"I don't understand this anti-government attitude. It sounds like some folks are against government programs that benefit others, but not themselves." Tom Copeland.
Totally agree with this. The greater good is ignored by some in exchange for what will benefit the individual. This country won't function on an "every man for himself" mentality. It will crumble. It must be a "one for all, all for one" mentality to be truly successful.
~No doubt there are people who only look out for themselves, who are selfish and such as that...very true, they exist. However, I just wanted to say that I don't think it's true that Americans, most Americans in general, function on an "every man for himself" mentality or that they ignore the greater good. Americans, again in general, are a very giving, thoughtful people. In fact, America is the most charitable nation in the world*- we give more, help others more than any other country or people in the world. Just think, after every disaster you can think of, foreign or domestic, how long did it take everyday Americans to pull out their checkbooks, donate their time, etc.? It's hard for me to see these same people, doing a total 180, when it comes to politics, voting, etc.
*Study- It was found that wealth had nothing to do with how much people gave; so, in other words, how wealthy America is had nothing to do with them being #1.
I am curios about what you mean by this. Do you think any of the candidates are going to over turn or abolish the second amendment?
Are you opposed to stricter gun laws regarding background checks, closing loopholes at gun shows, requiring gun safety classes?
I grew up in a hunting house, but would love any candidate who made getting a gun like driving a car. ie licenses that need renewed, safety/competency test, and guns registered. etc. I also don't see a need for weapons that fire multiple rounds without reloading. I don't think their deadliness makes sense on a civilian level. Rifles for hunting great. Smaller guns that can be concealed for safety are fine.
Hope this isn't too OT
Yes I am opposed to many things toted as "better gun control".
NONE of the new measures being suggested are going to prevent criminals from obtaining guns. Criminals don't fill out background checks or abide by gun safety rules as it is so how are more of those rules going to help?
It is my right as a US citizen to own any style and type of gun I choose and it is no ones right to know what type, how many or for what reason I choose to own them UNLESS I use them illegally.
Tracking (beyond what is already monitored) is the beginning of a tyrannical government.
Our forefathers felt so strongly about this right that it is the second ammendment.... Second only after our right to free speech.
I own many guns.
Everything from a RedRider BB gun to multiple round semi-automatic guns.
However, as an educated, law abiding citizen that is my right and no one else's business. Including the government.
So yes, any candidate that is looking to change or remove my right to legally bear arms is not a candidate I will support and sadly so far NONE of the "new stricter gun rules" being suggested are going to fix or help the real issue we are facings when it comes to death/tragedies.
~No doubt there are people who only look out for themselves, who are selfish and such as that...very true, they exist. However, I just wanted to say that I don't think it's true that Americans, most Americans in general, function on an "every man for himself" mentality or that they ignore the greater good. Americans, again in general, are a very giving, thoughtful people. In fact, America is the most charitable nation in the world*- we give more, help others more than any other country or people in the world. Just think, after every disaster you can think of, foreign or domestic, how long did it take everyday Americans to pull out their checkbooks, donate their time, etc.? It's hard for me to see these same people, doing a total 180, when it comes to politics, voting, etc.
*Study- It was found that wealth had nothing to do with how much people gave; so, in other words, how wealthy America is had nothing to do with them being #1.
P.S. I hate it when the extreme anti government people say "Well sure we want people who truly need help to get it but we don't believe in food stamps/welfare." Huh? I wonder what this means. You can't really have it both ways unless you set up some private programs and they don't have to be fair to everyone by law like government programs do. It seems it would be better if those people and all of us would just work to close loopholes, catch cheaters and make the program work instead of wanting to scrap it....and for what? What is an alternative?
Just to clarify on my last post...I am not anti government and when I say I don't support some government programs, I simply mean I don't support them in their current state. It makes no sense to keep throwing money down the tubes just for the sake of having a program. I think the idealism that we can fix the current programs is an issue. We need to scrap them and start over, imo.
And I don't agree that private organizations do not have to be fair. Just as businesses cannot discriminate, it is illegal for private organizations to as well. I think private organizations do much MORE for people than the government. My town flooded in 2011. The people who helped and made the most impact were from church groups, private orgs, and individuals. FEMA came months later and caused a whole heck of a mess and the people who needed the most help were left struggling. The people who benefited the most were very low income who didn't own their homes and who were already being provided assistance in other ways. People whose homes were worth less than $5000 (mostly trailer homes) were given the same as those with homes who were worth $200k. The ones who were hurt the most and are still trying to come out of it, were the middle class people who owned their homes and saw their value go to nothing. Everything they had, 25 years of paying their mortgage, gone. Most had to foreclose and they lost big time. This is the issue I have with many programs. If we want to be able to help those in need, we have to find a way to do it so it is not at the expense of others. If someone needs help buying food, I am there to offer what ever I can. If they need food and come in my house and take it out of my fridge by force, then I am not so willing to help. My point being, people are tired of paying to help others and not seeing their money used wisely and they (government) keep coming back for more and more. It makes people resentful and less willing to help of their own accord. That is just human nature. It is hard to sacrifice for the greater good when you feel like you are the only one making any sacrifice.
I hope that makes sense what I am trying to say. I tend to ramble!:: Long story short, I am not anti government, but our current system needs an overhaul
I've avoided this thread because politics this year is making my blood boil.
I'd like Bernie to be the Dem nominee. But I'm a realist and it will be Hillary.
I'd vote Hillary over Trump.
Say what you will about Hillary, but she has so much more experience than Trump. Like it or not, you can't bull doze your way forward, and Hillary knows it. Like someone else said, she may be crooked but she's not incompentant...
But I maintain that by the time politicians get to a certain level, they've sold their souls. High level politics is dirty, ugly business.
I am going to have to put up a poll soon with options like
Who would Never Vote for Trump?
Who would Never Vote for Sanders?
Who would Never Vote for Clinton?
I think it would be interesting since the election may come down to not who you would vote for, but who you would never vote for. There are high negatives on those running.
I am going to have to put up a poll soon with options like
Who would Never Vote for Trump?
Who would Never Vote for Sanders?
Who would Never Vote for Clinton?
I think it would be interesting since the election may come down to not who you would vote for, but who you would never vote for. There are high negatives on those running.
Well my problem right now at this point is both who are looking to be nominated are on my "I would never vote for list". Now what?
See this is why I am at a crossroads. I feel like I should vote. I think if we don't exercise the right, we could in fact loose it. And as far as a write in, well that would be okay if there was a push for someone who could win, but that isn't likely to come about. I am really feeling in a quandary about this.
There are other parties, people. If enough of us vote third party maybe they will start to get the idea.
But if we don't all vote for the same third party, the vote is wasted. And honestly I haven't heard of any third parties being put on the ballot in my area.
Comment