And these are the same people who say our democracy is at risk because of Donald Trump. Got it. They also control the House, and this guy sits on both the Judiciary Committee and the House Intelligence Committee. Just FYI.
U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell on Friday said the U.S. government would use its nuclear weapons in a hypothetical war against Second Amendment supporters refusing to give up their firearms.
The California Democrat, who is openly considering a run for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination in 2020, made the outlandish remark on social media after a gun-rights advocate pointed out that the lawmaker once called for gun owners to surrender their assault weapons.,,
The comment drew an immediate backlash, with thousands of people criticizing the lawmaker for the ill-thought-out remark.
“Here is an actual member of the U.S. Congress talking about using nuclear weapons against Americans,” David Freddoso wrote.
“Personally, I have a bigger problem with an elected official blithely talking about nuking his fellow Americans than my neighbor owning an AR-15,” Cam Edwards tweeted.
Swalwell — a member of both the House Judiciary Committee and the House Intelligence Committee — tried to defuse the situation, saying the need for a firearm to protect against the government is “ludicrous” and suggested that if an assault weapon ban would happen, people would just follow the law.
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.
— Rep. Eric Swalwell (@RepSwalwell) November 16, 2018
Swalwell op-ed in USA Today May 2018: Ban assault weapons, buy them back, go after resisters: Ex-prosecutor in Congress
Could there ever be a better example of why the Founders wrote the 2nd Amendment into the Bill of Rights?
Once again, this was not written to support citizens who join the Militia. It’s a statement of balance: Because the State must necessarily maintain an armed Militia, therefore the people may also arm themselves. To allow the State to possess a monopoly of deadly force is an invitation to tyranny. Indeed, the “shot heard ’round the world” was in consequence of the British marching on Lexington and Concord for the purpose of disarming the colonists. The 2nd Amendment was written by men who remembered this, and their intent was it never happen again in America.
A disarmed citizen is an impotent citizen. An armed citizen can be killed, but he can never be enslaved.
Swalwell has co-sponsored bills re No-fly No-buy, eg, if you’re on the No-Fly ‘suspected terrorist’ list, you can’t buy firearms. I think the plan is to pass that bill and intersect with the recent accusations that the NRA is a White Supremist/Nationalist org; thereby, all NRA members will be placed on No-Fly and won’t be able to buy. They’ll go for confiscation from those on list next, and maybe can’t buy ammo.
Also, remember last year, Dems & Never Trumpers (Corker) were questioning Trump’s fitness (impulsiveness) for control of the nuclear football. Will that issue surface for Swalwell as a candidate? Not holding my breath.
You know why nobody ever suggested taking that nuclear football away from Bill Clinton? Because he didn’t have it in the first place. He lost it!.