Voting as a gun owner

[jsalcedo]

I used to be a staunch Republican. I was young and idealistic so cut me some slack. When I discovered libertarianism in the 80's and read stuff by Ron Paul it altered my views somewhat.

It is difficult to say the least going into the polls as a one issue voter.
You don't hear much about a candidates position unless you have a good memory, read the newspaper and watch the news. You might catch a politician stepping on his or her figuarative d*** regarding the gun control issue.

The American rifleman magazine sends out a customized election issue which grades many of the candidates in your particular zip code

Then there is the letter writing to your local elected officials.. if they respond
then they will send you a form letter about being tough on crime blah blah yeah whatever.

So you are at the polling place what do you do?

1st I pick everyone who is an incumbant who has voted against gun control.

2nd When there is someone I don't know I pick the Republican because I know I can put pressure on them. Since more gun control is a major platform of the Dems I always vote against unless I know for sure they have a proven track record.

3rd I pick Libertarians for small offices that are winnable. (don't yell at me)

4th Anyone left over gets the coin toss, usually when its a Democrat vs a Democrat. If possible I will leave it blank.


I don't want to open a can of worms... but I have to ask how do you guys do it?

 

[ka50]

3rd I pick Libertarians for small offices that are winnable. (don't yell at me)

Do you think if founding fathers had this attitude, they'd create America?

Hmmm....

Just because odds are not in your favor does not mean you should not vote for what you believe, even in presidential elections.

 

[jsalcedo]

I voted for Perot because I believed in him.

Got 8 years of Clinton for my trouble.

Figured that I'll be a bit more pragmatic now about my votes.

I believe in libertarianism but unfortunately the party is much divided
and are too busy fighting each other and name calling to get a serious vote of confidence from me.

 

[jsalcedo]

Do you think if founding fathers had this attitude, they'd create America?

I think they would have made the Bill of Rights more watertight if they could see what is happening today.

 

[Alex45ACP]

I vote for the person who I trust the most to abide by the limits set in the Constitution. Last time it was Badnarik. Next time it will probably be the Libertarian candidate again. Unless things change drastically, I can not see myself ever voting for a Republicrat or Demopublican.

 

[jsalcedo]

Unless things change drastically, I can not see myself ever voting for a Republicrat or Demopublican.

I tend to agree but at least where I am there is no lbertarian candidate on over half the offices up for election

 

[cbsbyte]

In rural Western Mass, we only have three choices; Democrats, Republicans and Green Party. I have yet to see a Libertarian candiate run in the local elections. Depending on the canidate I share the vote between Dems and Repubs, rarely does a Republican win in the local state elections. In the central part of the state the voters are more independent from voting pure Democrat, so there are several Republican legislators. Also I have to take in account that many of the Republicans that do run are pro-gun control since it is a better selling pointfor them in the Democrat leaning state. We still have some oldtime pro-gun Democrats in Mass, though fewer are running for reelection. :banghead:

 

[RavenVT100]

As far as I'm concerned, the Democrats are not to be trusted, period, when it comes to the issue of guns. The party at large has apparently decided that lying is a means to an ideological end, and that they will see their righteous crusade to its bitter end regardless of what they have to do to accomplish it. Even a pro-gun Democrat is going to be supportive of his party at the national level most of the time, so you are only screwing yourself out of your own rights if you vote Democrat in anything but the most local of elections.

Hate to put it that way, but it's the truth. Just got done reading Bill Clinton's autobiography. The same gun control propaganda is in there, too. I don't buy the idea that it's anything other than deliberate, because not only is Clinton from the south originally, but he's too intelligent and well read.

The Dems approach the gun issue with the same feverish, ideological passion as a stanchly religious person would approach the issue of abortion. It is viewed in an entirely emotion-fueled, subjective way by the party.

It presents a very limited set of choices for the person who cherishes their rights under the 2nd Amendment, but does not agree with the way the GOP has been handling things lately.

 

[Standing Wolf]

I think they would have made the Bill of Rights more watertight if they could see what is happening today.

