I posted this earlier today on my blog. I thought some of the folks here might enjoy reading it as well.
Original post
Original post
lnoldan.com said:
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Why I became a Libertarian
- Thread starter Lars
- Start date
-
- Tags
- libertarian
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Lars, great post. I'm somewhere in between a Republican and Libertarian myself. As I posted in another thread earlier today, I'm a conservative at heart, and whichever parties' candidates are exhibiting those core values and principles that lead in line with my own will earn my support.
SF???
Not sure that I want to take the train to SF..... but I dont want to go to NYC or Atlanta either !!!
Good post, I caught an episode of GBeck when he was discussing the Libs viewpoints vs the others...... I am definately leaning that way too.
The Repubs are trying to play catch up and are now in a PC mode to please and appease and to try and regain some support.
All I know for sure is that we are all screwed big time.... very scary times.
Not sure that I want to take the train to SF..... but I dont want to go to NYC or Atlanta either !!!
Good post, I caught an episode of GBeck when he was discussing the Libs viewpoints vs the others...... I am definately leaning that way too.
The Repubs are trying to play catch up and are now in a PC mode to please and appease and to try and regain some support.
All I know for sure is that we are all screwed big time.... very scary times.
Excellent post!
I took an online test, (for what that is worth) and it showed I am a Conservative leaning Libertarian, so we are on the same page.
I guess I have Dyslexia too.
When I saw the post heading, I thought you getting a second job at the library?
I took an online test, (for what that is worth) and it showed I am a Conservative leaning Libertarian, so we are on the same page.
I guess I have Dyslexia too.
When I saw the post heading, I thought you getting a second job at the library?
"I am a libertarian" can mean a lot of things.
Does this mean you believe in libertarian principles?
That you are a member of the Libertarian party?
That you actually believe the Libertarian party is viable and effective?
I definitely believe in libertarian principles.
However, I think there are some major barriers to the Libertarian party ever becoming effective and having a large following.
And, no, I don't believe the biggest problem is the self-fulfilling prophesy of "I'll never vote third party because they'll never get enough votes to win." I do believe that is a problem, but it's not insurmountable and it isn't the Libertarian's greatest barrier.
I think their greatest problem is that although most everyone will say that they believe in freedom and liberty, and on a list of ten top political issues they may say the government should stay out of 7 or 8 of them, most everyone has their 2 or 3 issues that they really do want the government involved in, and worse, those are usually the 2 or 3 issues they really feel most strongly about.
Everyone will score 7 or 8 out of 10 on that online test - but it's those other 2 or 3 issues that are going to be the real kicker and determine that they won't be voting libertarian.
You see this problem play out on gun boards all the time.
De-regulation of guns? Lots of support! Machine guns for everyone! Not much opposition to this one here on INGO. But what about gun rights for felons? That one always draws a heated debate.
Open borders? Anyone can come or go as they please? There are very few who are willing to "go libertarian" on this issue.
Legalization of drugs? Some folks on gun boards will agree to this one, but there are just as many who are vehemently opposed.
End all government entitlements? (No social security, no medicare, no medicaid? No worker's comp? No unemployement insurance?) Most people would be willing to shut down 3 or 4 of those programs, but most people also have one or two of those programs they are drawing benefits from they don't want stopped.
What about gay marriage? Polygamous marriages? If you're really going to be a libertarian, you have to give a lot of latitude to whatever wierd arrangements consenting adults want to dream up.
What about abortion? Lots of people want that regulated.
That, in a nutshell, is why I don't think the Libertarians will ever get widespread support.
Just about everyone will say "I agree with the libertarians on a lot of issues, except for ________. I will never vote for anyone who's going to allow _________."
If the libertarians start crossing things off their list of liberties, then they won't be libertarians any more.
If they really hold to their principles and declare liberty on ALL issues, just about everyone is going to have one or two issues where they violently disagree with the libertarians and won't vote for them.
Does this mean you believe in libertarian principles?
That you are a member of the Libertarian party?
That you actually believe the Libertarian party is viable and effective?
I definitely believe in libertarian principles.
However, I think there are some major barriers to the Libertarian party ever becoming effective and having a large following.
And, no, I don't believe the biggest problem is the self-fulfilling prophesy of "I'll never vote third party because they'll never get enough votes to win." I do believe that is a problem, but it's not insurmountable and it isn't the Libertarian's greatest barrier.
I think their greatest problem is that although most everyone will say that they believe in freedom and liberty, and on a list of ten top political issues they may say the government should stay out of 7 or 8 of them, most everyone has their 2 or 3 issues that they really do want the government involved in, and worse, those are usually the 2 or 3 issues they really feel most strongly about.
