Aurora Tragedy Could Have Been Prevented / A New Libertarians View on Gun Control

If you listen to the news you’ll almost never hear a positive story about someone with a gun. What we are continuously shown gives us the impression that everytime something happens with guns, its negative. This leads people to think we need to get rid of them, or make them harder to get. If more emphasis were put on the positive stories of how people successfully defended themselves however this would begin to give our country a whole different attitude about guns. When we do hear the stories, they’re just kind of watered down …with “oh good for them” lines and ….”this is not something that anyone should try at home” .

Like when the man who caught his neighbor molesting his 6 year daughter. His daughter was saved, she wasn’t kidnapped or murdered and the molester will never molest another child ever, because the man killed the molester. That to me is a victory. Not that the man was killed …that was unfortunate buts its what happens when people are encouraged to “stand their ground”. The only person that wouldn’t protect their daughter in a situation like this is a coward, or someone who felt inadequate, or who was defenseless or not equipped., which believe it or not IS most people

Take the shooting in Aurora, Colorado on July 20, 2012, where 24 year old James Eagan Holmes entered the Century movie theater at the midnight screening of the Dark Knight Rising. This man came in wearing tactical clothing comes in setting off tear gas grenades and shooting into the audience with multiple fire arms ultimately killing 12 people and injuring 58 which they say is the biggest mass murder in U.S. History. Not one person there was equipped at all to take down this lone gunman, not one person. Yet there were hundreds there but not even one security guard was there equipped to help. A job for the police? Well they did show up but by the time the police got there the damage was done and the man who shot them still lives. Everybody there was left defenseless.

I would imagine that most people there never even dreamed of carrying a gun, because guns are made out to look like they are only for bad people, lawbreakers, people with evil hearts who want to kill other people. But what if just one guy in that dark theater had a gun and was lying on the ground, who the gunman never saw, and was trained in how to use it, just one person … a number of lives would be saved and we’d be celebrating a hero who had a gun, instead of a criminal. We’d be proud of him and our sons and daughters would be aspiring to be like him. However instead of a hero’s name going down in history, its the name of another villain , who has made people feel weak and afraid because that villian was empowered and they are not. Our thinking is wrong, we’re thinking about how to weaken the villain by taking away guns instead of empowering ourselves.

What people don’t realize is you can’t stop villains. I don’t care how stringent you make gun laws or how hard you make guns to get, villains don’t care about the law. Thats why they are called villains. The villain will always have guns. I don’t care how many laws are made or how many guns are banned . The only people who are going to obey those laws and give up their guns are law abiding citizens and a law abiding citizen isn’t a person who does senseless killings. Banning guns are not going to stop criminals from doing senseless killings. As a matter of fact, if guns are banned, the villain is the only one who will still have a guns, as they will just be in the black market. When the villain comes from to black market to shoot, bang bang we’re dead, because we’re all law abiding citizens and call 911 when trouble comes and we only call them because we are not encouraged trained or equipped to handle trouble ourselves. Why is that?

There is something really wrong with that picture. We’re a country gearing up to ban law abiding citizens from carrying guns knowing that the only ones who will have them is the criminal and police who always show up after everybody is already dead like they they did in Aurora. Why aren’t we a nation thats been reared to protect ourselves and taught so much to depend on others to defend us?

I never thought about this prior to the Aurora shooting. Up until that day I was a firm believer in “gun bans”. Never again.

Just the thoughts of a new libertarian.

Advertisements

Mayor Rahm Emanuel Penalizes People of Faith: A Libertarian Stand For Gay Marriage!

Mayor of Chicago

Before we get into this article let me say first I am huge supporter of “the freedom to marry” and thank God everyday that the U.S. Constitution says we have the right to worship God according to the dictates of our own faith. That means, IF A FAITH (any faith) encourages same-sex marriage then the constitution says that faith has the freedom to do it. However if a faith encourages its people to speak out against gay marriage, our constitution ALSO says that that faith has the freedom to do that as well. Its a constitution that supports liberty for all and that is what the Libertarian Party is all about. Mayor Rahm Emanuel (pictured above) wants to take that liberty away.

