Question? I was speaking with a person the other day who was sharing about being a patriot, the importance a free speech and the right to own guns. I asked him his thoughts about a recent proposal for the government to review your social media involvement and post as part of the application process to buy a handgun.He thought this was a "GREAT" idea, saw it as a way to screen out the, "bad" people. I was speechless. Does anyone have any ideas how you respond to these type of logic?
Thanks!!!!!
Some people do believe in Big Brother government, and there are as many different definitions of being a patriot as there are different ways to believe in God. How much freedom versus how much security is a never ending argument and disagreement. The more people live in fear, the more they are willing to sacrifice freedoms for security.
It is a very bad idea whenever the government gets involved in ideas. Of course, they are already involved in ideas in many aspects of our lives -- think education as a primary example. But, just because the government is already violating our rights does not mean it's a good idea to expand violations. Who will decide what constitutes a social media post that would prevent someone from being able to purchase a gun? Will it be a left-wing politician that thinks anyone who wants to buy a gun is crazy? Our social media posts are part of our property, within the limits of our contract with the social media company (terms & conditions). Before the government should get access to that information, they should need a warrant -- read the fourth amendment of the constitution.
I'm a very live and let live kind of person, but there needs to be limits on everything for the good of society as a whole.
The good of society is dependent on the good of the individuals in that society.
And who is the one who decides what is good for society? The Soviet Union of old was a dictatorship in the name of what is good for society. Our constitution was built to protect the minority by not letting the majority enact unconstitutional laws. We must cherish and protect this approach to government. IMHO, the second amendment is necessary for the protection of the first. Once we give it up, we open the floodgates to a police state.
It's a horrific intrusion and nothing about it relates to Liberty.
Posted by SpikeTalonI kneel before no one. No gods, no masters, no control freaks. Screw the tyrants from both political extremes, and their agendas.
Posted by SpikeTalonNeither one of the extremes, and yet the best of both worlds...
Posted by SpikeTalonSubstitute the word liberals for progressives, and that would describe me as well. As for the conservative part, the socially/theocratic (aka, bible thumpers, mostly) ones in particular.
Posted by SpikeTalonIndividuality is a dirty word to the authoritarians (both left and right) in the world.
Posted by HLMenckenFanStatist bingo
Posted by HLMenckenFanA quote from famous American libertarian journalist H. L. Mencken on government.
Posted by HLMenckenFanDo any of you own this flag? I do.
Posted by BigMac10Just found this site and am delighted!! I gave up on the Republicans after Nixon and have never looked back.
Posted by jeshueyIt's all a matter of perspective!
Posted by SpikeTalonOne of my favorite Libertarians.
Posted by CommunityTomSaw this craziness as I was scrolling through my Facebook News Feed.
Posted by MagnetarRocksI don't know about you, but I've been doing Libertarian victory laps over the last few weeks.
Posted by LEPeffTonight might be a nice time to listen to 2112. I'll miss you Neil!
Posted by RoboGrahamSwanson is wise.
Posted by OldMetalHeadThis is heartwarming
Posted by LEPeffPeople will claim this is a hoax!