Libertarian Party of Bernalillo County, New Mexico: self-defense

Showing posts with label self-defense. Show all posts

Friday, August 19, 2016

Resolution: Right to Self-Defense and to Firearms

WHEREAS, Libertarians affirm that self-defense is an inherent and unalienable human right; and

WHEREAS, the Platforms of the National Libertarian Party (LNC) and the Libertarian Party of New Mexico oppose all laws at any level of government restricting, registering, or monitoring the ownership, manufacture, or transfer of firearms or ammunition; and

WHEREAS, the Platforms of the LNC and the Libertarian Party of New Mexico affirm the right of due process, and deny the legitimacy of “victimless crimes”; and

WHEREAS, the government has steadily encroached upon these rights by illegitimately regulating and restricting access for firearms and ammunition, and may further seek to deprive people, who have been convicted of no crime, of their inherent right to full self-defense by denying their civil and inherent rights to obtain firearms and ammunition; therefore

BE IT RESOLVED that the Libertarian Party of New Mexico opposes any policy which would deny access to any firearms or ammunition to any person solely for being placed on any government watch or no-fly list, and reaffirms its call to repeal and oppose any existing or proposed firearm and ammunition regulations.

Copyright © 2016 Libertarian Party of New Mexico, Libertarian Party of Bernalillo County, New Mexico and Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with medit and Notepad++.

Monday, June 20, 2016

"No One Wants to Take Away Your Guns" [2]

Well, it's Hoplophobia Season again, as your friendly (in appearance only) politicians scramble to stand atop the fifty-some bodies of those killed at Pulse Orlando. As usual, their media friends will say "no one wants to take your guns," even as they say explicitly that they do want to disarm you. Here are some examples:

The first is an old one, from August of last year, from science fiction, fantasy and comic book writer Peter David, which is a shame, as David can be a good writer when he wants to be. Still, at least he's honest and up-front about his desire to disarm America's population, which is more than I can say for most hoplophobes and victim disarmers.

[Click on the picture to go the article]

Amitai Etzioni, a current proponent of what's called "communitarianism," wrote the next piece in The Huffington Post yesterday, and suggests that they probably will need to be sneaky about disarming the American population:

[Click on the picture to go the article]

FOR FURTHER REFERENCE

NOTES

Approximate reading level – 15.9

Sunday, January 17, 2016

"Nobody wants to take your guns" v.1

Whenever I, or others, object to "registration" or bans on transfers, or other forms of "gun control" and firearms restrictions as steps toward an eventual complete prohibition and the confiscation that such would necessarily entail, we get told we're paranoid and "nobody wants to take your guns."

Well, perhaps we should consider these "nobodies":

"A gun-control movement worthy of the name would insist that President Clinton move beyond his proposals for controls . . . and immediately call on Congress to pass far-reaching industry regulation like the Firearms Safety and Consumer Protection Act . . . [which] would give the Treasury Department health and safety authority over the gun industry, and any rational regulator with that authority would ban handguns."
Josh Sugarmann (executive director of the Violence Policy Center)

"My view of guns is simple. I hate guns and I cannot imagine why anyone would want to own one. If I had my way, guns for sport would be registered, and all other guns would be banned."
Deborah Prothrow-Stith (Dean of Harvard School of Public Health)

"I don't care if you want to hunt, I don't care if you think it's your right. I say 'Sorry.' it's 1999. We have had enough as a nation. You are not allowed to own a gun, and if you do own a gun I think you should go to prison."
Rosie O'Donnell (At about the time she said this, Rosie engaged the services of a bodyguard who applied for a gun permit.)

“Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option. Permitting could be an option — keep your gun but permit it.”
Andrew Cuomo

"I do not believe in people owning guns. Guns should be owned only by [the] police and military. I am going to do everything I can to disarm this state."
Michael Dukakis

"If someone is so fearful that they are going to start using their weapons to protect their rights, it makes me very nervous that these people have weapons at all."
U.S. Rep. Henry Waxman

"In fact, the assault weapons ban will have no significant effect either on the crime rate or on personal security. Nonetheless, it is a good idea . . . Passing a law like the assault weapons ban is a symbolic – purely symbolic – move in that direction. Its only real justification is not to reduce crime but to desensitize the public to the regulation of weapons in preparation for their ultimate confiscation."
Charles Krauthammer, columnist, 4/5/96 Washington Post