In case you haven’t heard this story,Lauren Silich, who owns a Chick-fil-A had plans of opening one of its franchises in Chicago. After an anti-gay marriage statement made by its company’s head Dan Cathy in the Chicago Tribune, Alderman Joe Moreno, supported by Mayor Emmanuel began to work to put a block on the Chick-Fil A effort. In response to Mr Cathy’s statement, Mayor Emanuel said “Chick-fil-A values are not Chicago values,” He said “They disrespect our fellow neighbors and residents.”

When I heard this all I could think was …WHAT?? Now we have GOT TO HAVE the same values as …now we have GOT TO HAVE the same beliefs?? Where is the freedom of religion and the freedom of speech that everybody is always always reminding us about? Its one thing to say gays should be allowed to marry, I agree 100% . But to PENALIZE people who don’t agree and hold “different” beliefs and values by blocking their efforts to do business in the city, is flat out unconstitutional. How does taking a way a freedom that another group has always had .. promote liberty . Also is the whole company going to be penalized just because of statements of its owner. Liberty, in our country is not to be just for some …it is suppose to be for all.

The LGBT community has done so well and fought so long for the freedom to marry and are seeking to have that same freedom all over the country that so many are having all over the world. The moment that that freedom begins to intrude on freedoms of others who believe differently though, is the day “freedom for all” in country begins to stop. Mayor Emanuel , Alderman Moreno, If your goal is to work with the gay community in promoting the freedom to marry, just know … you won’t be able to ever do it… by taking the freedoms of others away. Please don;t send us 20 years back to start all over again by legally penalizing the Chic-Fil A franchise. We have come to far on this issue. One of the main beliefs of Libertarianism (which I’ve supported throughout this blog) : No one should authorize another person to violate someone else’s rights.

One nation, Under God. With Liberty, And Justice – FOR ALL

Just a opinion of another libertarian

They Haven’t Hurt ANYONE, So Why Are They in Prison? : One Libertarians Take On Ending the Drug War

Gary Johnson Libertarian nominee for President of United Sates said ““I’m going to be the only candidate that doesn’t want to bomb Iran. I’m going to be the only candidate that wants to get out Afghanistan now—and the wars. I’m going to be the only candidate that wants to end the drug war. I’m going to be the only candidate that wants to bring about marriage equality, believing that it’s a constitutionally guaranteed right.” Thats all stuff that I want to hear particularly the part about ending the war on drugs. To me if things are going to change , especially here in Detroit, that has got to happen. It seems though that the only political party that understands this and sees it as a priority are Libertarians and its one of the mains reasons I recently decided to become one. Its a party thats about standing up for ‘”individual” rights, the rights for individuals to be free to to able to live their lives HOWEVER THEY WANT as long as what they want as individuals DOES’NT HURT ANYONE ELSE. Its not just about promoting what society wants as a whole, its about what the different individuals want, as sometimes what society wants and what a individual wants, is different.

Take drinking alcohol and smoking weed or some other drug, for example. They are all things that a lot of people like, but for me as an individual, its never been anything that as an individual, I wanted to see in my life. My father was an alcoholic, died of cirrhosis of the liver. I’ve seen people become totally different people when they’re high (from alcohol or whatever). They fight and argue, hurt people, say things they shouldn’t. Seeing all this growing up made me realize if people want this life they can have it but as an individual “..this is not the life for me”. So now as an adult I don’t allow any of it in my home ever not even when I entertain. I don’t hang with people or go places where its done in excess. It doesn’t excite me and Its just not my life. That doesn’t mean however that I think other people shouldn’t have it in their lives. Whatever people do in their homes, in their circles of friends is alright with me AS LONG AS it doesn’t interfere with my life . Thats what libertarianism is all about.

