Despite advocating gun control, Representative Tom Suozzi said that guns could help resist Trump.
I don’t know if we should be outraged that someone would suggest that firearms are needed to resist Trump or that we should be glad that a Democrat shows he finally acknowledges the purpose of the Second Amendment. The problem is that, besides making up grievances against Trump to make armed resistance seem justified, these people still work at constricting the Second Amendment. They aren’t bound by the law of non-contradiction.
The New York Post reports, “Congressman suggests Second Amendment as means of opposing Trump.”
A Democratic congressman from Long Island implied that Americans should grab weapons and oppose President Trump by force, if the commander-in-chief doesn’t follow the Constitution.[…]
“It’s really a matter of putting public pressure on the president,” Suozzi said in a newly released video of the March 12 talk in Huntington. “This is where the Second Amendment comes in, quite frankly, because you know, what if the president was to ignore the courts? What would you do? What would we do?”[…]
Suozzi political adviser Kim Devlin denied the pol was “advocating for an armed insurrection.”[…]
the Suozzi campaign at the same time seemed to double down on the comments, as they forwarded a line penned by Thomas Jefferson that called for armed resistance.
“What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms.”
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com