Glock Talk

Glock Talk (http://glocktalk.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Okie Corral (http://glocktalk.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=29)
-   -   is there a political party I fit into? (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1446702)

Snaps 10-07-2012 19:39

is there a political party I fit into?
 
Being in the spirit of election season, I can't really see there's a political party i really fit into so maybe y'all can figure out where I should be.

I'm against any gun laws & pro choice on abortion which seems to DQ me from the two parties.

against 3rd generation welfare queens, well really any welfare at all. Against foodstamps unless it's a short term thing like a brief run at unemployment.

I'm against "The war on drugs" as well. Feel they should legalize and tax it. let people kill themselves as they see fit.

Also believe any man who's not in prison should have the right to vote and own firearms. Be that a convicted felon or a kid in highschool. I don't believe in ANY gun laws at all, think the govt should be allowing drilling all over the country and keeping us away from our dependance on arabs.

Is there anything i fit into? I'm sure I can't be the only guy that doesn't fit into parties.

XDRoX 10-07-2012 19:45

You're libertarian. They never make the ballet so just vote "R" for all your homies on GT:supergrin:

bumpin88 10-07-2012 23:39

XDRoX hit the nail on the head. Just vote "R" if you want to keep your guns. Pro-life/ Pro-choice debate isn't going anywhere anytime soon. And almost anyone on either side of the aisle will agree with your view of welfare, unless they are far lefties.

This political party nonsense gets overplayed way to much. It is just not possible to have a party that fits everyone's views. And if you did nothing would get done, there would be major political strife all the time, or it would boil down to a group taking complete control of the Gov't. and kiss America goodbye.

I'm sure there are countries with at least 9-10 politcal parties and the Gov't. is in shambles.

Bottom line, just find canidates, local and nationally, that "might" protect your "CORE" interest. Most people I think tend to overlook the importance of electing local officals and not only the POTUS I hope that makes sense. Good luck!!!

Fox 10-07-2012 23:56

You will want to be Republican for this election. Obama's reelection means that we get three more liberal activist judges on the supreme court.

Remember that Heller -vs- D.C. and McDonald -vs- Chicago were both 5 to 4.

Andy W 10-08-2012 00:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by bumpin88 (Post 19495971)
XDRoX hit the nail on the head. Just vote "R" if you want to keep your guns. Pro-life/ Pro-choice debate isn't going anywhere anytime soon. And almost anyone on either side of the aisle will agree with your view of welfare, unless they are far lefties.

This political party nonsense gets overplayed way to much. It is just not possible to have a party that fits everyone's views. And if you did nothing would get done, there would be major political strife all the time, or it would boil down to a group taking complete control of the Gov't. and kiss America goodbye.

I'm sure there are countries with at least 9-10 politcal parties and the Gov't. is in shambles.

Bottom line, just find canidates, local and nationally, that "might" protect your "CORE" interest. Most people I think tend to overlook the importance of electing local officals and not only the POTUS I hope that makes sense. Good luck!!!

In a lot of countries, particularly parliamentary democracies, there are many politics parties. To get a majority in parliament and form a government, several parties will often have to form a coalition. This is beneficial to smaller parties because they can enter a coalition with a larger party and get some of their policy preferences implemented. They would also have a say in electing the Prime Minister and cabinet. Imagine if something like this were done in America.

Imagine if, the Libertarian Party, for instance was able to gain a little more of a foothold here and start winning seats in Congress and neither the Democrats or the Republicans had a majority by themselves. The major parties would then have to try and get the support of the libertarians in order to have a majority. They would also have to try not to piss off the libertarian block because if they pulled their support nobody could get anything done. It would also de-stagnate politics in Washington.

CitizenOfDreams 10-08-2012 00:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by XDRoX (Post 19495449)
You're libertarian. They never make the ballet

Yep, only RINOs make this ballet...

http://images.clipartof.com/small/21...nd-Jumping.jpg

Fox 10-08-2012 00:08

http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c2...21427159_n.jpg

dre23 10-08-2012 02:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaps (Post 19495416)
Being in the spirit of election season, I can't really see there's a political party i really fit into so maybe y'all can figure out where I should be.

I'm against any gun laws & pro choice on abortion which seems to DQ me from the two parties.

against 3rd generation welfare queens, well really any welfare at all. Against foodstamps unless it's a short term thing like a brief run at unemployment.

I'm against "The war on drugs" as well. Feel they should legalize and tax it. let people kill themselves as they see fit.

Also believe any man who's not in prison should have the right to vote and own firearms. Be that a convicted felon or a kid in highschool. I don't believe in ANY gun laws at all, think the govt should be allowing drilling all over the country and keeping us away from our dependance on arabs.

Is there anything i fit into? I'm sure I can't be the only guy that doesn't fit into parties.

So you really think a person with a history of convictions for violent crime should be allowed to own firearms upon release from prison ?

certifiedfunds 10-08-2012 02:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by dre23 (Post 19496074)
So you really think a person with a history of convictions for violent crime should be allowed to own firearms upon release from prison ?

