Even Liberal PolitiFact Hits Beto O'Rourke for Lying About Gun Confiscation


“There is no ban on guns. No one’s banning the gun … No one’s going to take anyone’s gun.”

That was then-Vice President Joe Biden back in 2013, assuring law-abiding Americans that politicians have no interest in confiscating legally owned firearms. Other Democrats have made similar statements, with one clear message: Stop worrying about your Second Amendment rights and trust us.

But then came Beto O’Rourke. The former Texas congressman and current Democratic presidential candidate has been campaigning breathlessly on the issue of gun control, and his plans clearly include confiscating legally purchased rifles from U.S. citizens.

Now he’s lying about it. After being rightly called out for his radical statements on gun control, O’Rourke appeared on MSNBC earlier this month and told a falsehood so blatant that even left-leaning PolitiFact admitted he is full of malarkey.

“Democratic presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke is not talking about confiscating Americans’ guns — except for when he is talking about it,” the fact-checking site reported on Oct. 21.

'A Significant Development': Judge Deals a Blow to Fani Willis, Rules Nathan Wade's Divorce Attorney Must Take the Stand

At the center of PolitiFact’s fact-check was O’Rourke’s grossly misleading statement to “Morning Joe” host and anti-Trump pundit Joe Scarborough.

“Tell us about your plan on the confiscation of guns which, obviously, many believe is unconstitutional, also very concerned that it plays right into the hands of Republican candidates,” Scarborough asked.

That’s when O’Rourke spat out this doozy of a lie: “To be clear, I’m not talking about confiscating anybody’s guns.”

Just a few sentences later, he contradicted himself. “[AR-15s and AK-47s] must be bought back or else each of them are an instrument potentially of terror in this country,” he said.

Do you agree with PolitiFact's assessment of O'Rourke's claims?

That’s a pretty bad blunder, but as PolitiFact rightly noted, the Democratic candidate lied through his teeth when he claimed not to be talking about confiscating anybody’s guns. Mandatory confiscation is exactly what he’s been talking about almost nonstop.

During an appearance on CNN’s “Cuomo Prime Time” last month, O’Rourke was directly asked to explain his gun control stance. “Are you, in fact, in favor of gun confiscation?” CNN’s Chris Cuomo asked him on Sept. 18.

“Yes, when it comes to AR-15s and AK-47s,” O’Rourke answered. “So, when it comes to those weapons, Chris, the answer is yes.”

If there was any doubt, he made a similar statement during the Sept. 12 Democratic debate. “Are you proposing taking away their guns?” moderator David Muir asked the former congressman.

“I am, if it’s a weapon that was designed to kill people on a battlefield,” O’Rourke replied.

Beto Urges Biden to Treat Texas Like Segregationist Arkansas in 1950s, Send in Troops

“Hell, yes, we’re going to take your AR-15.”

The Texas Democrat has tried to weasel away from admitting that he’s pushing for confiscation, despite the fact that his proposed “buyback” would be mandatory and involve “a visit by law enforcement to recover that firearm,” as he said on “Morning Joe.”

Thankfully, PolitiFact isn’t letting him get away with this staggering lie.

“It is unreasonable to call what Mr. O’Rourke is proposing anything other than confiscation,” University of Wyoming law professor George Mocsary told PolitiFact.

The problem is that no matter how much he dances around the issue, O’Rourke’s proposals would necessarily lead to confiscation.

“Imagine the situation when an owner of one of the weapons refuses to sell. He or she is issued a fine. The owner still has the weapon, however. Does paying the fine mean that he or she can now keep the weapon and it is perfectly legal? Certainly not,” Mocsary said.

“There is no scenario under which the owner of one of the designated weapons gets to keep it. That is confiscation.”

Mocsary’s right. O’Rourke and other Democrats can dress this issue up however they like, but at the end of the day, they’re still talking about bureaucrats seizing lawfully owned firearms from American citizens.

Ironically, that nightmare scenario is exactly why the Second Amendment exists in the first place. O’Rourke may be either too dense or too unwilling to understand that, but even liberal fact-checkers aren’t falling for his chicanery any more.

Truth and Accuracy

Submit a Correction →

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

, , ,
Benjamin Arie is an independent journalist and writer. He has personally covered everything ranging from local crime to the U.S. president as a reporter in Michigan before focusing on national politics. Ben frequently travels to Latin America and has spent years living in Mexico.