Everyone will score 7 or 8 out of 10 on that online test - but it's those other 2 or 3 issues that are going to be the real kicker and determine that they won't be voting libertarian.
You see this problem play out on gun boards all the time.
De-regulation of guns? Lots of support! Machine guns for everyone! Not much opposition to this one here on INGO. But what about gun rights for felons? That one always draws a heated debate.
Open borders? Anyone can come or go as they please? There are very few who are willing to "go libertarian" on this issue.
Legalization of drugs? Some folks on gun boards will agree to this one, but there are just as many who are vehemently opposed.
End all government entitlements? (No social security, no medicare, no medicaid? No worker's comp? No unemployement insurance?) Most people would be willing to shut down 3 or 4 of those programs, but most people also have one or two of those programs they are drawing benefits from they don't want stopped.
What about gay marriage? Polygamous marriages? If you're really going to be a libertarian, you have to give a lot of latitude to whatever wierd arrangements consenting adults want to dream up.
What about abortion? Lots of people want that regulated.
That, in a nutshell, is why I don't think the Libertarians will ever get widespread support.
Just about everyone will say "I agree with the libertarians on a lot of issues, except for ________. I will never vote for anyone who's going to allow _________."
If the libertarians start crossing things off their list of liberties, then they won't be libertarians any more.
If they really hold to their principles and declare liberty on ALL issues, just about everyone is going to have one or two issues where they violently disagree with the libertarians and won't vote for them.
I'll admit that there are some topics with which I disagree with the Libertarian stance, but I think most people will be hard-pressed to find a political party with which they align 100% of the time. I for one am against open borders, I would like to see our borders much more secure than they currently are. I don't think drugs need to be legalized either. But that's just my 
, to each their own. Politicians please just keep your laws off of my guns and hands out of my pockets and we should be able to get along pretty well. And stop spending money like it's going out of style. 
, to each their own. Politicians please just keep your laws off of my guns and hands out of my pockets and we should be able to get along pretty well. And stop spending money like it's going out of style. 
curraheeguns
Master
Damn....I though it said "Why I Became A Lesbian...."
The simple truth is, I'm willing to vote for a direction. Currently my only viable option is the Libertarian Party. Right now the direction I want this country to go is Smaller, Less Intrusive Government. A Constitutional Government.
Neither the D's nor the R's are giving us any of that.
I don't have a problem with any of what you suggested above. I believe if any of that is to be regulated, it's for the states to decide and not the federal government. That's what the framers believed in. Put the most control in the hands of the people closest to you.
Is this going to be "fair" for everyone? Nope. But nowhere growing up was I told "life is fair" either. Some people will get rich with very little effort. Others will work their @##es off and will never be successful. I am ok with this. Even as someone who is struggling to be successful.
Neither the D's nor the R's are giving us any of that.
I don't have a problem with any of what you suggested above. I believe if any of that is to be regulated, it's for the states to decide and not the federal government. That's what the framers believed in. Put the most control in the hands of the people closest to you.
Is this going to be "fair" for everyone? Nope. But nowhere growing up was I told "life is fair" either. Some people will get rich with very little effort. Others will work their @##es off and will never be successful. I am ok with this. Even as someone who is struggling to be successful.
Personally, I completely agree with you.
I'm willing to pay the price for moving in the direction of more liberty - even if that means "freeing up" some issues to allow choices I personally do not like.
I just don't think America as a whole is willing to go there yet. Most of us will take the liberties that are important to us, thank you very much, but much less tolerant of other people's liberties.
I also agree with the "more local" model. Most of the times governments have gotten way out of control, it has coincided with power becoming more centralized. I think the local city council understands me a lot better - and is a lot more reluctant to cross me - than some bureaucrat in Washington who's never even heard of my town.
That saint of libertarianism, Barry Goldwater, once said, "I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution or that have failed their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is "needed" before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents "interests, " I shall reply that I was informed that their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can."
I am a libertarian. I believe in secure borders. Contradiction? Not at all. I believe that the US should have borders secured by the people who live along them, and those who do not wish to comply with a set of unifying codes, i.e. the Pledge, the DoI, the Constitution and Bill of Rights need to stay out. Those who are willing to come in, work, earn their way, and not try to change our government into a more intrusive 800# gorilla than it already is should be welcome. Those who want only to come in and partake of the benefits, whether for their own benefit or to send out of the country, without contributing to what makes them possible are not. Those who enter, or for that matter, who are born here but wish only to prey on others need to go somewhere else to find their victims.
