search
top

More Radical Proposals from Democrats

Eric Swalwell on Tucker Carlson:

I’m not calling for a confiscation. What I’m saying is we should invest in buyback, that we should restrict any weapons that aren’t bought back to gun clubs, hunting clubs, shooting ranges. Keep them there, where it’s safe. Not on our streets. And if you were caught, just like you were caught, you know, with drugs, or anything else, or they have probable cause to go in your home and you have one of these weapons, yeah. You’d be prosecuted. I’ve never suggested sending troops out and collecting and confiscating–

If we just call it a buy back, and make it mandatory, it’s not confiscation! Sure, we’ll “criminally prosecute all — criminally prosecute any who refuse — choose to defy it by keeping their weapons,” but you gun nuts are crazy to think anyone here is talking about taking your guns.

And where are all these gun and hunting club that clearly all shooters and hunters must belong to? And clearly they are all set up to store thousands of firearms? He doesn’t have a clue. My club is starting to get inundated with requests from New Jersey members who would like the club to provide storage so that they can keep all their soon to be illegal stuff in Pennsylvania. But we don’t have the resources or security level to provide for on-site storage of firearms. Neither do most other clubs. I’ve heard this from people before who assume it’s practical. They don’t know anything about the culture and even less about guns.

And I trust the American people are law-abiding, that their weapons can be bought back or keep them at a gun club. You don’t have to give them up. Just keep them at a gun club.

No. That won’t work. Even if we were willing, which we are not. Absolutely 100% non-negotiable. This is basically saying you can have guns, but only if you never use them for self-defense.

22 Responses to “More Radical Proposals from Democrats”

  1. Alpheus says:

    I don’t know why we have problems with the idea of storing our guns at gun clubs. Isn’t it nice to have a central repository for gun thieves when they want to go steal guns? And unlike police stations (the other repository from where criminals sometimes steal guns) it’s not even guarded 24/7!

    (One gun club local to the area is open to the public Wednesday Evenings and Saturday Mornings; I’m not entirely sure when else it’s open. It’s in a nice out-of-the way location up a canyon, several miles from civilization, on the way to campgrounds in the wilderness, making it that much “harder” for gun thieves to drive up with a trailer in the middle of the night (or heck, even in the middle of the day!), break in, and take if not everything, a good fraction of everything….

    Assuming, of course, that the gun club stores guns on location. I’m pretty sure they don’t, though.

    • Richard says:

      It used to be a thing to rip off National Guard armories. Don’t know if that is still happening. I know that when the Soviet Union broke up, people showed up not only with real (full auto) assault rifles but with crew served stuff, APCs, and on one occasion, an attack helicopter.

      • Paul C says:

        If my memory serves me right, was it the SDS that was ripping off National Guard Armories? SDS is that Students for a Democratic Society?

      • Kevin says:

        Old rural armories often had terrible arms rooms. Newer ones and ones recently renovated are much harder. The security of the arms rooms of my units in an old armory in Lansing MI and the ones of my unit in Chicago were worlds apart, with the century old Chicago one being a lot harder to burglarize due to where in the building the arms rooms were and how many hardened and alarmed doors you had to breach to get into it.

        For a modern armory, see appendix G of AR190-11 For example:
        “a. Walls. Walls will be of 8 inches of concrete reinforced with No. 4 reinforcing bars at 9 inches on center in each
        direction in each face of the wall. Reinforcement in the 2 faces of the wall will be staggered on each face to form a
        projected grid approximately 4–1/2 inches square. Reinforcement in the walls will be tied into floors and ceilings in
        accordance with American Concrete Institute standards.”

    • Oldwindways says:

      I have been wary of central/communal storage of arms since I learned about an April morning in 1775. I don’t see any reason to make tyranny easier to implement than it already is.

  2. I know this doesn’t matter to many people on the East Coast … but here in the West it’s nice not to have to go to a gun club. To setup a thrower over a (approving) farmer’s field or setup some targets up in the mountains away from everybody. Or in your backyard if you’re like my relatives and live in the country.

    There’s not much more American than camping out and shooting some targets with the kids.

