A Tale of Two Rallies, One Pro Gun, One Against Guns, Which One Was a Dud?


Democrat Gun Banner Eric Swalwell Failed Rally For Gun Control
Democrat Gun Banner Eric Swalwell's failed Rally For Gun Control with his paid staff and biased media. Sucks to be him.

Fairfax, VA – -(Ammoland.com)- The 2020 presidential contest is now underway in earnest. On Tuesday, President Trump officially kicked off his reelection campaign to a packed house at the 20,000 seat Amway Center in Orlando, FL. Earlier that day, one of the two dozen or so contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination tried to have a rally of his own to draw attention to his signature issue of gun control. The difference between the two events speaks volumes about the role the Second Amendment plays in American politics.

At about 1:30 in the afternoon, a little-known U.S. Congressman from California’s 15th District held an event on the sidewalk across from NRA Headquarters in Fairfax, VA. There doesn’t seem to be much point in mentioning his name, as he is polling at a pathetic 1% in his party’s primary race and just barely qualified to attend the first Democrat debate.

The location of the “event” (if that’s not too strong a word) was meant to be symbolic. Speaking to The Hill last week, the candidate boasted: “I’m taking the battle to the NRA’s doorstep with a new, broader package of commonsense reforms to end gun violence.” The Hill article noted that “gun control” is the “centerpiece” of this individual’s “long-shot Democratic presidential bid.” Indeed, at his campaign launch in April, he told his audience that “this issue [i.e., gun control] comes first.”

It can only be assumed, then, that this “confrontation” with the NRA was a key moment in his effort to gain some national attention and raise his profile in a crowded field.

Instead, the gathering was an embarrassingly lame example of either extremely poor planning or rank disinterest in anything the individual had to say.

With sun breaking through the clouds, accompanied by typical Northern Virginia heat and humidity, the crowd topped out at 18 individuals during the height of the event. This does not include the individual himself or a small contingent of reporters, but it does include his own staff and others who actually accompanied him to the site.

Adding to the humorous nature of the scene was the backdrop of a giant black tour bus that looked as if it could have held many dozens of occupants. Like a reverse clown car, it disgorged a “crowd” completely disproportionate to its size.

There’s nothing funny, however, about what this pretender would do to your Second Amendment rights in the far-fetched event he actually wielded power from the Oval Office.

The individual’s plan – which he misleadingly calls “A National Framework to End Gun Violence” – is basically a compendium of the worst thinking on gun control from the last 40 years.

Needless to say, the centerpiece of the “Framework” is a massive gun ban, in this case on what he calls “military-style semiautomatic assault weapons.” This likely refers to magazine-fed semi-automatic rifles like the AR-15, which not incidentally is America’s most popular centerfire rifle platform.

Unlike other recent proposals, his plan calls for forcing those who previously obtained the newly-banned guns lawfully to surrender them to the government for whatever compensation D.C. bureaucrats decided to offer. He calls this the option for the person “who chooses to follow the law.”

Any person “caught defying the law” by refusing to relinquish their lawfully-obtained and constitutionally-protected property, meanwhile, could expect to be criminally prosecuted under the plan.

Of course, the true threats to public peace and order do not “choose[] to follow the law,” and the types of firearms he proposes to ban are actually under-represented in violent crime in the U.S. And even considering the far more infrequent phenomena of mass shootings, semi-automatic rifles are under-represented in those crimes as well.

The rest of the individual’s proposed agenda is too lengthy to fully enumerate, but lowlights include:

  • a mandatory 48-hour waiting period to take possession of a purchased gun (including, apparently, for those who already own guns);
  • a ban on the private sale of firearms;
  • federal licensing and mandatory training to obtain a firearm;
  • a nationwide registry of every firearm, firearm owner, and firearm transaction in America;
  • rationing of the purchase of handguns and ammunition; and
  • a cap on the amount of ammunition that individuals may possess at any one time to 200 rounds per caliber or gauge.

The full list is considerably longer, but the obvious intent is to discourage gun ownership by making it as expensive, burdensome, bureaucratic, legally perilous, and socially unacceptable as possible. Indeed, if he accomplished every item he proposes, American citizens would be worse off in terms of access to firearms than residents of many Western European countries that have no pretense of a “right” to arms and instead treat gun ownership as a tightly-restricted privilege.

