No, Beto did not kill his chances with "we will take your AR15s"

[ColinC]

Running on gun control in Texas, according to most polls, appears to be a politically savvy thing to do. This is the most recent poll I can find, which shows that a vast majority of Texans prefer more strict gun laws.

https://www.fox7austin.com/news/survey-poll-suggests-texas-voters-overwhelmingly-support-stricter-gun-regulations

On edit: okay maybe RUNNING on gun control isn't the most savvy thing to do based on the last quinnipiac. But as some folks have pointed out, that might not be the most consequential issue on peoples' minds at this point. And a 5-10 point deficit on banning assault rifles, in my opinion, is not a political killer.

https://poll.qu.edu/poll-release?releaseid=3813

[BlueTsunami2018]

1. They prefer background checks sure but outright banning doesn't do well.

It’s a pretty big split against banning guns.

http://texaspolitics.utexas.edu/archive/html/poll/features/gun_control_feature/slide1.html

I maintain that he did destroy his chances with that.

[ColinC]

3. Again. That is from 2013.

Clearly opinion has changed over the last 8 years. More recent polls show more strict either clearly winning or a close call. Even in 2013, more strict was only losing by "stay the same" or less strict" by 6-7 points. Not a blowout by any standards.

[ColinC]

8. A post below cited a quinnipiac though, that shows similar numbers

On assault rifles to the UT poll from 2013. So to that point I concede. However, the numbers have gone back and forth and with so many more directly consequential issues (like the Texas power outage and freeze), I really don't think a 5-10 point deficit on assault rifles is a killer. Especially since a lot of the folks against a ban probably won't make that a deciding factor.

[redstateblues]

14. I like Beto but banning guns in TX is a loser.

He sealed his fate with that one.

[questionseverything]

20. I don't think he could even be elected in liberal Illinois

I just hope he doesn’t drag other democratic candidates down with him

[Torchlight]

2. My experience is that the Feb freeze is much more ingrained in the minds of Texans

than just about anything O'Rourke has said or done; and I'm not hearing too much chatter about the singular plank of O'Rourke's campaign you reference from anyone of note or measure in the Texas electorate, though the real campaign has yet to begin.

Even 11 months later, the freeze is still getting mentioned on practically every local news channel in north Texas if only to suggest what to do in case it happens again. Each time its mentioned is fewer votes for Abbott.

It's simply a matter of getting an apathetic Texas democratic base off its collective butt and voting.

[BusterMove]

4. A little more current...

https://poll.qu.edu/poll-release?releaseid=3813

"When it comes to assault weapons, a majority (52 - 44 percent) oppose a nationwide ban on the sale of assault weapons.

A majority of Texas voters say 56 - 42 percent that they do not think stricter gun laws would help to decrease the number of mass shootings. This compares to a 2019 survey when voters said 50 - 45 percent they did not think stricter gun laws would help decrease the number of mass shootings.

[ColinC]

6. Point taken.

Still not a blowout. And it is a single issue. If the first paragraph here was a 30-40 point margin, I would change my tune. But 7-8 points ina politically fluid environment isn't the worst.

[Budi]

5. Correct. We're not all hugging guns over hugging our children's lives.

We're just not the loudest.

[Initech]

7. Some people should have their guns taken away.

[SYFROYH]

9. Wishful thinking.

Forcing people to turn in their rifles is a long way from banning future sales of ARs and other gun control.

Interesting that the survey didn't ask about that issue specifically.

[ColinC]

10. Good point. Even the most recent quinnipiac didn't ask it

https://poll.qu.edu/poll-release?releaseid=3813

But I think it might be a safe bet that folks willing to ban the sale of assault rifles won't care if they are taken away from people.

[LiberatedUSA]

11. I doubt that would go well in this political climate.

How would that work? A SWAT team can surround a house, but if the other houses are with the house, then oppsie daisy.

Or like Missouri and other entire states that have declared they will ignore a federal ban. Gonna need a mighty big swat team.

[ColinC]

12. Nothing like the swat scenario. Just voluntary buybacks and tickets for people who still have them.

"take back" can mean a lot of things. Turning ownership into a civil violation works just as well as your scenario.

[SYFROYH]

13. Beto advocates for mandatory buyback under gov't penalty

I don't think you can really call it voluntary if there is the threat of government imposed penalty for failing to turn in your guns.

I should say that I like a lot of things about Beto, but IMHO he really jumped the shark with his statement.

Quoting the candidate's past comment about selling back AR-15s and AK-47s, moderator David Muir asked O'Rourke: "Are you proposing taking away their guns? And how would this work?"

O'Rourke answered, "Hell, yes, we're going to take your AR-15, your AK-47."

https://www.npr.org/2019/09/12/760386808/orourke-promises-to-take-your-ar-15-but-americans-are-split-on-buybacks

[ColinC]

15. True. Still not a swat team response.

Folks can keep their guns as long as they want if they are willing to pay the penalty -whichnlets face it, would at worst be a $400 citation or something similar. So yeah, kinda voluntary...


The upside to this would be any suspects on this list of violators could be more easily apprehended.

[Whiskeytide]

19. This is EXACTLY why it won't fly in Texas. The republicans will ...

… run nationally on “they’re gonna take your guns”, and Beto gave them an excellent sound bite for that campaign in every state. THAT alone will motivate lazy republicans to get out and vote.

