A Revolt Over Gun Control

Quote of the Day

If the Supreme Court eventually says that states or the Congress can’t pass universal background checks or can’t take these assault weapons off the streets, I think there’s going to be a popular revolt over that policy.

Chris Murphy
U.S. Senator (D-Connecticut)
May 14, 2023
Possibility of ‘popular revolt’ about gun control, Sen. Chris Murphy says

Perhaps it would not be quite a popular as the Senator claims to believe:



9 thoughts on “A Revolt Over Gun Control

  1. Wow. 85% disapprove (4% somewhat disapprove + 81% strongly disapprove), and only a narrow sliver have no opinion.

    We can take that to mean he’s a sufficiently polarizing figure that nearly everyone has an opinion on him. But the 85% disapproval means that polarization does not bode well for him.

    That might explain why he’s pushing so hard; he has to get as much of his agenda enacted as he can, before the 2024 election (I do believe he’s up).

  2. If there’s going to be a popular revolt, I believe that I may want to have a couple of assault weapons handy.

  3. And he will probably win re-election by a landslide. Go figure.
    What isn’t going to happen is his popular uprising against guns.
    Hell, Anitifa (gay-trans version), is carrying them now. And how is he going to get all his little trans psycho bitches guns to shoot everybody up with?
    If they just enforced the laws on the books, the government and democratic party would be completely dis-armed. And barred from buying new.
    But thanks for another great example of communist dystopian crap-think, Chris!

    • Trust me, he and “Slimeball” Blumenthal are thoroughly hated everywhere in Kommiecticut outside the shithole cities full of “Gib me dats,” which between ballot harvesting and election irregularities guarantees reelection in perpetuity.

  4. A great example of dissonant thinking if ever there was one. How is a revolt against firearms going to be successful without someone having the means to physically compel owners of firearms to surrender them? And what means of compulsion could be sufficiently effective? Oh yeah, more firearms, but in the hands of the trusted lackeys. Those lackeys will soon find out just how “popular” their demands are, if they survive the initial confiscation effort. So you say, “Well, let’s just starve them into submission.” Right; and what do you think they will do with those dreaded firearms long before a lack of nourishment compromises their ability to take effective action? Why yes, they will take effective action — against those, who in the first place, sought to put themselves above all others. Starting to get an idea why the framers of the Constitution, having just defeated a tyrant by bloody battle, realized the necessity of retaining the ultimate power in the hands of the general population? Because of the fallen nature of the human race, the only sure way to have peace is to also have an unquestioned ability to stop anyone person or group that tries to compel you to behave contrary to the interests of your liberty. Certainly it is better to respect everyone, but for those without such a moral compass, a real and certain threat to their lives is the only thing that will keep them at bay. It is way past time for the Honorable Senator Murphy (the honorific used only in respect to the office, certainly not for the man who seeks to infringe on my God given rights) to compose and submit a letter of resignation and move off the stage and try to live life under the constraints that he is so willing to impose on others!

  5. A revolt of the unarmed against the armed? That always works out well.

  6. Does anyone really believe that Murphy…or any of the other criminal leftists in power actually give a rats ass what we think of them? They don’t. Haven’t for a long time. When you OWN the mechanisms for deciding who wins elections you don’t have to worry about polls or popularity.

Comments are closed.