Unfortunately most people don’t think that way. Their thinking is ” I don’t want it in my life, its bad,(and here’s where they cross the line)”and nobody else should be able to have it in there’s”. How arrogant is that? Whats worst is ..then they’ll go out, form groups and get people to pass laws to make sure it doesn’t happen, ultimately taking away somebody else’s individual freedoms. Somebody who is not doing anything to hurt THEM at all. They might be hurting themselves, but they are NOT hurting us or forming groups to take away OUR freedoms. Yet people are working to take the freedoms THEY enjoy, away .Then when laws are passed against what they do, it classify’s what they do as “criminal activity” and ultimately for that activity (which hurts no one else) gets them locked away. Yet they never did anything in that crime that hurt another. The laws calls them “non-violent” offenders and they already make up 60% of the United States prison population which cost our country billions and the goal is pass laws to get more of these NON-VIOLENT offenders put away. Wow!! Unbelievable! They are not killers, they are not brawlers, they are not rapist, they are not robbing stores or banks. They have done none of those things but they are locked away with people who have done those things. 25% are in simply because they purchased a drug for themselves that they wanted with their own money …and somebody who didn’t like it passed a law and made that illegal and now theres a war thats costing our country billions to get as many of these NON-VIOLENT PEOPLE LOCKED UP. Whats more, the states that have the most of them locked up are all crying “BROKE” . Thats because they are spending billions of dollars for things like this that we don;t even need.

A lot of people ask today what would Jesus do? What would he say to people like these folks with these drugs who know they are blatantly breaking the law. Would he want the law enforced. Well, the woman caught in adultery, didn’t just sin she committed a crime and blatantly broke the law of the land (John 1-11). The law said she was to be stoned, just like the law says these folks should be locked up,. Well Jesus, rather than make her pay the price simply said to her, just don’t do it. I think we should do the same. Instead of just working to see that people pay these sever penalty’s who crimes that are actually harming no one, I think we’d come out more on top just telling them not to do it and why. No, it’s not going to necessarily stop them from doing it. If what they’re doing is not hurting you, why do you really care how often they do it anyway. If its because you love them then do like Jesus did and just tell them. Why be bent on making them pay a price, especially if they have hurt no one.

Don’t I see how buying and selling these drugs are bad for people? I definitely see it. But I also think drinking any kind alcohol is bad for folks but I’m not going to get out and start a war against alcohol and so that everybody that likes to drink gets locked up and INCREASE the prison population. If we did that, that would mean we’d be gunning for almost every guy we meet to get locked up because 9 out of 10 guys that we meet has a beer every now and then. I don’t think drinking is a good thing, but I don’t think there should be laws against adults who do it either, especially if they drink responsibly. Why would I feel any different about people who buy or sell drugs. Its only a disgraced community because we made laws against people who do it. If we’d stop passing laws against it we’d look at people who smoked weed the same way we look at people who drink wine because taking away the laws would take away the disgrace. Thats exactly what happened in the 1920’s in Prohibition when alcohol was legalized. It took it out of the black market, made it legal and legalizing it took away the shame. Now most don’t look at people who drink beer or wine as evil because now what was once illegal is now legal. When alcohol was legalized all the killings associated with it decreased as well. The same thing will happen if we can get this war on drugs to stop the way we did Prohibition

Half the prison population could come out and start helping raising their family’s. People could start now operating legitimate “drug” businesses and employ people legitimately with out shame. It’d save our country billions of dollars and once its made legitimate it’d be taxed like everything thats sold and purchased too. According to studies of the Cato Institute the State and local savings: would be $25.7 billion. Federal savings: $15.6 billion. Savings from legalizing marijuana: $8.7 billion.Savings from legalizing other drugs of addiction: $32.6 billion. As far as tax revenue the projected revenue from taxing marijuana would be $8.7 billion.Projected revenue from taxing other drugs of addiction: $38 billion. Yet making laws and locking up non-violent people is somehow more attractive than having this additional income. I wonder why all of this is?