To make all of the above happen, our people need a "sea change" in their attitudes. We need to realize that, as Lars said, we are responsible for ourselves. There are certainly some functions for government, but those functions are strictly and severely limited. Defense of the nation as a whole would be one, i.e. NORAD. We as a people need to of our own choices decide that if someone commits a crime, he needs to pay retribution for it to the injured party or their survivors, but once paid, it's done and in the past. If the crime is such that retribution is impossible, i.e. murder/rape/child molesting, that person needs to find a closed door anywhere he goes for shelter, food, etc. Perhaps he will leave and move elsewhere in the world. Perhaps he will die, cold and hungry. Perhaps he will try to commit yet more crimes and find himself on the business end of a shotgun belonging to someone who doesn't plan on being a victim that day.
I admit, I'm something of an idealist, but I consider myself a realistic idealist- I recognize that the above is all possible, if we decide to make it happen. I also recognize that the majority of the people have not the first clue how well this could work, and would therefore resist even a change that could improve their lives by removing the 800 pound tick on our collective asses. That governmental tick presently prevents any improvement in our individual situations in favor of it's own growth. At present, we pay income tax, sales tax, excise tax, property tax, cigarette tax, liquor tax, capital gains tax, inheritance tax, gasoline tax... Imagine how much we would have and be able to put away for our own retirements if all those huge chunks of money weren't being sucked up by our parasitic government? Imagine how low unemployment would be if the roads were built by private companies, the police forces were hired much as security companies are now, the judges were sworn to uphold the law but were jointly hired by the parties involved in a dispute to arbitrate.
Imagine how prosperous we'd be if we all understood the free market and believed in it working. Don't like China's inhumane treatment of their people? Express that disagreement by refusing to buy products they make-not as a governmental, but rather as a personal action. Voice your complaint. Let people know what you're doing and why. Just don't expect a law to forbid those purchases-some people may agree with them, and that is their right.
Could it all happen as I described? Could it be a reality? I'd like to think so. Could our people today make it happen? Not without that "sea change". Too many don't understand what true liberty is, much less how to fight for it.
We need another Barry Goldwater.
Blessings,
Bill
I am a libertarian. I believe in secure borders. Contradiction? Not at all. I believe that the US should have borders secured by the people who live along them, and those who do not wish to comply with a set of unifying codes, i.e. the Pledge, the DoI, the Constitution and Bill of Rights need to stay out. Those who are willing to come in, work, earn their way, and not try to change our government into a more intrusive 800# gorilla than it already is should be welcome. Those who want only to come in and partake of the benefits, whether for their own benefit or to send out of the country, without contributing to what makes them possible are not. Those who enter, or for that matter, who are born here but wish only to prey on others need to go somewhere else to find their victims.
To make all of the above happen, our people need a "sea change" in their attitudes. We need to realize that, as Lars said, we are responsible for ourselves. There are certainly some functions for government, but those functions are strictly and severely limited. Defense of the nation as a whole would be one, i.e. NORAD. We as a people need to of our own choices decide that if someone commits a crime, he needs to pay retribution for it to the injured party or their survivors, but once paid, it's done and in the past. If the crime is such that retribution is impossible, i.e. murder/rape/child molesting, that person needs to find a closed door anywhere he goes for shelter, food, etc. Perhaps he will leave and move elsewhere in the world. Perhaps he will die, cold and hungry. Perhaps he will try to commit yet more crimes and find himself on the business end of a shotgun belonging to someone who doesn't plan on being a victim that day.
I admit, I'm something of an idealist, but I consider myself a realistic idealist- I recognize that the above is all possible, if we decide to make it happen. I also recognize that the majority of the people have not the first clue how well this could work, and would therefore resist even a change that could improve their lives by removing the 800 pound tick on our collective asses. That governmental tick presently prevents any improvement in our individual situations in favor of it's own growth. At present, we pay income tax, sales tax, excise tax, property tax, cigarette tax, liquor tax, capital gains tax, inheritance tax, gasoline tax... Imagine how much we would have and be able to put away for our own retirements if all those huge chunks of money weren't being sucked up by our parasitic government? Imagine how low unemployment would be if the roads were built by private companies, the police forces were hired much as security companies are now, the judges were sworn to uphold the law but were jointly hired by the parties involved in a dispute to arbitrate.
Imagine how prosperous we'd be if we all understood the free market and believed in it working. Don't like China's inhumane treatment of their people? Express that disagreement by refusing to buy products they make-not as a governmental, but rather as a personal action. Voice your complaint. Let people know what you're doing and why. Just don't expect a law to forbid those purchases-some people may agree with them, and that is their right.
