging out, heads blown off and human tissue and body fragments running down the walls and dripping from the ceilings.

MAKE THEM LOOK AT THE PHOTOS.

Then ask them which one of THEIR loved ones they'd be willing to sacrifice to gun violence while they keep sucking up to the NRA and allowing weapons of war (and don't forget those extra-round magazines) to be available to any civilian who can buy them.

[hack89]

49. This is silly

Any rifle - not just military style - will cause horrific wounds. Civilian hunting ammo is the absolute worse because it is designed to expand. There is a reason issuing civilian ammunition to soldiers is a war crime under the Geneva Convention.

[brooklynite]

4. It's badly framed

The message that "semi-automatic weapons are bad and we're going to take them away" is an easy sell to gun control advocates but allows the advocates to get tarred as "anti 2A" or "anti gun".

The correct approach would be to START with: "You have a right to own a gun. You will be able to keep your pistol; you will be able to keep your rifle. BUT semi-automatic weapons are only good for violence against innocent people and we're going to take them away"

[Hoyt]

15. Agree. But, it sounded good last night, especially focusing on the ammo

and the damage done. It kind of nullifies gunners’ junk that people don’t like the “looks” of assault style rifles.

[Celerity]

48. many pistols are semi-auto

The correct approach would be to START with: "You have a right to own a gun. You will be able to keep your pistol; you will be able to keep your rifle. BUT semi-automatic weapons are only good for violence against innocent people and we're going to take them away"

[greymattermom]

5. Maybe just call it buy back.

They did something like this with gold coins many years ago, and it was done by Presidential executive order. Maybe a law against hoarding ARs combined with limits on ammunition would be a good first step. Start calling folks with a lot of guns what they are: Hoarders.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102

[Moostache]

6. Leave the guns, Take the bullets...

You may "keep and bear arms"...in the 17th and 18th century the right to bear arms was hereditary in England and kept in the nobility, away from the commoners and 'riff-raff'...a concept the founders wanted no part of in America. The weapons of the day were single shot muskets and pistols....so, I propose a simple solution...

Bullets will cost $5,000 per round (after your complimentary one round to approximate the intention of the Constitution in 1787 for all those strict 'conservatives') and purchase of ammunition will be controlled as much or more than licensing a vehicle for use. There will be training, tests, and most importantly - liability insurance. If you want to own a gun, fine...but there will be MASSIVE restrictions that make it prohibitively expensive and make civil AND criminal liability exhaustively expensive as well. If you fail to control your gun, and it is used in the commission of a crime, YOU are as liable as the perpetrator for civil damages and criminal charges...your gun, your right, your responsibility.

I don't really want anyone's gun...but I do want background checks, magazine capacity limits, and loopholes closed, and then I want the bullets. No bullets? No mass deaths and they can keep their precious guns...

[hack89]

50. Unconstitutional

Arms includes ammo. Settled law.

[greymattermom]

80. And even though you can only drive one car at a time,

they all have to be insured. It should be the same for guns.

[Big Blue Marble]

7. A ban on these weapons will not be enough.

Millions are out there:.

"As of 2012, there are an estimated 2.5–3.7 million rifles from just the AR-15 family of rifles in civilian use in the United States; the total number of assault weapons in the United States among all types is not known, and can not be known because of the different definitions in different jurisdictions."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapon.

Voluntary buybacks will fail, as the most dangerous, paranoid owners will keep them.

Confiscation will only partly be effective and most likely lead to violence and a thriving
black market with criminals making fortunes. Think Prohibition.

We need to change our culture; that will take time and only be partly successful. We live
amidst a huge gun cult. It grew around us and now we are paying the price in deaths
and destruction with little recourse in the short term.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

8. You might give them an option to keep it in a secure locker at an approved shooting range.

'Approved' meaning certified secure for facilities and procedures. People could go to the range to shoot them and get that tingle up their legs or whatever it does for them but they can't carry them off the range.
And anyone who can't afford secure range storage probably shouldn't have bought the thing in the first place.

[qazplm135]

9. right answer but will never happen

every nation has a couple of things that they are just nuts about.

For us, guns is one of those things.

[Big Blue Marble]

13. The citizens of most countries are not nuts about things that are dangerous as automatic weapons!

Remember the majority of American do not own guns.

