Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« Brady Campaign not satisifed with California | Main | Nothing in Heller today »

Bob Barr's candidacy

Posted by David Hardy · 18 June 2008 01:02 PM

Here's a good post on it.

· Politics

15 Comments | Leave a comment

Frank | June 18, 2008 1:39 PM | Reply

I just discovered your site two weeks and have enjoyed it very much but your link without comment is a great disappointment.
"Adolescent rebellion in nominal grown-ups is called libertarianism. ... They don't know it yet, but human freedom died a couple of centuries ago when the government started carrying the mail."
. . .Rick Darby, Reflecting Light

Absolute freedom among civilized people is anarchy, yet that's what libertarians espouse.

Ben | June 18, 2008 2:59 PM | Reply

Does the Constitution allow for "absolute freedom?" I find it humorous that the statists among us try to make a respectful, subservient government sound undesirable.

jon | June 18, 2008 3:55 PM | Reply

there's no commenting allowed on that story. unfortunately, the only mention of "war" is item number 11, and it addresses a non-issue.

barr's position on the war on drugs and the war in iraq (or, the occupation, i should say) falls far, far short of what libertarianism is all about. "was for it but now against it" and "redeeming aspects" are nothing but apologetic shying-away.

anarchy, the logical conclusion of the true, populist libertarian system, is indeed what libertarians espouse -- but not what the Libertarian Party espouses, not any more. members of the LP would do good to recall their radical roots; it would give them something to believe in again.

Letalis Maximus, Esq. | June 18, 2008 7:39 PM | Reply

"Libertarians - Republicans who smoke pot."

DJK | June 18, 2008 8:20 PM | Reply

I'm a Libertarian and I don't smoke pot. Although, I believe it should be legal to do so if I so desired. I also don't agree with a lot of the GOPs views. So, Letalis Maximus, your statement is untrue and a stab that falls short of it's target.

Our bodies belong to us, that means we should be able to do to them whatever we want; drugs, abortion, suicide, etc. as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of anyone else.

ATL | June 18, 2008 8:49 PM | Reply

Why is it that Libertarianism is usually opposed with hyperbolic and inane statements?
I am sorry, till Republicans actually put somebody in power that actually doesn't just pay lip service to limited government, then maybe they would have a leg to stand on to criticize Libertarianism.


ATL

Letalis Maximus, Esq. | June 18, 2008 8:55 PM | Reply

DJK:

Chill. The quote actually comes from either James Watt or one of his minions. Either way, its just a joke.

dave | June 18, 2008 10:30 PM | Reply

"Our bodies belong to us, that means we should be able to do to them whatever we want; drugs, abortion, suicide, etc. as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of anyone else."

I think quite a few people have problems with the idea that you should be able to have an abortion performed simply because it's your body, seeing as it could be construed that there is a victim. Right to life, liberty, and all that other declaration of human rights nonsense.

jesse | June 18, 2008 11:29 PM | Reply

The Libertarian party platform recognizes that reasonable people can come to diametrically opposed positions on the abortion issue and explictly does not take a position other than that government funds should not be used to pay for them because that would involve forcing people who are morally opposed to abortion to subsidise them.

I'm registered as an independant and generally agree the most with the Libertarians, but the idiotic views on the Iraq war and national security that the leaders of the party have espoused over the last few years have pushed me away from them and back towards the Republicans.

Jim | June 19, 2008 2:09 AM | Reply

I always find it interesting when people claim that abortion does not impact the rights of anyone else.

Micheal | June 19, 2008 6:35 AM | Reply

Voting Libertarians, Republican answer to the green party.

MichaelG | June 19, 2008 9:45 AM | Reply


I will *not* vote for Bob "Bar the door against pagans and gays" Barr. Top his dish of issues with long standing support for the Lautenberg amendment and I don't understand how he even got in the door at the LP National Convention.


BTW:

I support the Global War on Terror.

I oppose the Drug War.

I don't smoke pot. (It's not compatible with
my employment in the military-industrial complex.
But I do own a VW bus & a school bus RV & tend to wear flowered shirts under my long hair and bushy greying beard. So I find it humorous how many people assume that I do.)

I oppose No Knock Warrants.

I oppose government laws on who can marry who.

I support abortion choice.

I oppose government funded abortions.

I target shoot with a .357 & a .308.

I am actively religious.

I don't believe something is a person with inalienable rights until it has lived outside of the host body. Some ancient Indo-Europeans would not name a child until it had lived out of the womb for 3 days.

I support capital punishment, but not as it's currently handled legally.

I support a bullet to the head as an execution method. I also like the idea of putting into a car crusher drunk drivers that kill when driving drunk.

And I am a former vice-chair of the local libertarian org. Anybody who tries to stereotype L/libertarians doesn't really know them. On the otherhand I have liked the joke about Republicans who smoke pot. Even if it is older than some of the people who use it.

MichaelG

"What part of 'shall not be infringed' don't you understand?"


Ryan | June 19, 2008 11:04 AM | Reply

Michael,

Except for the short list of firearms, I match your list and views 100%. I think the libertarians lost their way when with Barr. What happened to Gravel being the candidate? I think the people believe they are playing to the disenfranchised republicans with Barr. Gravel may have been a democrat 20 years ago, but he sure as hell represented us much better (not great, but much better.)

MichaelG | June 19, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply


Ryan,

I believe that the Libertarian party has been spun by competing interests for years. There are people that insist on seeing the world as they wish it to be from both the far left and moderate right in it. Sometimes it seems that the only thing they have in common is a desire for smaller government - one side so that they can grow pot and the other side so that they can make and own explosives and fully auto guns.

For example, I believe that the constitution requirement about providing for the common defense allows defense of our borders against undesired border crossings. But others believe that I can't be considered a libertarian unless I want free and open borders.

As a result of such conflicting points of views is there any possibility of competing interests coming behind a strong candidate that will appeal to the vast number of American moderate voters?

I liked George Phillies as a person when I met him. But I didn't see him as a potential president. As for Gravel - Not even close. His support for national health care would have doomed him for me. And lets consider this:
"While Senator Gravel fully supports the 2nd Amendment, he believes that fundamental change must take place with regards to gun ownership. The senator advocates a licensing program where a potential gun owner must be licensed as well as properly trained with a firearm before they may own one."

Gravel & Barr probably represent what is wrong with the entire political process: if even the Libertarian Party can not find candidates that actually know the US Constitution what luck can any other party have?

In my mind - none. Until we once again have the real US Constitution taught to the children of this country. In English.

MichaelG

The right to peacefully assemble means that I do not need the city's permission to share my house with my friends.

Ryan | June 20, 2008 11:09 AM | Reply

Micheal,

Your very right again-- I am getting my Alaskan's confused. I was thinking of the former (or maybe current, I honestly don't know)governor of Alaska being brought up earlier in the year, not Gravel. The only thing I remember of what was reading was that the guy sounded a lot like Ron Paul.

Boarder security falls under that one main/only thing the government should be doing if you ask me. If anyone supports the government maintaining a military to defend the country, that is the same thing if you ask me. The only thing I can think of that I like the government doing that is not constitutionally mandated is the interstate road system. That is a greater good project that I am not sure anyone would find very profitable to want to take over.

Thank you for setting me straight on that one before I said that to someone else and looked stupid.

Leave a comment