Eric Swalwell and Cory Booker Battle Over Who Would Be Better at Taking Guns Away From Americans

Alex Edelman/Win McNamee/Getty Images

Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) and Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) got into a bit of a spat over who would be better at taking guns away from Americans.

In the crowded field of 21 Democrats running for president in 2020, Swalwell made gun control his niche issue to stand apart from his competitors. As IJR previously reported, Swalwell vowed to implement a mandatory gun buyback of “military-style weapons” — á la New Zealand — and vowed to arrest those Americans who didn’t participate.

Unfortunately for the congressman, a candidate higher up on the recent primary polls released his own gun-limiting plan, stealing Swalwell’s spotlight.

As IJR reported Monday, Booker announced his own plan that would require gun owners to have a license, close “loopholes,” and “ban assault weapons.”

Booker’s team called this plan the “most sweeping gun violence prevention proposal ever advanced by a presidential candidate.”

Clearly, Swalwell took offense to Booker’s claim to the “most sweeping” proposal. He told the Washington Examiner that the senator’s plan didn’t make it clear how he would ban assault weapons, while Swalwell has a clear plan to force Americans into a buyback program:

“I support gun licensing. You need a license to drive a car; using a gun shouldn’t have a lower standard. I want to know if Sen. Booker’s assault weapons ban would include the 15 million on the streets now, or just future sales. My plan bans both.”

Booker also tiptoed around whether he would arrest gun owners who refused to turn over their weapons. He dodged a “yes or no” question from CNN on the matter Monday night.

Watch Booker dodge the question:

POPPY HARLOW: Would you prosecute people? Do you support the government buying them back and, if not, potentially people could go to jail if they don’t want to sell them back, yes or no?

BOOKER: Again, we should have a law that bans these weapons, and we should have a reasonable period in which people can turn in these weapons. Right now, we have a nation that allows, in streets and communities like mine, these weapons that should not exist.

Swalwell took a harder line than Booker on the issue of arrests, instead blatantly telling CNN’s Jake Tapper that gun owners who refused to turn in their weapons would go to jail.

As IJR previously reported, several major Democrats have targeted the Second Amendment as part of their primary bid. With a field of 21 candidates that could still grow, it could help some candidates to set themselves apart as staunch supporters of gun control — as Booker and Swalwell are trying to do.

It remains to be seen if it would be a strong strategy to target the Second Amendment in a general election.

What do you think?

-4 pledges
Upvote Downvote
newest oldest most voted
Notify of

fun fact: in ’68 the Supreme Court decided that convicted felons could NOT be punished for failing to register their firearms because it violated their 5th amendment right to not incriminate themselves. (as felons in possession of firearms.) q.v. Haynes v. United States

Haynes was in possession of an item which normally required NFA registration.

the lesson here: refuse to register and become a felon. Then make whatever suppressor, SBR, sawed-off or actual assault weapon you want.


They’re fighting to see who can first violate the Constitution? Morons.

Shmucktacus gains points for dragging out the entire gun-control laundry list.

SwelledHead keeps it simpler. Jail or mass-murder by nuclear weapons.

Like I said. Morons. Anti-American morons. It’s too bad no one reminds them of their oaths of office to uphold and defend the Constitution.


Here’s something these wannabe tyrants do not acknowledge.

Gun registrations/turn-ins have massively failed in CT, NY, and CA. Same for Australia and Canada.

A lot of local law enforcement SIDES with private owners AND will resist orders of confiscation. q.v. NY

Confiscation efforts WILL result in violence and they both have families who, ironically, must then be 24×7 protected by people with guns.


I’m willing to surrender my firearms (the ones not lost waterskiing) on one condition.

I want Booker and Swalwell and Bloomberg to suit up in Kevlar and personally lead the forced-entry into my home to take them.


But, what about all the criminals who use guns as the tool of their trade? Do you plan to put them on the unemployment line? Or, give them an extra ration of food stamps?

So much for exhibiting a lack of knowledge and understanding of our 1791 Bill of Rights. So many with so much hot air making so little sense.

George Peters

i would say that whoever survived being shot in the head, trying to take mine.

Tom Bodine

Neither of these two knows who it is they want to confiscate the guns from, best of luck and pre-select the inscription for your head stones, who am I kidding both are gutless wind bags.

Jeff T.

A couple more “do as I say, not as I do” assclowns that want to make criminals out of constituents simply for exercising our Constitutional right.

House GOP Trolls Dems With Proposals Renaming Health Care Bill ‘Don’t Let States Innovate Act’ and More

Melania Expands ‘Be Best’ Pillars on Anniversary While Vowing to Help Children Reach Their ‘Full Potential’