Yet even as this plan was being unveiled to an audience that could barely fill a spacious utility closet, another, significantly larger audience was massing well ahead of President Trump’s official campaign kick-off later that night. That event packed the 20,000 seats of the arena, with an overflow crowd cheering the President on from outside of the venue as well.

And it wasn’t just the numbers that told the tale. There was an enthusiasm and electricity to the crowd in Orlando that is simply unmatched in American politics today.

For Second Amendment supporters, the president has been a steadfast ally, refusing to bend to the will of anti-gun forces within the Democrat party, the legacy media, and increasingly in a business climate that appears to embrace virtue signaling even over company mission or shareholder value. His years in office have seen some of the harshest, most sustained attacks against the Second Amendment in our nation’s history, and he has held firm to his promise to be friend to the law-abiding gun owner. None of the many gun control bills introduced into Congress have succeeded during his watch.

Not only that, he has appointed two justices to the U.S. Supreme Court committed to the original understanding of the U.S. Constitution. The Second Amendment will again be before the court this year, and thanks to President Trump, it will be given the respectful consideration it deserves. That would not have happened if Hillary Clinton had succeeded in her bid for the White House.

President Trump mentioned the Second Amendment three times in Orlando, and the crowd responded each time with raucous cheering and applause.

Like his would-be opponent from California, the President has situated the Second Amendment squarely at the center of his campaign. President Trump, however, understands the fundamental place the right to keep and bear arms holds in American life. “We will protect our Second Amendment,” he promised once again.

Fortunately, President Trump will almost certainly not be facing the Congressman from California’s 15th District in the race for the White House. And while the president’s eventual opponent is likely to take a more “moderate” stance on firearms in the general election, there’s little doubt the gun control wish list unveiled last Tuesday was as much as anything a roadmap anti-gun forces hope will lead to the eventual destruction of the Second Amendment. Bit by bit, they are hoping to change the terms of the debate and move the window on what is considered possible in infringing your rights.

Two views of the Second Amendment emerged on Tuesday, and it was clear which one was more widely embraced.

But make no mistake, there is still much work to be done to ensure that view also prevails in 2020. The media’s knives were out before the president even finished his speech, spinning familiar tales about the doom that surely await his electoral ambitions.

So we must do all we can to protect our freedoms in the 2020 elections.

National Rifle Association Institute For Legislative Action (NRA-ILA)

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the “lobbying” arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Visit: www.nra.org

  • 15 thoughts on “A Tale of Two Rallies, One Pro Gun, One Against Guns, Which One Was a Dud?

    1. hey, eric is not a small time guy. he is always on cnn and msnnbc. oh wait, no one watches them, so maybe. I have seen him on tucker’s show when I had cable and he was and I assume still an stupid leftist authoritarian who wants to become a dictator.

    2. Patriot guy, you have it figured out on Eric Swallows. Someone needs to knock this stupid mother fuckers teeth down his throat. He needs to be recalled and removed from office, Only in the state of California could this piece of shit be voted into office. I just wish I could send this cocksucker a personal email..

    3. The Constitution isn’t perfect but there is nothing more perfect. The Supreme Court’s sole job is to protect and preserve the Constitution.

      There should be no on opinions only decisions of adherence to the letter of the law.

      Opinions there of are basic infractions there of.
      The letter of the law is the only true evaluation of the Constitution.

      Some will say the Constitution is not law but it is based on Natural law. It can be argued about but can NOT be changed. Therefore it is law.

      The Constitution is the law of the land and anyone opposing it is the same as those that opposed it in the beginning. ENEMIES of the REPUBLIC.

    4. Simple approach: go after the criminals and leave the law-abiding alone. Criminals commit crimes, but law-abiding do not. Too much emphasis on the gun and not much on the heart, or lack thereof, that is the driving force of the criminally minded. Evil will never be eradicated no matter what happens to the gun, but the defenseless will always be the victim. Things do not hurt people. People hurt people. We need to focus on the “heart” of the matter. The heart of mankind is deceptively wicked and capable of all sorts of evil. That has always been the case since the beginning of time.

