Categories
Right Angle

Hell No, Beto: Here’s How President O’Rourke Could Take Our Guns

Democrat Presidential candidate Rep. Beto O’Rourke drew a huge cheer at the last debate when he said, “Hell yes, we’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47…” Let’s imagine that the Texas lawmaker miraculously gets to the White House and attempts to keep that promise. Bill Whittle, Scott Ott and Stephen Green game it out.

Democrat Presidential candidate Rep. Beto O’Rourke drew a huge cheer at the last debate when he said, “Hell yes, we’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47…” Let’s imagine that the Texas lawmaker miraculously gets to the White House and attempts to keep that promise. Bill Whittle, Scott Ott and Stephen Green game it out. Will gun owners compliantly turnover their weapons, or will Beto finally learn the meaning of his home state credo: “Come and Take It”? (Hat tip to a Spartan King Leonidas I, who at the Battle of Thermopylae allegedly said, ” μολὼν λαβέ,” which is ancient Greek for, “Hell No, Beto.).

43 replies on “Hell No, Beto: Here’s How President O’Rourke Could Take Our Guns”

It wouldnt be the police force or the military it would be a specially hired force to specifically take away guns plus any other pesky things they feel we dont need any more…

I think the biggest dismay I have for our future is the possibility that those of us who took our oaths to defend the Constitution seriously will have to someday fight our fellow Americans in combat to protect the rights of citizens under the Constitution. No one wants to do that, but rest assured, we will do it it comes to that. We pledged to protect the Constitution of the United States, not a president, a governor, or a bunch of legislators bent on becoming our masters.

Two movie quotes come to mind here that I think apply to this. The first is from “The Mountain Men” starring Charlton Heston, that occurs when some Indians angrily declare they will take the scalps of the mountain men, to which Brian Keith replies, “That’ll be after the fight.” The second quote is from the opening scene of the movie “Billy Jack,” where Billy Jack looks at Sheriff’s Deputy Mike and says “When policemen break the law, then there isn’t any law; just a fight for survival.”

If you try to disarm the American people you are violating the Constitution, and that makes your government illegitimate then and there. Those of us who swore the oath and took it seriously to protect and defend it against ALL enemies, foreign or domestic, are required by our oaths to do whatever is necessary to defend it from anyone, even our own government if they become tyrannical. That means picking up arms and fighting them if necessary, for the Constitution will be defended. We swore to die to protect it, and at that point, these people will be domestic enemies. This is the same oath, I should point out, that every president, every Senator, every Congressman and most all law enforcement officers also swear when they take office. The government official enters into tyranny when he or she tries to take away citizens’ rights under the Constitution. Such action would legitimize open rebellion. If we “oath-keepers”–as the Left likes to call us, intending derision (but which we take as a great compliment)–are willing to fight and die to keep our rights, the big question then becomes, are the tyrants who want to take those rights as willing to fight and die to take control?

As a retired military officer and a former police officer, I would refuse to follow such order from above as it clearly violates the Constitution that I swore to uphold and protect. No one is required to follow orders that are illegal or immoral. I would quit my job and join the Resistance first. Anyone who tried to enforce such an order would therefore become a tyrant and become an enemy of the Constitution that I swore to fight, which means their laws are then illegitimate, and they thus become open targets as enemies of America. Most military folks and police would simply refuse to obey Beto’s order. In fact, most would outright mutiny–AS REQUIRED BY THEIR OATHS. This is hard to understand by the radical Left, who think words don’t actually mean things, and who don’t consider lying to be immoral (or much of anything else either, except racism).

In any coming conflict, if such is to occur, over gun control that becomes a deadly force battle, it is logically clear to me that the battle will be won by one group alone–the group that has the guns! That means the Left will lose such a WAR big-time, as they are not well-armed, have no warrior instincts, and are not willing to die to get what they want, not like the Right is, especially after the military and LEOs refuse to go and take the guns for them. Making these claims is the stupidest thing Beto could have sdone, but at least he’s being honest for once about it–I’d much rather deal with an honest tyrant who inform me he’s evil than a lying politician who pretends to be a true American any day (because we known how to handle tyrants).

