Shall be Infringed. A discussion on open carry.

“A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”  The second amendment as written and intended, died years and years ago.  The Supreme Court ruled that the federal government could restrict firearms ownership.  Machine guns now require a federal license.  Fighter jets and tanks are tightly controlled and always unarmed.

Last year, Arkansas passed a law intended to clear up the language in the law allowing carrying a firearm in a vehicle.  It has & is legal to transport if unloaded & the ammo stored separate where it cannot be loaded quickly or easily, and you are on a journey.  (or any other lawful reason to have a firearm) (1)   Poor wording of the revision led many county attorney generals to interpret it as allowing open carry as a constitutional right.  The Arkansas State Police have issued their own opinion that open carry is not legal and they will arrest any and all that make that attempt.

Sadly, I find myself conflicted.  I lean libertarian & want as few laws and restrictions as possible.  I am a strong supporter in the second amendment and especially the right to defend yourself.  But I do not want to see open carry expanded.  Arkansas, along with Texas, South Carolina and  Oklahoma  restricted open carry during the post-Civil war Reconstruction era.  About a dozen states allow open carry of handguns without requiring a permit.  Another dozen allow with a permit similar to a concealed carry permit.  Some states also allow open carry of long guns such as shotguns or rifles.

Notice, I do not ask for any restrictions or new laws be passed in these open carry states.  I simply do not think it wise to push for more open carry.  My concern is it will be used to commit a crime.  Be it a terrorist, foreign or domestic that parades into a crowded event, heavily armed, and attempts a massacre.  Or peaceful protesters, such as in Ferguson, are infiltrated by armed thugs, intent on violence.  If open carry is legal in that state, any attempt by police to ascertain the legality of the armed individuals will be decried racist.  And after blood is shed, they will blame the police for failing to protect the public.

And my fear is some on the left want such an occurrence to promote more restrictive national gun laws.  Ronald Ritchie,(2) the “witness” who reported John Crawford to 911, insisting he was a threat, later recanted his story.  Anti-gun activists are advocating reporting of any open carry. (3) Was John Crawford “Swatted”?

And some will say, why insist on restricting our freedoms on what if’s?  I will agree they have a point.  I will also point out, in the 90’s, a man was wondering “what if” I can get some of my followers to hijack an airplane and fly it into a skyscraper….  So what if we all agree there are threats in today’s world.  What is the best way to combat them while allowing the most freedom?

And just now, a terrorist attack in Paris.  France has very tough gun control laws.  “They were armed with Kalashnikov rifles and are also believed to have had a rocket-propelled grenade.” 

1.  How did they get their weapons?

2.  What other laws would have prevented this?

3.  Would open carry help or hinder the police & government?

(1)  http://media.law.uark.edu/arklawnotes/2014/02/13/open-carry-in-arkansas-an-ambiguous-statute/

(2) http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/07/ohio-black-man-killed-by-police-walmart-doubts-cast-witnesss-account

(3)  https://www.nraila.org/articles/20141003/gun-control-supporters-advocate-swating-of-gun-owners

Speaking the UnSpeakable

I do try to not make judgements on issues until the smoke clears & a clear picture emerges.  I mostly ignored the Zimmerman story for a couple of days.  I have tried to do so on Ferguson until enough facts emerged to form an intelligent opinion.  First fact, the MO Govern is a total tool & should be recalled, impeached or just shipped to Iraq to directly head negotiations with ISIS.  (OK, not a fact, just a strongly expressed opinion)

On Tuesday, August 19, Governor Jay Nixon (D-Mo.) called for the “vigorous prosecution” of Darren Wilson, the Missouri police officer who shot and killed Michael Brown last week. 

Despite the highly charged rhetoric by the state’s Democratic governor, NBC’s Today was the only network morning show to acknowledge Nixon’s comments, giving it a mere 41 seconds on its Wednesday morning broadcast.

So what do you think?  Calling for vigorous prosecution before even determining if he committed a crime?  I have a different perspective.  Officer Darren Wilson should be awarded the highest awards available to a law enforcement officer for his actions.  By several accounts, Michael Brown & another male were walking down the middle of a city street, disrupting traffic.  (This was soon after the report of a robbery in that area.)  Officer Wilson yelled at them to get out of the street.  (this is a LEGAL order!  The ideal that this is a free country does not mean there are not laws such as those that restrict the streets to vehicles, not pedestrians.  Police also have the authority to enforce those laws thru tickets, arrest or whatever level of force is required)  Brown walking down the middle of the street after committing a strong arm robbery (battery) shows he was intent on violence, on provoking a confrontation. 