Of course. I do too.

If a seasoned felon wants a gun to commit more crime, he'll get it. What good is a silly law? All it does is disarm the guy who gets out of prison and has reformed himself.

Snaps 10-08-2012 03:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by dre23 (Post 19496074)
So you really think a person with a history of convictions for violent crime should be allowed to own firearms upon release from prison ?

indeed, if he's a free man he gets all the rights afforded him. I don't recall a part that says "shall not be infringed unless."

If you're releasing them from prison you're obviously saying they're not longer a threat to their fellow citizens right? Saying there's a law against that person having a gun implies there was no law about the crime he committed in the first place right? I mean if he follows laws then yes that law will stop him from getting a gun. However it's already proven that laws haven't stopped him from anything else

I also believe in a much stricter sentencing and prison system.

EDIT: there are women in jail from DUIs and minor drug violations. They get out do they lose the right to protect themselves against rape? Murder? Their children being abducted?

dre23 10-08-2012 03:36

Also unless I am mistaken certain felons are able to apply for reinstatement of their rights after a time period of " clean living"
Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaps (Post 19496113)
indeed, if he's a free man he gets all the rights afforded him. I don't recall a part that says "shall not be infringed unless."

If you're releasing them from prison you're obviously saying they're not longer a threat to their fellow citizens right? Saying there's a law against that person having a gun implies there was no law about the crime he committed in the first place right? I mean if he follows laws then yes that law will stop him from getting a gun. However it's already proven that laws haven't stopped him from anything else

I also believe in a much stricter sentencing and prison system.

EDIT: there are women in jail from DUIs and minor drug violations. They get out do they lose the right to protect themselves against rape? Murder? Their children being abducted?

I also believe in stricter sentencing myself. I would not characterize DUI and minor drug offenses as violent. On that same note though a career felon who is out but gets picked up on minor drug charge would have a felony charge added increased sentence. I also 100% realize that felons can and do still get guns. I also believe that certain crimes/criminal do warrant a loss of rights. Again I would much rather see stricter/ harsher penalties for violent crime. Person out on parole is subject to unannounced visits searches and knows the rules still has a gun proves they are not ready for society and should be sent back for more time to be rehabilitated.

treeline 10-08-2012 03:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaps (Post 19495416)
Is there anything i fit into? I'm sure I can't be the only guy that doesn't fit into parties.

Easy - you're a pro-choice Republican. It's the members who influence party policy and every party has divisions within it. Party policy, especially at national level, is the most common choices among the mebership, not an exlusive list defining membership.

Google 'pro choice republican' and you'll find groups promoting that policy. I see results also bring up RINO. Don't worry, the people who call others RINOs are usually idiots who're angry not everyone agrees with their particular concept of republican or conservative. Dicks. GT has a few of them. (Edit: that's not aimed at CoD)

aplcr0331 10-08-2012 04:04

The real question is; Why are you intent on negating you significane in this world? Blindly identifying yourself with externalities does this. Why are you so eager to lose your identity as a person and become part of some voting "block"?

schild 10-08-2012 04:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fox (Post 19495987)
You will want to be Republican for this election. Obama's reelection means that we get three more liberal activist judges on the supreme court.

Remember that Heller -vs- D.C. and McDonald -vs- Chicago were both 5 to 4.

The Supreme Court is one of the most important decision that will come out of this election. Elect Obama and the Court will be full of progressives for the next twenty years.

boby 10-08-2012 04:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fox (Post 19496002)

This crap gets old fast.

Here on GT, everyone complaining about third party voters, saying they will cause Romney to lose the election.

Go to a Democrat forum like Democratic Underground, everyone complains about third party voters, saying they will cause Obama to lose the election.

:upeyes:

eracer 10-08-2012 04:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by boby (Post 19496163)
This crap gets old fast.

Here on GT, everyone complaining about third party voters, saying they will cause Romney to lose the election.

Go to a Democrat forum like Democratic Underground, everyone complains about third party voters, saying they will cause Obama to lose the election.

:upeyes:

Voting for a candidate who doesn't best represent one's own political views is cowardly. Rather than admitting it, many demagogues simply attack those who use their vote to express the freedom we are supposed to cherish.

Having said that, I admit to being cowardly in this election. I feel that it's more important to elect Romney than vote with my heart (and head,) for the reason that Fox stated above: namely, that the Supreme Court, which has become an activist panel, must not be allowed to become any more liberal. The chances of that, should Obama win (and given the age of the current appointees) are quite good.

If that happens, all is lost.

CLoft239 10-08-2012 04:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by dre23 (Post 19496074)
So you really think a person with a history of convictions for violent crime should be allowed to own firearms upon release from prison ?


Quote:

Originally Posted by certifiedfunds (Post 19496104)
Of course. I do too.

If a seasoned felon wants a gun to commit more crime, he'll get it. What good is a silly law? All it does is disarm the guy who gets out of prison and has reformed himself.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaps (Post 19496113)
If you're releasing them from prison you're obviously saying they're not longer a threat to their fellow citizens right?