Prior to coming into the knowledge of the Libertarian party this year I never realized how much money our government waste’s on so many things we really don’t need. Everybody cries “deficit” and “broke”. One of the reason we’re there is because of this unnecessary war we have going on right here in our own country against our own people on drugs and minorities are the the main people who are getting hurt in this war. It needs to end and the only political group that seems to have it at the top of their agenda are Libertarians

Just an opinion of a new Libertarian

Would Dr. King Protest the “No Smoking Laws” Here in 2012 ?

This is just my third blog and today is “Martin Luther King Day” and I thought since Bayard was such good friends with such a great civil libertarian that it would only be appropriate to do a light refection on Dr. Kings protest of govrernment laws.

Most people who will be doing these blogs today will be talking about the great works Dr. King did back in the day. Personally I think, if a person really wants to honor him a better way to do it would be by “speaking up” for something he would have spoke up for today.

A lot of people believe that if he was still young and here today, he would be standing with the gay community in their fight for marriage equality. Now me I’m Libertarian and I definitely support marriage for all, but I’m not 100% Dr. King would have, because he basically stood up against unjust laws that affected him and those in his community. His good friend and co-community worker Bayard might have, because it was publicly known that he was gay and lived with his partner. What I do think Dr. King would be speaking up and out against however are these crazy “non-smoking” laws we have in Michigan because he definitely was a smoker.

.I’m not a smoker, I have never been a smoker nor have I ever had a desire to, but my mother, father, sisters and brother. friends, even had a pastor who smoked. I never had a problem with it. What did bother me however was to see something that had been legal for years all of a sudden just banned from all public places here in Michigan.

It started way back when they started saying “smoking was hazardous to your heath”, then they started having “smoking sections” in restaurants. It reminded me so much of the “the whites” and “colored only ” water fountains.

I will never forget riding downtown one day and the first time I saw nearly 100 executives standing outside in the winter in front of an office complex smoking and I thought how unfair. These people work for this company and have brought the city and this company millions of dollars, and now where smokers could once smoke inside, now they have to do it outside in the cold. What’s worst was, just to get inside of the building you had to walk through a crowd of people who normally wouldn’t be there but are now only there because they smoked but have been forced outside. How tacky.

Some of that I got, because these were private owned company’s and I believe every company should have the right to determine what they want and don’t want to have in the company’s they started. Then they made the law to ban smoking from ALL PUBLIC PLACES forcing all business owners who don’t agree, to participate. I’ve only been to a bar 2 or 3 times in my entire life and I when I learned smoking was banned in bars I thought … that’s taking it too far. It was one of the few places that were left that people could smoke in. Now thousands of Bars in Michigan are struggling to stay open because the law is forcing folks to stop smoking or just stay at home.

Most people would say …”well what can you do …its the law?”. Well …all that segregation that went on back then in Dr. Kings day was the law too, but they fought it. The difference is Dr. King fought for the rights that minorities never had. Smoking is a right that a minority of people had … that’s being taken away. Right now, there’s just no smoking in public places and trust me the ultimate goal is force people to stop smoking all together.

We know smoking is hazardous for your health and we that believe also know according to scripture that our body is the temple of the Holy Spirit  (I Cor 6:19). The question is, shouldn’t the right be reserve for the Holy Spirit within to lead and guide us individually  as to what should or should not be put in our individual bodies OR are legislators who make laws more qualified to do it, than He. I think not. It says “let everyman  be fully persuaded by his own mind” (Rom 14:5) , not by the government .And as far as “second hand smoke” , my grandmother is 96 years old, been around smokers all of her life and never complained and is as healthy as you can expect any 96 year old to be as well of tons of the elderly. May be the second hand smoke just hasn’t taken its toll on them yet.

