Ban assault weapons, buy them back, go after resisters: Ex-prosecutor in Congress
…Reinstating the federal assault weapons ban that was in effect from 1994 to 2004 would prohibit manufacture and sales, but it would not affect weapons already possessed. This would leave millions of assault weapons in our communities for decades to come. Instead, we should ban possession of military-style semiautomatic assault weapons, we should buy back such weapons from all who choose to abide by the law, and we should criminally prosecute any who choose to defy it by keeping their weapons. The ban would not apply to law enforcement agencies or shooting clubs.
…The Parkland teens have taught us there is no right more important than every student’s right to come home after class. The right to live is supreme over any other.
At least Eric Swalwell is being honest where the majority of Democrats refuse to be. Instead, they always talk about “compromise”. The problem is that the compromise they offer only goes one way: they want, we give. It’s time to get in their faces and go “and what are YOU willing to give up in return?!?!?!”; it is time to stand up and tell these Anti-Constitutionalists “No further”.
The commentors ripped Salwell to shreds. For starters: “Eric Sawlwell, You need to Volunteer, Bulk Up, Man Up and be the first one in my door to take my rights!”. There was also a Progressive anti-gunner by the name of Jacqueline Blaszka Campbell that that decided the old phrase “better to remain quiet than to speak out and remove all doubt” didn’t apply to her (emphasis mine):
Jacqueline Blaszka Campbell · Northampton, Massachusetts
Automatic weapons are not in the constitution neither was stand your ground or carrying a concealed weapons. But nice try
And it went down from there. These kinds of folks had to have failed their history because back then, private citizens owned their own ships outfitted with lots of cannons and sailed under Letters of Marquis to fight for our nascent country. However, she couldn’t stop digging:
Jacqueline Blaszka Campbell ·
Northampton, Massachusetts
Because guns are more important than lives. Guess you are for abortions too. If not then you lying about being pro life.
Having lost the debate on logic and Constitution, she goes the emotional rant; the commentors were having none of it:
Jacqueline Blaszka Campbell Democrats, like you, are evil. You adovocate for a woman to have the choice to execute her unborn child, yet deny the same woman the choice to bear arms to protect her studetns.
And then coup de grace’s (??) started coming:
- Jacqueline Blaszka Campbell Our rights are more important than anyone life. Ask any of us Veterans who have fought to preserve the those rights. When you are so afraid that you are willing to give up your rights for safety, you then open the door for all other rights to be removed. Obviously you do not care if you are told what you can or cannot say or who to worship. People like you are so nieve at the ways of the world. Having been deployed several times I have seen first hand what happens when freedoms are removed. Just keep telling your self it wont happen here. Then wonder why when it does people did nothing. It will be because people like you felt as you needed to infringe on others rights.
- Jacqueline Blaszka Campbell one has nothing to do with the other. The right to bare arms is clearly in the bill of rights. The right to terminate a life is not. If you are so worried about lives taken with guns why aren’t you out there voting against the democrats who control our urban areas which are shooting galleries? Instead of focusing on the real issues you decide it is better to punish the law abiding, to strip people of their rights. The left’s warped thinking. If we treated drunk driving the same way normal people would be walking beause they would be denied owning a car and the drunks would be racing around killing innocents in their cars.
- Jacqueline Blaszka Campbell wrote: “Because guns are more important than lives.”
This is a prime example of the logical fallacy known as a “false dilemma.” Apparently she wants us to consider only two options when, in fact, more options exist. Two things can be important without one being “more important” than the other. I might also note that most of the “more important” people and things in the world are usually protected by… people with… wait for it… guns.
- Jacqueline Blaszka Campbell as a jew who lost family to a government that outlawed gun ownership i say YES MY RIGHTS ARE MORE IMPORTANT… Because if you take the right to self defense then you are setting up the next mass murder in a few years… when the political winds are blowing a different direction. Study history…
Like I said, quoting a former President of the Alinsky kinship: “get in their faces:
- Jacqueline Blaszka Campbell – There are lots of things more important than lives. For example, my First Amendment rights are much, much more important than your life.
And it just keeps on going so I’ll stop with this one:
Jacqueline Blaszka Campbell nice try with the emotional response but I’ll play you’re game. Are guns more important than life? Of course not, but is life more important than freedom and liberty? Isn’t that the real question here? Perhaps you’re missing the point of this country and the principles upon which it was founded. I, and a great many of your fellow citizens ( and I would bet a majority), still believe in and cherish the rights of the individual; just because you are willing to cede your constitutional right doesn’t mean I am.
So, the two extreme coasts of the Progressive State of the US decided to weigh in. If you want to take away our Second, we demand that you turn in your First – and all the rest as well.
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.
(H/T: USA Today)