"Ban the damn things. Ban them all. You want protection? Get a dog."
Molly Ivins, columnist, 7/19/94

"[To get a] permit to own a firearm, that person should undergo an exhaustive criminal background check. In addition, an applicant should give up his right to privacy and submit his medical records for review to see if the person has ever had a problem with alcohol, drugs or mental illness . . . The Constitution doesn't count!"
John Silber, former chancellor of Boston University and candidate for Governor of Massachusetts. Speech before the Quequechan Club of Fall River, MA. August 16, 1990

"I think you have to do it a step at a time and I think that is what the NRA is most concerned about. Is that it will happen one very small step at a time so that by the time, um, people have woken up, quote, to what's happened, it's gone farther than what they feel the consensus of American citizens would be. But it does have to go one step at a time and the banning of semiassault military weapons that are military weapons, not household weapons, is the first step."
Mayor Barbara Fass, Stockton, CA

"Handguns should be outlawed. Our organization will probably take this stand in time but we are not anxious to rouse the opposition before we get the other legislation passed."
Elliot Corbett, Secretary, National Council For A Responsible Firearms Policy (interview appeared in the Washington Evening Star on September 19, 1969)

"Banning guns addresses a fundamental right of all Americans to feel safe."
Senator Diane Feinstein, 1993

"If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them... 'Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here."
U.S. Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) CBS-TV's "60 Minutes," 2/5/95

"Banning guns is an idea whose time has come."
U.S. Senator Joseph Biden, 11/18/93, Associated Press interview

"Yes, I'm for an outright ban (on handguns)."
Pete Shields, Chairman emeritus, Handgun Control, Inc., during a 60 Minutes interview.

"We must be able to arrest people before they commit crimes. By registering guns and knowing who has them we can do that. If they have guns they are pretty likely to commit a crime."
Vermont State Senator Mary Ann Carlson

"I am one who believes that as a first step, the United States should move expeditiously to disarm the civilian population, other than police and security officers, of all handguns, pistols, and revolvers . . . No one should have the right to anonymous ownership or use of a gun."
Professor Dean Morris, Director of Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, stated to the U.S. Congress

"I feel very strongly about it [the Brady Bill]. I think – I also associate myself with the other remarks of the Attorney General. I think it's the beginning. It's not the end of the process by any means."
William J. Clinton, 8/11/93

"The Brady Bill is the minimum step Congress should take . . . we need much stricter gun control, and eventually should bar the ownership of handguns, except in a few cases."
U.S. Representative William Clay, quoted in the St. Louis Post Dispatch on May 6, 1991.

"I don't believe gun owners have rights."
Sarah Brady, Hearst Newspapers Special Report "Handguns in America", October 1997

"We must get rid of all the guns."
Sarah Brady, speaking on behalf of HCI with Sheriff Jay Printz & others on "The Phil Donahue Show" September 1994

"The House passage of our bill is a victory for this country! Common sense wins out. I'm just so thrilled and excited. The sale of guns must stop. Halfway measures are not enough."
Sarah Brady 7/1/88

"I don't care about crime, I just want to get the guns."
Senator Howard Metzenbaum, 1994

"We're here to tell the NRA their nightmare is true . . . "
U.S. Representative Charles Schumer, quoted on NBC, 11/30/93

"My bill . . . establishes a 6-month grace period for the turning in of all handguns."
U.S. Representative Major Owens, Congressional Record, 11/10/93

"We're going to have to take one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily, given political realities, going to be very modest. Our ultimate goal, total control of handguns in the United States, is going to take time. The first problem is to slow down the increasing number of handguns in this country. The second problem is to get handguns registered, and the final problem is to make the possession of all handguns, and all handgun ammunition illegal."
Nelson T. Shields of Hangun Control, Inc. as quoted in `New Yorker' magazine July 26, 1976. Page 53f

"Our goal is to not allow anybody to buy a handgun. In the meantime, we think there ought to be strict licensing and regulation. Ultimately, that may mean it would require court approval to buy a handgun."
President of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence Michael K. Beard, Washington Times
12/6/93 p.A1