Yes, and they'd have limited the powers of government much more specifically. We could, of course, make up for their inability to predict the future; we could even, in fact, guess what the future of government might be if we don't take action.

 

[CAnnoneer]

Yes, and they'd have limited the powers of government much more specifically.

I think we have more of a problem with enforcement of laws, as opposed to inadequacy of said laws. I venture to say the problem of big government goes back to 1861...

 

[TIZReporter]

Politics is NOT a spectator sport.

If you want to make change, you have to participate.

At the bottom of the ladder is that you vote.

Then however, to really make a difference, you have to get far more involved.

When there is NOT a candidate you like, ask yourself why not? Maybe that candidate is you?

The Founding Fathers were not politicians, they were citizens.

Change starts with a single person saying enough!

TIZ

 

[WT]

The only thing that grabs a candidate's attention is cash. How much money am I going to give him?

According to the local newspaper the going rates in my area are:
US Senator - $50,000
Governor - $40,000
Judge - $5,000 to $10,000
Prosecutor - $5,000
Police chief - a free dinner.

 

[xd9fan]

2006 will be interesting.....do the GOP voters reward the weak GOP with votes given the mess they have?

the statist Libs will never pick up votes from the Conservatives that are mad at the GOP. So will the LP have a chance??? who knows BUT will never vote for the GOP again. If I cant vote for a known libertarian....I will not vote. I will not help to feed the beast. I will then put my energy elsewhere in others ways to effect change.

 

[antsi]

2006 will be interesting.....do the GOP voters reward the weak GOP with votes given the mess they have?

the statist Libs will never pick up votes from the Conservatives that are mad at the GOP. So will the LP have a chance??? who knows BUT will never vote for the GOP again. If I cant vote for a known libertarian....I will not vote. I will not help to feed the beast. I will then put my energy elsewhere in others ways to effect change.

Why don't you just go ahead and vote to put Hillary, Kennedy, Schumer, Feinstein, and their ilk in power? What you are doing will have the same effect as an outright vote in favor of the gun-grabbers.

 

[Capteddie]

I don't vote strictly "as a gun owner" it does have a strong influence on whom I vote for but there are other issues that deserve consideration... Fortunately for me my values generaly align fairly well with gun rights pols. but not always. I would contend that if gun rights are the only thing you look at you are doing yourself and the country a disservice. ie. a pol. could be pro-gun and against everything else you believe in.

 

[RealGun]

I tend to agree but at least where I am there is no libertarian candidate on over half the offices up for election

Same here, but if an LP candidate were on the ballot, I wouldn't vote for that person. What I would vote for is a libertarian Republican. A representative of a pure LP platform would scare me away.

 

[jsalcedo]

A representative of a pure LP platform would scare me away.

Heck whats the difference at this point? A true Libertarian who wants to scale back government would be like an Ant vs a Scyscraper.

The best we can hope for is status quo unless something drastic happens.

We need to find a way to start scaling back the mountains of laws passed each year that we don't even know about or if we are obeying.

 

[TallPine]

Gun control is a key issue (or at least one of them) that defines how a politician thinks: if he/she favors gun control, then they by necessity also favor more state control and less individual freedom. At worst, they directly favor tyranny and genocide

However, a "pro-gun" (or anti gun control) candidate is not necessarily any good on other issues, because on either side of the aisle they tend to follow the party line. And it doesn't even mean they really favor individual rights, because a "pro-RKBA" candidate may (and probably does) want to take away other liberties - little things like your right to a jury trial and right to demand a search warrant (GWB ).

Honestly, I think some of the "pro-gun" Socialist-Republicans are just as much tyrants as the Democratic-Socialist gun-grabbers. The supposed pro-RKBA politicians don't care if you have handguns and "assault weapons" because the government has tanks and napalm bombs

 

[RealGun]

And it doesn't even mean they really favor individual rights, because a "pro-RKBA" candidate may (and probably does) want to take away other liberties - little things like your right to a jury trial and right to demand a search warrant (GWB ).

