Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old 03-13-2013, 6:22 PM
LBDamned's Avatar
LBDamned LBDamned is offline
Made in the USA
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: OC - So Cal - Soon-to-be AZ!
Posts: 9,950
iTrader: 51 / 100%
Default

many (dare I saw most) Libertarians are Constitutionalists...

there are many, MANY people in both major parties that actually have Libertarian views... many people that have (in the past) considered themselves "liberal" are more Libertarian than they think... "liberals" of today are much different than decades past.

If more people would have taken the time to understand Ron Paul's position, we would be in a lot better shape... most people that I turned on to Ron Paul (including several Dems) valued his ideals and thought he was spot on.

Rand Paul is a much better speaker and I think has great public appeal... In my opinion, he's the best hope this country has for not reaching the tipping point (if we haven't already).

Unfortunately, I feel BO's second election may have been the beginning of the end (hopefully I'm wrong and people wake up in the near future).
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 03-13-2013, 8:17 PM
penguin0123 penguin0123 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,804
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vector16 View Post
Ron Paul was a libertarian. He was running as a Rep. but he was way too far to the right liberal in the sense of the Enlightenment to be a Republican. Santorum was a standard party line Republican, Romney was more of a Independent cardboard cutout than anything else.
Fixed.
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 03-13-2013, 11:19 PM
thayne's Avatar
thayne thayne is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: CA
Posts: 2,282
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by therealnickb View Post
Libertarians are quite supportive of 2A from what I've read and heard. But when they abandon all other conservatives they hurt us. There are not enough of them to make a positive difference on their own.
Libertarian isnt conservative. Conservatives are just as bad as liberals in my book.
__________________
Quote:
"It wasn't a failure of laws," said Amanda Wilcox, who along with her husband, Nick, lobbies for the California chapter of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. "I just don't see how our gun laws could have stopped something like that."
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 03-14-2013, 5:31 AM
therealnickb's Avatar
therealnickb therealnickb is online now
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 4,433
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thayne View Post
Libertarian isnt conservative. Conservatives are just as bad as liberals in my book.
Didn't say it was but I sure cant agree with your superiority. Regardless.....

It's been hashed out over many many threads here and elsewhere. The splintering elected o.

Keep holding your breath until everyone agrees with your very thin "book" and the liberal/socialist/Marxist types will keep winning.
__________________


"I've heard this is a good read. I'm mean, I haven't read it myself but many very smart people said it's a good read. Believe me, many people are saying it....."
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 03-14-2013, 6:13 AM
CDFingers CDFingers is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Chico, CA
Posts: 1,853
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

For me, the Libertarian Party's views on the 2A are irrelevant because they have no mechanism in their party platform for regulating capitalism's expansion on a finite planet. Whether we all have guns is irrelevant if we extinct ourselves.

I reject their party.

CDFingers

Last edited by CDFingers; 03-14-2013 at 6:13 AM.. Reason: bought some white space for clarity
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 03-14-2013, 6:40 AM
Hoooper Hoooper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Petaluma
Posts: 2,371
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CDFingers View Post
I reject their party.

CDFingers
Well there's a surprise
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 03-14-2013, 6:43 AM
robcoe's Avatar
robcoe robcoe is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 8,665
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by therealnickb View Post
Didn't say it was but I sure cant agree with your superiority. Regardless.....

It's been hashed out over many many threads here and elsewhere. The splintering elected o.

Keep holding your breath until everyone agrees with your very thin "book" and the liberal/socialist/Marxist types will keep winning.
You can keep saying that as much as you like, but that does not make it true. The reason Mitt Romney lost the election was Mitt Romney was a ****ty candidate, probably would have made a good used car salesman, but he was a crap presidential candidate. Even if every single 3rd party voter voted for Mittens, he still would have lost

As evidence, the actual results of the election.

Candadate ------Popular votes------%------- electoral votes(the ones that actually decide the election)
Barack Obama-----65,907,213------51.07%------332
Mitt Romney-------60,931,767------47.21%-------206
Gary Johnson------1,275,804--------0.99%---------0
Jill Stein ----------469,501 ---------0.36%---------0
Virgil Goode--------122,001 ---------0.09%---------0
Roseanne Barr------67,278----------0.05%---------0
Rocky Anderson----43,011----------0.03%---------0
Tom Hoefling-------40,586----------0.03%---------0
Other------------217,669---------0.17%-----------0
__________________
Yes, I am an electrical engineer.
No, I will not fix your computer.