Officer Wilson ordered him out of the street.  Brown ignored him.  Officer Wilson started to exit his vehicle but was stopped by Brown & his accomplice, who shoved him back into the police car.  Brown then punched officer Wilson several times resulting in significant to severe injuries.  There are reports the struggled for Wilson’s gun.  Brown stepped away & Wilson exited the car.  Brown then taunted Wilson, “What you gonna do, shoot me”?  Brown then began an aggressive run at Wilson, who then shot Brown six times.

Reports indicate Wilson suffered a fractured eye socket from Browns attack.  A few days ago, I criticized Wilson’s marksmanship.  I was wrong.   While Brown was struck four times in the right arm, two went thru and struck the upper body.  Wilson was aiming center mass, exactly as police officers are trained.  That he was this accurate after a brutal beating, impaired vision and possible concussion or concussion like symptoms shows focus, restraint and professionalism of the highest order.  Brown had shown himself intent on violence and unwilling to submit to arrest.  Had Wilson allowed him to escape, who would have been his next victim?  Wilson, as a police officer, is entrusted with authority & powers not shared with the general public.  He is expected to protect the general public from violence.  Had Brown continued to walk away, Wilson would still be expected to stop Brown.  Compare that to you or I.  If we had been beaten & they walk away, we cannot legally shoot them or use lethal force.  Once the threat to our or others safety passes, we cannot legally engage even a violent criminal.  But in this encounter, we & officer Wilson have the clear right to self defense.  Brown reversed direction and began a fast approach toward Wilson.  He died an aggressor.  He died because he choose to attack others.  Wilson was injured doing his job stopping people like Brown.

And while I am happy to praise Officer Wilson, I think it should be contrasted with some criticism.  A few years back there was a shooting in Time Square.  I am still waiting for reports on what happened to the officers who shot innocent bystanders.  In California, during the Dorner manhunt, police twice fired on mistakenly identified vehicles, shooting one man & injuring two others.  Two separate incidents where two different police organizations violated the law & their legally recognized procedures.  If shoot on sight orders had been issued, they would have to have identified the suspect.  The first incident involved two women.  The second a small build white male.  Dorner was a large, black male.  NY could be excused, that they had to stop a threat to the public at large, even if it meant injuring innocent bystanders present at that time.  (I don’t agree with this, but acknowledge a case can be made)  But no such defense can be offered for the illegal actions in California.  One thing shared by both is the lack of accountability.
 
 
And like many, I share a distrust over the militarization of our police forces and that displayed in Ferguson, I also see a disconnect.  Violent rioters are nightly looting and attacking.  A large, civil disturbance that was the justification for acquiring such equipment.  The real question should be, why isn’t it being used?  Why are the violent people still one the streets?  Why haven’t they arrested dozens or hundreds?  Why aren’t they protecting the innocent citizens of Ferguson and their property?  It can only be politics.  The politics of Eric Holder, who ordered the Ferguson police to not release the video of Brown’s attacking a man in a store minutes before being shot.  The police chief defied Holder and obeyed the law, releasing the video as required by a freedom of information request.  And again, compare this to Zimmerman, where a firearm was used legally to defend against a violent attack.  Is this what Holder, Obama & the liberal press are trying to smear?  The right to self defense?

Can We Talk?

Todd says:

No comments about the Las Vegas shooting?

 

  • As the State increases its arbitrary violence wholesale across society, fringe elements will duplicate such violence locally.

     

I prefer to wait on such events & let the fog clear, let information catch up to speculation.  But OK,  we can talk about it.  I have to agree with Flag we should expect more.  As more and more people feel wronged by a government that holds itself immune from the law, people get frustrated.  They go over the edge.  I do not agree with them or any who advocate violence except in self defense.  I remember a movie with Denzel Washington where he took hostage a hospital to force them to treat his sick child.  Sadly, that lets me imagine a vet in chronic pain going postal at a VA that ignored him.  Remember the Oklahoma bomber felt motivated by Ruby Ridge.  When the Bundy Ranch stand-off started, I wondered if our government was courting an incident….  But what about the Vegas shooting?

 

Paul Waldman writing at WaPo’s Plum Line. The headline gives you the flavor of the post:

“How much does right wing rhetoric contribute to right wing terrorism.”