And the fact that you have added that it will create a state registry of gun owners to more easily round them up later plays right into their hands. It was a foolish thing to say. And likely cannot be taken back at this point.

[ColinC]

21. I disagree. But less than a year to go before we find out who is right!

I think that Texans are probably more focused on issues like incompetent leadership involving the freeze out. Even if the national gop runs those ads, the ads about leaders essentially abandoning their state during a crisis will likely have far more traction.

[SYFROYH]

22. True not a SWAT response.

But I cannot abide by the civil penalty (and likely confiscation either) for mere possession.

[ColinC]

23. He couldn't confiscate them

I don't think it would fly in Texas even if Democrats win the governor's race and a supermajority in the legislature. Or even in the rest of the country, really...


On edit: Or at least not for several years. I imagine at worst there would be some kind of deadline where everybody would have to get rid of their assault rifles several years down the road. But yeah... Honestly I don't see how that would be politically feasible to pull off. Nonetheless i really don't think it will -or has, decided his career.

[MichMan]

24. How do you figure under mandatory buy back, one could just pay a fine and keep them?

[ColinC]

26. In the way that laws to prosecute gun owners won't fly in Texas.

The closest we will get are civil violations IMHO.


I am strongly leaning, however, toward the idea I am wrong in this respect.

[EX500rider]

35. How would they know who owns assault weapons?

Everybody who wants to keep theirs would say they sold it awhile back or it fell off their boat in deep water.

[ColinC]

36. So yeah. Registrations is a start.

How insane is it that you can own a deadly machine and not have to register it

[EX500rider]

37. Same thing for registrations, "I sold it", "I lost it overboard" nt

[LiberatedUSA]

16. Filibuster and Supreme Court

If you can’t get past that, forget it.

Blue states set an example the Red States get to feed on. Deciding not to enforce federal immigration locally and having sanctuary cities, as well as ignoring the federal ban on marijuana by legalizing it at the state level, they now get to ignore any gun control they don’t like, like legalizing those guns in their state. Monkey see, monkey do.

And it is not just that. Sheriffs are elected. Locals in red states won’t elect a sheriff that will go after their guns. The sheriff won’t do it, because he or she hunts, shoots and drinks beer with all the farmers. So it won’t get enforced.

Then I will note, as I like to do, the hypocrisy of calling these weapons “only good for war”, then allowing the same cops we protest for murdering people to be exempt from the ban; meaning they keep theirs.

Smart thinking. If you don’t trust a group of people because they are known for abusing and killing, you want them better armed than you. Makes perfect sense.

[ColinC]

18. We are talking about Texas specifically.

In the insane scenario that Democrats take over the entire state government with Beto s governor. Not gonna happen honestly, even if Beto is in charge. But if it does happen, Texans will be living under the dystopian reality of mandatory buybacks of their AR15s at the risk of receiving a ticket of several hundred dollars. Maybe even a tax penalty.

I... I can't imagine..

[Kaleva]

29. I don't think long guns like AR15s are registered in TX so nobody would know who had them

[ColinC]

31. Yeah that's insane. Neither does the US apparently.

[LiberatedUSA]

32. We have no registration in Missouri.

Even people suspected of owning them could turn in a few of their massive collection to throw the scent off. Of course, Missouri doesn’t plan on enforcing any new federal ban: local sheriffs aren’t interested and they privately own the same guns as well.

[ColinC]

33. Sounds like a mess.

[PTWB]

17. It's just a very odd position for any politician to take.

All long guns (rifles and shotguns combined) account for a statistically insignificant number of annual gun deaths compared to handguns. So-called assault rifles (how exactly are we defining them now?) account for some smaller percentage of an already small percentage.

So, really, what is the damn point? Why would a politician waste political capital pushing to pass an unpopular piece of legislation that has zero chance of passing AND even if it did pass would have minimal impact on the very real problem of gun violence?

The fact of the matter is that violence is a socioeconomic issue. We could eliminate far more gun violence by enacting universal basic income, a guaranteed living wage, universal healthcare (including mental healthcare), and fixing the systemic oppression of minorities in our criminal Justice system.

[Midnight Writer]

27. In addition, the Governor of Texas has no authority to ban or confiscate guns.

Why would he even open that can of worms?

[ColinC]

28. He was running for the democratic nomination for president at the time

My guess is he thought it would help him win.

On retrospect he appears to be have been very wrong if that was his assessment.

[left-of-center2012]

25. How is Beto doing in the latest polls?

[ColinC]

30. Here

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2022/governor/tx/texas-governor-abbott-vs-orourke-7376.html


Nearly a year out from the election , his odds can easily improve or worsen.

[Amishman]

34. might not have killed his chances, but sure didn't help

was a bad misstep strategically, the kind we can't really afford

Across the board we need to be focusing on popular initiatives and hitting the pubs on topics where they are the ones underwater. pretty basic really.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

38. re: "we will take your AR15s"

"kill his chances"? No.
Do anything to improve them? No.
I suggest that statement, however small, equals an overall minus for him.

One of the prime errors polls make when asking about pending new laws or changes is qualifying the respondent's knowledgeable of the existing laws.
Poll: "Would you like stricter ___ laws?"
Respondent: Yes.
But can the respondent demonstrate any knowledge of the existing laws?

Many folks respond to these types of questions based on their memory of their opinions of what they overheard at the bar 5 years ago.

Overall this topic is nuanced and complicated. Sweeping generalities are no one's friend. YMMV