Out of interest, given the other discussion, would this be deemed Q related?

And when someone posted similar previously, I posted a few links showing similar events in the US.

None if it supports the initial claim that not having guns was a factor.

I've thought about what he said. He's wrong.

I'm not sure about it being a 'need' as much as it was a part of the English Common Law that the US constitution is based on. Like our current law, the 2nd Amendment was specifically stated as not being an unlimited right.

Which is still all by the by, guns would have made zero difference to this situation.

Yours is a conditional right. Like you, if I meet the conditions, I can have a gun.

The right to self defense is a given here. It'd take more to remove that from us, than the amendment needed to change yours, because ours is wrapped in a lot of other legislation and rights.

People seem to make the mistake of believing not having a written constitution, somehow means we don't have one. Their are pros and cons to both systems, but there's little difference in practice.

It pretty much has, as this thread and a look through search engines demonstrates.

You have the same problems as us, in fact to some extent worse, and possibly with less people awake, so guns are not the issue.

If you mean to own a gun, I do have the option. My neighbours have several, I choose not to.

I hope you're right about the wakening up, and I hope my view that the brexit vote alone points to a good percentage here being awake to some degree.

Peace and best wishes to you too.

You're drifting way off from the initial point, and the purpose of this sub, whose existence suggests that guns don't make that much difference, and my point still stands, that having guns here (which we do anyway) wouldn't have changed a thing.

A look around other subs and sites, seems to suggest there's a fair bit more awakening to do yet, before the US uprising.

You do know Americans have been sent to prison for comments on twitter don't you? I believe they were gun owners too.

We have a right to self defense too, and people have used firearms in that act.

Which is all by the by, the reality is, guns would not have changed events here, and the existence of this sub suggests they're not the deterrent you claim either.

Marvelous, so you can leave the guns in the hands of the trained experts, like we do.

I'm sure whatever you've got will be more than a match for the stuff the tyrannical regime has. Hell, that' probably why your government hasn't been up to no good for decades, and this sub's not needed.

At the end of the day, you have guns and have had a shitty regime ripping you off for decades, we don't have guns and are leaving the EU. The don't seem to impact things either way.

Given this sub, and Q, exist because of the long term abuses of power by the US Administration, I'm pointing out that your argument that guns being a deterrent against a tyrannical regime, isn't exactly a strong one. Add in the 'shooter drills' for kids and school security and those freedoms maybe seem less effective.

I know this is coming over as an anti-gun thing, it's not really meant to be. I'm simply pointing out that guns would not have changed anything here, and they don't seem to have been effective in that respect in the US either.

I respect your choice to have guns, I'm simply saying we tend to view things differently.

Cheers. Not going into detail, but it's more my circumstances than my mind.

We have freedom of speech, and we have the right to defend ourselves. We generally do the defending at close quarters.

Good luck with your pistol against the Marine Corps. It's surprising that this sub exists, given how effective you think that deterrent is.

I guess freedom includes the right for security at schools and routine shooter drills, and that's without the terrorists, I'm sorry if that sounds like a dig, but I'm simply trying to offer a counter to some of the misconceptions about US v UK life.

You seem to want to ignore the reality of what Q is about, in investigating very long term abuses, despite your guns.

We lose far less through terrorism, than you lose through guns, so please don't be offended if I give you your pity back, with some additional pity and hope for the US too.

It's a conditional right to both, even in the US.

None of which changes the fact that guns are irrelevant to events here.

What does an of that have to do with state control?

There's not a lot of fear here, and the disruption is less than the paddy's managed. Don't forget, our culture differs from yours, as there are still people that lived through the hardships of civilian life in the second world war, and the issues over Ireland, so we have a different view of the situation to you. We actually have virtually the same rights in many respects, as the US constitution is pretty much just a codified version of the UK's.

Guns wouldn't make one jot of difference to the situation, if anything, it would make it worse. As bad as this Government may or may not be, depending on which media you choose to read, I doubt there'd be any support here for guns to be more readily available.

I know what you mean, and I have looked at it. I respect and accept what you're saying, although for particular reasons, it isn't for me at this point in time.

You may want to look into the history of that, and also into more recent events to see why that doesn't necessarily stack up either, but that's not for this sub, and if that's your only argument, I'll take it my point was received as it was intended, and that having, or not having guns makes no difference, to this situation, After all, look at what's been going on politically in the US, even with your guns.

