Congresscreep Eric Swallow Swalwell [CA-15] is a coward. A not-very-bright coward.
Not bright, based upon his little confiscation screed:
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.
I say he is a coward because he hides from criticism. I attempted to write to his office with some pointed questions about his grand plan to disarm America. I had to look up a zip code within his district to get past his filter (he doesn’t want to hear from nonconstituents). But because I want answers to my questions, I gave my real — non-California-because-I’m-sane — address.
Rejected. He really doesn’t want to hear from nonconstituents. I’ve written to a lot of congresscritters for other states, and this is the first time I couldn’t get through at all. If he’s going to call for national human/civil rights violations, he should man up and take national feedback.
RE: Ban assault weapons, buy them back, go after resisters: Ex-prosecutor in Congress, May 3, 2018
“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.”
A few questions:
1. “Military-style semiautomatic assault weapons.” Can you name a single country on the planet that uses semiautomatic rifles as standard issue to its regular troops? It’s something of a hobby of mine, and I haven’t been able to find a nation with standard issue semiautomatic rifles since the 1990s. In fact, other than some specialty cases (snipers, for instance), semiautomatic rifles are not considered suitable for combat by national militaries. So what makes these “military-style”?
2. Darned few people are going to be willing to give up firearms, costing up to several thousand dollars, for a paltry $200-$1000. I seem to recall a Fifth Amendment that mentions something about “just compensation.” But hey, post-Kelo, who cares about justice, right?
3. Have you floated your little confiscation plan by working cops? Not political appointees, or other chairwarmers, but the working guys who would have to go kicking in millions* of doors BECAUSE the occupants are well-armed?
(* 60,000,000 is a conservative estimate of gun owners; if only 90% complied, you’d have to send your jackboots after 6,000,000 — six million — noncompliant sonsabitches with guns. When the California legislature considered this in the 1990s, the head of one police union predicted the largest outbreak of blue-flu in history.)
4. Will you personally lead an entry team on confiscation raids, or are you too cowardly to put your money where your mouth is? Put up, or shut up.
You talk a brave game, but HOW do you plan to do this?
There are, by varying estimates, 55,000,000 to 120,000,000 million gun owners in America. Estimates of the firearms they hold range from 265,000,000 to 750,000,000 — three quarters of a billion. No one knows who all those owners are, much less where. Ditto with the guns (estimates of AR-pattern rifles alone, manufactured since the end of the “Assault Weapon Ban”, are in the neighborhood of 16,000,000; just one type of “assault weapon” by the usual politician definition).
You’re from California; you should know what happened when the state merely mandated registration (not confiscation): a whopping 2.33% compliance rate. Connecticut got 13.44%.
Again using that 60,000,000 number, imagine you reverse the compliance ratios and get 90%, leaving those 6,000,000 pesky noncompliant SOBs. Heavily armed SOBs.
The FBI estimates the number of law enforcement personnel in America (local, state, federal) at 698,460. You’re outnumbered by almost 9 to 1. So you toss in all military personnel (who also tend to be gun owners… oops); active, reserve, guard…
And you’re still outnumbered by more than 2 to 1.
5. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO ENFORCE your little police state wet dream? With what?
You like the Australian example. You might note that after 22 years and multiple amnesties, the Australian government now estimates compliance at 20%. And they have more guns now, than before the grab.
6. Are you crazy, stupid, or both?
Carl “Bear” Bussjaeger
Author: Net Assets, Bargaining Position, The Anarchy Belt, and more
NRA delenda est