President Gary Johnson: Nationwide constitutional carry?

I recently got fed up with all the political hooplah surrounding the upcoming presidential election and decided I really don't like either of the main candidates at all! I decided to look into who else may even stand a chance and came across Gary Johnson. His views on the second amendment and firearms are pretty awesome and I certainly see a lot of other great thing with his politics.

Anyone have any thoughts on his politics surrounding firearms? I just really liked his view and wanted to start a potential dialogue on his view surrounding carry/firearms?! Thoughts?

Welcome to the club of people who refuse to waste their vote looking only 4 years down the road, only to have to do so every four years for all of eternity.

If Gary Johnson gets the votes from all the people who actually think he is the best man for the job, he will still lose, but the Republicans, and the entire country, will realize that a third party that represents Conservatives is viable and could actually win NEXT TIME.

Whats more is his so called "stealing of votes" has actually tracked evenly with both reps and dems so its kinda hard for someone to really blame a loss on him. I really hope all the noise and lawsuits he's making get him into at least one debate. Its like everyone is brainwashed using that lame wasted vote excuse.....people keep saying that and it makes me actually feel sick. How the heck is anything gonna change with attitudes like that. I really think he is gonna put a dent in the polls. And of course i love his statement that outlawing guns means that only outlaws will have guns! If that isn't the most common sense thing i've heard thru all this campaigning, i don't know what is!

ryan7068 said:

I recently got fed up with all the political hooplah surrounding the upcoming presidential election and decided I really don't like either of the main candidates at all! I decided to look into who else may even stand a chance and came across Gary Johnson. His views on the second amendment and firearms are pretty awesome and I certainly see a lot of other great thing with his politics.

Anyone have any thoughts on his politics surrounding firearms? I just really liked his view and wanted to start a potential dialogue on his view surrounding carry/firearms?! Thoughts?

Click to expand...

His rhetoric on gun rights seems to indicate he is a supporter.

Where he falls flat is on something even more important--economic matters. Bob Wenzel, a liberatarian radio host and founder of the blog Economic Policy Journal (just add dot com) interviewed him a few months ago. Johnson couldn't remember the principles in a seminal libertarian book. His economics are pretty fuzzy.

I said "something even more important" because we've already got guns and gun rights. We need to shut the door on government and the banking sector controlling the economy. Auditing the Federal Reserve and allowing competing currencies would be an excellent start.

Citizen said:

I said "something even more important" because we've already got guns and gun rights. We need to shut the door on government and the banking sector controlling the economy. Auditing the Federal Reserve and allowing competing currencies would be an excellent start.

Click to expand...

Some may believe differently, but along with his line of thought.....i don't believe in regulation of firearms....it may seem a little radical but so be it. On a more realistic note, I would like to see open carry as well as concealed carry allowed for citizens in every state in the near future.

Economically I know he advocates the FairTax but in one of his interviews he said that would obviously take a little time but would initially audit the federal reserve but eventually wants to get rid of it.

Keep in mind that part of the Libertarian policy is to hire EXPERTS in their fields for government positions, not political appointees, and only as many as necessary. So he need not himself be an expert in all matters, as long as he has a sound overall policy, and is a capable administrator.

The President was never meant to run the friggin' country.

Politics aside,,,,he seems pretty plane jane which would certainly be a fresh change.

"While visions of sugar-plums danced in their heads..."

TFred

You can vote for him, Ron Paul, Mickey Mouse, et al.

A vote for anyone other than Romney at this point is a wasted vote. Just my opinion. No need to flame.

ProShooter said:

...A vote for anyone other than Romney at this point is a wasted vote. Just my opinion. No need to flame.

Click to expand...

If you want to do it every four years, forever, yes. I completely agree with you.

This is not a flame. They are both valid viewpoints.

But I feel the Republicans deserve to lose. We've not had a Conservative President since Ronald Reagan. We've been voting for "the lesser of two evils" for 24 years. It's time to pull the bandage off the wound. It's gonna hurt.

MAC702 said:

If you want to do it every four years, forever, yes. I completely agree with you.

This is not a flame. They are both valid viewpoints.

But I feel the Republicans deserve to lose. We've not had a Conservative President since Ronald Reagan. We've been voting for "the lesser of two evils" for 24 years. It's time to pull the bandage off the wound. It's gonna hurt.

Click to expand...

Check this out
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgnyZdClTpM

MAC702 said:

We've been voting for "the lesser of two evils" for 24 years. It's time to pull the bandage off the wound. It's gonna hurt.

