Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell found himself in hot water over the weekend after he tweeted that the government has “nukes – too many of them” in response to a comment about gun control.
The remarks were made on Twitter, beginning when conservative pundit Joe Biggs challenged Swalwell’s stance on gun control, saying, “So basically @RepSwalwell wants a war. Because that’s what you would get. You’re outta your f**king mind if you think I’ll give up my rights and give the gov all the power.”
Swalwell replied, “And it would be a short war my friend. The government has nukes. Too many of them. But they’re legit. I’m sure if we talked we could find common ground to protect our families and communities.”
And it would be a short war my friend. The government has nukes. Too many of them. But they’re legit. I’m sure if we talked we could find common ground to protect our families and communities.
— Rep. Eric Swalwell (@RepSwalwell) November 16, 2018
Swalwell, who is said to be considering a shot at the Democratic Party’s nomination for the 2020 Presidential election, didn’t stop there.
“So our government would nuke its own country in order to take guns? Wow,” Biggs tweeted back to Swalwell.
“Don’t be so dramatic. No one is nuking anyone or threatening that. I’m telling you this is not the 18th Century. The argument that you would go to war with your government if an assault weapons ban was in place is ludicrous and inflames the gun debate. Which is what you want,” Swalwell replied.
Don’t be so dramatic. No one is nuking anyone or threatening that. I’m telling you this is not the 18th Century. The argument that you would go to war with your government if an assault weapons ban was in place is ludicrous and inflames the gun debate. Which is what you want. https://t.co/oX0rY7Nbs1
— Rep. Eric Swalwell (@RepSwalwell) November 16, 2018
Radio host and former Illinois politician Joe Walsh weighed in on the exchange, saying, “’If you don’t turn over your guns, ‘we’ll nuke you’ is definitely a reasonable argument to make.”
Swalwell then insisted that his remarks weren’t serious, saying, “Joe, it’s sarcasm. He said he’s going to war with America if gun legislation was passed. I told him his government has nukes. God forbid we use sarcasm 🤷♂️”
Joe, it’s sarcasm. He said he’s going to war with America if gun legislation was passed. I told him his government has nukes. God forbid we use sarcasm 🤷♂️
— Rep. Eric Swalwell (@RepSwalwell) November 16, 2018
Whether or not Swalwell would seriously consider the use of nuclear force against gun owners isn’t known, but his stance against gun ownership was clarified in a May op-ed he penned in USA TODAY.
“We can give ourselves and our children the chance these [mass shooting] victims never had. We can finally act to remove weapons designed for war from our streets, once and for all,” he wrote.
Swalwell continued by arguing the federal “assault” weapons ban would be an inadequate step in ridding the country of guns permanently.
“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,” Swalwell asserted.
Swalwell proposed a nationwide buy-back program in which the federal government should spend $15 billion buying back the estimated 15 million “assault weapons” across the U.S. at a rate of $1,000 each.
He implied that it’s not possible to protect lives and the Second Amendment, referring to himself as “guilty” of saying the two can exist at once.
“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,” Swalwell said.