Could it all happen as I described? Could it be a reality? I'd like to think so. Could our people today make it happen? Not without that "sea change". Too many don't understand what true liberty is, much less how to fight for it.
We need another Barry Goldwater.
Blessings,
Bill
I am a libertarian. Small "L". What does that mean? It means I believe in libertarian principles, but I can't bring myself to vote for the Libertarian Party. I don't vote Libertarian Pary because I believe that pure libertarianism - which I believe in - is simply too rigorous a political philosophy for most people.
The argument in a nutshell is: What is the proper role of government?
The libertarian point of view is that government is there to prevent or punish the initiation of force. All voluntary transactions between people should be unregulated except the initiation of force. For purposes of clarification, fraud is a type of force.
The implications of this are too tough for most people, so libertarianism can't compete as a stand alone philosophy, IMO.
I vote Republican, because they are more towards my libertarian ideals than the Dems.
Once in my life I voted principle, and I have to live with the fact that I helped elect a man whose intent was to trash my ideals. The other guy just wanted to step on them a bit. Unfortunately, I live in the place called the Real World, which requires me to make tradeoffs and choose the lesser evil.
The argument in a nutshell is: What is the proper role of government?
The libertarian point of view is that government is there to prevent or punish the initiation of force. All voluntary transactions between people should be unregulated except the initiation of force. For purposes of clarification, fraud is a type of force.
The implications of this are too tough for most people, so libertarianism can't compete as a stand alone philosophy, IMO.
I vote Republican, because they are more towards my libertarian ideals than the Dems.
Once in my life I voted principle, and I have to live with the fact that I helped elect a man whose intent was to trash my ideals. The other guy just wanted to step on them a bit. Unfortunately, I live in the place called the Real World, which requires me to make tradeoffs and choose the lesser evil.
I'm a "Ron Paul" type Conservative-libertarian. What does that mean to me?
Well, I believe in what "most" of what the Republican and Libertarian parties stand for but am not 100% for either.
It also means that I believe a vote for the Libertarian Party in Presidential (only) elections, is a vote for the Left. I voted for Perot and we got Clinton. I hate feeling like I'm voting for the lesser of two evils and hated having to vote for McCain, even though Palin took some of the sting out of it.
I have voted for Libertarians on occasion at State and Local levels. I'm never one to straight-ticket vote either. Each person should be judged and voted on accordingly.
Well, I believe in what "most" of what the Republican and Libertarian parties stand for but am not 100% for either.
It also means that I believe a vote for the Libertarian Party in Presidential (only) elections, is a vote for the Left. I voted for Perot and we got Clinton. I hate feeling like I'm voting for the lesser of two evils and hated having to vote for McCain, even though Palin took some of the sting out of it.
I have voted for Libertarians on occasion at State and Local levels. I'm never one to straight-ticket vote either. Each person should be judged and voted on accordingly.
That's true. They're politicians, for the most part. We don't have many/any statesmen anymore.
They say what they have to to get into office, secure in the knowledge that the party elite will never put anyone who really does what he says up against them. Such a person would win in a landslide, given a chance.
I say again: We need another Barry Goldwater.
Blessings,
Bill
That's why I left the GOP and they won't get a dime until they act like Conservatives. I think Michael Steele understands that. There have been many others who understand they have to clean house.
Site Supporter
Staff online
-
Cameramonkeywww.thechosen.tv -
d.kaufmanStill Here
Members online
- Cameramonkey
- Mfoster20
- Indianajeff
- LokhXIV
- ws6guy
- rbhargan
- Cavman
- d.kaufman
- Snapdragon
- carsgunsandgirls
- tsilveus
- nhgluff
- maxipum
- Longhair
- gpasp101
- abeguzmanmarine
- Wolfhound
- Gascitykid
- Principal Skinr
- darkkevin
- DeadeyeChrista'sdad
- hereforthecootbash
- jt1975
- Emerson Dambiggins
- jcole123
- mmpsteve
- joshf63a
- indyblue
- SomeOld Guy
- Gena_Allen
- CPE1704TKS
- Defensive Shooting Concepts
- Jmtbug21
- Will0369
- MC1983
- KG1
- Altrex
- radar8756
- MrSmitty
- loudgroove
- Gabriel
- Phil502
- ancjr
- Doug28450
- INPatriot
- bobzilla
- OneBadV8
- dekeshooter
- indyartisan
- Kirk Freeman