"Waiting periods are only a step. Registration is only a step. The prohibition of private firearms is the goal."
U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno, December 1993

"The sale, manufacture, and possession of handguns ought to be banned . . . We do not believe the 2nd Amendment guarantees an individual the right to keep them."
The Washington Post – "Legal Guns Kill Too" – November 5, 1999

"There is no reason for anyone in the country, for anyone except a police officer or a military person, to buy, to own, to have, to use, a handgun. The only way to control handgun use in this country is to prohibit the guns. And the only way to do that is to Change the Constitution."
USA Today – Michael Gartner – Former president of NBC News – "Glut of Guns: What Can We Do About Them?" – January 16, 1992

"I would personally just say to those who are listening, maybe you want to turn in your guns," Representative Sheila Jackson Lee, 2012

" 4. Any person who, prior to the effective date of this law, was legally in possession of an assault weapon or large capacity magazine shall have ninety days from such effective date to do any of the following without being subject to prosecution:
           (1) Remove the assault weapon or large capacity magazine from the state of Missouri;
           (2) Render the assault weapon permanently inoperable; or
           (3) Surrender the assault weapon or large capacity magazine to the appropriate law enforcement agency for destruction, subject to specific agency regulations."
Legislation introduced in Missouri. 2013

And you can repeat the exact same thing for Minnesota

"Since assault weapons are not a major contributor to US gun homicide and the existing stock of guns is large, an assault weapon ban is unlikely to have an impact on gun violence. If coupled with a gun buyback and no exemptions then it could be effective." NIJ Memo on a new "Assault Weapon" Ban. 2013

"The sheriff of the county may, no more than once per year, conduct an inspection to ensure compliance with this subsection" (Warrantless searches by law enforcement?) Washington State Senate Bill 5737 (2013)

“the state of Iowa should take semi-automatic weapons away from Iowans who have legally purchased them prior to any ban that is enacted if they don’t give their weapons up in a buy-back program. Even if you have them, I think we need to start taking them,” Iowa state Rep. Dan Muhlbauer (D-Manilla) 2013

California Senate Bill 374 (Steinberg 2013) would expand the definition of “Assault Weapons” to include ALL semi-auto rifles (including rimfire calibers) that accept a detachable magazine. SB374 would ban on the sale and possession of ALL Semi-Auto rifles and require registration to retain legal possession in the future.

California Senate Bill 47 (Yee 2013) would expand the definition of “Assault Weapons” to include rifles that have been designed / sold and or equipped to use the “bullet button” or similar device. SB47 would ban on the sale and possession of ALL those Semi-Auto rifles and require registration to retain legal possession in the future.

California Assembly Bill 174 (Bonta 2013) would ban the possession of any firearms that were “grandfathered “ for possession if registered in previous “Assault Weapons” gun control schemes. Californians that trusted the State of California and registered their firearms will be required to surrender the firearms to the Government or face arrest. Passage of AB174 would make SB374/SB47 (above) into confiscation mandates.

California Senate Bill 396 (Hancock 2013) would ban the possession of any magazine with a capacity to accept more than 10 cartridges. ALL currently grandfathered “high-cap” magazines would become ILLEGAL to possess and the owners subject to arrest and the magazines confiscated. ("High-cap" means a capacity that has been standard, that the firearms were designed for, since the 40's--AK pattern rifles--or 60's--AR pattern rifles.)

“We want everything on the table. This is a moment of opportunity. There’s no question about it . . . We’re on a roll now, and I think we’ve got to take the–you know, we’re gonna push as hard as we can and as far as we can.”
Illinois Rep Jan Schakowsky says assault rifle ban just the beginning, ‘moment of opportunity’ and seeks to ban handguns (2013).

"People who own guns are essentially a sickness in our souls who must be cleansed." Colorado Senator (Majority Leader) John Morse. 2013 (Cleansed? "Final Solution" anyone?)
(Emphasis added in the above).