I vote this column “Most Despicable of 2014.” It just can’t get any worse than this:

What I’m about to say will raise some hackles, but we need to talk about it. It’s long past time for prominent conservatives and Republicans to do some introspection and ask whether they’re contributing to outbreaks of right-wing violence.(1)

Or maybe not. I can accept being labeled “right wing”, “conservative”, “libertarian”, “idiot” and a few other things.  But don’t try & put me in with these psycho murders.  A white, married couple.  Do we now suspect all white couples of planning murder?(2)  I do see they identified themselves as right wing.  I don’t think I agree with their definition of right wing.  And how do liberals identify themselves in these times?  Who gets  Elliot Rodger, The  Santa Barbara killer?

They were psycho’s looking for a cause.  They tried to join the Bundy Ranch defenders And were asked to leave.

Ammon Bundy, one of Cliven Bundy’s sons, told The Associated Press by telephone that the Millers were at his father’s ranch for a few days this spring but were asked to leave for unspecified “conduct” problems.

He called the couple “very radical” and said they “did not align themselves” with the beliefs of other protesters, adding that while thousands of people have been to the site over the last few months, “not very many people were asked to leave. I think they may have been the only ones.”

Cliven Bundy and his supporters, some of them armed militia members, thwarted a Bureau of Land Management roundup of his cattle near Bunkerville, Nevada, in April. The BLM says Mr. Bundy owes more than $1 million in grazing fees and penalties for trespassing without a permit over 20 years, but he refuses to acknowledge federal authority on public lands.

Ammon Bundy said his family “has had no quarrel” with Las Vegas police and disavowed the Millers’ actions.

“The only thing worse than tyranny is anarchy, and we certainly recognize that,” Mr. Bundy said.

The Millers moved to the Las Vegas area in January, police said. Amanda Miller, 22, had worked at a Hobby Lobby craft store in Las Vegas, the chain store said in a written statement, but was no longer employed there.

Jerad Miller, 31, was convicted of felony vehicle theft in Washington state, police said. He also had a criminal record in Indiana. (3)

 

Mr. Waldman seems to want to use this to attack conservatives & gun rights groups.  A convicted felon.  I assume not legally allowed to own a gun & not a NRA member.  The NRA does not support white supremacists or sorveign citizens.  Now some of them may support the NRA, but that does not make it mutual.  And most especially, the NRA only supports legal gun owners.  They are very against violent felons with guns.  They also state, only a good guy with a gun stops a bad guy with a gun.  Sadly, it didn’t play out that way.

 

A DEADLY MISSION

At a news conference Monday, Metro officials filled in many of the details and clarified some initial reports. Contrary to what was said immediately after the attacks, for example, neither of the two officers nor Joseph Robert Wilcox, the Las Vegas man killed inside Wal-Mart, ever got off a shot. The only woman killed was Amanda Miller.

Assistant Sheriff Kevin McMahill said it all began when Jerad Miller walked into the pizza parlor and quickly left, returning moments later with Amanda in tow.

“They walked past our officers, who were eating lunch in one of the booths, and immediately upon passing them, Jerad Miller pulled a handgun out and shot officer Soldo one time in the back of his head,” McMahill said.

Officer Beck tried to engage the couple, but was shot in the throat before he could pull a trigger, McMahill said. The Millers then shot him several times more.

The suspects pulled the officers from the booth and covered Beck with a Gadsen Flag, a yellow banner with a coiled snake above the words, “Don’t Tread on Me,” and threw a swastika on him. One of them then pinned a note to Soldo’s body that “basically stated that this is the beginning of a revolution,” McMahill said.

The exact contents of the note have not been made public by Metro.

Once the two entered the Wal-Mart, Jerad fired a single shot and repeated his call for revolution.

Wilcox, 31, was near the cash registers when he saw events unfolding. He was armed with gun of his own, and told a friend he was going to do something.

As he moved to confront Jerad Miller, Wilcox passed Amanda, not realizing the two were together. She slipped behind Wilcox and shot him at close range.

Within minutes more Metro officers arrived on the scene in response to 911 calls. McMahill said they initially blocked the back door with a patrol car. After Jerad Miller shot the door from the inside to open it, a five-officer team entered and exchanged gunfire with the couple.

The shooting raged in the store’s automotive section, spilling oil and antifreeze onto the floor. The two were hiding behind items Jerad Miller had stacked around them for protection, but Amanda was hit by a bullet during the firefight, McMahill said.

Pinned down by police and blocked from all exits, Jerad layed down in front of Amanda, and she shot him several times. Then she shot herself in the head.