Last edited by robcoe; 03-14-2013 at 7:04 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 03-14-2013, 6:46 AM
bslaney bslaney is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Orange County
Posts: 159
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

I haven't read the whole thread, but I do have a question. Has anyone read books by Robert Heinlein? The ideas behind the Libertarian Party seem to be exactly the kinds of things he envisioned as being the ideal political environment (You can do anything you want as long as it doesn't hurt another person).
__________________
NRA-Certified Pistol Instructor
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 03-14-2013, 6:51 AM
Diablohtr Diablohtr is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 162
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CDFingers View Post
For me, the Libertarian Party's views on the 2A are irrelevant because they have no mechanism in their party platform for regulating capitalism's expansion on a finite planet. Whether we all have guns is irrelevant if we extinct ourselves.

I reject their party.

CDFingers
As resources become more limited costs go up, competitors come in with cheaper alternatives. Not really a problem.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 03-14-2013, 7:58 AM
Green Ice Dragon Green Ice Dragon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 146
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Ownage. One thing that's interesting about Republicans is that they're under the impression that Libertarians need them and (at the time) Romney. Most Libertarians saw Romney and Obama as essentially the same thing so why would they choose either?

And if anyone thinks Republicans defend the 2A... HAHAHAHAHA! To a certain extent they do but they are still for limits which would eventually reach the same levels of Democrat limits on the 2A.

Quote:
Originally Posted by robcoe View Post
You can keep saying that as much as you like, but that does not make it true. The reason Mitt Romney lost the election was Mitt Romney was a ****ty candidate, probably would have made a good used car salesman, but he was a crap presidential candidate. Even if every single 3rd party voter voted for Mittens, he still would have lost

As evidence, the actual results of the election.

Candadate ------Popular votes------%------- electoral votes(the ones that actually decide the election)
Barack Obama-----65,907,213------51.07%------332
Mitt Romney-------60,931,767------47.21%-------206
Gary Johnson------1,275,804--------0.99%---------0
Jill Stein ----------469,501 ---------0.36%---------0
Virgil Goode--------122,001 ---------0.09%---------0
Roseanne Barr------67,278----------0.05%---------0
Rocky Anderson----43,011----------0.03%---------0
Tom Hoefling-------40,586----------0.03%---------0
Other------------217,669---------0.17%-----------0
Reply With Quote
  #91  
Old 03-14-2013, 7:59 AM
therealnickb's Avatar
therealnickb therealnickb is online now
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 4,433
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by robcoe View Post
You can keep saying that as much as you like, but that does not make it true. The reason Mitt Romney lost the election was Mitt Romney was a ****ty candidate, probably would have made a good used car salesman, but he was a crap presidential candidate. Even if every single 3rd party voter voted for Mittens, he still would have lost

As evidence, the actual results of the election.

Candadate ------Popular votes------%------- electoral votes(the ones that actually decide the election)
Barack Obama-----65,907,213------51.07%------332
Mitt Romney-------60,931,767------47.21%-------206
Gary Johnson------1,275,804--------0.99%---------0
Jill Stein ----------469,501 ---------0.36%---------0
Virgil Goode--------122,001 ---------0.09%---------0
Roseanne Barr------67,278----------0.05%---------0
Rocky Anderson----43,011----------0.03%---------0
Tom Hoefling-------40,586----------0.03%---------0
Other------------217,669---------0.17%-----------0
I didn't realize how absolutely ineffectual the libertarians where on the national stage. One would never realize that by all the noise they made. Thanks for pointing it out. I stand corrected.
__________________


"I've heard this is a good read. I'm mean, I haven't read it myself but many very smart people said it's a good read. Believe me, many people are saying it....."
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 03-14-2013, 8:43 AM
robcoe's Avatar
robcoe robcoe is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 8,665
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by therealnickb View Post
I didn't realize how absolutely ineffectual the libertarians where on the national stage. One would never realize that by all the noise they made. Thanks for pointing it out. I stand corrected.
Be as condescending as you like, I would still rather vote for a candidate I like who will lose in place of just another police state/socialist/theocracy candidate from the identical cousin main party's who will continue to erode my rights just so I can say I voted for a "winner".
__________________
Yes, I am an electrical engineer.
No, I will not fix your computer.

