Should gun owners compromise?
- Thread starter Redworm
- Start date
Compromise?
When, in this century compromise has meant "what's mine is mine, and what's your's is negotiable". I don't think it is such a good principle for gun rights, since it has always been our side that has to give up things.
Sadly, while there are single issue voters, there appear to be no single issue politicians. So, everytime we go to vote, we are forced to make a compromise, usually on which candidate is likely to hurt us least.
A politician who agrees with your views on the gun issue may not agree with your views on other issues, and one who agrees on other issues may be anti-gun. So we have to compromise all the time. Sadly we often are "betrayed" by people we voted for because of their stand on gun issues, only to find their performance in office to be just the opposite of what we we hoping for when we voted.
The popular belief (by both D and R pundits) is that a vote for a Libertarian is a wasted, or thrown away vote. So they tell us, over and over. But if you want a politician who'se views are most in line with yours, you may well have to choose a Libertarian, or compromise with a R or a D who actually has a chance of getting elected.
So, in this world of poor and worse choices, whom do you choose? Someone more in line with your political views, or someone who may be effective in office, with which you hold some points of agreement?
Ron Paul looks like a pretty good choice, if he can get the nomination, but there are a lot of people who have a vested interest in business as usual, and his views threaten their kingdoms. So he may not, but I wish him well.
The main difference between mainstream politicians of the usual variety seems not to be if they are going to **** us, but how much, and how soon.
When, in this century compromise has meant "what's mine is mine, and what's your's is negotiable". I don't think it is such a good principle for gun rights, since it has always been our side that has to give up things.
Sadly, while there are single issue voters, there appear to be no single issue politicians. So, everytime we go to vote, we are forced to make a compromise, usually on which candidate is likely to hurt us least.
A politician who agrees with your views on the gun issue may not agree with your views on other issues, and one who agrees on other issues may be anti-gun. So we have to compromise all the time. Sadly we often are "betrayed" by people we voted for because of their stand on gun issues, only to find their performance in office to be just the opposite of what we we hoping for when we voted.
The popular belief (by both D and R pundits) is that a vote for a Libertarian is a wasted, or thrown away vote. So they tell us, over and over. But if you want a politician who'se views are most in line with yours, you may well have to choose a Libertarian, or compromise with a R or a D who actually has a chance of getting elected.
So, in this world of poor and worse choices, whom do you choose? Someone more in line with your political views, or someone who may be effective in office, with which you hold some points of agreement?
Ron Paul looks like a pretty good choice, if he can get the nomination, but there are a lot of people who have a vested interest in business as usual, and his views threaten their kingdoms. So he may not, but I wish him well.
The main difference between mainstream politicians of the usual variety seems not to be if they are going to **** us, but how much, and how soon.
WSM MAGNUM
New member
I like that one.
Well said 44 AMP. I urge everyone here not to vote for a Republican candidate simply because they are afraid that if they don't Hillary Clinton (Or some other Democrat) will be elected if they don't. The one thing that shouldn't be compromised on is freedom. And in this case the only person who will support freedom for all of us (not just gun owners) is Ron Paul.
That being said, generally I am a one party voter. Libertarian. However, I believe that I would vote for Ron Paul over any candidate the LP might nominate.
That being said, generally I am a one party voter. Libertarian. However, I believe that I would vote for Ron Paul over any candidate the LP might nominate.