Posted on 12/06/2018 12:23:20 PM PST by Kaslin
My question for Congressjerk Eric Swalwell is pretty simple: “How many Americans would you murder to achieve your goal of disarming us?”
It’s a fair question.
Swalwell is the MSNBC stalwart who recently wrote an op-ed advocating that the government confiscate the guns that make people like him wet themselves and imprison those of us who decline to surrender them. Millions of Americans own these basic tools of freedom, which the ignorant call “assault weapons,” and these loyal citizens keep and bear them to protect themselves, their families, their communities and their Constitution. But Rep. Swalwell would make these citizens felons, though these patriots are only a threat to criminals and aspiring tyrants.
Of course, he wants to make these patriots felons because they are a threat to criminals and aspiring tyrants. After all, that’s what leftist Democrats like him are.
Now, we know that some Americans would resist this kind of tyranny. People all over the world are resisting the elite’s commands. The Brits Brexited. The French are rioting because they don’t want to sacrifice their livelihoods on behalf of the global elites’ weird weather religion. And a decree that the Second Amendment is not a thing anymore would certainly provoke some serious pushback here.
That’s why it’s fair to ask Rep. Bloodlust how much blood he’s prepared to shed to achieve his goal of disarming Normal Americans.
Rep. Swalwell, some people are going to fight rather than cave in, so what’s the number of bodies you would be willing to pile up to win? Let’s put aside the right or wrong of resistance; it’ll be a thing. It’ll happen. You’re from near San Francisco, so you don’t know any real Americans, but even though I am from that hellhole too, I’ve met a few Americans in my travels. They are an ornery people who don’t give in to the kind of bullying you advocate. So, you’re going to have to kill some people to do what you want, and I just want to know how many you’re prepared to off to achieve your goal.
After all, it’s not as if you Democrats don’t already have a history of killing people for having guns you disapprove of.
Remember Waco? The raid on David Koresh’s compound was because his weird band of misfits allegedly had scary, outlawed guns. That’s why Democrat Janet Reno initially decided to send in the troops. The government got four of our ATF agents killed, then slaughtered the resisters, including women and kids.
Was it worth it? Maybe these creepy cultists were violating the law, but was making sure they didn’t have guns that were scary worth shooting or burning alive about 80 people, including four cops?
Was it?
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?”
On Twitter, which is a wonderful thing because it makes people truly reveal themselves, one gentleman pointed out the not-so-far-fetched notion that mass gun confiscation (let’s leave the problematic logistics for the gun-hating fascists aside) would spark a civil war. But Rep. Swalwell was not worried; he observed that a bunch of citizens with rifles could not stand up to a military armed with nuclear weapons.
Well, that’s a troubling notion.
Now, Congressman Strangelove properly took a lot of grief for suggesting nuking fellow Americans, but even if you accept his backtracking about how this was a joke – nothing’s funnier than suggesting the mass murder of fellow Americans! – he only put nukes off limits. What killing systems are still on the table? Infantry? Artillery? Bombers? Because his answer assumed that he would support prosecuting a war against those who failed to obey and submit to arrest.
So, Congressman, what means of destructions are still on the table to use against fellow Americans who refuse to allow you to strip them of their Second Amendment rights because you Bay Area liberals want to show those hicks in Jesusland who’s boss? Is shooting them okay? Shelling them? Bombing them, just not with nukes?
Having seen the fruits of oppression overseas, I find this troubling. Actually, that’s putting it lightly. I find it horrifying. I’ve written about it in my novels about how our country could be ripped apart by leftist oppression. My just-released book Wildfire paints a most unpretty picture, but my predictions keep coming true. Try as I might, nothing I write speculating about what they would do if given the chance seems to hold a candle to what people like Congressman Stalin tell us they are actually willing to do to crush us under their Gucci loafers.