You haven't seen anything yet, and it's not GW. It is the advice. The latest is the 9/11 commission, now some silly sounding new name, proposing that the government needs more drastic measures to combat terrorism and in order to provide homeland security. The statement was critical of efforts so far. That implies that the Patriot Act was just a warmup.

 

[xd9fan]

LOL, antsi could not disagree with you more.......I dont vote based on fear.
If thats all the GOP has now is, a vote for a thrid party is a vote for the statists, then the GOP is worse off then I thought. (problem is they are just as statist as the libs...thats a fact!)



"George W. Bush will go down in history not as a great war president, we recall predicting earlier this week, but as the greatest debt-beat president the country has ever had. In his few years in office, the feds have borrowed more than $1.05 trillion from foreign governments and banks. This is more than all the rest of the nation’s administrations put together, from 1776 to 2000.

Last month, the U.S. national debt passed the $8 trillion mark. This year’s budget deficit alone added $319 billion to the country’s obligations. According to the feds themselves, deficits will rise to $873 billion per year within 10 years. Two years more and they will be at $1 trillion per year, with a national debt edging up to $20 trillion. By 2017, annual deficits are supposed to reach $2 trillion per year."
--lewrockwell.com

HMMMM where are the Conservatives? where is the conservative gang of 14???
GOP or LIbs both are statists...period!

 

[jefnvk]

I don't vote on only the gun issue. It is one of the bigger issues, but not the only one. All my big issues have to be supported by the candidate before they get my vote.

3rd I pick Libertarians for small offices that are winnable. (don't yell at me)

I'm gonna agree with you. I cannot grasp their idea of running a guy for president every four years, when they do not have any Congress seats. Take the money you are dumping into the Presidential run, and sponsor a few congressional races in which you have a good chance of winning.

 

[Monkeyleg]

Amen, TIZReporter.

This past spring, I voted for a Libertarian candidate who campaigned on the promise that he would oppose a road project that is going to ruin the park-like setting of my neighborhood, and have us living in hell for over a year.

Once in office, he started 'splaining to me why the road project was necessary.

Vote the man, not the party. (Caveat: if you're voting Democrat, make darned sure it's a Zell Miller type).

 

[Sam]

Monkeyleg has the correct idea.
Only vote for the man never for a party.

Vote for the man or woman who best typifies your values, period.
If the government goes Tango Uniform we have been equipped with methods for rectifying the problem. Do a bit more for those who really match your values, personally campaign for them, and make an issue of campaigning against those who aare enemies of the republic. Go to their rallies and challenge them on the issue most important to you. If you are thrown out, make sure you get in the papers and tell your story there.

Sam

 

[cropcirclewalker]

I voted for Perot because I believed in him.

Got 8 years of Clinton for my trouble.

Me too except that we didn't put Clinton in office. Bush and the republicans put Clinton in office. Then Dole and the republicans kept Clinton in office.

Dole, who gave us the Brady Law. How could a gun voter vote for him?

Just between me and you, I think LOTS more people voted for Perot than they like to tell us. I lived in KS in '92 and I know several people who were in line to vote at 7 p. Those guys stayed in line till after 11p along with most others at their poll just to vote for Perot even though the managed media had already announced that Bush won KS. They wanted to make a statement.

Then they announce that Perot got 20 percent of KS.

They can make me listen to the music, but they can't make me sing along.

Here's the easy way to choose your candidate.

1) If there is a Libertarian, vote for him.

2) No Libertarian? Reform.

3) No Reform? Constitution.

4) No Constitution? Independent.

5) No Independent? Nothing left but Dems, Reps and Greens? Write in Ozzie Osbourne.

You can walk out of the polls proud, since you've done your citizenship duty.

 

[xd9fan]

cropcirclewalker I am not picking on you but I do want to make a side comment here. just voting IMHO is not fulfilling our citizenship duty. I think its more than that. Its trying to find truth, self education on history, this country, emailing, joining groups etc. etc.
Like I said not picking on you but everytime I hear (and I hear it all the time) that voting is SOOOO important....I think yes but ........Eternal Vigilance is the Price of Liberty.

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined." -- Patrick Henry, Virginia's Ratification convention, 1788