 

I think the Waldman’s distract us from the issue & even fan the flames, but for the greater good, of course.  Many on the right seem equally partisan or agenda driven.  The NRA denounced an open carry demonstration in Texas.  They then walked back their comments and seem still to be reeling.  If you are pro-gun & it’s LEGAL, you have to support it, right???(5)    Errr, no!  No I don’t.  I was pleased with their original denouncement.  As a CCW holder, NRA member and member of other shooting organizations, I do not like to see IDIOTS WITH GUNS!  In this day of media hyped mass shootings, is it a good ideal for a small group of men to parade in a crowded restaurant with shotguns & rifles slung from their shoulders?  Were I in that restaurant, I would be deciding who I would shoot first, if they showed any sign of hostility.  I understand what they are doing is legal, but it is out of place & rude.  I have people pull out in front of me while driving.  If I can stop or slow down without hitting them, it’s legal.  That doesn’t make it smart or right.  Imagine a large law firm playing commercials on what is legal on how to pull out in front of traffic.  If you are hit & injured, call this toll free number…  That’s how I see these open carry idiots in the restaurants.  This is not to say I am against open carry.  A lot depends on how it’s done.  I don’t like riots, but understand there are laws against “inciting riots”.

And to add balance to the open carry, on the other side, the FBI was worried more about ecoterrorism not too long ago..  (6)  And for any who want to look at common causes in mass shooters (7) good luck to you.  Myself, I know a few “crazy” people.  Might fit the description myself.  I don’t know any crazy, hate the world & want some sort of revenge people.  My kind of crazy hope you get bald & fat sooner that we do….

 

 

Just a Number

“To teachers I’m just another child”.  Can anyone not relate to that thought?  Seger has a gift for taking thoughts we’ve all had, putting them to paper & music and somehow they become profound.  An article on school bullying got my attention.  The CDC has done another study & there are dots we can connect.  Is that reporter speak for, I’ll tell you what I think this all means, don’t bother to read or research it for yourself (or to have an independent thought)  Unkind & maybe undeserved, but my read on this is a shift & emphasis on guns & school shootings.  “Bullying victims are sneaking hundreds of thousands of firearms, knives and clubs into U.S. high schools”.

 Direct from the CDC study:

School associated violent deaths are rare.1

• 17 homicides of school-age youth ages 5 to 18 years occurred at school during the 2009-2010 school year.

• Of all youth homicides, less than 2% occur at school, and this percentage has been stable for the past decade.

In 2010, there were about 828,000 nonfatal victimizations at school among students 12 to 18 years of age.1

Approximately 7% of teachers report that they have been threatened with injury or physically attacked by a student from their school.1

In 2009, about 20% of students ages 12–18 reported that gangs were present at their school during the school year.1

In a 2011 nationally representative sample of youth in grades 9-12:2

• 12% reported being in a physical fight on school property in the 12 months before the survey.

• 5.9% reported that they did not go to school on one or more days in the 30 days before the survey because they felt unsafe at school or on their way to or from school.

• 5.4% reported carrying a weapon (gun, knife or club) on school property on one or more days in the 30 days before the survey.

• 7.4% reported being threatened or injured with a weapon on school property one or more times in the 12 months before the survey.

• 20% reported being bullied on school property and 16% reported being bullied electronically during the 12 months before the survey.

OK, it’s not the reporters fault.  I am an @ss, quick to judge & frequently wrong.  I seem to remember President Obama assigning the CDC to study school shootings/violence.  It’s hard for me to look at this “study” where a

gun=knife=club.  In what world are they equal?  The CDC wants to talk about mass/school shootings.  Problem, the numbers do not help their cause.  My guess only, since they didn’t publish numbers of guns, knives or clubs separately.  I think they lump them together to inflate their hype on guns in schools.  According to the CDC, there are around 50 million students in K thru college.  There were 828,ooo instances of reported victimizations, ages 12-18.  Statistically, any school student is very safe.  Reality, as always, is not the same.

 “20% reported being bullied on school property ”  One/fifth of students are bullied in the survey year?  And this is after years of increasing anti-bullying laws, rules and soap box promises that politicians would END bullying & school violence once & for all!  But they haven’t fixed it, after all these years and studies and money spent.  Why can that be?  How can this keep happening?

Maybe because they don’t actually want to “fix” the problem.  The Obama administration/CDC is interested in promoting gun control.  This does not mean they want or support school shootings, but consider their efforts on bullying and compare it to energy spent on gun control.  Seems oblivious they only want to treat the symptom, not “cure” the cold.  There could and likely are other factors.