It has only been in the last fifty years that guns have been the center of a cult in this country.
Understand that the tradition of gun ownership in rural areas goes back through our history.
This "passion for the 2n Amendment" has only been fostered during my life time.

It is driven by the gun manufactures who grew the NRA into an wedge issue for
the Republican Party. These gun owners were successfully weaponized with propaganda
to believe that their right to own guns supersedes our rights to be safe.

[qazplm135]

14. probably not

nevertheless guns have been part of our history. From our citizen militias that "defeated the greatest military power in the world to win our independence...twice" to our "taming the West via guns" to the carnage of the Civil War...guns have been a central part of our mythos and identity.

I'm by no means defending it, but it's there and no I don't think it's just the last 50 years.

[Big Blue Marble]

18. I know you are not defending it.

But I am old enough to have watch the culture around guns change from guns being a tool
to being a fetish. It is not by accident as I said above something has changed and it
is important to understand how these people became, not by accident, gun cultists.

As a child in the fifties, I lived in a remote rural area. My father owned a gun; my uncle
owned a gun; every family we knew owned a gun. It was no big deal. Hunting was normative
and protection might be needed from wild life. When we moved to the city, my dad left his
gun behind. It did not serve us in the city.

Now guns are a statement of personal power. The bigger the gun the more power is attributed
to the owner; the more guns that are owned, the more power is attributed to the owner.

Gun ownership has become not an accidental cult, but an intentional one. It is important
to understand this shifting dynamic if we want to unravel this crisis.

[qazplm135]

29. I think the difference is technology

but remember Tommy Guns and the glamour of the big mafia/crimelord guys of the 20s and 30s?

Fetishing guns goes back farther than you might think.

Of course, the guns we have today are amazing killing machines by comparison.

[Big Blue Marble]

33. You make an excellent point.

Hollywood in the twentieth century majorly contributed to the "glamour of guns."
From the western genre to mafia movie, guns played a major role in making a man
a man.

We have come a long torturous way from a well-ordered militia.

[qazplm135]

36. most def

Movies have glamorized a lot of things that are bad for us from guns to smoking.

Of course, they also inspire and move us in positive ways too.

[Big Blue Marble]

60. Yes I love movies.

I watched westerns as a kid and even had toy guns.

[Celerity]

51. In 1995, political scientist Robert Spitzer said that the modern American gun culture is founded on

three factors: the proliferation of firearms since the earliest days of the nation, the connection between personal ownership of weapons and the country's revolutionary and frontier history, and the cultural mythology regarding the gun in the frontier and in modern life.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_culture_in_the_United_States#History

[Big Blue Marble]

59. I agree it was founded on these traditions.

But the current gun cult that threatens everyone of us was fanned by
political and commercial interests.

[Celerity]

62. oh yes, absolutely nt

[Hoyt]

54. Really only about 25% of population are nuts about gunz.

[RKP5637]

10. Something needs to be done. It's totally out of control. The gun fetish cult needs to be stopped,

somehow.

[bdamomma]

30. people resorting to violence

is not an answer, if you have issues talk to someone, don't blow away people who have not done one thing to you. Oh, you loose your job, and that warrants a person to kill others??? or to drive somewhere to blow away people because the color of their skin??? WTF.

Are people that insecure or fear someone else based on their colour or being different from others, can you imagine not having diversity in the US, no culture whatsoever. Diversity is what makes us great, tell that to tRumps cult. Rant over.

[RKP5637]

38. It's incredible! It's all become a total WTF! n/t

[RKP5637]

42. Sometimes I think they want some type of dystopian society with people roaming killing

off each other in open warfare. To me, the US is a quite sick society ... and worse under tRump. I hope that 2020 will get us back to a better society. There seems to be an awful lot of blood lust in this country ... maybe some acting out of desperation or whatever. I often wonder when I leave the house if I will ever be coming back or murdered someplace. What a way to live. It's really getting creepy. I've been working out front in the yard a lot ... and I often wonder if someone will do a drive-by shooting for the sport of it all. I live in a relatively safe neighborhood, but weird shit sometimes happens.

[J_William_Ryan]

85. That somehow

can’t be more laws, more bans, more regulations, and more government overreach, that’s not who we are as Democrats – such measures will not have the desired effect, and will only contribute to us losing elections.

