CA Dem. Rep. Swalwell Ready to Use Nukes On Gun Owners!

11C1P

Ground Beetle
Messages
996
Reaction score
4
Points
133
Location
North Dakota
.

Funny how the gun grabbers always say "Nobody wants to take your guns away!" but then say they will use nuclear weapons if you don't turn them in. The mind just boggles at liberal logic.

.

Democratic Rep. Swalwell warns gun owners that 'government has nukes'

.

By Valerie Richardson - The Washington Times - Friday, November 16, 2018

Rep. Eric Swalwell, California Democrat, warned gun owners Friday that any fight over firearms would be “a short one,” because the federal government has an extensive cache of nuclear weapons.

After Joe Biggs tweeted that Mr. Swalwell “wants a war” over the Second Amendment, Mr. Swalwell responded, “And it would be a short war my friend.”

“The government has nukes.Too many of them. But they’re legit,” the congressman tweeted. “I’m sure if we talked we could find common ground to protect our families and communities.”

Mr. Swalwell quickly added that “No one is nuking anyone or threatening that,” but by then it was too late.

“Swalwell 2020: Nuke the Resisters,” tweeted conservative pundit Ben Shapiro.

Swalwell 2020: Nuke The Resisters https://t.co/FNjtgWsp3g
— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) November 16, 2018

How quickly Democrats went from “we only want sensible restrictions to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the insane” to “we will nuke your ass if you don’t hand over your weapons” - that’s what Dems regaining some power does https://t.co/G2ank3YOzE
— Legal Insurrection (@LegInsurrection) 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

Mr. Swalwell has long tangled with gun-rights supporters over limits on firearms access. In May, he proposed outlawing “military-style semiautomatic weapons” and requiring owners to sell them to the government or face prosecution.

He told the “gun trolls” erupting over his Friday nukes comment, “Don’t be so dramatic.”

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




:doodoo: :flail: :doodoo: :flail: :doodoo: :flail: :doodoo: :flail: :doodoo: :flail: :doodoo:
 

ancona

Praying Mantis
Messages
3,370
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Waaay south
I read the whole tweet chain between him and Dana Loesch. This guy is a fucking lunatic. He sincerely would nuke American Citizens if we fought against turning in our legally owned weapons.

People like this are exactly why we need to oust the liberals from our places of higher learning. We need a purge of the highest order. Perhaps a giant crash, or a re-set if you will. Something so severe that all the snowflakes simply die off or harden up.
 

11C1P

Ground Beetle
Messages
996
Reaction score
4
Points
133
Location
North Dakota
I read the whole tweet chain between him and Dana Loesch. This guy is a fucking lunatic. He sincerely would nuke American Citizens if we fought against turning in our legally owned weapons.

People like this are exactly why we need to oust the liberals from our places of higher learning. We need a purge of the highest order. Perhaps a giant crash, or a re-set if you will. Something so severe that all the snowflakes simply die off or harden up.
Could you even begin to imagine what this country would look like if the witch had won 2 years ago AND they had the house & senate? Forced diversity training to learn about the "peaceful" religion of islam & 1,001 gender pronouns for beginners, gun confiscation, all veterans to have tracking monitors (the ones not immediately committed anyway), fully nationalized healthcare, & that's just the tip of the iceberg. :flushed:
 

pmbug

Your Host
Administrator
Messages
7,424
Reaction score
9
Points
193
Location
Texas
The "citizens couldn't win a war against the US military" argument that "gun control" advocates employ is so silly. History has shown that peasants (Afghanistan) can hold off the worlds mightiest militaries (both the USSR and USA) for decades with weapons less sophisticated than AR-15s. But it's beside the point. We have a natural right to defend ourselves. We formed a government here to protect our rights last I knew.
 

11C1P

Ground Beetle
Messages
996
Reaction score
4
Points
133
Location
North Dakota
.

The "citizens couldn't win a war against the US military" argument that "gun control" advocates employ is so silly. History has shown that peasants (Afghanistan) can hold off the worlds mightiest militaries (both the USSR and USA) for decades with weapons less sophisticated than AR-15s. But it's beside the point. We have a natural right to defend ourselves. We formed a government here to protect our rights last I knew.
.

When I got out of the army, it was less than a year before the AWB got passed, but that law & others had been talked about a lot well before it passed. While I was still in, we would talk about what we would do if we were ordered to confiscate weapons or do some other type of B.S. against our own citizens. The guys I hung out with not surprisingly said no fucking way would they do that. My son is in now & most of the guys he knows said the same thing. Now that all being said, how many would actually refuse a direct order, even if it is unlawful? Who knows. You just have to look at things like the bonus army riots (if you are a fan of Patton and/or McArthur, you might not be after reading about that), or even George Washington the sitting president, leading the U.S. Army against civilians to put down the whiskey rebellion & many examples in between to see it has and could happen here. While I certainly don't think a large majority of the U.S. military would go along with it, I do think a fair % would. I don't know if it would be 20% or 40% or what, but they would certainly be dangerous. They would have their hands full though also. Again I don't know what % of the military would fight against the part violating citizens rights, but it would almost certainly negate any edge in weaponry the other one has. It's scary as a citizen to think about, and even scarier now that I have a kid in. :(

.
 
Top