Gun control activist David Hogg has been on one recently with the number of unintelligent takes he has dolled out with regards to firearms, but he recently had one that made pro-gun advocates take a second look.
Hogg chastised gun control proponents who believe it is possible for the U.S. government to confiscate firearms within the United States. He called for more realistic solutions to address gun crime, "Like funding more research and MH programs to fight gun suicides."
The idea that the government could ever take 400,000,000 guns from people even if it wanted to is ridiculous. It's a moot point that stops us from talking about the many things we do actually agree on. Like funding more research and MH programs to fight gun suicides.
— David Hogg ☮️ (@davidhogg111) March 5, 2023
Hogg even invited Twitter users to message him to "discuss what we can agree on to address the gun violence none of us want to continue."
Time permitting I am going to try to have at least one convo a day for the next week with someone who's messaged me to discuss what we can agree on to address the gun violence none of us want to continue. So if you wanna talk dm me. Can't promise I'll get to all but I will try.
— David Hogg ☮️ (@davidhogg111) March 5, 2023
Hogg was widely mocked, and even officially fact-checked on Twitter, last month after proclaiming, "You have no right to a gun. You are not a militia. When you’re talking about your second amendment rights you’re talking about a states right to have what is today the national guard." He said he believed the Supreme Court's opinion was wrong to decide the Second Amendment applies to individuals, which it does.
You have no right to a gun. You are not a militia. When you’re talking about your second amendment rights you’re talking about a states right to have what is today the national guard. The modern interpretation of 2A is a ridiculous fraud pushed for decades by the gun lobby.
— David Hogg ☮️ (@davidhogg111) February 26, 2023
The Birdwatch note on Hogg's tweet states, "While individual opinions about the proper reading of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution differ widely, and have for generations, the United States Supreme Court has ruled that it does protect an individual right to bear arms (with certain limitations)."