[RKP5637]

86. It needs to be culture change. n/t

[essadaw]

11. Here is Beto's campaign explanation for how this would work

Here is a twitter response from Beto's campaign when Meghan attacked him on this

How a gun buyback would work As you may have heard, @MeghanMcCain had some things to say about Beto's mandatory buy back program today, and a lot of her criticisms were based on popular misconceptions about buybacks that deserve to be addressed. (1/6)

‘How would a buyback even work? This doesn't sound rational’

We would not be the first. Australia & New Zealand both did buybacks. Lots of U.S. cities also hold voluntary buyback programs

Australia saw a 42% decline in its homicide rate in the 7 years after its buyback (2/6)

'There’s no official definition for ‘an assault weapon’ so the government will overreach with an ‘assault weapons ban' & buy back'

Beto's program will apply to all AK & AR-type guns - weapons specifically designed to kill as many people as efficiently as possible (3/6)

‘How can the government buy back a gun it didn't sell? How much would you pay people?'

An independent commission would determine compensation, using market value as a benchmark. This is what Australia did. It would be paid for by a tax on gun manufacturers (4/6)

‘What happens if someone refuses to voluntarily turn in their weapon of war? Couldn't that lead to violence?’

No. If you don’t voluntarily turn in your weapon of war, you will be fined. (5/6)

‘Bad guys aren't going to turn their guns in’

Like New Zealand and Australia, Beto’s program would create a window of amnesty, allowing individuals to turn in their weapons anonymously, without compensation, no questions asked. (6/6)

[Straw Man]

68. The explanations are weak and muddled. They answer nothing.

Australia & New Zealand both did buybacks. Lots of U.S. cities also hold voluntary buyback programs

Australia and New Zealand had nothing like the sheer numbers of weapons in circulation, nor did they have anything like the entrenched gun culture of the United States.

Some interesting reading here:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6187769/

Voluntary municipal buybacks are where one goes to get a $100 gift card in exchange for granddad's rusty old .38 Special. Nobody is bringing in high-quality modern weapons.

Beto's program will apply to all AK & AR-type guns - weapons specifically designed to kill as many people as efficiently as possible

This is either ignorance or obfuscation. AK and AR are only two of dozens of designs of semi-auto rifle with various combinations of modular and ergonomic features. To ban those two only would be absolutely futile. To ban all of them would require either an exhaustive list, needing frequent updating, or would have to rely on lists of features and capabilities, leading back to the old "define an assault weapon" conundrum. Unless, of course, the plan is to ban all semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines, but that's going to be an extremely hard sell to the American gun-owning public -- hence the obfuscation.

‘What happens if someone refuses to voluntarily turn in their weapon of war? Couldn't that lead to violence?’

No. If you don’t voluntarily turn in your weapon of war, you will be fined.

Say what? How are going to confiscate that weapon and collect that fine without some form of state-sanctioned violence?

‘Bad guys aren't going to turn their guns in’

Like New Zealand and Australia, Beto’s program would create a window of amnesty, allowing individuals to turn in their weapons anonymously, without compensation, no questions asked.

Again, huh? What would prompt "prohibited persons" to turn in their weapons without compensation? They have already demonstrated a willingness to flout the law by possessing the weapon in the first place. Sudden attack of conscience?

This all smacks of back-pedaling to cover a rash and divisive statement. Bad, bad idea.

[kentuck]

12. My problem is with the people that flaunt these weapons in public...

Knowing there are women and children that are terrified by them. They don't know that you're one of the "good guys". It is taking every other freedom away from honest citizens just so they can say they are exercising their right to bear arms. When people cannot walk down the street without fear, there is no freedom. When people see one of these guns in public, they should understand that you are up to no good.

[dalton99a]

21. They are insecure assholes who like to bully people with their toys.

[Haggis for Breakfast]

44. My father was in law enforcement for over 30 years

He said these guys suffered from "virility compensation syndrome."

[customerserviceguy]

16. It means

he has no chance of being a US Senator from Texas.

Also, it becomes trying for other Democratic presidential candidates: "Senator So-and-So, a lot of praise was heaped on Representative O'Rourke for his dealing with the situation in El Paso. Do you support his proposal on mandatory buybacks of certain weapons?"