There is actually video of Beto, when he was running for office in Texas against Ted Cruz, stating that he felt everyone had a right to a gun if they bought one legally. Now, in his presidential run, he flips 180 degrees, because, like most Democrats, he will LIE and say anything to get himself into power. The man simply has no integrity. We should also realize that he is a criminal. Beto has been arrested in the past for both burglary and DUI.

This is the guy who’s going to come and take away my rights under the Constitution? I think not. I think millions of fellow Americans think not as well. I understand that as a former burglar he might be trying to improve working conditions for burglars across the nation, but too bad. In the end, we will NEVER let him take our guns (we might, however, let him receive some ammunition).;-)

I can think of nothing that would plunge this nation into a civil war faster than someone actually trying to confiscate guns nation-wide, for then the tree of liberty would then indeed by refreshed by the blood of patriots and tyrants, as Jefferson wrote, and I have no doubt that the patriots would win. We are not England, Australia or New Zealand. We don’t want to be. Our people will not give up their arms, because we are not slaves of the government; they work for us.

That Constitution will be defended by anyone who ever took the oath and meant what they said when they took it. This former crook and crybaby is just making bold statements his rear end can’t cash to get some cheers from a crowd that already hates America. But it disturbs me greatly that so many Democrats would cheer a man who has told them that, not only will he violate the Constitution and violate our citizens’ rights, but he would do it by force. At some point, unless people of his ilk back off on this idiocy, a civil war/rebellion will become inevitable. If that happens it will be bloody, and the Right will ultimately win that battle, and probably quite brutally as they are getting rather irritated by this constant unending effort to disarm them. Those arms ensure our safety and our freedom. There will be atrocities committed by both sides in any such civil conflict. And the biggest irony is that it can all be completely avoided by simply doing one thing: follow the Constitution.

The radical side of the Democrat party does not seem to understand the nature of the sleeping giant they are prodding. If it awakens in anger it shall be a savage beast indeed, and it will come to devour its tormentors. At this point I think this is all talk and political positioning, but if it ever becomes serious, a bunch of angry Americans will put the tyrants against walls and shoot them or hang them from light poles in the streets. I pray it never comes to that, since it is so easily avoided, but if it does, oh well. The radical tyrants will have asked for it. The oath to defend the Constitution will be kept by the men and women who swore to defend it, whatever the cost, even if we must all perish in that defense.

This has become quite irritating.
Bill – why do you (of all people) feel the need to virtue signal, saying that you don’t like his (president Trump) Tweets?
I really don’t get it ?!
You made it clear more than once, that Politically Correct is bad for us – for our culture, for our county (me in Israel, you USA).

Very well, so what do you think we should do about it?

Maybe, if we had a leader who was brave enough to lead us out of this mess, But how?

Don’t you see that with every Tweet – he removes another brick from this wall?
(Some walls need to be built, and some need to be broken)

As I currently see it – we are already half way there, this is happening …

This channel has to fully support this president – and make it your first priority!

You know how to do it best – and we rely on you!!

Thanks a lot
Amos (Israel)

P.S – after 2024 – could you please send Donald Trump to Israel – we also have some issues here, you know 🙂

I’m not speaking for Bill, but for myself. I will never treat any human politician as if he’s infallible or support whatever he does for the sake of the party, the movement, or popular opinion. It’s not virtue signaling to discern between right and wrong. It’s not political correctness to say what you believe. It’s merely correct. I understand your point, Amos, and the urgency of the moment. But suspension of discernment can never be part of a call to duty. Glad you’re with us, brother.