They have done studies on gun violence that discredit nearly every liberal talking point.  When the numbers are displayed broken down by neighborhood, not state, an overwhelming fact emerges.  There are no violent states, just small, violent area’s.  A correlation  between low income/gangs can be indicated, but again, who would want to cure a cold if they made their living off repeatedly treating that illness.

By the same token, are all schools violent?  Are all failing to stop bullying?  Or are some inner city schools overwhelmed?  What are the chances of a school in any of those violent neighborhoods being an oasis from gangs and violence?  Are those same schools heavily unionized?  Those are topics this administration does not want discussed.  Hence a “study” that leads to their desired conclusion, or at least, talking points.

Some personal experiences.

I attended a concert years ago.  The show was ruined for me & hundreds by three obnoxious drunks shouting over the music.  Several of us complained to several city police officers.  They nodded and did nothing.  I was sorely tempter to attack and fight them.  Frustrated beyond belief that the police would not do their job, but had I acted, I would be arrested, possibly sued by the drunks.

A friend was called by the school years ago.  His son was hurt & needed to be taken to a doctor.  His son had a broken jaw.  Broken by a bully he had been complaining about for a while.  The bully sucker punched him outside the gym.  The bully was suspended for ten days.  The school did not call the police or an ambulance.  My friend did call the police, who were reluctant.  He ended up having to sue in civil court for damages.  Bullies are not expelled because of the thousands of dollars in funding they bring to the school.  Expel them & another school gets that funding.

Three or four years ago, the high school my kids are now attending had a bullying incident.  Three, black, Sr high girls severely beat a black, Jr high girl.  We were very interested in how the school would handle this incident.  We were considering switching to a private school.  We never could find out what was done.  Must protect a child’s privacy, we are told.  But then, college’s are very secretive when it comes to campus violence.  I understand no school wants a reputation for violence, but what about the public’s right to know?

Would you knowingly send your daughter to a school with a high number of rapes over the years?  How can colleges keep such secrets for so many years?  It seems to me there is a lot of money spent on education.  We hear tuition costs are jumping at headline making rates.  And all school loans now go thru the federal government and are exempt from bankruptcy protections…..

My how I’ve jumped around….but there is a concise thought & conclusion.  Schools are an artificial environment created for educating our young in a group of similar age.  Since this environment has been taken over by central government control it has been on a path to failure only staved off by diminishing results, standards and accountability.  Government does not cause this, but creates the environment where failure thrives.

Pity the students trapped in public schools being bullied and ignored.  Can any of the bureaucrats presiding make them or us believe they aren’t just numbers….

 

Feel Like A Number
Words and music by bob seger

I take my card and i stand in line
To make a buck i work overtime
Dear sir letters keep coming in the mail
I work my back till it’s racked with pain
The boss can’t even recall my name
I show up late and i’m docked
It never fails
I feel like just another
Spoke in a great big wheel
Like a tiny blade of grass
In a great big field
To workers i’m just another drone
To ma bell i’m just another phone
I’m just another statistic on a sheet
To teachers i’m just another child
To irs i’m just another file
I’m just another consensus on the street
Gonna cruise out of this city
Head down to the sea
Gonna shout out at the ocean
Hey it’s me
And i feel like a number
Feel like a number
Feel like a stranger
A stranger in this land
I feel like a number
I’m not a number
I’m not a number
Dammit i’m a man
I said i’m a man

 

And this is a decent article with links.  My main gripe is him going along with the CDC narrative without question.

http://www.nbcnews.com/health/kids-health/bullied-students-sneak-thousands-guns-schools-n95781

 

Third Party Viability…. Scene 3, Take 2

3RD_PARTYI covered this topic once upon a time. In fact it was the 4th blog post that I wrote way back when I started. I covered the topic OK then, but I think I can do better this time around. More importantly, the last time I covered it I only had about 3 readers, lol. I got 3 responses other than my own, one was Revolution, whom some of you have become acquainted with, and another was my wife. I would say we have grown a bit with a couple thousand page hits a day. It is hard for me to tell how many people actually come to the site, but I am sure that the number is significantly larger than it was the last time I talked about this. When I started writing this blog, I was disgusted with the outcome of the elections and disgusted with the Republican party. Those two factors in the equation have not changed. I was also in the firm belief that moving to a third party, possibly the Libertarians, was the absolute best move for me. So let’s talk about a third party and whether that is a viable move in today’s political climate…
Can a 3rd Party Actually be a Factor in Today’s Politics?

