Posts
California
Democrat Threatens "Nukes" If Americans Don't Hand Over
Their Guns
16
November, 2018
Well
that escalated quickly...
Just
days after taking back the House, a
Democratic Congressmen has proposed outlawing "military-style
semi-automatic assault weapons" and forcing existing owners to
sell their weapons or face prosecution.
In
a USA
Today op-ed entitled
“Ban assault weapons, buy them back, go after resisters,” Rep.
Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., argued Thursday that prior
proposals to ban assault weapons “would leave millions of assault
weapons in our communities for decades to come.”
Swalwell
proposes that the government
should offer up to $1,000 for every weapon covered
by a new ban, estimating that it would take $15 billion to buy back
roughly 15 million weapons - and
“criminally prosecute any who choose to defy [the buyback] by
keeping their weapons.”
As
NBC News reports, this
is a major departure from prior gun control proposals that typically
exempt existing firearms; as in
the past, Democrats and gun safety groups have carefully resisted
proposals that could be interpreted as 'gun confiscation', a
concept gun rights groups have often invoked as part of a slippery
slope argument against more modest proposals like universal
background checks.
And
sure enough Swalwell's egotistical over-reach - going full
"Australia" - prompted anger across social media. But it
was one particular thread that caught our eye...
John
Cardillo, 'America Talks Live' host on Newsmax, tweeted in
response: "Make
no mistake, Democrats want to eradicate the Second Amendment, ban and
seize all guns, and
have all power rest with the state. These people are dangerously
obsessed with power."
Make no mistake, Democrats want to eradicate the Second Amendment, ban and seize all guns, and have all power rest with the state.
These people are dangerously obsessed with power. nbcnews.com/politics/congr…
Which
prompted a further response from Joe Biggs, a combat vet, "So
basically @RepSwalwell wants a war. Because
that’s what you would get. You're outta your fucking mind if you
think I’ll give up my rights and give the gov all the power."
So basically @RepSwalwell wants a war. Because that’s what you would get. You’re outta your fucking mind if you think I’ll give up my rights and give the gov all the power.
To
which Rep. Swalwell decided to reply - in a not tyrannical-sounding
way at all... "And
it would be a short war my friend. The government has nukes. Too many
of them. But they’re legit. I’m
sure if we talked we could find common ground to protect our families
and communities."
And it would be a short war my friend. The government has nukes. Too many of them. But they’re legit. I’m sure if we talked we could find common ground to protect our families and communities.
"So our government would nuke its own country in order to take guns? Wow," Biggs responded.
"Don’t be so dramatic. You claiming you need a gun to protect yourself against the government is ludicrous. But you seem like a reasonable person. If an assault weapons ban happens, I’m sure you’ll follow law," Swalwell tweeted back.
And
after the furor exploded, Swalwell quickly resorted to the "it
was sarcasm" excuse.
*
* *
Now
the question is - who will Twitter ban? The
conservative-leaning 2nd Amendment-protector raising his 'social
media' above the pulpit; or the liberal politician who is threatening
to unleash nukes on domestic soil in order to ensure the citizenry
follow his demands and hand over their means of defense?
To
be continued...
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.