Sheriff Stands Up To Beto O’Rourke, Vows He Won’t Disarm Americans

Democratic presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke has repeatedly said that if he were to win the White House, he would outlaw the ownership of AR-15s and AK-47s. To enforce the plan, the former congressman said he would send law enforcement officials door-to-door to confiscate them—should gun owners not comply with handing them over in the first place.

And O’Rourke is not shy about saying it.

“Hell yes, we’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47,” he said during the Democratic primary debate in September.

He clarified during an interview with MSNBC that there “would be a visit by law enforcement to recover that firearm.”

Even though a victory in the 2020 election is a long shot, it would make O’Rourke the country’s chief law enforcement officer. But state and local law enforcement officers do not want anything to do with the confiscation plan.

The Western Journal reports the Kinney County Sheriff’s Office spoke out against the plan on its Facebook page on Oct. 19 “to give O’Rourke a reality check.”

In a post, Sheriff Brad Coe said: “Recently ‘Beto’ O’Rourke made comments about a mandatory buyback for all AR-15 and AK-47 rifles and that those who refused would have them ‘confiscated’ by law enforcement.”

“As Sheriff of Kinney County, I would meet ATF and the FBI at the county line and deny them access to the county to violate the Second Amendment,” the sheriff continued. “For almost 40 years I have sworn to protect the Constitution ‘against all enemies, foreign and domestic.’”

Recently “Beto” O’Rourke made comments about a mandatory buy back for all AR-15 and AK-47 rifles and that those who…

Posted by Kinney County Sheriff's Office on Saturday, October 19, 2019

The Western Journal continues:

The message here is crystal clear — confiscation would be dead in the water in this Texas county.

Now, not only does O’Rourke face armed citizens unwilling to give up their Second Amendment rights, but entire law enforcement agencies are making it known that they will actively protect Americans’ freedoms.

The Washington Free Beacon reports “leaders from groups representing hundreds of thousands of law enforcement officers” overwhelmingly criticized the plan. They reportedly said it was unconstitutional, as well as “ridiculous” and “asinine.”

The leader of the National Fraternal Order of Police—which represents more than 330,000 law enforcement officers—says he also draws the line at confiscation.

“Mr. O’Rourke may not be aware that state and local police officers (who comprise more than 90% of all police in the U.S.) receive their orders from their local jurisdictions – not from the Federal government,” Jim Pasco, the order’s executive director, said to the Free Beacon. “Further, any such legislation, if it passed, would no doubt be vigorously litigated with a view to its apparent inconsistency with the Second Amendment.”

“In view of the foregoing, and in view of Mr. O’Rourke’s current standing in the polls, we do not view this as an issue we will have to grapple within the foreseeable future,” he added.