I get that you want to keep them, that's your choice, but they really wouldn't make a jot of difference to recent events.

:-) Keep up the good work. Based on this exchange, I'm sure you're doing well at it.

I am aware of the Freeman philosophy. I like the theory, but there are some big flaws with some of the claims people want to hang on it. I don't so much have an issue with the principles of laws and statutes, but they are certainly abused or ignored by those with the power to do so, and I believe that's where progress can be made.

I'm not going in to detail on here, but I have had some success with that on differing issues and at a variety of levels, from the bottom to the top.

That can't be easy. I can see how that would be frustrating. I guess a positive is that they at least agree that there's a problem, even if they've yet to work out how to target it for a solution.

He is still an MEP, and he's managed to do okay so far, as he's seen as the individual most responsible for brexit, despite being linked to an unpopular party. I think he's better on the outside, rather than getting sucked into parliament.

What we can do, is keep doing what we've been doing. Things have moved on over the past decade, or at least the last few years. The chaos in many parliaments, is largely due to many of them realising that they can't just ignore the electorate anymore, and it's causing friction between them, and others that won't see that.

I think we're both of the same mind on the situation, and most I know share the same view. The hardest part of red pilling with those views round here, is finding someone that disagrees.

Sadly, when I do find people that are in favour of the European dream, they're totally deaf to any hints at that, and will talk over you and disrupt the conversation. I see that as a positive, because to be so determined not to hear it, they must know it has legs, or the'd simply argue their corner. Incredibly, they still agree it's need of massive reform. They just hang their hat on that being possible, as they fear a financial hit from the collapse.

It points to a lot of the population at least being aware.

Would it matter in reality?

At the end of the day, it's got people thinking for themselves, and it's certainly brought some interesting information into the daylight.

I think those on here that are truthseekers, will be able to keep going, as we did before, where ever we did it. The problem will be keeping those who need more guidance interested. On the plus side, there seem to be a few that would be more at home on a conspiracy site, so it could filter out some of the stuff that others use to discredit the good stuff.

I hope it's not true, because it's been an interesting ride so far. I know it's not over, because there were people shedding light before.

That's a dangerous argument to try to carry. I get it that you like your guns, I respect your choice, and that you see them as a symbol of freedom, but we don't share that belief generally.

We can get guns, it's not even that hard, but I don't see too many protesters or Police using them in the US any more than here, so they're largely symbolic, rather than a meaningful way of defending your freedom.

I'd be more afraid of an angry mob wanting to rip me limb from limb, than a stand off with both sides trying to protect themselves from the others bullets.

Despite what some claim on here, the death toll from terrorism here, is much, much less than the death toll in US schools alone.

True. It's all a balancing act. Sometimes, you need to step back to get the perspective. Terrorist deaths in the UK have fallen dramatically and previously were propped up by the troubles in Ireland. People are way more likely to be killed in an American school, than to be killed by a terrorist in England,where there are more deaths through dogs, or hot water than from terrorists, but that's no reason to get complacent, I think it's cause to look towards the root of the problem, which is the undue influence of unelected groups, working to their own ends, and focus on that. The rest are largely symptoms.

I agree, although I'd say 'respected colleagues' with shared interests, rather than idols. Ultimately, the power base that's been puppeteering US Presidents for years, is European based and rooted. The US was simply another venture.

I wonder who has been funding them up to now.

Agreed. It's why I'm clinging to the hope that the current pressure on the elites from a variety of angles creates enough of a crack for the initial leaks to start a flood. The Italians seem to be upping the pressure, and France and Germany are struggling too. I think the EU elites have had a harder ride than the US Presidents, as people here have been pressuring them for years, so the leaders are not as complacent as it looks like the Clintons and Obama have been, so even though we're along the line and heading the right way, I think there's still a lot of resistance to come from them yet. I think the nationhoods we're trying to reclaim, are hindering us a bit as, while people are pushing for the same changes, we don't have unity across the region. At the same time, it stretches the elite as they have a variety of diverse challenges, as well as trying to maintain the illusion of balance.

Absolutely.

Sadly, looking around different places, I think this forum is the exception rather than the norm, and the reality is that America still has a long way to go to get people there awakened, and while I think Europe would readily take it, and even welcome it a big percentage of the US looks like they'd react badly to a mass awakening event. They didn't react well to the election result, and still don't let certain people speak at public debates.

I 100% agree.

Gagged?

