Former Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Julian Castro offered some powerful pushback to other Democrats’ plans to implement a mandatory gun buyback program for assault weapons at tonight’s debate, emphasizing the police power that would be required to make that a reality.
Earlier in the night, former Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D–Texas) equivocated when asked how he would enforce his mandatory gun buyback proposal while also sticking to his promise that he would not have the police go door-to-door.
Castro, to his credit, pointed out that this is impossible, and that any confiscation efforts would fall hardest on those people who already bear the brunt of police enforcement of so many other laws. “I am not going to give these police officers an excuse to go door to door in these communities,” said Castro.
O’Rourke was pressed by CNN debate moderator Anderson Cooper on how he planned to “take away weapons from people who do not want to give them up.” He hinted at “other consequences” for individuals unwilling to voluntarily turn their weapons in
“If someone does not turn in an AR-15, or an AK-47, one of these weapons of war, or brings it out in public and brandishes it in an attempt to intimidate—as we saw in Kent State recently—then that weapon will be taken from them,” Beto said. “If they persist, there will be other consequences from law enforcement.”
O’Rourke did not elaborate on what those consequences would be.
And more intra-Dem disagreement:
https://reason.com/2019/10/15/police-violence-is-also-gun-violence-says-julian-castro-arguing-against-mandatory-gun-buybacks/
Beto is having some messaging problems. His promise of future AR-15 door-to-door “visit[s] by law enforcement” to collect weapons contradicts what his staffer is saying: https://twitter.com/LaurenHitt/status/1184466220910895104
Which one is lying?
And from last night’s Dem debate:
https://freebeacon.com/issues/beto-ominously-promises-other-consequences-for-those-who-dont-turn-in-guns/