Understand that the leftists with Swalwell’s mentality are not driven by notions of justice or reason, but by cold hatred for Normal Americans. We’ve been disobedient. We’ve been defiant. We’ve refused to surrender our means of defending our own sovereignty to our elite overlords, and that is intolerable.
After all, a man without a rifle is not a citizen. He’s a serf, subject to the whims and will of his overlords who you damn well know are never giving up the guns their minions keep and bear.
Look at England. They gave up their guns. Now, the police watch their Twitter feeds and arrest them if they say unapproved things. That’s not a bug to our liberal elite; that’s a feature. That’s the goal.
Wait, this is crazy talk! If we disarm and only a government controlled by the liberal elite has guns, our overlords will be totally cool. They’ll respect our right to say and do what we want. They’ll allow us to practice our religion as we please. You know, just like liberals respect the rights of normal people where they are in control, like on college campuses, or on social media, or in the municipalities that hassle Christian cake shops.
Get woke. They hate you, and your freedom to tell them to pound sand sticks in their collective collectivist craw. Ignore the leftist media and the Fredocon collaborators who demand you not believe your lying eyes or ears when they tell you what they intend to do to you if given the chance.
So, the question remains. Our liberal elite betters think we should be stripped of those scary bangsticks the Constitution protects, and we disagree. So, Rep. Swalwell, how many Americans are you willing to kill to fulfill your vision of a disarmed, defenseless, servile population of docile subjects?
One?
One hundred?
One thousand?
One hundred thousand?
More?
My third novel about America after it splits into two countries, one red and one blue, just dropped. Check out Wildfire and see what could happen if we fail to defend our freedom in the face of people who want to make us Venezuela del Norte.
Who’s better armed, the left or the right?
Eric should read up on fourth generational warfare.
Lefties are willing to shed the blood of gun owners, Christians and conservatives, but one it comes to getting their own skin in the game, they’ll fold right up.
The Left thinks that they would have law enforcement and the military on their side, but they might be surprised to discover otherwise.
Just like the left is willing to give away other people’s money, they will likely only be willing to risk other people’s lives. When it comes to them making the sacrifice, I highly doubt their convictions will overcome their narcissism.
Molon Labe baby,
Molon Labe.
Against snowflakes? Say ‘Boo’ and they’re gone.
Well it will not be the Left shedding the blood as they never do their own dirty work, no it will be the cops doing their killing....So they will shed as much blood as needed...
The wrong question is posed
The question should be How many leftists will be slain trying to disarm America?
It isn’t just leftists, it’s their masters, the cynical & selfish ultra elites, who all have armed security, whose minions have all the technological means of discovering who has the guns and extracting them with minimal fuss. Knife terror England is proof there’s no security, because laws favoring criminals over victims are too useful for social control.
Hahahaha molon labe.
He’s a great author, but why in heck did his latest book have to start out with ZOMBIES..?
I am sooooooo zombied out.
But maybe that’s just me.
Watch Colorado as the communists take over in January, as they will try all sorts of nonsense.
Watch for the rate of compliance (or not).
Watch for the fallout.
Remember, the left is particularly good at lying to themselves. Many of them believe their agitprop.
This kind of war happens, because both sides believe they will win.
It won't happen while Conservative hold the government, or even just the executive branch, because the left, more than life itself, believes in using government power to get what they want.
But if the current crop of dysfunctional lefties gain the White House and legislative power again, it could happen.
Not likely. They would be more subtle and plan the disarmament to occur over two or three generations.
But the right circumstance... some of them are more than self-deluded enough to do it.
Depends. Theirs or someone else’s?
25,000,000-35,000,000 - the number they were willing to kill in the 1970s. More modern target would likely be significantly higher.
Bill Ayers, founder of the Weather Underground and friend of Obama, said they figured they would need to kill off about 25 million Americans who wouldn’t get with their program for a perfect society. At that time, it would have been about 12% of the population. Considering the current population, that would now be around 40 million people.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.