Quote:
Originally Posted by We TaRdED  I don't think smaller is necessarily better.
So why have states anyways? Why not have us be USA one state?
So you would rather have the fed gov't be in charge of everything? lol, what if they say everyone should accept the Vchip? What if they say we are going to join Canada and Mexico into the North American Union?
What about the national ID card? The fed gov't was telling all the states to implement the national ID card which an RFID(radio frequency identification) chip will be in it.. Since when is a drivers license not good enough?
My point being is that there are some crazy power hungry lunatics that want to control every aspect of our lives that work in the Fed.
In my opinion, the combination of readily available guns and urban areas is nothing but a recipe for disaster
Most of the gangsters have illegal guns. Why shouldn't a citizen be able to protect their self from the "animals" JIC? Anyone with a criminal record would most likely not be able to own a legal gun.
|
There are obviously things that should remain part of the federal domain and those that should be decided by the states. I don't get the impression that Ron Paul thinks just that the states will do a better job. I think he just wants to dismantle publicly funded education. Notice how strongly he advocates home-schooling?
I'm not saying that everything should be controlled by the federal government. What I am saying, however, is that I don't believe all government programs not specifically delineated in the constitution should be abolished. That is in essence the Libertarian platform: the government that governs least governs best - protect our borders, our citizens, and we'll call it good. This means the elimination of all taxpayer-funded public assistance programs. Yes, it means the elimination of drug prohibition too, but that is a truckload of garbage to bring along with that benefit.
The other major problem I have with him is that he does not adhere to the libertarian belief that the government should not interfere with citizens' rights to abortions or sexual preference. He is a bigot by association, and has taken money from at least one white supremacist leader.
It's interesting that you should mention the US joining with another country. History shows that when our states' rights were the strongest was when we had talk of secession. . . i mean, washington, oregon and idaho wanted to secede as an all-white state at one point. WTF, right? I think the size of the country compared to the state tends to buffer those to the left and right of center .. or we would be prolife in the center and even greener on the edges.
As long as guns are legal to purchase at every sporting goods store or walmart, it will be nearly trivial for anyone to get one. While it is non-trivial to plug all the holes in the illegal import of guns, the first step is making it (MUCH) more difficult to get them legally in the first place. Not allowing anyone with a criminal record to own a gun would be a good first step, but even that is surely not a goal of Ron Paul. He apparently wants to go the opposite direction ... however part of the problem - as the tragedies of VT, NIU, and other prove - is that when it is easy for people to get guns legally, bad shit can and will happen. While obviously the long-term solution is teaching people how to properly deal with their anger, there will always be those that reach for a gun .. and if it's there, the innocent have their problems to deal with.