    5. Eric swalwell is a mentally unstable, psychotic, meth user, who masterbates which looking at photos of micheal Bloomberg.
      How in the hell did this turd get elected to office or any job as far as that goes. The way he talks sounds like he is suffering from a severe case of mental illness!
      Hold a recall on him and get him out of office and into a mental institution! Where he belongs.
      I’m surprised that he didn’t get his ass kicked in front of the NRA. headquarters. What a piece of crap he is.

    6. Swallowwell and the rest of the Gun Grabbers can Kiss my ass. I will Never surrender my guns to Socialist, anti-Constitutional Ideals or Illegal Laws , and I refuse to Consent to be governed by the likes of him , Pelosi, etc. As Charleton Heston put it years ago…”From my COLD DEAD HANDS !” This is a Play right out of Adolph Hitlers record of gun registration, Confiscation, then Extermination of people !

    7. Belief in president Trump as being a protector of our rights is pretty naive considering he’s already used the power of the administrative state to outlaw bump stocks and now he’s considering going after Suppressors. This is intolerable and we’ve got to quit deluding ourselves that he’s on second ammendmendts rights supporters side. He outright lied at the NRA conference.

        1. Bill, being verbally less anti-rights than a person who is rabidly anti-rights, then using EOs to deny our rights, isn’t pro-2. However, he overall is still better than the opposition. That still doesn’t make him a good choice, only a slightly less bad choice.

          1. This is a different Bill. I agree, he is just a less bad choice. He, like every other single rich person is not on our side here. They never will be. They dont live in neighborhoods where one has to actually defend your life and your families lives with deadly force. They dont understand that concept. They believe that that requirement cant exist in our utopia.

          2. Considering the full-scale hell-on-earth that ANY/EVERY Demonkkkrat candidate would install as soon as they could occupy the office of President… Trump is not a “slightly less bad choice,” he is overall FAR BETTER than anything else available. Stop ragging on the man, and give him his proper due – he has, after all, appointed two Supreme Court justices who damnably-well WILL uphold traditional constitutional values, and not a single piece of gun-control legislation from Congress has been signed into law. That’s not actually a bad record, at all.

            OK, so Trump is “only” 95% supportive of the 2nd Amendment (instead of the perfect-world 100% that you sagaciously feel is so desperately demanded)… In every category (economy, national security, foreign relations, Constitutional rights, etc etc etc), Trump completely outclasses and outshines any Donkeycrat dildo of a politician. Be thankful we have him, not Hillary!!!!

    8. Hanging our hat on the 2nd is going to result in government defining what we will be allowed to own, buy and sell. We seen this with Heller and Scailias ideas that rights not listed do not exist. STOP THAT! The Constitution merely enumerates a few rights not all of them! Now we have this idea that “common usages” that Kavanaugh is talking about. Well using that we are going to be limited in the future- was the AR platfoem common in 1980? NO! so the government could have easily banned them using this thought process of the government is the determiner. Rights are inherent and we must mention that each and every time we discuss rights. The Constitution is the governments rule book – written by the citizenry for the government to follow. It has absolutely nothing in it regarding giving us rights as the founders said they were inherent. If the government is determining right then we are subjects /slaves. The governments powers are few and defined not many and undefined. WE have to quit letting the other side frame the arguments, we must start reframing them using proper terminology. These people are authoritarians, their ideas mean they think they own us ( who wants to be owned? nope not even Swalwell wants to be somebodies property) rights are inherent and the Constitution does not give us rights The 9th clearly states that: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people

    9. Young v Hawaii, Nichols v Brown, Baird v Becarra, all open carry cases, none of them supported by the NRA.
      We the people have all the power. We have always had the power. We just need to stick together and learn to use it.
      The Socialist child murderers can get. One hundred thousand people to wear hats shaped like women’s private parts to march on Washington D. C. But we can’t get one hundred people to show up anywhere on a work day. Conservatives can win, but we had better learn to show up. It is the summer soldier and the sunshine patriot who shrink from the service of their country. Those who stand with us now deserve the thanks of men and women. It is important to make a stand. It will define this nation. Make it a point to turn off the t.v. Once a month and find a cause to help out with.

    Leave a Comment 15 Comments