[NBC News] Dem Congressman calls for gun confiscation and nuking gun owners

Honestly I doubt most politicians give a **** about gun rights. Weaponry has advanced so far now that a thousand's of people with guns could never really do anything significant against the government, you know this isn't the 1880's. Gun restrictions as far as background checks for the mentally ill and everyone else should be or stay in place at least so we don't **** up each other up.

 

Nevermind that the OP's thread title is a lie as he didn't call for nuking gun owners. Of course, you need the lie to create the hysteria.

 

His speech still refers to using unlawful force, which would be a use of violence, against gun owners. Showing his true colors. Why is it that people are so quick to support violence against people who are minding their own business?

 

The use of unlawful force being talked about was the unlawful force gun owners would theoretically use against the government.

 

Good luck with your search.

 

That's real nice. Original.

 

What I love is all of the people who think Trump is Hitler, and want to resist. So if Trump is literally making himself a dictator, wouldn't you want people to rise up with their arms to protect themselves from a tryannical government? I mean in theory of course? I don't think that, but some people I know seem to think that he is the next Adolf. So ok, would you support nuking (or be pro-violent response) resistance fighters who are breaking the law of the government in that case?

 

Groovy. Glad you liked it. I'm a gun owner myself, but I find the constant paranoia exhibited by a relatively small percentage of the millions of other gun owners in this country to be largely based on gross exaggerations and outright lies heavily promoted by the NRA, which is more concerned with protecting their lucrative relationship with the gun manufacturers than they are in the welfare of the citizens of this country.

 

See my previous post.

 

I can understand your opinion friend. I don't necessarily care about the same things you do, but I hear ya.

 

No. That would be stupid. People rising against the United States government with their guns would not stop it. The government controls the power. They will cut off water and power to people's homes. Then they can just sit there until people cave. If that doesn't work they can then send in tanks. Tanks will not be harmed by citizens' guns. They can also drop bombs on them. Those aircraft will not be harmed by citizen's guns fighting an authoritarian dictator of the United States. The citizens won't ever even have to see a member of the military that will be protecting the president. Their firearms will not protect them against tyranny.

The best way to actually overturn a government like that will be to go on strike and not relent. With the nation shut down, the government can not function.

 

Oh the irony...

 

Ridiculous thread, sensationalized - what a dumbass reach.

**** TRUMP!

DD

 

The nuke part is false and I got to believe you knew that and was joking... but if not, shame on you.

 

Wow, your lack of knowledge about warfare is showing. I bet your gun knowledge is just as limited.

 

Well, I own and shoot several guns regularly. I don't claim to be an expert at it by any means. Knowledge about warfare has nothing to do with armed citizens thinking they can use their firearms to fight against the government. The government would not really have to get into range to defeat armed citizens.

I do know that shutting down all production in the nation would cripple the government and make it impossible for a nation to function.

 

That's not what snopes is saying. You posted a ridiculous thread - it's just an outright lie to say he called for nuking gun owners. But the truth wouldn't be a very good headline of course

 

I've always asked proponents of the "the second amendment is to fight a tyrannical government" trope about what is the threshold to actually use firearms against the federal government for a legitimate cause?

I was thinking that the Black Panthers of the 60s who used firearms as a show of force to fight Jim crow segregation and voter disenfranchisement against African Americans was an acceptable threshold but those same proponents of the second amendment label those movements as extremist and "thugish".

So when is it the right time to start pointing weapons at the federal government? When is that "tyranny" threshold reached? Seems like an important aspect to nail down before someone touts the "the second amendment is to fight tyranny of our own government" line?