About the only way to dance away from it is to say, "I can understand Beto's passion on this issue, clearly, a mass shooting affected him in a way that few other candidates can fully empathize with, but I don't necessarily share his approach for something that needs bipartisan support to pass through Congress."

It looked like a desperation move for him, and while it might fatten his campaign coffers for a while, it brings him no closer to the nomination, in my opinion.

[Vinca]

17. Loved it. We were much better off when the assault weapon ban was in effect.

That said, it's got as much a chance of passing as I have of striking gold while digging in the flower bed.

[broiles]

19. Loved it!

[monmouth4]

20. Me too, he was brave to say it and it had to be said. I think it will help him too. n/t

[DrToast]

22. I'm for a ban. I'm definitely for a voluntary buyback. Undecided on mandatory buyback

I think a ban would go a long way. Most of these mass shootings are by people who recently acquired the weapons.

[LincolnRossiter]

23. I agree with him, but it's political suicide.

And it's never going to happen. So why promise it?

[Hekate]

24. What do I think? A good start. Seriously, Beto has signed off on his political career in Texas, but

...has embarked on a national career as an anti-gun crusader. He knows he's not getting the nomination (or so I assume) but is seizing the moment to hammer his ideas home.

Battlefield weapons have no business in civilian society. Period.

[42bambi]

79. I agree. Beto is on a mission!

[aikoaiko]

25. It's a bad idea. Or in Beto-speak, "It's fukt up!"

His distinction that they are weapons of war is intellectually weak. Almost every major design in guns was designed to increase rate of fire in battle including bolt action rifles, revolvers, pistols, pump-action shotguns, and magazine-fed rifles. If he wants to confiscate all "weapons of war" then he's coming for all guns -- even flint-locks.

It is an even more extreme reaction than how we handled machine guns which only required NFA registration and it worked to eliminate homicides with legal machine guns.

I'm personally offended that he thinks I'm a danger if I own one.

It may cost of the 2020 election or subsequent house/senate seats for years to come just as Bill Clinton described after the 1994 AWB.

I'm not impressed with his stance at all and will fight this policy any way I can except for not voting for Democrats.

When people focus on ARs and AKs, I remind them that the larges school mass shooting was at VATech with just two handguns. Even if you snapped your inevitable fingertips and all the ARs and AKs disappeared, it would do nothing to reduce the number of mass shootings.

[VarryOn]

55. I agree...

I have an AR in the gun safe. I love shooting it, but dont get to often enough. No way I'd support being required to give it up.

But...incentives work. If the buyback price was the right price, I'd sell, and I bet lots of others would too. But, gun enthusiasts usually buy a new gun when they sell a gun. It probably wouldnt reduce the number of guns, only reduce ARs.

[LonePirate]

26. It's long overdue. The sooner we start it, the better.

[onetexan]

27. +1 K&R

[melman]

31. I like it

It's bold.

The NRA has been very successful in setting the terms of the debate and getting getting gun control advocates to play defense.

They push so hard that it's like to even talk about guns you have to spend half the time placating gun people. Like, "oh no we don't really want to..."

So I like the idea of playing offense and just saying..Yeah. fuck you. We are going to take it

[guillaumeb]

32. The vast majority of Americans see no need for the weapons of war.

Some vocal few claim a need. And the NRA, and Russian money, can but enough politicians to block the will of the silent majority.

[GumboYaYa]

34. I am ready for the list of candidates to dwindle so folks like Beto

stop staking out positions that are political suicide for our party to get attention.

[andym]

35. Beto shows leadership

It may cost votes, but it's worth it.

[Devil Child]

37. I think it is a foolish and damaging proposal which is destined to fail

[Doreen]

39. I think the word "confiscate" is not a good word to use.

I would say optional buy back but if you choose not to sell your assult weapon and it is found ANYWHERE off of your property you will be heavily fined possibly jailed and then have it taken permanently without pay. Those who rent living quarters out will have the choice to say yes or no to allowing assult weapons on the property by their tenants.

I see the assult weapon people being given a choice there.

[doc03]

40. That was the one line in the entire debate the

Trumpsters picked up on. There are people Republican and Democrat that vote on that one issue. That will be used to paint ALL Democrats as gun grabbers.