Last edited by robcoe; 03-14-2013 at 9:48 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 03-14-2013, 9:09 AM
Hoooper Hoooper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Petaluma
Posts: 2,371
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by therealnickb View Post
I didn't realize how absolutely ineffectual the libertarians where on the national stage. One would never realize that by all the noise they made. Thanks for pointing it out. I stand corrected.
libertarians tend to make more noise than their counterparts person for person because their ranks are not filled with empty chairs that just vote based on letters, libertarians are much more likely to actually be involved in what is happened that their average D and R counterparts
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 03-14-2013, 9:20 AM
Green Ice Dragon Green Ice Dragon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 146
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by therealnickb View Post
I didn't realize how absolutely ineffectual the libertarians where on the national stage. One would never realize that by all the noise they made. Thanks for pointing it out. I stand corrected.
This more reinforces that Dems and Repubs both like to make claims without checking their facts.
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 03-14-2013, 9:36 AM
the86d's Avatar
the86d the86d is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Pinko-occupied ObamaDerkaderkastan
Posts: 5,760
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

If we currently vote for a 3rd party (no matter how noble) this take votes away from a candidate that could preserve human rights listed in the Constitution (Republican?), and the Democratic candidate WILL ALWAYS be elected as our current voting system is first past the post. Due to this, rights will be taken as this is all Democrats seem to do, while we feel good about voting for a Libertarian that has liberties in mind, although currently will never win an election.

Once lost, freedoms we once had are usually never given back.

If Feinkenstein passes an Personal Defense Weapons ban, then it will be forever, and she tried to include 90% of all firearms owned in the US preventing my children from owning them when they turn of legal age, and could get them killed if they were limited to a revolver if multiple attackers entered their home years down the road. BIGGER PICTURE.
__________________
"That's what governments are for - get in a man's way." - Captain Malcolm 'Mal' Reynolds

Last edited by the86d; 03-14-2013 at 9:49 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 03-14-2013, 10:33 AM
CEDaytonaRydr's Avatar
CEDaytonaRydr CEDaytonaRydr is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Montgomery, AL
Posts: 4,079
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by therealnickb View Post
I didn't realize how absolutely ineffectual the libertarians where on the national stage.
Yeah, exactly...

...and we're just the "dumb" ones who post on internet forums. Check out some lectures by Walter E Williams, Doug Casey, or Thomas Sowell. Those guys are "masterminds"!!!
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 03-14-2013, 12:14 PM
Trenchfoot's Avatar
Trenchfoot Trenchfoot is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Little Manila
Posts: 7,293
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by the86d View Post
If we currently vote for a 3rd party (no matter how noble) this take votes away from a candidate that could preserve human rights listed in the Constitution (Republican?), and the Democratic candidate WILL ALWAYS be elected as our current voting system is first past the post. Due to this, rights will be taken as this is all Democrats seem to do, while we feel good about voting for a Libertarian that has liberties in mind, although currently will never win an election.

Once lost, freedoms we once had are usually never given back.

If Feinkenstein passes an Personal Defense Weapons ban, then it will be forever, and she tried to include 90% of all firearms owned in the US preventing my children from owning them when they turn of legal age, and could get them killed if they were limited to a revolver if multiple attackers entered their home years down the road. BIGGER PICTURE.

I vote for a candidate based on what I want to see done, not because I am afraid something will happen if I don't vote for them. Pro-2A or not, there is no way in hell I am voting for Rick Santorum or Michelle Bachmann as long as there is a Libertarian on the ticket.

I vote for people who value Liberty. Dems and Repubs only value Liberty that falls under what they personally believe in. Supporting Liberty means supporting it even if you personally disagree with the way someone preactices it. If you think that Libertarians should support the GOP by default because our candidate can't possibly win, then you are missing the point.

If the GOP can count on Libertarian support without having to support Libertarian values, then there is no reason for them to change, and there is no reason for us to be registered as Libertarians.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 03-14-2013, 12:16 PM
PatrickRyan's Avatar
PatrickRyan PatrickRyan is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: S.O.J.
Posts: 429
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by therealnickb View Post
Because there are far more of them.