I also believe in a much stricter sentencing and prison system.

This is what is difficult for me, being an LEO... i agree with the above statements, which in my area, generally isn't the norm.

I believe if a person is deemed "rehabilitated" enough to be released back into society, they should have their rights restored. I see it as night or day: you're either rehabilitated, or you're not; there's no in-between. Either keep them locked up, or kick them loose and restore their rights. As said above, a criminal will get a gun regardless of the laws if they want one, and the individuals who truly do turn legit and become productive members or society/law abiding citizens are the one's who suffer because of gun laws.

That being said, I have a job to do, and I don't allow my opinions to interfere; I still perform my job in the manner in which I'm supposed to...





Sent from the Titanic. I named my phone "The Titanic" so when I plug it into the computer it says "The Titanic is syncing".

Bren 10-08-2012 05:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by XDRoX (Post 19495449)
You're libertarian. They never make the ballet so just vote "R" for all your homies on GT:supergrin:

Everybody is a libertarian, when they describe themselves. Belonging to a political party is meaningless unless the party can accomplish something. Libertarians are just refusing to participate or accept blame.

eracer 10-08-2012 05:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bren (Post 19496189)
Everybody is a libertarian, when they describe themselves. Belonging to a political party is meaningless unless the party can accomplish something. Libertarians are just refusing to participate or accept blame.

That's ridiculous.

CLoft239 10-08-2012 05:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bren (Post 19496189)
Everybody is a libertarian, when they describe themselves. Belonging to a political party is meaningless unless the party can accomplish something. Libertarians are just refusing to participate or accept blame.

+1 on this as well



Sent from the Titanic. I named my phone "The Titanic" so when I plug it into the computer it says "The Titanic is syncing".

CLoft239 10-08-2012 05:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by eracer (Post 19496195)
That's ridiculous.

Not really... each person chooses the candidate/party which supports the same "liberties" as they do. The division is caused by what each person/party considers "liberty".

The constitution, regardless of how simple and clear it's worded, is similar to the bible in the aspect that each party (D)/(R) can both read the exact same writing, and have different interpretations of what it means.

Sent from the Titanic. I named my phone "The Titanic" so when I plug it into the computer it says "The Titanic is syncing".

eracer 10-08-2012 05:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by CLoft239 (Post 19496200)
Not really... each person chooses the candidate/party which supports the same "liberties" as they do. The division is caused by what each person considers "liberty".

The constitution, regardless of how simple and clear it's worded, is similar to the bible in the aspect that each party (D)/(R) can both read the exact same writing, and have different interpretations of what it means.

Sent from the Titanic. I named my phone "The Titanic" so when I plug it into the computer it says "The Titanic is syncing".

The constitution was not developed with only two parties in mind. Nor were our economic system, national foreign policies, or anything else currently manifested under the umbrella of the federal government.

To claim that libertarians are any less valid than democrats or republican is simple arrogance.

CLoft239 10-08-2012 05:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by eracer (Post 19496205)
The constitution was not developed with only two parties in mind. Nor were our economic system, national foreign policies, or anything else currently manifested under the umbrella of the federal government.

To claim that libertarians are any less valid than democrats or republican is simple arrogance.

I think we both interpreted his post differently :beer:

See what i mean?


Sent from the Titanic. I named my phone "The Titanic" so when I plug it into the computer it says "The Titanic is syncing".

dre23 10-08-2012 05:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by CLoft239 (Post 19496187)
This is what is difficult for me, being an LEO... i agree with the above statements, which in my area, generally isn't the norm.

I believe if a person is deemed "rehabilitated" enough to be released back into society, they should have their rights restored. I see it as night or day: you're either rehabilitated, or you're not; there's no in-between. Either keep them locked up, or kick them loose and restore their rights. As said above, a criminal will get a gun regardless of the laws if they want one, and the individuals who truly do turn legit and become productive members or society/law abiding citizens are the one's who suffer because of gun laws.

That being said, I have a job to do, and I don't allow my opinions to interfere; I still perform my job in the manner in which I'm supposed to...





Sent from the Titanic. I named my phone "The Titanic" so when I plug it into the computer it says "The Titanic is syncing".

I can totally get behind the option to petition for them to be restored under set clear guidelines in a reasonable ampunt of time, but not an automatic restoration of them. I understand ink on paper does not prevent access to guns, simply see the potential for someone who has shown a high potential to commit further violence to be locked up before they do. I understand just because you commit a felony does not make you life time violent. In my opinion a criminal who is out after his third or fourth robbery or maybe even assault is not the best candidate to have a gun. Not that the law itself keeps him from getting one, but to caught for something lesser leading to the discovery of a firearm possibly putting them away longer is all I am saying.

Snaps 10-08-2012 06:02

I think you should be able to walk into a store, grab a pair of full auto MP5s, 1k rounds and a pack of beef jerky without having to do more than pay and show ID to prove your an American. Ex con or not shouldnt be a factor IMO.



Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 22:59.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2013, Glock Talk, All Rights Reserved.