CA: Rep suggests forceful confiscation with nukes

[TexasJohnBoy]

Mr. Swalwell has encouraged me to get a specific Glock slide backplate from milspin.com...

[treadlightly]

Been a while since I've posted, and here I show up like a bad penny and find something I've been pondering lately.

Back in the good old days, when every cowpoke on TV packed a Colt and the term "drive-by shooting" had never been heard, philosophies like socialism weren't held in much higher regard than pederasty. Socialism was an icky, terrible thing.

Now, it's become a fresh term, an expression of escape, a way to free ourselves from anything that bugs us.

The Representative's rush to compare arsenals between the state and the individual is just more of the same, isn't it? Socialism escalated beyond money, the same bad mental hygiene applied to gun control.

I recently found this on youtube - - about civil asset forfeiture, which can happen to your guns, too - https://www.atf.gov/asset-forfeiture . I wonder how long it will take for gun grabbers to realize the same mechanism could produce confiscation without legislation. After all, the criminal taint on a pile of cash isn't in giving it a ride down the highway. It's the presumed provenance. Exactly how safe from seizure is a lawfully carried firearm?

Thank goodness for the quality of local law enforcement in my neck of the woods. They don't have to worry about me and I don't have to worry about them misunderstanding my peaceful motivations.

But wouldn't it be nicer if the law were more consistently grounded on presumption of innocence?

[Ruark]

I think he's all hat and no cattle.

[Pawpaw]

More from the incredible mind of Kurt Schlichter:

How Much Blood Would Leftists Be Willing To Shed To Disarm Patriotic Americans?

So, in light of his party’s track record, I want to know how many people Rep. Swalwell – who fancies himself a potent Democrat presidential contender – is prepared to see die so he can ensure Americans are disarmed in order to please the liberal Californians he represents. How many?

One?

One hundred?

One thousand?

One hundred thousand?

More?

How many corpses would Eric Swalwell and his blue state buddies accept because they don’t think some law-abiding citizen in Oklahoma should be allowed to choose what kind of weapon he has, because they think they should choose for him, and that that choice should be “None?”

[Oldgringo]

These people do not elect themselves. The uninformed, self-serving stupidity of the American voter is the problem!

[Oldgringo]

These people do not elect themselves. The uninformed, self-serving stupidity of the American voter is the problem!

[chasfm11]

These people do not elect themselves. The uninformed, self-serving stupidity of the American voter is the problem!

I'm not so sure. The recent stories on ballot harvesting in CA suggest that, at least in some places, the Democratic Liberals DO elect themselves by stuffing the ballot boxes. I have not believed that there are fair and free elections in places like Chicago for a very long time. The Democratic turnout in places like Philadelphia, where there was not one Republican vote cast in a recent election, suggest that voter intimidation among other things may play a big part in the results. I know that there are stupid voters out there. I suggest that there are more uninformed (because of available news sources) and manipulated voters than stupid ones.

An anecdote. In a recent speech that I heard by Col. Allen West, he challenged the audience to spend more time in Dallas, talking to the residents. One of the audience members responded that attempting to go into some of the Dallas neighborhoods would result in challenges of racism. He said that the Liberals do it all the time and that some of the people there are eager to hear a different message.

[Oldgringo]

These people do not elect themselves. The uninformed, self-serving stupidity of the American voter is the problem!

I'm not so sure. The recent stories on ballot harvesting in CA suggest that, at least in some places, the Democratic Liberals DO elect themselves by stuffing the ballot boxes. I have not believed that there are fair and free elections in places like Chicago for a very long time. The Democratic turnout in places like Philadelphia, where there was not one Republican vote cast in a recent election, suggest that voter intimidation among other things may play a big part in the results. I know that there are stupid voters out there. I suggest that there are more uninformed (because of available news sources) and manipulated voters than stupid ones.

An anecdote. In a recent speech that I heard by Col. Allen West, he challenged the audience to spend more time in Dallas, talking to the residents. One of the audience members responded that attempting to go into some of the Dallas neighborhoods would result in challenges of racism. He said that the Liberals do it all the time and that some of the people there are eager to hear a different message.

And then, there is that.

[Grumpy1993]

If somebody threatened to nuke him and his buddies first, would he still think it's funny?

[KLB]

How many people are they willing to kill so as to successfully confiscate firearms?

https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtsch ... n2537012.

[Take Down Sicko]

I'm guessing they're thinking that when we see law abiding gun owners starting to be killed and jailed we will get scared and give in to there demands.

[spectre]

I'm guessing they're thinking that when we see law abiding gun owners starting to be killed and jailed we will get scared and give in to there demands.

That strategy has worked for them since 1934, so why should they stop now? Especially with a GOP POTUS on their side.

[srothstein]

How many people are they willing to kill so as to successfully confiscate firearms?

https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtsch ... n2537012.

This is a question that all legislators should ask themselves before they pass every law. How many people am I willing to kill to enforce this law? We have had people killed over such inane laws as mandating adults wear seat belts while driving their cars and selling cigarettes without a license. Sometimes the people are regular citizens killed by accident during a police chase. Sometimes the people are police officers killed by people resisting the law. Sometimes the people are the ones resisting the law. They could be people who had one law too many passed and they could be people with long criminal records. But they are all people and very rarely did they deserve to die. Yes, some of them died because of their own decisions but I have to admit that in many cases the crime did not justify the death.

And, on the other side, we all need to ask ourselves the same question. How many people are we willing to kill over what law? Where is our line in the sand where we stand up and say this is wrong? When do we tell our legislators not to pass this law that is proposed? Yes, we may agree with the concept of the law, but are we willing to have people killed over it? For one example, I agree that wearing seat belts saves lives. I am only alive today due to seat belts and airbags. But is mandating it really worth even on life that does not have to be lost?

And the corollary to this concept is what law is it going to take to make us actually fight back and kill over the law? Do we fight over bump stocks? Or over semi-automatic weapons, or revolvers, or when? Have you considered how many people you are personally willing to kill resisting a law? Do you have a line in the sand? If you do not, then the legislators, both right and left, will continue making laws.

As I write this, one of my religious holidays is drawing to a close. Hanukkah is the celebration of a miracle that came about when a small group of Jews reached their breaking point. The government tried to force them to violate their religion and they rebelled and won. As I have gotten older, I have grown older I have grown more religious, more libertarian, and less tolerant of people telling me what to do. I have my line drawn where I will start shooting. I know how many I am willing to kill and over what. My line may not be the same as yours, but we all truly need to think over both sides of this one question.

[KLB]

As I have gotten older, I have grown older I have grown more religious, more libertarian, and less tolerant of people telling me what to do. I have my line drawn where I will start shooting. I know how many I am willing to kill and over what. My line may not be the same as yours, but we all truly need to think over both sides of this one question.

Well put. We all need to consider this. Sooner or later, Democrats will control the government, a nd we'll all have decisions to make.