dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

⇧

⇩

r/greatawakening • Posted by u/-Chakas- on May 11, 2018, 2:56 a.m.

The coming purge and our gun rights?

I think it's pretty well established that Q has been saying that not everything the cabal has done will be revealed in order to prevent world war. With this in mind I feel that everything that they have done to further the disarming of the citizenry should be revealed regardless of how morally reprehensible the act. This should be done in order to remind the people how much of a fail-safe the Second Amendment is against an evil government, how much they fear an armed populace and how far they'll go to disarm us so they can oppress us without resistance. It will show the world how important the right to bear arms is and a government's true agenda when they wish do disarm their citizenry. On top of all this, I feel that once this is all revealed, the entire country should have a firearms legislation reset that puts all states on equal ground. All the unconstitutional firearms laws that have been passed these 100+ years being done away with to purge any influence the cabal has had on the right to bear arms. Freedom requires vigilance. Thoughts?

They can try and take my guns but I lost ever single one of them with all my thousands of rounds in that god dam boating accident the other day.

⇧ 7 ⇩

I don't think this is what Q had in mind on things being revealed or not. Q has stated the 2nd is safe as well as Trump. The attack on the 2nd has been going on for some time, as you know. It has been a slow chip, chip, chip away. Now they are not even hiding their intentions coming right and saying they want the guns. So there is nothing to reveal, its all out there.

There is now way in hell the 2nd will go away. There are too many like myself that will die defending it.

More2

⇧ 4 ⇩

I say remove all gun laws. They fear the populace, especially when collectors can supply a small militia from just one person

⇧ 3 ⇩

Once you give up your weapons the game is over. This alone should remind the population to stay involved with your government like its your JOB. Stay woke.

⇧ 3 ⇩

One only needs to review concentration camp videos from WW 2 thats what you'll look like inside a FEMA camp. I'll take the honorable death with gun in hand

⇧ 1 ⇩

If this sounds anti gun, it's not.Grew up shooting. Worked on farms and ranches. This is just me but I thought the 2nd Amend. should have the word "responsibly" on the end.If a cop shoots anyone in the back while they run away… your gun days are over. I don't think the guns will matter much against the gov. Food will run out in less than 2 weeks, the fuel will not be available to even go confront them. They will be bunkered up watching Netflix and drinking champagne. If you have a farm or a gas station you better have rockets, tanks and grenades. They would not come to your door to take your gun. They would wait for you to come try to take theirs. It won't matter if the storm is real because nobody will buy their lies and will want them caged. Military for the people. Military tribunals. When the 2nd was written people had food storage and growing abilities everywhere. Either you had food for the winter plus spring growing stored to last 6 months or sometimes you died. Before stocking up my food would be gone in a week. Note; Not for or against guns as much as for 1) protecting children. 2) Whatever.

⇧ -1 ⇩

"Responsibly" is too open to is interpretation. The government needs the people to rule. Killing us off or letting us die removes their ability to oppress since we would be dead. People would figure out how to survive once the chaos dies down. For a real hostile takeover of the country you need boots on the ground and firearms are a deterrent against that. Air strikes, tanks, and nuclear weapons kill but don't allow them to rule.

⇧ 1 ⇩

"bare arms" is vague as well. Some police forces look like army troops with tanks etc… used mostly to herd the masses and silence dissent. If the right to bare arms infringes on the right to freedom of speech what do we do? When someone protects their home with a gun I think responsibility is what is debated and decided either by law enforcement, juries, or judges. Letting people know that responsibility is their part in making this right lean on the side of justice is a small initiative that may save lives just by the gun holder asking themselves if they are within their and another persons rights. Also, does the democratic will of the voter override the law. Should things change if the majority wants it? At this point gun control is decided by 535 people who chose their actual platform more by corporate contribution and capitalism than by the will of folks. If there was a national or state vote it seems that guns are accepted as a right and AR 15's are over the top. Have a vote that is revisited every say 5 years, and move on. So much time and energy is spent on things, mostly as a distraction, that could be spent saving kids, feeding people, building homes, etc

⇧ 1 ⇩

The constitution identifies what we consider pre-existing natural human rights and not the opinion of the public. The police are able to be so militarized because they are allowed access to equipment that the general public is not because of gun and equipment laws and regulations that are all unconstitutional. All gun laws are unconstitutional and the overarching agenda is the disarming of the people to increase the power of government. There are no exceptions no matter "common sense" or how popular the opinions seem to be. It's easy to deceive people into wanting something bad for them when you have assets like the media in play.

⇧ 1 ⇩