March 28, 2018
Real Americans aren’t interested in abolishing the constitution.
The Jews are organizing a gigantic gas-lighting operation meant to give the people the impression that there’s a wide consensus forming around the need to abolish the right to bear arms.
I have no idea why in the middle of all this, they’d come out with statistics showing that this agenda is overwhelmingly unpopular.
I guess they’re banking on the fact that no one reads the Washington Post anymore.
One consequence of the success of the National Rifle Association’s expansive gun-rights agenda — and its lobbying power in Congress — is that groups favoring more gun control have pared down their ambitions in recent years.
The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, for instance, no longer talks about banning handguns. Advocates have moved away from the term “gun control” in favor of more specific language like “gun violence” and “gun safety.” Democratic leaders in Congress have grown timid about proposing significant new restrictions on gun ownership.
In that context it’s a bit of a jolt to read an op-ed published Tuesday by retired Supreme Court justice John Paul Stevens titled “Repeal the Second Amendment.” Stevens is something of an expert on the issue, having considered the proper scope of the Second Amendment in the 2008 case District of Columbia v. Heller.
Did he want to abolish the Constitution while he was serving on the supreme court? Or is this a new plan?
In his op-ed, Stevens praises the work of the March for Our Lives organizers and urges the group to “seek more effective and more lasting reform” via a “repeal of the Second Amendment.” He calls the Second Amendment a “relic of the 18th century,” concerned more with the balance of power between the states and the federal government than with individual gun rights.
The point of the Second Amendment was always to facilitate the overthrowing of tyrannical government. In the mind of a corrupt government bureaucrat, that’s definitely an unsettling concept.
Here’s the thing about weapons: everyone in the world has exactly the same opinion about them. They want weapons in the hands of people they like and trust, and out of the hands of people they don’t trust.
I personally fully support gun control – for brown people.
So when anyone talks about “disarming” any given group of people, what that really tells you is which group they consider their enemies.
In the case of these Jews and bureaucrats, the American people themselves are their hated enemy.
But public-opinion polling shows that it would take a lot of persuading to bring the public around to that view. In February, for instance, the Economist and YouGov asked Americans whether they supported a repeal of the Second Amendment. Twenty-one percent said they favored such a proposal, compared with 60 percent in opposition.
So, basically all White men and a large majority of White women oppose this gun-grabbing agenda.
Gun control isn’t even popular with brown people, surprisingly. I guess when they think “gun control,” they know they’ll lose their guns (at least they will be slightly harder for them to get – they don’t own them legally anyway), yet the cops will still be armed, which makes them uneasy.
So this whole “march for our lives” crap is pure social engineering with no base of support in the population. Even the most liberal politicians know that pursuing it too aggressively is electoral suicide.
Yet the Jews simply can’t help themselves. They’ll do whatever it takes to disarm their enemies – normal White people.
This is going to blow up in their face.
Next time try for less repulsive crisis actors, huh kikes?