Conservatives will vote for libertarians if they run in a party that can actually win an election. Think about that. Vote out the harmful republicans.
Well said. I don't argue with logic.
__________________
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." ~Benjamin Franklin
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 03-14-2013, 12:32 PM
therealnickb's Avatar
therealnickb therealnickb is online now
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 4,433
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Green Ice Dragon View Post
This more reinforces that Dems and Repubs both like to make claims without checking their facts.
I'm totally guilty on this one issue. I truly thought the libertarian vote would have made a difference.

I do pay attention and learn from mistakes though.
__________________


"I've heard this is a good read. I'm mean, I haven't read it myself but many very smart people said it's a good read. Believe me, many people are saying it....."
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 03-14-2013, 12:39 PM
therealnickb's Avatar
therealnickb therealnickb is online now
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 4,433
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by robcoe View Post
Be as condescending as you like, I would still rather vote for a candidate I like who will lose in place of just another police state/socialist/theocracy candidate from the identical cousin main party's who will continue to erode my rights just so I can say I voted for a "winner".
Just the facts. I was wrong & it didn't mean squat. Just like all the wasted effort on Ron Paul.

Get Rand Going. He has a chance.
__________________


"I've heard this is a good read. I'm mean, I haven't read it myself but many very smart people said it's a good read. Believe me, many people are saying it....."
Reply With Quote
  #101  
Old 03-14-2013, 1:16 PM
CEDaytonaRydr's Avatar
CEDaytonaRydr CEDaytonaRydr is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Montgomery, AL
Posts: 4,079
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by therealnickb View Post
Just the facts. I was wrong & it didn't mean squat. Just like all the wasted effort on Ron Paul.

Get Rand Going. He has a chance.
They've already started demonizing him as a "racist", so I don't think that will work.

The left will do what they always do, and drive a wedge between minorities and "the white guy". Which sucks too, because some of the most profound Libertarian scholars are black. Thomas Sowell is one of the best examples, and he makes some salient observations about affirmative action, and other Libertarian positions, as they relate to minorities.

My boss (also a Libertarian) is Asian, I have a buddy from when I was in the Air Force who is Columbian, and a staunch Libertarian, so calling us "racist" is laughable, but they do it anyway. Even Van Jones took a "shot" at us for it...
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 03-14-2013, 1:53 PM
Nor Cal Scot's Avatar
Nor Cal Scot Nor Cal Scot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Paradise, CA
Posts: 1,205
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by therealnickb View Post
Just like all the wasted effort on Ron Paul.
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 03-14-2013, 8:15 PM
therealnickb's Avatar
therealnickb therealnickb is online now
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 4,433
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nor Cal Scot View Post
Picard and #1 right back attcha.
__________________


"I've heard this is a good read. I'm mean, I haven't read it myself but many very smart people said it's a good read. Believe me, many people are saying it....."
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 03-14-2013, 9:18 PM
CrysisMonkey's Avatar
CrysisMonkey CrysisMonkey is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Roseville
Posts: 130
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I vote Libertarian for most things. Since my vote for a republican Senator does no good, I can at least vote for what I believe in.
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 03-14-2013, 9:32 PM
penguin0123 penguin0123 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,804
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

This whole discussion can be summed up by this South Park episode. And Libertarians who vote Libertarians are treated the exact same way as Stan. Go watch the whole episode if you haven't already seen this. Warning, strong language ahead.

Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 03-14-2013, 11:36 PM
Simply115's Avatar
Simply115 Simply115 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: San Nicolas Island
Posts: 2,275
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I am a part of the Libertarian Party, which I joined since they mirror some of my beliefs. I am really a libertarian anarcho-capitalist. They have a chance if they they step in in lieu of the current GOP.
__________________
California Über Alles

Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 03-21-2013, 10:44 AM
coma13's Avatar
coma13 coma13 is offline
Übermensch
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: A farm somewhere.
Posts: 2,073
iTrader: 51 / 100%
Default

In case anyone is interested, here is an excerpt from the California Libertarian Party's official platform:

Quote:
15.The Right to Keep and Bear Arms
Because the right to life, liberty, and property implies a right of defense of self and property, and a right to acquire and maintain the tools to exercise such self defense, and because an armed citizenry is the final defense against government tyranny, we support:
A. The repeal of laws regulating the ownership and bearing of arms, including automatic or so-called assault weapons.
B. The elimination of registration and all other government records pertaining toownership of arms.
C. The repeal of laws requiring permission from any government agency for any purpose relating to arms and ammunition.
D. The right of airlines and other common carriers to decide their own weapons policies.
Further, we oppose extension of liability to the manufacturers or vendors of arms for crimes committed by the users of such arms.
__________________

As in a ruin where violets grow
In moss covered fields
On cold marble stone
Love sometimes steals into a heart...
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 03-21-2013, 10:54 AM
a1c's Avatar
a1c a1c is offline
CGSSA Coordinator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lake County, CA
Posts: 8,874
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sunaj View Post
Ron Paul and most of his supporters are libertarian

sunaj
Ron and Rand Paul are libertarians... to a point. For instance, they are both pro-life. Their "out" on this issue is that they want to leave it to the states, which is a cop-out - in many Midwestern states, there already is a de facto ban, with only a couple of clinics, which means low income women are more likely to not have access to abortion. This is the same kind of approach as liberals who want to tax firearm transactions and ownership to oblivion.

Rand Paul also recently suggested that same sex marriage should be solved by allowing civil unions, offering LG couples the same rights. But it's also a cop-out - that means creating a separate-but-equal class of citizens.

True libertarians would suggest that 1. women should have the right to do whatever they want with their bodies, and should not be dictated by the federal NOR the state government what to do or not do, and 2. same sex couples should have the same rights as heterosexual ones, and ideally, government should get out of the marriage business altogether.
__________________
WTB: French & Finnish firearms. WTS: raw honey, tumbled .45 ACP brass, stupid cat.
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 03-21-2013, 11:03 AM
Diablohtr Diablohtr is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 162
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by a1c View Post
Ron and Rand Paul are libertarians... to a point. For instance, they are both pro-life. Their "out" on this issue is that they want to leave it to the states, which is a cop-out - in many Midwestern states, there already is a de facto ban, with only a couple of clinics, which means low income women are more likely to not have access to abortion. This is the same kind of approach as liberals who want to tax firearm transactions and ownership to oblivion.

Rand Paul also recently suggested that same sex marriage should be solved by allowing civil unions, offering LG couples the same rights. But it's also a cop-out - that means creating a separate-but-equal class of citizens.

True libertarians would suggest that 1. women should have the right to do whatever they want with their bodies, and should not be dictated by the federal NOR the state government what to do or not do, and 2. same sex couples should have the same rights as heterosexual ones, and ideally, government should get out of the marriage business altogether.
You nailed number 2, but number 1 is largely up to debate. At what point does the fetus have rights as a living individual?
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 03-21-2013, 11:28 AM
a1c's Avatar
a1c a1c is offline
CGSSA Coordinator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lake County, CA
Posts: 8,874
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diablohtr View Post
You nailed number 2, but number 1 is largely up to debate. At what point does the fetus have rights as a living individual?
As far as I'm concerned, a fetus doesn't have rights. If it's not viable on its own, it's not a person. SCOTUS has ruled on this many times, and the consensus seems to be that up to the first trimester, the state doesn't have a say.

Now what I loathe are those pieces of legislation that many states are passing left and right in order to restrict abortion rights: forcing pregnant women to take invasive, useless procedures, getting lectures from doctors, etc. It's insulting to the patient. It's big government treating citizens like they're children.

We all know what this is about: forcing an agenda down the throat of individuals in sinuously, similar to those highly restrictive gun laws advocated by Brady types which goal is to reduce gun ownership as much as possible, until it becomes so impractical to own a firearm that many people just give up. That's a strategy that's been successfully applied in many other countries.
__________________
WTB: French & Finnish firearms. WTS: raw honey, tumbled .45 ACP brass, stupid cat.
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old 03-21-2013, 11:31 AM
Diablohtr Diablohtr is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 162
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Agree to disagree then. IMO there is no moral difference between terminating a fetus on day 1 vs after birth (assuming the fetus can be carried full term w/o medical complications for it or the mother).
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 03-21-2013, 11:36 AM
LBDamned's Avatar
LBDamned LBDamned is offline
Made in the USA
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: OC - So Cal - Soon-to-be AZ!
Posts: 9,950
iTrader: 51 / 100%
Default