  3. Wiregrass says:

    The NJ club members best bet is to find a somewhat climate controlled storage facility in PA near the range. I had to do this for a year when my son that lives in my home went through a stupid streak and wound up getting a year of probation. I had to move all my guns out of the house “for the safety of the probation officer”. Like we’re going to shoot a probation officer over a DUI.

    As far as what Swallowwell wants: Not going to happen.

  4. dwb says:

    AirBnB for gun storage coming to PA soon. Or should be. I can see this as a viable business in Eastern PA – between NJ and MD refugees.

  5. Archer says:

    “This is basically saying you can have guns, but only if you never use them for self-defense.”

    Respectfully, I disagree. It might be a nit-pick, but the choice of words seems … off.

    Specifically, the reference to using guns for self-defense; “Safe storage” laws, or the D.C. requirements pre-Heller (i.e. must be stored disassembled or rendered inoperable), make guns generally unusable for self-defense, even if they are stored in the home.

    This proposal goes further than that: your semi-auto rifles cannot be stored in the home at all.

    It’s more like saying you can own guns, but you can’t have guns.

    Just my $0.02.

  6. Patrick Henry, the 2nd says:

    Its amazing to see him trying to argue two opposing things at the same. They know that saying “confiscation” is bad, but its what they want. Its like a kid trying to argue something.

  7. Sean D Sorrentino says:

    He’ll lose his mind when he finds out how many people actually carry their guns around on their person.

  8. You should be paying attention to the ERPO shitshow in the MA legislature. It’s going to be a blueprint for bullshit in other states.

    Straight up confiscation bill where all the due process, right to an attorney, mental health treatment, serious penalties for false reports, has been deliberately stripped out. They aren’t even trying to hide it by voting down mental health funding stating it, “isn’t a mental health bill” and even killing amendments to take away drivers and professional licenses away at the same time as firearm licenses (MA ignores Heller and it is a felony for simple possession of even a spent brass casing). So some crazy person gets ERPO’d walks out of the courthouse (no requirement for confinement or evaluation) and can drive their car into crowds of people no problemo.

    • Joe says:

      So Massachusetts is now making ERPO’s; “Call the SWAT Team on a Gun Owner Anytime You Want” Laws…………..

      Is that correct?

      Basically, if your neighbor believes in a total ban on Civilian Firearms Ownership, they can fabricate a false accusation and have the police SWAT Team your house to take your guns away at anytime……….right?

      If that is the case, than there will at some point be armed conflicts between gunowners and police, but the Democrat Party wants that.

      • rd says:

        No penalty for false reports?
        What is going to stop someone from calling in a false report from a public telephone?

        (MA ignores Heller and it is a felony for simple possession of even a spent brass casing.)
        Be a pity if someone finds a box of ammo or a loaded full sized magazine in their house during any search.

        Bad things will happen. Hopefully the hoplophobes learn the shortcomings and futility of their laws firsthand.

    • Sean D Sorrentino says:

      This is EXACTLY what you want. You want the worst, most intrusive, least constititutional law possible so it’s harder to pass into law and if they do pass is, it’s easier to get a court to overturn it. Never help your enemy make their laws more “reasonable.”

  9. Chris says:

    Sean, the problem is that the first circuit doesn’t recognize the 2a as a real right. I wouldn’t hold my breath for a remedy from them. and the Supremes need one or maybe two more votes to enforce McDonald.

    • Joe says:

      Kennedy needs to retire and Ginsburg and/or Breyer need to suffer horrible strokes that drop ’em.

      The Heller and McDonald Decisions need 6-3 or 7-2 SCOTUS Majorities to be meaningfully enforced and honored. I think Kennedy and Roberts keep on denying Cert to these cases because they might see 5-4 Partisan Rulings as weak, and that the Left/Anti-Gunners would use that as an excuse to ignore the SCOTUS with political spin, as they are already doing now.

  10. Sigivald says:

    “What did Heller even say? I dunno!”

  11. TS says:

    And will each transfer between the gun owner and the range owner require the $75 background check fee and trip to the closest FFL per “universal background checks” demands?

  12. Chas says:

    The Second Amendment, the keeping and bearing of arms, is a right, not a crime.

top