Ad Here

Congressman Threatens Gun Owners

A California Democrat opined on Thursday that the fix for America’s gun issue involves a ban, a buyback, and criminal prosecution.

U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell is a former Alameda County deputy district attorney and has represented the San Francisco area in Congress since 2013. In an op-ed published by USA Today on Thursday, Swallwell recalls an incident where he prosecuted the killer of a taco truck security guard, Gary Jackson, murdered by a man who ambushed him with an AK-style rifle.

“So Gary didn’t stand much chance,” says Swallwell. “First-graders and teachers in Newtown, Conn., didn’t either. Nor did dancers at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, nor concert-goers in Las Vegas, nor teenagers at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High in Parkland, Fla., nor the people at the Waffle House outside Nashville. Like so many American mass-shooting victims in recent decades, their doom was all but assured by the murderer’s tool.”

The solution as advanced by the lawmaker who serves as the co-chair of the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee: a ban on “military-style semiautomatic rifles” followed by a turn-in program funded by the federal government that he says could top $15 billion. For those who do not elect to sell the feds their firearm outlawed by such a ban, Swallwell says, “we should criminally prosecute any who choose to defy it by keeping their weapons.”

Swallwell, who says, “Australia got it right,” was an original co-sponsor of H.R. 5087, the Democrat-proposed federal assault weapon ban as well as a half-dozen other gun control bills, and has spoken often on the subject of gun violence in the House. In addition to the USA Today piece, The Guardian published a similar op-ed from the former prosecutor last October in the days following the Route 91 Harvest festival shooting in Las Vegas.

source: guns.com

31 Comments

  • Steven Sparkuhle

    Screw that Ca. Fag! They will never take Americans’ guns away! Not by England and not by that left wing D sucker!

    Reply

  • CompletelyOutsane

    Swallwell, go to Australia if you like it better than USA. We don’t need you anti-American leftist 2-holes anyway. All the infringements already placed upon the UNALIENABLE right to keep and bear arms are UNCONSTITUTIONAL and need to be repealed.

    Reply

  • Marlin J. Musgrove Jr.

    That U.S Rep. just needs to come and take the guns himself and make sure that since he thinks that is such a great idea he definitely needs to do it personally, it might take about 2 stops and that would be the last time we would hear from him and his buy back government program. Anyone who saw what happened to him would think twice about coming to get any Americans gun by threat of force.

    Reply

  • Alan

    And there are streets in Sydney where only the crazies dare go, for fear of the those crazies killing you.
    All the Aussies did was make the criminal element safer, nothing more.

    Reply

  • Dennis Parker

    Australia didn’t have s second amendment. If you like their policies, move there!

    Reply

  • disqus_rEWjgfyzIp

    My property is protected by the constitution and should some idiot think they will stop by to collect my firearms, they will find out what the 2nd amendment is all about. As any one that infringes against any constitutional right is listed by the constitution as a domestic enemy.

    Reply

  • Proudvietvet58

    This Congressman is out of his mind if he thinks America is going to stand for his brain farts.

    Reply

  • Daniel Gray

    Let him try and take my guns. Want to bet that he will be in more legal trouble then anyone in history? Its a violation of the 2nd Amendment, its a violation of Title 18 USC section 926 and its a violation of the lates US Supreme Court decision that was handed down on March 21st 2016
    Cite as: 577 U. S. ____ (2016)
    Per Curiam
    SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
    JAIME CAETANO v. MASSACHUSETTS
    ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME
    JUDICIAL COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS
    No. 14–10078. Decided March 21, 2016

    Which says that the 2nd Amendment protects ALL forms of weapons and their add ons if the add ons effect the operation of same. AND it stated that to “infringe” means to violate another persons rights.

    So let the idiot try, I can assure you that he will still be in prison come 3016!

    Reply

  • Mike11C

    “The Tree of Liberty must be refreshed, from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants”.

    ~Thomas Jefferson

    Reply

  • Bill Cutillo

    the 2a was meant to prevent a hostile govt. from taking over the country. first health care then education then confiscating firearms. then your subservient to the govt.. which is exactly what these lifetime politicians want.

    Reply

    • freethinker4

      Exactly look at how far this country has degraded in 8 years, the Fags have special rights and their even teaching the perversion in schools, Obama care that fines people that can’t afford it go figure. And now these inbreds want open borders and like always our guns what a treasonous party of filth.

      Reply

  • dan

    Do a test case in Chicago just to check on effectivity for illegal firearms.

    Reply

  • Rick Alenn

    By all means ass hole, come and take them. Our Second Amendment is our First line, and last line of defense against totalitarian thugs. So as I said at the beginning by all means come and get them. Molon Labe. Stupid ass mother fucker threatening American Patriots, that’s funny! I’m still rolling around on the floor. These pathetic peaces of shit are the enemy of Freedom and Liberty. They are the enemy of our Constitutional Republic, and they are the enemy of We The people.

    Reply

  • donald540

    IF you get the guns removed then you WILL have an INCREASE in the number of ROBBERIES and KILLINGS done by those that try to ROB people and get RESISTANCE from the home owners and thus get KILLED by those they were trying to rob them because they would have NOTHING else on hand to resist those trying to ROB them and those CROOKS will KNOW that they have NO GUNS before they even TRY to rob most people because of that HUGE gun removal.

    Reply

  • safehavenwithin

    Try it, asshole! You’ll have so many barrels up your ass, you won’t know what direction to go in, let alone where you are! Just go for it, asshole!!!