I hate when 2A topic turn to abortion beliefs.
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 03-21-2013, 11:41 AM
calebgold's Avatar
calebgold calebgold is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 90
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

The more I hear Rand Paul talk the more i like him.
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 03-21-2013, 11:53 AM
Uxi's Avatar
Uxi Uxi is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,110
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

lol are the capital L libertarians relevant yet?
__________________
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -- Thomas Jefferson

9mm + 5.56mm =
.45ACP + 7.62 NATO =
10mm + 6.8 SPC =


Et Verbum caro factum est et habitavit in nobis; Jn 1:14
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 03-21-2013, 11:57 AM
bwiese's Avatar
bwiese bwiese is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Jose
Posts: 26,764
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

  1. The capital L libertarians can't/don't win anything. They always wanna run for President without doing a
    decade or two worth of running (and winning) for school board seats, dogcatcher, ports commissioner,
    local judgeships, etc. [In fact the BEST thing for immediate outcomes would be for big-L libertarian
    lawyers to get into state Superior Courts, fugheddabout Presidency...]

    And a party that is against a certain level of organization often can't organize itself: voters in national
    elections seem to like someone who can actually run a campaign; the undercurrent is that someone who
    can't run a national campaign probably can't run the country.

    Big L libertarians are also held back by some of their overvocal supporters - Ma & Pa Kettle think there's
    gonna be heroin, let alone pot, sold on every street corner. (Yes, it's already happening, but that's
    irrelevant.) Their lack of organization can't control their message, and then they allow idiots to pipe
    up about nonsense "eliminating public schools" etc.

    [For the record, the Tea Party types also show many of these same problems: disorganized, no controlled
    messaging, they let groups with other issues (prolife, antigay, racist, yadayada...) take over their message
    - or are so passive about rejecting these that they indeeed appear complicit and unbelievable. [This can
    NOT just be blamed on a liberal, etc. press. Press can be managed. The TPers continue to deny much of
    the abovve but their lack of effective management skills allowed this to blossom and taint their whole
    'brand', which is really an IQ problem. I note TP was very strong and they threw their gains away last
    election: they were handed some fire a few years ago and let the torch burn out thru stupidity.]
    .
  2. Rand Paul just toasted himself by driving a pro-lifer bill. Dumb. And he's popular enough in KY that he's
    not gonna lose his seat if he DOESN'T carry/drive that bill. [Perhaps he got a big donation from a prolifer,
    dunno - but that's gonna be a VERY expensive chunk of cash if that did occur.]

    Hell, he might even get the nomination 2.5 years from not but will lose on that alone: he has high negatives
    with F voters and that didn't help at all.

    Plus various things that he's said about certain civil rights law matters aren't gonna help him either. He
    should learn to STFU on losing crap.
__________________

Bill Wiese
San Jose, CA

CGF Board Member / NRA Benefactor Life Member / CRPA life member

No postings of mine here, unless otherwise specifically noted, are
to be construed as formal or informal positions of the Calguns.Net
ownership, The Calguns Foundation, Inc. ("CGF"), the NRA, or my
employer. No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as
legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.

Last edited by bwiese; 03-21-2013 at 12:57 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 03-21-2013, 12:51 PM
ZombieTactics's Avatar
ZombieTactics ZombieTactics is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Roseville area, or wherever they pay my confiscatory rates for things only I know how to do (lol)
Posts: 3,684
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

One giant thing that people have to do is to stop reading their personal preferences into the libertarian philosophy.

Libertarian philosophy is neither "Pro Choice" or "Pro Life" in the traditional sense of those phrases ... it's more like "not any of the government's damned business"

Libertarian philosophy is neither "Pro Gay Marriage" or "Anti Gay Marriage" ... it's more like "not any of the government's damned business"

Gun, property, economics ... "not any of the government's damned business"

This is a hard concept for many, as they want the government to be a reflection of their own personal views. That's the point though ... anytime it's a reflection of one person's views, it's generally trampling all over someone else's.