Click to expand...

No. We've been voting for the lesser of two evils since George Washington. Presidential candidates are human beings. Last I checked, none of us were perfect, and we all have an inherently sinful nature. Show me a perfect candidate, and I'll have to break it to you that you've crossed that river to the golden shore...

TFred

Nobody is looking for or expecting perfection. All things are relative. Focus on the actual point, please. At least this time your post actually attempted to contribute to the discussion.

If I want to play word games, I'll point out that you are implying George Washington was perfect.

Aside: Anybody know who was the last President we had that wasn't a lawyer?

MAC702 said:

Nobody is looking for or expecting perfection. All things are relative. Focus on the actual point, please. At least this time your post actually attempted to contribute to the discussion.

If I want to play word games, I'll point out that you are implying George Washington was perfect.

Aside: Anybody know who was the last President we had that wasn't a lawyer?

Click to expand...

Bush II? Reagan? Eisenhower?

Quote from George Washington :

20 I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the state, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party, generally.

21 This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.

22 The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.

Citizen said:

Bush II? Reagan? Eisenhower?

Click to expand...

You know, I'd actually forgotten that Bush the Younger has an MBA...

ProShooter said:

SNIP A vote for anyone other than Romney...is a wasted vote. Just my opinion. No need to flame.

Click to expand...

MAC702 said:

SNIP If you want to do it every four years, forever, yes. I completely agree with you.

This is not a flame. They are both valid viewpoints.

Click to expand...

Oh, one those is definitely not a valid viewpoint.

It has been thoroughly refuted on this forum. It can be better characterized as a very nasty and deliberate attempt to manipulate others by implying they will regret it if Obamney wins. An attempt to influence others into actually approving a candidate who will help cut their economic throat and trample more of their liberties.

This is nasty beyong belief. An attempted violation of the strongest impulse in nature--self-preservation. An instinct at the root of the right against self-incrimination. Recognized even in ancient Hebrew law by its refusal to allow confessions to be used as evidence. Oh, no, our wasted-vote advocates would have us re-arrange the noose around our own necks by actively approving and legitimizing one of the men who helped braid the rope.

ryan7068 said:

I recently got fed up with all the political hooplah surrounding the upcoming presidential election and decided I really don't like either of the main candidates at all! I decided to look into who else may even stand a chance and came across Gary Johnson. His views on the second amendment and firearms are pretty awesome and I certainly see a lot of other great thing with his politics.

Anyone have any thoughts on his politics surrounding firearms? I just really liked his view and wanted to start a potential dialogue on his view surrounding carry/firearms?! Thoughts?

Click to expand...

I agree with Johnson's politics on many issues, but I can't bring myself to vote for him, because I don't see any evidence that he can deliver real changes on any of those issues.

Why? Because the President is not a dictator. He cannot, by fiat, change the law or impose his will. Most power to change government resides with Congress, not the Presidency, and I see no evidence that a President Johnson would have any support in Congress to make the changes I would want. While I don't agree as much with Romney's policies, I do see evidence that he would be able to make more of the changes that I want, and so he gets my vote.

After all, what are the key changes that we would want on issues? With firearms, it would take an act of Congress to repeal federal firearm laws, including the NFA, GCA, and their successors. On size of government, the President can't simply abolish any departments, because they were created by Congress. On the deficit, while the President can propose a budget, it's up to Congress to actually write and pass the bill. The list goes on and on.

Of course, that also works the other way. A president Romney or President Obama can't simply impose new restrictions without Congress either. We won't get a new AWB from either Obama or Romney, because it wouldn't be able to get through Congress.

I personally believe that a vote for someone who, even if they won, cannot deliver on their promises because they lack support in Congress is a wasted vote. I may not get everything I want from the candidate I vote for, but I will get more from them than I would from someone who has virtually no chance to win, and no support to get anything done if he did win (by some miracle).

He does seem to state solely that these are his positions and he promises only to advocate for the change. The biggest change i believe would come from his veto power just like in new mexico. He, just like most elected officials have but a limited amount of power. But his election is soon and it certainly wouldn't hurt to elect a president whos ideas i agree with no matter how disabled you believe the president of the united states to be.

Romney can get change to come about because he is so willing to sell-out individual liberties like the 2A as he did so well in MA.

If Johnson got in and the only thing he accomplished was vetoing every piece of garbage legislation puked out then I would be thrilled.

I'd rather someone stomp on the breaks of this locomotive heading over the cliff than help it along.