Amash denounces armed protests in Michigan

[Krugminator2]

Yep.

You're talking to a guy who thinks gun ownership should require a license. 'Nuff said.

Feel free to find that quote from me. I am indifferent on the issue. I am not really for or against registering guns or having a license to own one. It isn't a big issue to me. I would be pretty surprised if I ever said you should have to get a license to own a gun though.

 

[CCTelander]

Feel free to find that quote from me. I am indifferent on the issue. I am not really for or against registering guns. It isn't a big issue to me. But I would be somewhat I surprised if I said guns should be registered.

Except I didn't say you said guns should be registered. I said youbsaid gun ownership should require a license, you compared it to a driver's license as I recall. I'll see if I can dig up the quote when I have time to do some searching.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Fixed it :o

thanks CCP china

 

[Krugminator2]

Wow. Your totally unsupported statements presented as gospel truth have convinced me. Who do I talk to about converting to Randian objectiveism? Not.

I did support it when I said thousands of years of world history demonstrates anarchism doesn't work. Not working so hot in Somalia.

Limited government on the other hand.. works quite well. See the United States, Hong Kong, Switzerland. Very big success.

 

[Krugminator2]

Except I didn't say you said guns should be registered. I said youbsaid gun ownership should require a license, you compared it to a driver's license as I recall. I'll see if I can dig up the quote when I have time to do some searching.

Pretty sure I said licensing dogs was not a big infringement on freedom. And that was to pay for animal control. Not guns. And I did say restricting guns from people with mental illness and people convicted of violent crimes was legitimate. I also remember agreeing with Rand Paul that having a multiday waiting period for people on a terrorist watch list was not a big infringement on freedom. I don't remember saying anything about a license though.

 

[oyarde]

The leftarian party is dead . Done , toast , never coming back .Time to move on to the big leagues . I realize it does not leave many choices . That is how it is , pick one .

 

[Krugminator2]

Except I didn't say you said guns should be registered. I said youbsaid gun ownership should require a license, you compared it to a driver's license as I recall. I'll see if I can dig up the quote when I have time to do some searching.

Pretty random that you remember one word from a quote in six years. Apparently I did say it. I am pretty indifferent and don't consider it a big infringement on freedom though. I remember why I said guns though. My dad had a stroke that week which caused diminished faculties. I am completely in favor of limiting gun ownership to someone like that. So maybe a licensing regime would be the best way to do that.

Given that roads are public, requiring a minimum level of competency is hardly an infringement on freedom. I don't want some 102 year old blind woman on the road crashing into people. It basically one of the few licenses I support. I also support licensing dogs, cars and guns.

I am strongly against occupational licensing because they are anti-competitive. They end up raising costs to consumers.

 

[CCTelander]

Pretty random that you remember one word from a quote in six years. Apparently I did say it. I am pretty indifferent and don't consider it a big infringement on freedom though. I remember why I said guns though. My dad had a stroke that week which caused diminished faculties. I am completely in favor of limiting gun ownership to someone like that. So maybe a licensing regime would be the best way to do that.

I have a VERY good memory but it has gotten a bit spottier in my advancing years.

Be that as it may I do want to thank you sincerely for digging that up and saving me the time and effort of doing so. I may not think much of your politics bit I do very much appreciate your honesty in this matter. Props.

 

[pcosmar]

The entirety of world history indicates that what you say is wrong.

No
The entirety of Human History is filled with Authoritarians who Wared with each other and forced people to die for them.
They Conscripted whoever the Police collected.
Police also Controlled the Slaves..
Were Muscle for Local political machines.

 

[susano]

Police are an part of a free society. In fact, protecting rights with law enforcement and the military is the whole reason for government existing.

So no, I don't have a problem with there being security at the Capitol. There are people hipped up on crystal meth and low IQ who might do lawmakers harm like the guy who shot Steve Scalise.

Mutual self defense between the states in the union in a time of war (constitutional) is not police "protecting" Americans or enforcing "laws".

I've seen more low IQ and psychopath cops, on video, murder people and dogs than I can count. More so, they get away it. If armed citizens at a state capital makes you uneasy than nobody should be armed - no public, no cops, no lawmakers, so state employees.

 

[susano]

There is something that already exists to handle that. It is called the ballot box.

Using physical threats to intimidate is fine for monkeys, not for humans.



Individual citizens don't get to decide which laws are legitimate. We have a court system that settles the legality of laws. The average person is a low IQ dunce. Laws aren't subject to the arbitrary whims.

Is this satire?

 

[susano]

Some of y'all should just admit that you're not libertarians, just run-of-the-mill Republicans. Libertarians are -not- a subset of the GOP, even though many held their noses and worked through the GOP as part of Dr. Paul's campaigns. We experienced how the GOP "welcomed" us by beating up elderly members, stealing vote ballots, shutting down state conventions when we were winning, driving around buses full of delegates for hours so they couldn't participate in the RNC, etc. Being so obsessed with bashing progressives, instead of trying to find common ground and offering positions that may appeal to them, just means you watch too much Fox News, read too much Breitbart and should just admit to being generic Republicans instead of libertarians.