[DrFunkenstein]

41. A Texas Congressman Basically Tweeted a Death Threat

I hope that it serves to bring more people behind Beto on this one.

Just imagine if someone you knew was killed by the military weapons. Hell yes, confiscate them. Stop pussyfooting around the NRA. Their time has come.

[aikoaiko]

46. He lost me forever.

[ElementaryPenguin]

45. I love it.

[hack89]

47. Desperation

He is trying hard to gain traction but this comes across as pandering.

[defacto7]

52. It sounds great and has a certain appeal to human necessity

but it was bad timing and sorely mis-applied. In my heart I'm all for it but this wasn't the way to do it. Just because most of us wanted to hear it doesn't make it useful or workable.
He got attention but he didn't help his campagn or the Democratic party.

[GeorgeGist]

53. Excellent ...

repealing the 2nd would be the best.

[Chemisse]

56. No. It will be a hurdle to just get them banned from being sold.

If you talk about confiscation, people will panic and the weapons won't be banned at all.

[Politicub]

57. Bold, direct and brave

It’s clear he’s tired of the stupid doublespeak dance about magazines and just making purchase of a gun harder. I am, too.

Many of us want AR-15s, AK47s, and other firearms like them purged from society. That is what it will take to reduce (I want to say solve) the problem of mass shootings.

[Amimnoch]

58. Think it was wonderful and stupid.

Killed off the one real thing his candidacy was bringing to the table.. Creating a battleground, and possible flip of Texas 38 electoral votes.

Even if Abrams is tapped as VP it made Georgia harder to turn into battleground and flip.

Is going to be totally used as misleading “they’re out to take your guns” fodder throughout the Mid-west/critical rust belt states come general election time no matter who our candidate is now.

His calls for legislation and background checks? GREAT
His attacks on Trumps ties to the El Paso shooting? SPOT ON
Wanting to restrict or even eliminate sales of these kinds of weapons? Workable, still would be used but with lessor effect.

The second he crossed over into “Yes, we’re going to take..” Energized their base, and will reduce the numbers that might have been willing to support in key swing states.

Totally fine with a law like that passing, but given the craziness of this country when it comes to “taking guns”, it was a stupid one to campaign on.

And, even though Biden is my choice now, up until Beto made this turn in the last week, I was 100% for Beto.

Heck, this was one of my posts on him just last week.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=252785

[liskddksil]

65. You're voting based on your fears instead of your heart nt

[Codeine]

71. Voting your heart is stupid.

Winning elections requires a pragmatic reading of the political room and adjusting accordingly.

[Amimnoch]

72. Neither fear nor heart. Logic, reason, and analyzing.

Although I do freely admit that I am fearful, bordering on outright terror at the very thought of sitting up late into the night of November 3rd/early morning of November 4th of 2020... watching election results being counted and having a repeat of that horrendously crappy feeling I had watching it 2016. Especially if not only Cheetolini gets a 2nd term, but if the Senate hits that 50/50 point and we realize that McConnell gets to stay majority leader because of Pence.. Yeah, you are 100% right that I do have fear.

That said, other than it being an influencer in my decision to focus solely on who has the best chance to make that scenario NOT happen, the reasoning is based in logic.

Gotta win. Our candidates need to stop the crapstorm attacks on each other, and run on issues that will resonate positively with the swing state voters that will get us to 270.

Promises like the MFA or enhanced ACA, or “Yes we will take your AK” needs to be converted to “I will sign any legislation that Congress passes that will move us forward in resolving the abysmal and predatory healthcare system we have now” and “I will sign any legislation that Congress passes that will move us forward in preventing this spree of mass shootings slaughtering our men, women, and children across this great nation.”

At the end of the day, that’s what they would do. Congress writes the bills that make policy, the POTUS just signs off, or Veto’s.

In Wisconsin and Michigan talk to the Dairy industry that is suffering from Cheeto’s tarriffs. State how they will restore our foreign policies to relieve them of their suffering. This will translate to critical win votes. Make the campaign speeches to help Pennsylvania shipping and iron industries being harmed by Trump tariffs. In Florida, make speeches on restoring international relations and foreign policy to alleviate the drop in tourism there, which is a primary and suffering industry under Trump.