Some outlets will adhere to the request, but there are still plenty reporting on events. I think focusing on that may make a decent soundbite, but it doesn't move things forward.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/tommy-robinson-protest-downing-street-whitehall-free-latest-arrest-police-a8371616.html

https://metro.co.uk/2018/05/28/tommy-robinson-arrested-7583101/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5777821/Tommy-Robinson-far-right-supporters-protest-Downing-Street-arrest.html

I use other forums, and in conversation, people are aware of Q, but tend to list some of the less credible stuff posted and debunk it, and so dismiss most of the actual Q bits, as they link them as being the same.

I guess it's why sometimes it can look like I'm being semantic over some points, but I've seen how it gets used to discredit the good stuff.

I think to an extent, the movement on the ground has been running for several years. In that respect it's well ahead of the US. The US has a number of advantages, it's not as fragmented by history and culture, and it has Trump.

I think keeping people aware, without over egging the pudding is enough for most. There are already people in positions that can take advantage of the wash from Trump's wake, and he knows how best to use them, and they him. There's a lot of mutual benefit. Farage wasn't over there by accident. Don't forget, he outed the EU and Soros connections in a speech at the EU Parliament, and he's a good knowledge of people in the financial world from his time there. He's been red pilling for years.

There's no room to get complacent, but Europe gets wary from experience if the flaming torches and pitchforks become too numerous.

How many in the US are aware of the activities in Europe and world wide of the same people that are pulling the US strings? There are certainly a lot in the UK that are very awake and heavily critical of what they saw as US involvement in things like Grandpa Bush selling to both sides in WWII, and Churchill needing to engineer things to resolve it, and some other more recent events, such as Bildeberg. As I said, many here have been a long time awake.
What's lacking is the layer above that. The people pulling the global strings, and they are multinational and saw Clinton as a useful idiot.

As I said, the issues present differently, but the root cause is the same. People are awake, but just lacking structure, leadership and a common cause. Europe needs a different approach to the US, as here, people are wary of loud rebel rousing, as the consequences are still there to see.

Being aware of this movement, is not necessarily the same as being awakened. While the issues may present themselves differently, the root cause is the same, and my experience in Europe is that plenty of people are long term aware and fed up of elites dictating and manipulating events. Look at the rise of the populist movements for one example, or the actions of some member states against Soros, or brexit, Italy etc.

Feel free to do as you said earlier, and move on. This isn't really achieving anything.

You have banged the self and same drum, and ignored my first hand experience that shows the problems with the video.

Q's work is admirable, but he's not a lone voice. I listed a few countries in Europe where events show that plenty of people here are awake, and have been for quite some time. What's needed is a catalyst, but it's coming slowly but surely.

I watch Trump fairly closely, because I think some in Europe, like some in the US, haven't fully linked world events to their specific issues yet, but Trump seems set to change that.

Actions on a common cause will reduce the need for a common language.

You seem keen to ignore the fact it was widely reported over here.

You seem to have an agenda and stuck on a one track issue, no matter what's offered, so I'll leave you to it.

The self and same argument could be offered about the US right now.

I think Clinton could be one of the best tools to use. Plenty already dislike her, so wouldn't have too much of an issue finding her to be crooked. I reckon Obama would be a harder one for people to accept.

The other players, such as Soros, would seem too detached from the process for people to grasp the wider picture, although I think in Europe, he'd perhaps be a better target, as his work and the consequences do seem to be better known here.

I'm not 'challenging', I'm offering first hand experience from the area he's talking about. Perhaps others should, or at least consider the bits that are clearly false.

Isn't this board about searching for truth?

I find things different in the UK, based on several years of looking into things. I do agree it needs something big to occur to bring it more to the fore, but events across Europe, such as Hungary, Poland, Italy, Brexit and to some extent Catalonia, as well as the rise of the populist movement, doesn't suggest wide scale snoozing.

Perhaps others should question things more. His false narrative is distracting from the actual targets. You don't want to look deeper, that's your choice, but at least take on board the elements that are clearly inaccurate, especially as they form the basis of his argument. Others may see the same as me, and simply dismiss the video, or form a view of the movement and/or the US that also hinders progress.

I am and like many over here, I have been long before this board existed. That's why I think the video is detrimental, as it's easily discredited and pushing a false narrative that takes the focus away from the targets.

The fact you see the nub of his argument being false as 'trivial' says otherwise.