The Parkland school shooting has once again spurred debate on gun control. Legislators, police officers and teachers have all spoken, giving their differing opinions on the matter. One Democratic congressman, however, has come up with his own solution to fix the gun problem in the US — forcing gun owners to get rid of their “military-style semiautomatic assault weapons” or face prosecution.
Democratic Congressman Eric Swalwell wrote an opinion piece at USA Today in which he explained that fixing the gun issue in America is as easy as simply taking all military-style rifles away from owners. In the op-ed piece titled “Ban assault weapons, buy them back, go after resisters,” Swalwell proclaimed if we don’t take these firearms from citizens it “would leave millions of assault weapons in our communities for decades to come.”
Swalwell believes that offering $1,000 to every person who surrenders the controversial firearms would cushion the blow of having citizens’ Second Amendment rights infringed upon.
For those who choose not to get with the program, Swalwell writes, “criminally prosecute any who choose to defy [the buyback] by keeping their weapons.” This ideas in his opinion piece are a far cry from the happy medium conservative Republicans and Democrats are currently working on.
According to NBC News, Swalwell took the idea of gun confiscation from Australia, which happened in 1996 after a gunman killed 35 tourists.
“Australia got it right,” he wrote before adding, “the right to live is supreme over any other.” Democrats have wisely been wary of using the term “confiscation” when discussing alternatives for gun control.
Swalwell then touched on the Parkland, Florida, shooting that began a real push for gun reform. “There’s something new and different about the surviving Parkland high schoolers’ demands,” he wrote. “They dismiss the moral equivalence we’ve made for far too long regarding the Second Amendment. I’ve been guilty of it myself, telling constituents and reporters that ‘we can protect the Second Amendment and protect lives.’”
It’s a safe assumption that the congressman may encounter a fair share of resistance when he comes for the guns of law-abiding citizens.