Your point? No one said anything about who the nazi symbols were directed toward or used for, just that they were present and unnecessary.

I'm not a Libertarian nor a Republican. There is no box that suits me. I'm just an individual with my own ideas and my own standards.

I most certainly can ally with someone on one or more issues we have in common when I might disagree with them on others.

You're pretty full of yourself making assumptions about what news I might watch, read or listen to and you're also wrong.

Gretchen Whitmer, the governor of the state that I live in, is a fucking tyrant. She should not be worked with, she should be removed, in jail or worse.

 

[susano]

The entirety of world history indicates that what you say is wrong.

Mob justice is not justice. It is jungle rule. Your worldview would reduce to human life to the level of wild animals. The people who survive and rise to the top would do so not through merit and voluntary trade, but only though brute force or with the help of a gang.

What the hell do you think cops do?

 

[Anti Federalist]

Using physical threats to intimidate is fine for monkeys, not for humans.

That is the very definition of government: an organized system by which to impose the threat of or actual violence for the purpose of intimidation and compliance.

What do suppose dispatching a carrier battle group to the Persian Gulf or South China Sea is supposed to be?

At the end of the day, that's all government is, the means by which to inflict pain to force compliance.

When it runs amok and starts forcing compliance with idiotic edicts and fatwas and jailing housewives and salon owners and people walking in parks, instead of limiting its efforts to murderers or invading armies, the only way to back it down, the only thing it understands is pain compliance.

We will continue to be oppressed in this and much more, until the day comes we decide to hurt them more than they can hurt us.

 

[acptulsa]

uhhh..... Justin does have credibility since he has been a Congressman for X years, McAfee does not have credibility.

Last time around the LP needed McAfee's name recognition, Austin's marketing skills, and Gary's credibility. If they were able to merge those 3 it would have been a great candidate.

What? You're not on a first name basis with John McAffee? How did that happen? You're on a first name basis with everyone else in the District of Columbia and half the state and territorial capitals.

Well, shoot me a PM some time and I'll introduce you. We'll have you calling him Johnny Boy in no time.

Just out of curiosity, do you call Jeb Bush Jeb or Jeb! when you address him by his first name?

 

[Sammy]

I'm not a Libertarian nor a Republican. There is no box that suits me. I'm just an individual with my own ideas and my own standards.

I most certainly can ally with someone on one or more issues we have in common when I might disagree with them on others.

You're pretty full of yourself making assumptions about what news I might watch, read or listen to and you're also wrong.

Gretchen Whitmer, the governor of the state that I live in, is a $#@!ing tyrant. She should not be worked with, she should be removed, in jail or worse.

I believe you are a Paleocon just like me. Most Ron Paul supporters were Paleocons before the Leftarians took over.

 

[devil21]

John McAfee should get the nomination over Amash. One is a real Libertarian and the other...well I'm not going to resort to name calling. If only we could convince Dr. Ron Paul to run again, can't really use the "he's too old" argument this time around.

Yes, because the Libertarian brand will surely be moved forward, not backward, by nominating an accused murderer on the lam from justice who lives on a yacht so as to avoid arrest. Excellent idea, for sure.

 

[acptulsa]

I believe you are a Paleocon just like me. Most Ron Paul supporters were Paleocons before the Leftarians took over.

Ron Paul built a pretty decent coalition. That's why he scared the crap out of the Powers that Be.

Since that time, his coalition allowed ourselves to be divided against each other through trolls using dehumanizing, collective labels like "leftarian". That's how we became toothless. We pulled our own teeth.

You may subscribe to Groucho Marx's theory that no club that would have you as a member is good enough for you. But wiser fools like having allies.

 

[Sammy]

Ron Paul built a pretty decent coalition. That's why he scared the crap out of the Powers that Be.

Since that time, his coalition allowed ourselves to be divided against each other through trolls using dehumanizing, collective labels like "leftarian". That's how we became toothless. We pulled our own teeth.

You may subscribe to Groucho Marx's theory that no club that would have you as a member is good enough for you. But wiser fools like having allies.

Ron Paul was able to unite Libertarians,Paleocons & Anarcho Capitalists. We agree on fundamental things like ending the wars,balancing the budget & ending the income Tax. The only one who would unite us is Thomas Massie or Rand Paul!
I use the label Leftarian because some Libertarians are working with the evil left to open our borders.
Some Libertarians admitted that they don't care if we have a welfare state, We should still have open borders.
Many people left the Liberty movement because of this issue. I want more people to believe in Freedom not less.

 

[acptulsa]

I use the label Leftarian because some Libertarians are working with the evil left to open our borders.
Some Libertarians admitted that they don't care if we have a welfare state, We should still have open borders.
Many people left the Liberty movement because of this issue. I want more people to believe in Freedom not less.

A lot of liberals got on board with Ron Paul because they believe in civil liberties, peace, and draining the swamp. They aren't on board with Trump because they wisely didn't believe he cared about peace (maybe it was the "take their oil" comment?) and they never heard him speak in favor of civil liberties. Now, most of them are for open borders and I am not. But I can't help but wonder if they aren't more effective allies than people who call closed borders "freedom".