Beto O’Rourke is probably the second-most confusing presidential candidate in the field, right after woo-peddler Marianne Williamson. O’Rourke lost his senatorial campaign to Ted Cruz in an election that was supposed to be a “blue wave” that swept the country. Despite his loss, though, people convinced him to run for president.

Now, he is. He’s not doing particularly well, but in the wake of deadly mass shootings in El Paso and Odessa, he’s rallying everything he has behind gun control. I’m not talking about universal background checks either.

I was asked how I’d address people’s fears that we will take away their assault rifles.

I want to be clear: That’s exactly what we’re going to do. Americans who own AR-15s and AK-47s will have to sell their assault weapons. All of them. pic.twitter.com/YbnSsz3bVy

— Beto O’Rourke (@BetoORourke) September 2, 2019

So much for no one is coming for our guns, huh?

Of course, no such thing will happen. Even if he somehow managed to get elected president and somehow convinced Congress to pass an assault weapon ban, he’s going to be sorely pressed to actually make anyone give up their AR-15s or AK-47s. It’s just not going to happen. Instead, the people who own these guns will look, chuckle, and then ignore the law.

You see, there’s a point where every law-abiding citizen will be pushed no further. There’s a line where you can push and push them toward and they’ll comply with your every directive to the best of their ability, but once you cross that line, they’re not going to listen anymore. That line, for many of us, is when you start coming for our guns.

Beto here isn’t talking about the assault weapon ban bill we currently have in Congress. That bill includes a grandfather clause that would exempt guns we already own. It’s a restriction on future sales and doesn’t require us to give up our guns in any real way. Not technically.

O’Rourke is talking about a mandatory buyback. He wants to make us sell our guns back or face criminal penalties. That’s a gun grab. That’s them coming for our guns, something so many anti-gunners habitually claim no one is trying to do.

Well, they are.

While O’Rourke isn’t exactly a frontrunner, he’s also far from the rear of the pack either. It’s entirely possible that he’ll push this hard enough–it’s likely to resonate with a Democratic base that’s notoriously anti-gun–that someone else will pick up the call and follow along.

More importantly, though, is that O’Rourke isn’t the first candidate to take a position like this. Rep. Erik “Nuke ’em All” Swalwell was a big fan of that as well. While Swalwell was polling slightly behind a desk lamp, O’Rourke is doing a bit better. Ideas like this can be a virus and will fester and spread, which is what they’re doing.

Folks, let’s be real. We’re going to have a fight on our hands if we don’t want to see this happen. O’Rourke is just the latest to push for this, but don’t expect him to be the last.

However, I do want to point out a bit of irony. You see, he’s making these comments in Charlottesville, Virginia, a place where politics led to a loss of human life…but where a car was the weapon, not a gun. Automobiles kill more people every year than guns, but O’Rourke isn’t talking about banning any class of them.

Then again, it’s not like gun owners were going to vote for O’Rourke anyways and he knows it. Car owners, on the other hand, might be a bit more problematic for him to tick off.