PowPow
Where's the beef?
It's the same old anti-gun "common sense", drivel after drivel. That's 2 minutes of my life that I should have used better.
Even more striking, consider the number that are killed annually by the "assault weapons" that he wants to ban and confiscate. It's probably under 500 and definitely under 1000. Most firearm homicides involve handguns. Similarly, year in, year out, the caliber associated with the greatest number of firearm deaths in the US is the lowly 22LR.Yup. According to the CDC, 33,171 people in the US died in 2015 in alcohol-induced deaths excluding "unintentional injuries, homicides, and other causes indirectly related to alcohol use, as well as deaths due to
fetal alcohol syndrome." Add those in and the number would be far higher.
The same year, 36,161 people died in motor vehicle traffic incidents.
Again, the same year, 36,252 people died in ALL firearms-related incidents. Note that this includes suicides. Remove suicides and the number drops substantially: 17,793 homicides using firearms.
So if you combine all alcohol-related deaths, MORE people are killed by alcohol every year than firearms. Nearly the same number are killed by motor vehicles. Yet the only one politicians and un-educated sheeple are trying to ban or heavily restrict is firearms. You can't reason with people like this, because they don't care about the facts, even though it's all publicly available data. I looked this stuff up in about two minutes using Google.
And of course the type of firearm they're most going after is modern sporting rifles, despite the fact that rifles of ALL kinds are used in a tiny fraction of firearm-related homicides. You'd think where one's constitutional freedoms are involved, these people might want to look at the actual facts.
Sources referenced above:
- CDC Alcohol Use Stats
- National Vital Statistics Reports, page 12 - alcohol induced mortality
- CDC Fast Stats - All Injuries and Assault or Homicide
Rep. Eric Swalwell, a Democrat from California’s San Francisco Bay area, is co-chair of the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee, and serves on the House Judiciary Committee*and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
Will Mr. Swalwell (the author and CA congressman) be the one knocking on doors to collect our firearms?
Rep. Eric Swalwell, a Democrat from California’s San Francisco Bay area...
I wonder if the author of this wonder piece of excrement understands what he is asking for when he advocates "arrest the resisters". What form do you think that resistance would take? I doubt it will just be folks burying their guns... it will be people DIGGING UP their guns.
"Buy them back"?
So, they once belonged to the government, the government sold them, and the government has a "right" to "buy them back"?
I have a bridge I'd like the government to "buy back."
It's a softer term than "forced sale." Or "eminent domain," which would be more fitting. Only in "eminent domain" proceedings, the forced seller can challenge the offer price and litigate it. What's the fair market value of an AR-15 that would be forcibly sold and can't be replaced? Priceless. What's the price of freedom? Priceless. The government couldn't EVER afford it.
Eric Swalwell, a CA Congressman, once lived in MD and went to the University of MD Law School, iirc.
He's also Adam Schiff's "Mini-me" on the House Intel Committee's Dem. RUSSIA! witch hunt.
how does this guy compare to donald "take the guns first ask questions later" trump?
how does this guy compare to donald "take the guns first ask questions later" trump?
I think the first amendment should be removed from the Constitution when its used wrong.
Even more striking, consider the number that are killed annually by the "assault weapons" that he wants to ban and confiscate. It's probably under 500 and definitely under 1000. Most firearm homicides involve handguns. Similarly, year in, year out, the caliber associated with the greatest number of firearm deaths in the US is the lowly 22LR.
pretty much all above. why don't we try putting and keeping actual violent criminals in friggin' jail instead of banning tools that the vast majority of folks use in a completely law-abiding manner. where's the ban on alcohol, heck where is the limit on buying alcohol at the ABC store to one beer per hour. there is none of that. anyone of age can buy as much booze as they want and we just trust that they won't drive drunk or kill their family in a drunken rage. why is this same trust and freedom not extended to firearms?
pretty much all above. why don't we try putting and keeping actual violent criminals in friggin' jail instead of banning tools that the vast majority of folks use in a completely law-abiding manner. where's the ban on alcohol , heck where is the limit on buying alcohol at the ABC store to one beer per hour. there is none of that. anyone of age can buy as much booze as they want and we just trust that they won't drive drunk or kill their family in a drunken rage. why is this same trust and freedom not extended to firearms?
This is what they refer to in police terminology as "a clue"..