If there was any doubt about Democrats’ agenda to take Americans’ guns away, Rep. Eric Swalwell just laid that to rest.
The California Democrat showed his true colors not only in an op-ed calling for semi-automatic rifles to be confiscated and prosecuting gun owners who resist, he also later noted that the “government has nukes” that it could use in a war against Second Amendment supporters who refuse to give up their firearms.
In an opinion piece for USA Today entitled “Ban assault weapons, buy them back, go after resisters,” Swalwell proposed using $15 billion in taxpayer money to fund the confiscation of “military-style semiautomatic assault weapons” and to go after gun owners who refuse to sell their existing weapons.
Swalwell’s proposal is in stark contrast to the carefully worded narrative Democrats have previously touted, avoiding that slippery slope argument that gun control will mean gun confiscation.
“Reinstating the federal assault weapons ban that was in effect from 1994 to 2004 would prohibit manufacture and sales, but it would not affect weapons already possessed. This would leave millions of assault weapons in our communities for decades to come,” Swalwell wrote.
“Instead, we should ban possession of military-style semiautomatic assault weapons, we should buy back such weapons from all who choose to abide by the law, and we should criminally prosecute any who choose to defy it by keeping their weapons,” he continued, adding that this “would not apply to law enforcement agencies or shooting clubs.”
He argued that “gun ownership runs so deep” in America that “we don’t even know how many military-style semiautomatic rifles are in U.S. civilian hands.” But the potential 2020 presidential contender suggested the government should pay up to $1,000 for every weapon in a new ban, with an estimated $15 billion needed to buy back the 15 million weapons that he estimates are out there, adding that the government should “criminally prosecute any who choose to defy [the buyback] by keeping their weapons.”
“It’s no small sum,” the Democrat admitted. “Consider this an investment in averting carnage and heartache and loss.”
Swalwell, who is co-chair of the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee, serves on the House Judiciary Committee and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, also cited the teen survivors of the Parkland shooting.
“There’s something new and different about the surviving Parkland high schoolers’ demands. They dismiss the moral equivalence we’ve made for far too long regarding the Second Amendment,” he wrote. “I’ve been guilty of it myself, telling constituents and reporters that ‘we can protect the Second Amendment and protect lives.'”
Former combat veteran Joe Biggs called out Swalwell’s proposal as something that would set off a “war.”
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. https://t.co/bK1GVyjFej
— Joe Biggs (@Rambobiggs) November 16, 2018
Swalwell responded with an outlandish tweet warning the government could use nuclear weapons against resisters.
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
So our government would nuke its own country in order to take guns? Wow
— Joe Biggs (@Rambobiggs) November 16, 2018
The comment sparked immediate and sharp backlash on Twitter.
Eric Swalwell is simply an idiot who has built a large social media #Resistance following by being the member of Congress willing to issue the most inflammatory, reckless & extreme decrees about Trump/Russia: the easiest way to get noticed in Dem politics: pic.twitter.com/jyRSF56UXx
— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) November 16, 2018
Remind me again how long the US military has been fighting the Taliban? This threat is the exact reason why the founders wrote the 2nd amendment so that if a tyrant like you was in charge we THE PEOPLE have the ability to defend ourselves and remove you from power.
— Chris Manning (@Manning4USCong) November 16, 2018
Personally, I have a bigger problem with an elected official blithely talking about nuking his fellow Americans than my neighbor owning an AR-15. But YMMV. https://t.co/yfiRAeuCn3
— Cam Edwards (@CamEdwards) November 16, 2018
“You don’t need AR-15s because the government isn’t tyrannical, and, anyway, if you try to stop us taking them we will nuke you” is my favorite of all the gun control talking points.
— Charles C. W. Cooke (@charlescwcooke) November 16, 2018
You deserve zero power and a lifetime of personal, internal shame for suggesting you’d nuke the American people who wouldn’t abide by a ridiculous law you want passed.
— Adam Trahan (@AdamTrahan) November 16, 2018
What the hell is this? Is this guy insane? ?? https://t.co/mTbOMC8xY2
— Dan Bongino (@dbongino) November 16, 2018
Swalwell 2020: Nuke The Resisters https://t.co/FNjtgWsp3g
— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) November 16, 2018
The lawmaker and Biggs continued the debate on Twitter with Swalwell finally stating that he was being sarcastic.
An AR is a rifle that was originally marketed for hunting. Do homework guy. I’m former military and I can tell you we can’t get access to “military grade weapons”. You would need a specific license to get that and it ain’t easy. https://t.co/b6EWt5b4oq
— Joe Biggs (@Rambobiggs) November 16, 2018
Don’t be so dramatic. No one is nuking anyone or threatening that. I’m telling you this is not the 18th Century. The argument that you would go to war with your government if an assault weapons ban was in place is ludicrous and inflames the gun debate. Which is what you want. https://t.co/oX0rY7Nbs1
— Rep. Eric Swalwell (@RepSwalwell) November 16, 2018
Joe, it’s sarcasm. He said he’s going to war with America if gun legislation was passed. I told him his government has nukes. God forbid we use sarcasm ?♂️
— Rep. Eric Swalwell (@RepSwalwell) November 16, 2018
Eric, I get that your use of “nukes” was sarcasm, and, yep, twitter doesn’t do nuance.
But understand how many of us gun clinging Americans recoil at the word “confiscation” and will do whatever we have to do to defend our guns against a government that would take them. Thanks https://t.co/GDDsm0gt0U
— Joe Walsh (@WalshFreedom) November 16, 2018
Wow! still can’t believe a member of our government said he’d nuke US civilians refusing to hand over guns. pic.twitter.com/Thks3q48jt
— Joe Biggs (@Rambobiggs) November 16, 2018
And Swalwell’s response to the outrage was apparently more sarcasm and attempted humor as he tried to make the critics look like the intolerant ones.
Taking on the gun trolls to protect kids from being slaughtered in class sometimes feels like Moana taking on these guys. *WARNING: My frame of reference for next 10 years will be @Disney movies. pic.twitter.com/NMQ3xxXNmy
— Rep. Eric Swalwell (@RepSwalwell) November 16, 2018
This did not help him win friends and influence people.
17 hrs ago a Congressman threatened to nuke Americans and he some how still has a job
— Joe Biggs (@Rambobiggs) November 17, 2018
In which a sitting member of Congress suggests the U.S. government could just nuke Americans who resist gun confiscation…
??? pic.twitter.com/2aaQS8zA7C
— CRTV (@CRTV) November 17, 2018
Claiming you need guns to protect yourself from the government is ridiculous.
Also, if you don’t turn in your guns we’re going to nuke the fuck out of you. pic.twitter.com/IdphV73nGy
— Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) November 16, 2018
Yes, I did, and wrote part of the Black Book, the President’s Nuclear Decision Handbook. To sink to such a level to threaten Americans with the full force of our own nuclear weapons is ludicrous, beyond a rhetorical faux pas, & should be taken very seriously. @RepSwalwell is nuts https://t.co/MKPl5cC03j
— Col. Rob Maness ret. (@RobManess) November 16, 2018
Swalwell is a ranking member of a subcommittee on the CIA. If this is supposed to be sarcasm, it’s not even remotely funny and is one of the most anti-American things an elected politician could tweet. https://t.co/U9ujwG5LKW
— Richard Armande Mills (RAM) (@RAMRANTS) November 16, 2018
DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW
Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!
Comment
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.