He better bring an Army with him ...
Swalwell Threatens "Nukes" If Americans Don't Hand Over Their Guns
- Thread starter CrazySanMan
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast
Member Benefits:
No ad networks! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Azmo
Member
He should come personally and attempt to take them. Doesn't know history very well or what a revolution really looks like. Gonna nuke his base in the cities? Not that he cares about them either. /sigh
Don H
Ultimate Member
Read the comments on his Facebook page, what a hoot!
https://www.facebook.com/CongressmanEricSwalwell/
https://www.facebook.com/CongressmanEricSwalwell/
Those comments are great!
md123
Ultimate Member
- Jul 29, 2011
- 2,005
It’s pretty clear that his comment was absurd and out of line.
However, the best way to shut up a grabber (say at thanksgiving dinner) isn’t debating how confiscation would go but to rather let them know just how uninformed they are.
Simply ask them to define what an assault weapon is. If they stutter over that question, offer an easy multiple choice test: which gun has NEVER been issued by any branch of the US Military, making it very objectively not “military style”?
A) Mossberg 590 A1 “pump shotgun”
B) Glock 19 “polymer pistol”
C) AR15 “fully semi automatic”
D) Beretta 92 “Italian pistol”
E) Remington 700 “hunting rifle”
They want us to talk about civil war because it makes us look crazy, justifying their underlying goal of confiscation.
However, the best way to shut up a grabber (say at thanksgiving dinner) isn’t debating how confiscation would go but to rather let them know just how uninformed they are.
Simply ask them to define what an assault weapon is. If they stutter over that question, offer an easy multiple choice test: which gun has NEVER been issued by any branch of the US Military, making it very objectively not “military style”?
A) Mossberg 590 A1 “pump shotgun”
B) Glock 19 “polymer pistol”
C) AR15 “fully semi automatic”
D) Beretta 92 “Italian pistol”
E) Remington 700 “hunting rifle”
They want us to talk about civil war because it makes us look crazy, justifying their underlying goal of confiscation.
I am sure that this guy has done thorough research and concluded that the military which skews red and second amendment fans will comply and go to war to eradicate gun owners. Dunno why they think that if it came down to that the military would support them en mass.
whistlersmother
Peace through strength
And why do they think <disfavored group> would go up against the military. It wasn't the military that put them in power, but their constituents...
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Yeah he's an idiot for saying it but at the same time plenty of people here responded to it as though it was imminent.
Mr H
Banana'd
It's what many do... assume a spoken thought is actual policy.
Sadly, MDS seems to be worse about it than genpop.
A little research can go a long way.
Rockzilla
Ultimate Member
Swalwell Threatens "Nukes"
hmmmm.
(Sec. 811) Prohibits anyone, knowingly, unlawfully, and with intent to cause death, serious bodily injury, or substantial damage to property or the environment, from: (1) possessing radioactive material or making or possessing a nuclear explosive device or a radioactive material dispersal or radiation-emitting device; (2) using radioactive material or a device, using, damaging, or interfering with the operation of a nuclear facility in a manner that causes or increases the risk of the release of radioactive material, or causing radioactive contamination or exposure to radiation; or (3) threatening, attempting, or conspiring to commit such an offense. Sets forth: (1) the circumstances in which the United States can exercise jurisdiction over such offenses, and (2) exceptions applicable to activities of the armed forces.
hmmmm.
(Sec. 811) Prohibits anyone, knowingly, unlawfully, and with intent to cause death, serious bodily injury, or substantial damage to property or the environment, from: (1) possessing radioactive material or making or possessing a nuclear explosive device or a radioactive material dispersal or radiation-emitting device; (2) using radioactive material or a device, using, damaging, or interfering with the operation of a nuclear facility in a manner that causes or increases the risk of the release of radioactive material, or causing radioactive contamination or exposure to radiation; or (3) threatening, attempting, or conspiring to commit such an offense. Sets forth: (1) the circumstances in which the United States can exercise jurisdiction over such offenses, and (2) exceptions applicable to activities of the armed forces.
Another reason to start at the SE corner of Kalifornicate and build a wall to the Canadian Border, and include the libtarded OR and WA states.
.
Biggfoot44
Ultimate Member
- Aug 2, 2009
- 33,217
Wouldn't even need to do that . A wall 100mi in from the coast would do it . Once you get east of Portland and Seattle metro areas, the rest of Wa and Ore are conservative Western states .
Your “S.A.T. style” question is simply excellent!
85MikeTPI
Ultimate Member
- Nov 11, 2009
- 30,964
Thanks for that link. It IS a great read, and serves to remind me that rational people do in fact exist throughout the country.
Reptile
Ultimate Member
Interesting data points from a 2017 Swiss study: The USA has 120.5 small arms in civilian hands for every 100 citizens. That's 100 times as many as in military hands and 400 times as many as held by law enforcement. If the problem is guns, several hundred million of them are shirkers.
Mr H
Banana'd
Mind you, depending on how the study was done, the number of UNKNOWN 'small arms' could vary widely, but it's guaranteed to be an undercount.
BMore
Active Member
He was the only Congressman to endorse Martin O'Malley for president. Swalwell has no problem violating rights for higher office, he learned it from the master.
krucam
Ultimate Member
T-shirts out (surprise) on this...
Swallowell is a danger to America , holy crap he wants to ban rifles he call military . SMH
And jail people that don't turn them in .
And jail people that don't turn them in .
Users who are viewing this thread
Forum statistics
Latest threads
-
Suggestions for a low powered, large objective rifle scope? (6 Viewers)- Started by E.Shell
- Replies: 8
-
-
Timonium Gun Show April 27-28 (Timonium Fairgrounds Exhibition Hall) (3 Viewers)
- Started by joro55
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
-