Are Libertarians Up To The Task?

libertarian-party-sealAs with the “Direction of the Republican Party” thread, this one has been extremely active so I have moved back up towards the top of the page. This was originally posted February 20. Many of you know that I started this blog as a way to ferret out my beliefs and start providing some viewpoints that I feel are important. The “Direction of the Republican Party” post has been far and away the most read article I have written. So now I want to discuss another option that is out there on the table. The Libertarian party easily has the most solid platform of the bigger parties. So I want to talk with everyone about whether they are up to the task of really operating on the big stage. So far they have progressed only as far as AAA in the minor leagues. They show promise. But will they find that they need a little more movement on that fast ball if they want to make it in the big leagues?
Are the Libertarians Wasting Their Time?

Libertarian Party Act IX

libertarian-party-sealWell we are finally out of the holiday season for me. And that means we can get back to business. The next to last section of the Libertarian Platform. We have certainly covered a lot in all of the first 8 acts, and we now near the finish line. But we aren’t done yet. There are some inportant areas still to be covered and analyzed. I look forward to your thoughts on these three areas…

Today We look at International Affairs, Free Trade, and Discrimination

Let’s Discuss a Free Market

As we have worked our way through the Libertarian platform and subsequent topics that involve government, we have discussed many different areas where there are disagreements about whether government should be involved, and if so, at what level. One of the most interesting to me and the most relevant to today’s current events is the idea of a free market. So I figured that it would be a good time for us to talk about how it can work, or how it cannot, depending on your position.
Is a Free Market Possible or Even Desirable?

Libertarian Party Act VIII

libertarian-party-sealThe Dissection of the Libertarian Party platform enters the final section, which will be comprised of three Acts. Here are some tougher topics that I look forward to the conversation around. National Security and Individual Rights are the topics in this section, which means that some of you are going to have really strong opinions. But I find that this section gives me a lot of unanswered questions.

Let’s Look at National Security and Individual Rights according to the LP

Libertarian Party Act VII

libertarian-party-sealAs promised, we move directly into Act VII of dissecting the Libertarian Party Platform. That last part was fairly tough for me. I had been cruising along and starting to think that maybe I could get behind this party, and then I hit a financial roadblock. That hasn’t ruled them out, but I certainly need some convincing that those parts can work.

Let’s look at health care, education, and Retirement according to the LP

Libertarian Party Act VI

libertarian-party-sealTime to get back to the Libertarian Platform. I am going to be doing the next couple of sections in quick order, as it does seem that we got away from it a little too long. We want to cover it all without too much interval in order to make sure everyone gets to see it all. So on to finance, money, and monopolies…

Act VI of the Libertarian Party Platform

Libertarian Party Platform Act V

libertarian-party-sealWell we have certainly had our fair share of interesting conversations about the Libertarian Party platform thus far, haven’t we? A lot of opinions and disagreements. But that is what this is about: talking about our differences. I am finding that I am gaining a much better perspective on each of these issues through the conversation around them. So on to the first section of the Economic Liberties Section…

More of the Libertarian Party Platform

Libertarian Platform Act IV

libertarian-party-sealI have to say that I am very pleased with the response to the first three acts in our dissection of the Libertarian platform. There have been hundreds of people visiting the site and reading what we are discussing, which only helps my argument that people are interested in learning what this party is about. But I encourage more of you to post comments! You don’t have to know politics. You know what you believe and that is what we are trying to hash out here! So on to the rest of the “personal freedoms” section…
Abortion, Crime, and Self Defense today

Libertarian Platform Act III

libertarian-party-sealNow we get to dig into specific issues in the Libertarian Platform. The Statement of Principles was a good start but was just a precursor. We begin with the first half of the “Personal Liberty” section, which covers expression and communication, personal privacy, and personal relationships. I must say that I am enjoying the conversations each day brings and I am sure some of my commentary here is going to fire some folks up…
Personal Freedoms according to the Libertarian Party

I Need Some Help on Deciding Whether to Write About…

Alright, here is the deal. While I can rant and rave and point out all the stuff in the world, and I will continue to do that, I was also floating around some ideas about some things I wanted to write about. So an idea came to me to write a series of blogs devoted to certain topics. But I want to make sure that it is something that people wanted to read about….
Tell me if I should write about the Libertarian Party