The Libertarian philosophy is possibly summed up as "mind your own personal business" and "keep the government OUT of everyone's personal business"
__________________
|

I don't pretend to be an "authority." I'm just a guy who trains a lot, shoots a lot and has a perspective.

Check the ZombieTactics Channel on YouTube for all sorts of gun-related goodness CLICK HERE
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 03-21-2013, 1:48 PM
BHPFan's Avatar
BHPFan BHPFan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Where they tax you on everything and give you the shaft.
Posts: 2,278
iTrader: 73 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZombieTactics View Post
One giant thing that people have to do is to stop reading their personal preferences into the libertarian philosophy.

Libertarian philosophy is neither "Pro Choice" or "Pro Life" in the traditional sense of those phrases ... it's more like "not any of the government's damned business"

Libertarian philosophy is neither "Pro Gay Marriage" or "Anti Gay Marriage" ... it's more like "not any of the government's damned business"

Gun, property, economics ... "not any of the government's damned business"

This is a hard concept for many, as they want the government to be a reflection of their own personal views. That's the point though ... anytime it's a reflection of one person's views, it's generally trampling all over someone else's.

The Libertarian philosophy is possibly summed up as "mind your own personal business" and "keep the government OUT of everyone's personal business"
This. Pretty much sums up my views. That being said, I am big supporter of the Constitution and to me, it says what it means and means what it says: Rights. If someone doesn't like a particular lifestyle or a particular belief, that person has the RIGHT not to follow that lifestyle or belief. When I studied the Citizenship guide and took the U.S. Citizenship test, the study guide clearly said "The Constitution of the United States of America is the Supreme Law of the Land."
__________________
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
~ Benjamin Franklin
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 03-21-2013, 3:33 PM
LBDamned's Avatar
LBDamned LBDamned is offline
Made in the USA
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: OC - So Cal - Soon-to-be AZ!
Posts: 9,950
iTrader: 51 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by calebgold View Post
The more I hear Rand Paul talk the more i like him.
I think most True Americans do
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 03-21-2013, 4:14 PM
vonderplatz's Avatar
vonderplatz vonderplatz is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Central Coast
Posts: 1,251
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

There are a number of people commenting on this thread picking apart every Libertarian and Republican, but when you call them a shill for the Democrats they will say "I'm not a Democrat".

What do you believe in? What specific polices need to be changed?

Being a Big "L" Libertarian for many years I can tell you that I know very few Libertarians that are ideologically pure, so finding that in a Candidate is going to be difficult.
__________________
There's no such thing as a former Marine. - General James F. Amos, 35th Commandant of the Marine Corps

Romans 1:16 - 32

Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 03-21-2013, 7:44 PM
CEDaytonaRydr's Avatar
CEDaytonaRydr CEDaytonaRydr is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Montgomery, AL
Posts: 4,079
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwiese View Post
a party that is against a certain level of organization often can't organize itself: voters in national elections seem to like someone who can actually run a campaign; the undercurrent is that someone who can't run a national campaign probably can't run the country.
Yeah, because GOP has done such a great job running campaigns over the last 5 years...

Rand Paul is changing his position because the political tide is shifting, and the GOP is on the wrong side of many issues. Don't get me wrong, so are the Democrats. The Republicans cannot win key states while preaching an anit-woman, anti-Mexican, pro-governmental restriction message. They have to change their message, or we will all suffer the wrath of President Hillary Clinton in 2016.

I honestly don't know what conservatives are afraid of. Do they think that their base is going to vote Democrat if they change their position on social issues? It's only a small cross section of the party that even cares about those issues and they are not going to go anywhere. At worst, they simply will not vote for anyone but they aren't going to vote for Democrats just because a Republican decides to support legalizing pot, and for every vote they lose, I think there will be a vote gained from someone who wants fiscal responsibility, while still being able to enjoy personal liberty. I actually think that a Republican could probably beat Feinstein out for Senate if he/she ran their campaign saying that they would push for marijuana legalization. She is in a very liberal state and there's no way she should be so adamantly against weed.

In closing, I would just say that if Republicans and Democrats did what they were supposed to do, there would be no need for a Libertarian party. I'm actually kind-of ashamed that we have to have a Libertarian party; that's a bad sign, in itself.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:40 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2016, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.