Scott – thanks for your (very quick) reply
1. Even after I took it to google translate – I am not sure I fully understood it 🙂 (but i like to challenge my English )
2. But for now – let’s go with what I did get – I never said that President Trump is infallible (nor do I think so), in the closer of that segment, Bill mentioned 3 things that are not OK with this administration
– The Tweets (what can i say more)
– The progress on the wall – that I partly agree with,since we all know the obstacles he had to overcome.
– And Spending – this one – I couldn’t agree more, this is outrageous !
My comment is not to shield him from criticism, but rather to point out that if you think that Politically Correct Is bad, so what do you do about it?
do you think that saying that it is bad will help?

And just to be on the safe side here – maybe I was a bit rough with my language in my first massage, and maybe (just maybe) you will not decide to adopt the new policy that I have just suggested.
I am still very happy to be a member of this channel, and I hope that I will be able to support it for a long time

take care
Amos

Most certainly – it is mutual
(as long as you will not decide to kick me off your platform for using a non PC language ;-))

Robert O’Rourke (I refuse to use the Latino nickname – Roberto/Beto – he appropriated and uses to try to fool Hispanics into voting for him) has admitted what all the anti-gun nuts really want to do but lie that they don’t/won’t.

And Again: “Sorry, this content isn’t available right now
The link you followed may have expired, or the page may only be visible to an audience you’re not in.
Go back to the previous page · Go to News Feed · Visit our Help Center ”
I guess I’ll never know what says it all!

The one thing about AR platform rifles that nobody is talking about amazes me. The AR platform rifle has been around since 1957. The parts to build them number in the billions all over the nation. The parts are so well understood and documented and easy to manufacture, especially given modern CNC milling and 3D printing, that there are literally thousands of guys in garages all over the nation milling parts for AR’s and selling them online. If you do a web search for any AR platform rifle part, you will get millions of returns on the search. Amazon, Ebay, etc…. have BILLIONS of AR parts and accessories available for purchase. The serial #’d part (the stripped lower) is currently only sold through legit dealers, but 80% lowers are available online and again are easily manufactured with modern computer operated tools as well as basic hand tools. 80% lowers requiring tooling and work to complete them. These are non-serial numbered because they are not technically a finished product. The point is this, there is a massive abundance of parts and accessories for AR’s ALL OVER the internet readily and easily available because these parts are simple and basic, and easy to make. If the government were able to take up all AR platform rifles(and they are not), guys in garages would be manufacturing and selling parts and complete rifles. The black market would flourish for them, and enterprising criminals would have a ton of them. And good law abiding citizens would be stuck with 6 shot revolvers(if the Democrats allow us even that). Hint: guys in garages with some tools are already making AR platform rifles.

Every time a ban is proposed I get people coming to my CNC machine shop looking for me to make AR-15 lowers. I don’t do it for two reasons, 1—I’m not a licensed manufacturer and 2—they are being made in such mass quantities everywhere that I couldn’t make enough to cover my shop rate.

OK — A little longer comment today – First: Remember that US Troops have fired on American Citizens in the past. Fairly small, but did happen – NY draft riots during the Civil War and the Bonus Camps in DC after the 1st world war. (If I have misspoken, please advise) So please don’t bet that LE and the Military absolutely will not go after you (but again, this will be a relatively small number) AND ::: Gun Control (or confiscation) is a theory espoused by some monumentally stupid people who claim to believe, against all logic and common sense, that a violent predator who ignores the laws prohibiting them from robbing, raping, kidnapping, torturing and killing their fellow human beings will obey a law telling them that they cannot posses or own a gun ?? Just Sayin’

PS.. Don’t know who wrote that, but I do admit that it IS NOT my original idea — JS

My Cousin (U.S.Army not National Guard) shot a civilian in the Detroit riots. Martial Law had been declared, and this guy was an observed looter that refused an order to HALT. So, not “self defense”, deadly force authorized to enforce a declaration of martial law. Wayne actually fired his .45 as the guy went around a corner in an ally (dropped the TV set), and only hit the dudes coat, but the energy of that round threw the guy against the opposite wall and knocked his ass out. The perp was otherwise uninjured.

