.@RepSwalwell suggested using nuclear weapons against Americans who oppose his gun control agenda. This includes forcing Americans to give up their semi-automatic firearms. This inflammatory and decisive rhetoric will inspire gun owners to fight harder to protect their rights. pic.twitter.com/FcpwoSqtYO — NRA (@NRA) November 17, 2018

California Representative Eric Swalwell is in the middle of a firestorm over some comments he made about gun control.

On Friday Swalwell, a Democrat and a staunch advocate for gun control, got into a heated exchange with some of his Twitter followers. It wasn’t long before Swalwell was talking about going to war. He even reminded his opponents that the government has nuclear weapons.

By Saturday, social media was buzzing with news about what Swalwell had said. Infowars weighed in. And on Saturday afternoon, the NRA took to Twitter to denounce Swalwell for his “inflammatory and decisive rhetoric.” The group wrote,

“.@RepSwalwell suggested using nuclear weapons against Americans who oppose his gun control agenda. This includes forcing Americans to give up their semi-automatic firearms. This inflammatory and decisive rhetoric will inspire gun owners to fight harder to protect their rights.”

So what did Swalwell really say, and how did things escalate to this point?

A Vet Named Joe Biggs Said There Would Be a ‘War’ if the Government Tried to Take His Guns & That’s When Swalwell Mentioned Nukes

And it would be a short war my friend. The government has nukes. Too many of them. But they’re legit. I’m sure if we talked we could find common ground to protect our families and communities. — Rep. Eric Swalwell (@RepSwalwell) November 16, 2018

Representative Swalwell is known for his strong positions on gun control. On Friday, NBC wrote about his position on assault weapons (Swalwell wants gun owners to get rid of them). NBC tweeted the story too, which led to some gun rights advocates starting to tweet at Swalwell.

One Twitter user named Joe Biggs tweeted at Swalwell that he would “go to war” if Swalwell tries to limit his Second Amendment rights. Biggs wrote, “So basically @RepSwalwell wants a war. Because that’s what you would get. You’re outta your fucking mind if you think I’ll give up my rights and give the gov all the power.”

That’s when Swalwell responded, saying, “And it would be a short war my friend. The government has nukes. Too many of them. But they’re legit. I’m sure if we talked we could find common ground to protect our families and communities.”

Biggs describes himself as “Right Wing. Combat Vet. 82nd Guy, roger! Harley dude. Hunting and Guns. political junkie. welder. jokester. Go Gators? Savannahs Dad.”

Swalwell Is Disappointed That Nobody Appreciated His ‘Joke’

A lot of people interpreted Swalwell’s response to Biggs to mean that he was planning to drop nuclear bombs on people who didn’t like the second amendment. That’s because Swalwell wrote, “It would be a short war my friend. The government has nukes.”

The exchange with Biggs led to a firestorm of tweets, with plenty of conservatives and gun rights activists denouncing Swalwell. He responded glumly, saying that nobody seemed to understand that he was being sarcastic: “Joe, it’s sarcasm. He said he’s going to war with America if gun legislation was passed. I told him his government has nukes. God forbid we use sarcasm.”

Swalwell summed up the entire debate in one tweet, which you can see here:

America’s gun debate in one thread. 1) I propose a buy-back of assault weapons 2) Gun owner says he’ll go to war with USA if that happens 3) I sarcastically point out USA isn’t losing to his assault weapon (it’s not the 18th Century) 4) I’m called a tyrant 5) 0 progress — Rep. Eric Swalwell (@RepSwalwell) November 16, 2018

Meanwhile, some gun rights advocates are circulating a petition which calls for Swalwell to be censured by Congress. You can take a look at the petition here.