The “no smoking laws” to me are the most ridiculous laws that are on the books. What’s next … banning restaurants that sell fried chicken. Laws that take away personal freedoms and choices that don’t harm others, should be stopped in the same way that segregation laws were stopped back then.

Dr. King was a smoker and while I’m sure smoking wasn’t any where near the top of his list of laws that should be protested, I believe because he enjoyed the freedom he had to do it, he would have stood up against the Michigan “no smoking” law today. He may not have marched for it or even went as public as back then but I believe he would have at least protested in some way by saying something,  if not for himself, at least in behalf of the businesses who’ve been forced into it who don’t believe they should have to support it . Actually I’m kind of surprised that more of the thousands of businesses’ who these laws have hurt are not speaking more. Maybe its because they’re too busy trying to run their businesses or looking for ways to supplement their incomes. At any rate to have this right taken away from them is unjust.

Those laws take away personal freedoms. Dr King protested senseless laws and if we want to honor his memory on his day one of the ways people could do it is by speaking out against senseless laws like this that hurt so many today.

Comparison Between Democrats, Republicans & Libertarians : From an Urban Libertarian View

Just a few weeks ago someone said to me “you talk like a libertarian”, a party I had only heard of but really knew nothing at all about. When I went online to see what I could learn, I found their general thinking about things seemed to be pretty much like my own, more so than the party I had voted with up to that time.

When I went to my first libertarian blog a couple of weeks ago however to join in on a conversation, I was told by the other libertarians there that, my thoughts were way off. I was kind of taken back, because I was just speaking what I had heard so many other Libertarians online say. (What really surprised me was that from my research it appeared that Ron Paul was pretty much the man that Libertarians supported but according to the Libertarian blog I went to, apparently I was very wrong).

When I went back to re-check some of the other things I had read about Libertarians, I learned a little bit more about them. I learned that even though they have a base philosophy , there are a ton of different conflicting  philosophy’s among them. In other words,  they all claim “libertarian” they just attack  their issues from a different approach.

Here’s one site  that I found, that I thought summed up some of the many differences among those who are Libertarian.

http://civilliberty.about.com/od/uscivillibertie1/p/libertarians.htm

After reading them all, in my own true independent libertarian “individualist” fashion (which libertarianism and freedom is all about) I’ve decided to put in this blog  a summary statement of how I see all 3 parties and how they respond to different situations. This won’t be the way I see them respond to all situations but the way I believe they’ve responded to most.

The statements will summarize the way I’ve seen all 3 parties respond to ….

1) government programs and initiatives
2) taxes
3) minimum wage
4) guns
5) abortion
6) marriage
7) environment
8) foreign affair

Keep in mind I am libertarian, but I will try to be as unbiased as I possible can in my summaries.

Okay here we go…..

Democrats are generally seen: committed to seeing that government funding is spent continually to develop strong “government controlled initiatives” that would work most to assist those who are disadvantaged in our country and those around us. This would involve a number of special interest groups. [Special interest might include, poor, seniors, labor unions, immigrants, the gay community and many others}

Republicans generally are seen: committed to drawing back from A LOT OF government controlled program that will increase government spending and they in turn support initiatives that would benefit “independent entities” (as tax cuts) so THEY can assist the disadvantaged in our country and others around the world. [Among Independent entities might be large corporations, small businesses, churches ect]

Libertarians are generally seen: working to remove the public from AS MANY government initiatives as they can, in a effort to reduce government spending and they in turn are more supportive of initiatives that would benefit more”independent entities” so THOSE entities can assist the disadvantaged in our country around the world.

Please note: These summary statements I’ve written (which in my opinion are very unbiased as I could make them) are not based on things that the 3 parties themselves have said. They are merely generalizations on how I have come to see the 3 parties operate over the years. The first two I am very familiar with. The information regarding the Libertarian party (which I’ve just recently learned of) is simply based on the research I’ve done. If they truly operate according to what is written, I will learn as I enter this new journey with them.