Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) caused a firestorm on Friday when he suggested using nuclear weapons against American citizens who oppose his far-left gun control agenda, which includes forcing Americans to give up their semi-automatic weapons.
Swalwell made the comment in response to a May news article on his radical plan that was widely recirculated on Twitter on Friday in which he called for a $15 billion government program to confiscate millions of guns from Americans.
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 to the tweet by writing: “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.
— Rep. Eric Swalwell (@RepSwalwell) November 16, 2018
Swalwell’s remark set off a firestorm online:
“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
AR-15s are so dangerous that we must nuke gun owners to confiscate them
— Kyle Kashuv (@KyleKashuv) November 16, 2018
You assume that members of our combined forces would follow unconstitutional orders, and take up arms against citizens of the United States. Short war indeed. .cc @DLoesch @KyleKashuv
— Matthew Kolken (@mkolken) 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
I’m stunned there were enough sheep to vote so this guy ended up with a “Rep” in front of his name. The U.S. government is now going to nuke…….get this……..its own people. https://t.co/S0NuyMZD2r
— Pat Miletich (@patmiletich) November 16, 2018
It must not be against @Twitter TOS to casually insinuate that it’s better to give up our guns than die in a thermo-nuclear blast at the hands of the U.S. gov’t.
☢️☢️☢️
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ https://t.co/3Zo1m93ikO
— Conservative Review (@CR) November 16, 2018
This is the best argument I’ve seen in a while why I will never give one gun. It’s scumbags like this who want to take them. https://t.co/SafvSd3rWs
— Dan Gainor (@dangainor) November 16, 2018
“If you don’t turn over your guns, we’ll nuke you” is definitely a reasonable argument to make. https://t.co/4YFDxi1CPf
— Joe Walsh (@WalshFreedom) November 16, 2018
What the hell is this? Is this guy insane? ???????? https://t.co/mTbOMC8xY2
— Dan Bongino (@dbongino) November 16, 2018
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
Swalwell later confirmed in a tweet to the NRA’s Dana Loesch that he wants to confiscate all semi-automatic weapons:
She’s not lying. We should ban assault weapons by buying them back or restricting them to ranges/clubs. #EnoughIsEnough https://t.co/XbRpOvXlF3
— Rep. Eric Swalwell (@RepSwalwell) November 16, 2018
Swalwell later argued that if a firearm contains a pistol grip then that somehow magically makes the weapon more powerful:
Would you limit the ban and confiscation to semi-auto rifles or would you extend the ban to semi-auto handguns also, seeing as they’re illegally used many times over more in crimes such as homicide? https://t.co/Snc8xhXhVp
— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) November 16, 2018
Via DailyWire