But Steve’s Looks like Bobby drives like Teddy. Yowza. I am so glad I came up with that line.

There are already some historical events as reference to gauge what might happen if the government tries to confiscate guns. First they have to get them registered so they know who has them. In Canada registration compliance was about 15%. Connecticut attempted registration after the Sandy Hook shootings with no better results. For the states that banned bump stocks there has been very few of them turned in.

Assuming 90 million gun owners and 15% compliance that leaves 76.5 million gun owners they have to identify and send out thugs to search and confiscate weapons from if they can find them. Gun shop records would help but when contacted owners could simply hide them and declare them lost, leaving the government the expensive and difficult task of proving otherwise.

Jail sentences for non-compliance is impossible for countless reasons, including the lack of resources to prosecute and house them and what would putting so many taxpayers in jail do for the tax base?

One good thing would come of it though. As they did in Connecticut, the government will get a refresher course on the limits of their power and a reminder come the next election that elected politicians are Servants of the people, NOT Rulers.

So my question for Francis is, for those who will not voluntarily surrender their guns, how do you identify them? A national registry? Is that not what Elizabeth Warren (who might actually win her party’s nomination) is suggesting? Step 1 on the way to confiscation.

Bill, it’s not Beto, it’s Francis. As in, “The name’s Francis Murphy, but all my friends call me Psycho. Any of you guys call me Francis . . . and I’ll kill ya.”

I don’t own a gun. I never have except a BB gun and a few cap pistols as a child. I am sorely tempted to change my status with respect to guns. At 82 years of age and mobility challenged might not be a good time to start.

What do I have to lose? My freedom, my individual rights, and possibly shorten my life by a few years.

What do I have to gain? I might be able to take a few of those evil bastards with me.

Still, I think the best way to fight the evil bastards is to stop feeding them. They start eating each other in a month or so and I would experience a few months of hard times. Hard times I can and have survived. I am very unlikely to survive in hand to hand combat.

I shall continue to fight with my mind, my thoughts, and my words. Considering the enemy is not well armed in that respect, my odds look much better.

I love how the Fed wants to use my tax dollars (my money) to ‘buy back’ my weapon that I legally purchased. They are not buying back anything, they are giving me a small tax refund in exchange for my freedoms. Not sure about anyone else, but my liberties are not that cheap, in fact they are priceless.

So much for the free everything the evil bastards are trying to trade for our votes.

They have nothing they don’t take from us in the first place. All they have is lies to stand on. That is not nearly as stable as quicksand.

I say let them sink in their own quagmire.

I know a number of responsible gun owners. They would NEVER sell a gun to somebody they do not trust. It would be an immoral thing to do.

If the government goes against their own constitution, they are not trustworthy. How could somebody in good conscience sell a gun to somebody that cannot be trusted?

I showed a class “The Princess Bride” Monday and as you were talking I realized Beta O’ is Humperdinck. Makes a brave noise but in the end, will have to live knowing he’s nothing. Beta O’ as president? Inconceivable!

OK, Bobby, here’s a handful of warrants. There’s Houston’s 5th Ward. You have at it, Bobby. Give us a call if you have a problem. We’ll be right there.
-HPD.

Most LEO want to maintain the peace. Not do something to create a bad situation that may result in someone, maybe even them, being killed.

Just yesterday, I replied to a Facebook friend who had posted an article about “Beta’s” declaration that all the Democrat candidates KNOW they would never be able to do what they so very much desire. They KNOW trying to disarm a huge nation could never, ever be done. They are just using the issue to gin up support in their sheeple in order to get votes. I’ve noticed that many of those sheeple are starting to wake up and not walk away, but run away from the Democrat party. I say good for them.

Leave a Reply