    Reply

  • Harry Wollscheid

    GUY’S, COVER YOUR BACK, THE GOVERNMENT WILL CHANGE THE CAN AND WILL CHANGE
    OUR AMENDMENTS AS ” THEY ” WANT, JUST SO PEOPLE WILL STOP PROTESTING……
    THERE IS NO ONE TO STOP THEM, THEY ARE THE GOVERNMENT THAT CAN CHANGE ANY THING THEY WANT. THEY HAVE MORE GUNS AND U.S.A MEN / WOMAN TO FIGHT AGAINST
    THEIR PEOPLE. THINK ABOUT IT PEOPLE, WE MUST ALL STICK TOGETHER, OR WE ALL LOOSE OUR RIGHTS TO BEAR OUR WEAPONS AND 2 AMENDMENT, AND MAYBE EVEN MORE.

    Reply

  • Roadmantoo

    Okay, so here is my question to all of America, but mostly to those conservatives, myself included because I’ve been trying to figure this out for some time now: When th3 shit does hit the fan and we are embroiled in a second American Revolution, this one having to do with saving our Constitution and Bill of Roghts, how do we discern the Leftist Socialist anti-gun and anti-American half of our country from the more Conservative half?

    This is a serious question so please no bullshit clap-trap answers. F there is to be blood in the streets, God help us as I don’t want this to happen, how do we know one side from the other? We are all wearing every day clothes, no blue from the north and grey from the south, no American uniforms versus German or Russian uniforms, just everyday American blue jeans against every day blue jeans.

    Reply

    • Jonathan Gonzalez

      For the most part, you wouldn’t tell. It would mainly be families (militia) against government. If the anti-gun owners don’t have guns for themselves, they would need the police or the national guard to fight for them. But not all states share the same values. The pro-gunners would most likely move out of blue counties and states and into red ones. The left are loud and showing how united they are now, but in a real-life situation of emergency and brake-down of law and order, they will all cower and shake when they see how defenseless they are.

      Reply

  • Robert Morris

    Eric Swallwell and the Democrats in congress are the real problem. I’ve yet to hear anyone from California stand for freedom and support for the constitution. I wish we could just allow the state of California, New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut to withdraw from the union as they would not be missed. This would be logical step since these brain dead states think that they should have won the 2016 election since they won the popular vote. The founding fathers had the foresight to create the Electoral College to prevent a few states from dictating laws and regulations to the remaining 46 states and the people who live there. California flaunts federal laws by allowing illegal aliens to flood in and increase the voter rolls despite the fact that the rest of the people are stuck with the expense of supporting these illegal non-citizens.

    Reply

  • joboro

    Australia:1/100 the number of guns, no Constitution, never a part of their history…and most never turned them in.i

    Reply

  • Shelba Herring

    Every country that has banned firearm possession by lawful responsible citizens have an illegal firearm problem and unchecked increased criminal activity according to statistics, this congressman should be a little more careful about his agenda to take away the second amendment from the American people, there are idiots out there that believe the only way to stop some people is by taking a shot at them to eliminate their talk and if he does not believe this all he has to do is look at the Parkland shooter it was stated whether it is true or not that he was bullied and made fun of when he was in school, look at how he took revenge which might have been prevented if the FBI had done their job instead of focusing on the agenda of trying to find a way to dispose our lawfully elected president

    Reply

  • Jonathan Gonzalez

    I’m a security guard for a higher end company here in California, a lot of people I work with are either ex-military and ex-law enforcement own semi-auto’s. If this idiot were to pass this law, There’d be no security guards going to work, that’s for sure, including me!

    Reply

  • Logan Dodd II

    This is the kind of idiot ‘we the people’ need to keep track of if what he proposes ever happens.
    Such irresponsible, and unconstitutional individuals shoot be on a watch list, and they are the ones who need to be arrested, or else if they resist. Not us law abiding citizens.
    And for those “high and mighty” who are saying ‘we the people’ don’t need the same type of arms as the military….when the 2nd Amendment was written the everyday citizen could purchase, own, and carry the SAME arms as the military and it was meant to be that way…to have ‘parity’ with the arms to government had…in such a case as this….the government tried to infringe upon or diminish our RIGHTS!

    Reply

    • coolman11

      I like it when gun banners say we don’t need weapons of war on the street, well then the same can be said for police departments that received mrap personnel carriers from the government.

      Reply

  • Mike

    When the war starts, will he be out in front leading the charge or hiding in the closet like the little girl he is. When the lead starts flying , how many of these anti gun liberals will fight? How many thug policeman will come at you? Will you fight or cower? I might die, but i will take some with me.

    Reply

  • Ed Cooper

    Another shoot on sight fool to add to the list, when the shit hits the fan!

    Reply

  • coolman11

    I’m going to steal the line from the great disaster Hillary, what difference does it make what a killer used, these people focus on only one thing when it’s an “assault style” weapon and not anything else they make it too obvious what there end game is and that’s total confiscation so we the people can’t defend ourselves.

    Reply

  • AC1USNRetired

    Called his D.C. office and informed his staffer if Swalwell himself does NOT come to my door directly and tells me to surrender my weapons he is a chicken crap coward.

    Reply

  • Dave Emery

    That will be the start of the second American Civil war. This isn’t Australia, this is the United States of America. We left British control for good reason, Australia is completely controlled by them to this day. Canada too and they are banning some knives that first responders need. It’s the Bill of Rights, not the Bill of Maybes or the Bill of Privileges. Sounds like he needs to become an Ausie. Bye-Bye Mate! And my mother was Australian. What a bugger.

    Reply

Leave a Reply