TARGET THE CHEETO! Identify in each key swing state those he’s hurt the most, and WIN them over. Do so with promises that are actually within the power of the Presidency to effect, not ones that will require a congress.. especially one we’re not likely to have. Whomever does the best job in attacking the Cheeto and winning the most votes in those states to win the election... throw in behind that one!

[Bev54]

61. Totally agree

People are fed up and want something done and would agree to getting these guns off the streets. If the politicians are paying attention to the chants at most town halls with dems and repubs they will hear the chant of DO SOMETHING. I wish all the dem politicians would take this position and I do think they will get more votes. Nobody with a brain cell thinks these guns should be owned by anybody but the military.

[gulliver]

63. A ban and a voluntary buyback would start a natural process for eliminating them.

The ban would make these types of guns unprofitable for the gun industry. That, in turn, would take away the incentive for the gun industry and its lobbying wing, the NRA, to mess with people's heads. Without those commercial interests driving the assault weapon paranoid fad, the assault weapons would start to be seen by their owners as unnecessary, boring, and problematic possessions.

The input flow to the AR-15/AK-47 pool would dry up. The voluntary buybacks would be there to absorb and destroy the remaining guns as they shake loose, either because their owners tire of them, age out of using them, or die and leave them to kids who don't want them.

You couldn't get these guns easily anymore, and that should impact the rampages.

[k2qb3]

64. The BOR is our social contract.

I don't think we want to see what happens if we cancel it.

[liskddksil]

66. Even David Jolly (Republican) agrees that this is sound strategy

https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/watch/beto-s-big-moment-on-guns-68906053968

[McCamy Taylor]

67. I think he meant a buy back. I want this! The Constitution only guarantees flint lock guns.

There were no AK 47s in the 18th century. I hate the fact that we cannot send our kids to school or go shopping or even drive a car without worrying that some crazy person will decide to "suicide by cop"---and take a bunch of people with him

[dalton99a]

69. Yes, he meant mandatory buyback

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287264400

[Straw Man]

75. Nowhere does the Constitution refer to flintlocks.

Your argument would restrict freedom speech to manual printing presses and the town crier.

[Humanist_Activist]

70. Its a good first step, but let's be honest, most gun deaths aren't from Assault Rifles, but...

handguns.

The next step would be mandatory buy back of handguns. I know it can't be said, but it would be necessary if you want to make a significant dent in the amount of deaths every year due to handguns.

[Iggo]

73. I like it. (n/t)

[McCamy Taylor]

74. Principles over politics! How refreshing! Makes the Whole Democratic Party look good.

Like we are not in it just for the (NRA) money. We are in it because we care. That is why the other candidates were being all kumbya with Beto.

[Polybius]

76. Did any candidates agree with Beto?

I'm going to watch the debate tonight, I have been working late all week.

[McCamy Taylor]

77. They all praised his compassion and courage but no, none of them committed political suicide.

I am convinced this for Beto this is no longer about the great Bull Moose in Heat Fight that is the Democratic Primary (metaphor from the great Hunter S Thompson).

[McCamy Taylor]

78. Again, what Beto did is important because it Made the Whole Democratic Party Look Good.

[LongtimeAZDem]

81. It is, hands down, the most effective soundbite for galvanizing the opposition

[creeksneakers2]

82. Foolish selfish move by Beto

It may get him a few points in primaries but he super motivated the opposition. Whoever wins will have to deal with that. And all for nothing too because he's never going to be able to take those guns away.

[lunamagica]

83. I like it

[waterwatcher123]

84. Beto Deserves Credit for His Courage

Instead of confiscation, maybe the easiest option is to simply make it illegal to own these weapons. Make it illegal to advertise, trade or sell these weapons on-line, at retail stores, gun clubs or gun auctions, and estate and garage sales (anywhere). Then you could give collectors a chance to dispose of them properly at a designated repository. These guns can then be melted down and turned into something useful for society or the people who live with the scars of gun violence.

[Joe941]

87. Don't use the word confiscate... use mandatory buy back.

[Devil Child]

88. Mandatory buy back equals confiscation

Last edited Sat Sep 14, 2019, 08:03 PM - Edit history (1)

No word play will change the reality.

[Joe941]

89. It's called marketing and branding. Which makes a difference.

[Seeking Serenity]

90. How does someone, like the federal government,

"Buy back" something they didn't sell in the first place?