"We needed a bill that was going to confiscate, confiscate, confiscate.” Discussion among Senator Loretta Weinberg (D37), Senator Sandra Cunningham (D31), Senator Linda Greenstein (D14) of New Jersey's State Legislature, May 9, 2013

“No one in this country should have guns.” Superior Court Judge, Robert C. Brunetti, Bristol, CT. September, 2013

Proposed Missouri Bill to ban "assault weapons":

4. Any person who, prior to the effective date of this law, was legally in possession of an assault weapon or large capacity magazine shall have ninety days from such effective date to do any of the following without being subject to prosecution:

(1) Remove the assault weapon or large capacity magazine from the state of Missouri;

(2) Render the assault weapon permanently inoperable; or

(3) Surrender the assault weapon or large capacity magazine to the appropriate law enforcement agency for destruction, subject to specific agency regulations.

New York sends out Confiscation letters.

But nobody wants to take our guns?

NOTES

Approximate reading level – 10.9
Original article

Saturday, August 24, 2013

How did we ever survive . . . ?

How did we ever survive with such death machines available to the general public through the mail, with the only paperwork involved being the sales slip?

Why were there no rivers of blood and gore flowing through the streets on a daily basis?

Up until 1934, subguns could be purchased without any mandatory paperwork from any level of government – no required background checks, no mandatory fingerprinting or photographs, no ∅200 transfer tax, no requirement that you get your police chief or sheriff to sign off on your purchase.

In fact, the STEN gun advertised in the picture was made AFTER the National Firearms Act of 1934 had been passed and signed into "law" – the STEN was first developed in 1941, as World War II was getting started. You see, the Brits had dumped truckloads of military-pattern rifles and subguns into the North Sea after WWI, rather than let their private citizens have them. The fact that quite a few weapons had to be left behind during the Dunkirk evacuation compounded the matter.

In this case, Cadmus Industries' advert uses the phrases "airdropped to Maquis" and "used in ill-fated Rommel HQ raid."

And after the War, plenty of American soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines brought weapons home in their duffel bags – not only war prizes such as specimens of the MG 42, FG 42, MG 34, Luger, MP 40, StG 44, Nambu pistol, etc., but they also brought home American and Allied weapons such as BREN guns, M1 rifles, M1 carbines and Browning Automatic rifles. Quite a few of those returning service members didn't bother to fill out any NFA paperwork, and quite properly so – the federal rules requiring such paperwork are quasi-Constitutional at best in the letter of the Constitution, the Declaration and the Bull of Rights. Where the spirit of the Founding Documents is concerned, the NFA-1934 is flat-out ANTI–Constitutional.

Yet there didn't seem to be many if any "active shooter" type of spree killers, of the kinds we saw at Virginia Tech, Fort Hood, Sandy Hook Elementary, Columbine High School, etc. Never mind that all of those locations had been legislatively designated as "gun free zones" since 1990 (thank you, (REPUBLICAN) George H. W. Bush!) where no one but law-enforcement personnel are permitted to carry weapons.

FOR FURTHER REFERENCE

STEN submachine gun – Wikipedia page / Modern Firearms page
MG 42 machine gun – Wikipedia page / Modern Firearms page
FG 42 rifle – Wikipedia page / Modern Firearms page
MG 34 machine gun – Wikipedia page / Modern Firearms page
MP 40 submachine gun – Wikipedia page / Modern Firearms page
Sturmgewehr 44 – Wikipedia page / Modern Firearms page

NOTES

Copyright © 2013 Libertarian Party of New Mexico, Libertarian Party of Bernalillo County, New Mexico and Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with Notepad++.

Friday, March 1, 2013

Press Release about BCSO "Buy-backs"

LIBERTARIAN PARTY OF BERNALILLO COUNTY RESPONDS TO COUNTY-SPONSORED
GUN "BUYBACK" EVENTS OF FEBRUARY 9th AND 23rd, 2013

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE (3/2/13)
Contact: Mike Blessing, County Chair – 505-249-1248
Alternate: Elizabeth Hanes, LPNM Press Secretary

[ALBUQUERQUE] – The Libertarian Party of Bernalillo County New Mexico (LPBC) strongly condemns the use of taxpayer money to conduct so-called "buybacks" of firearms in Bernalillo County. Such activities constitute a waste of tax dollars and do nothing to serve public safety.

"First, this wasn't a buy-back event at all. The word 'buy-back' assumes that you originally owned the guns and are buying them back, when the truth is that the firearms purchased by BCSO weren't owned by Bernalillo County in the first place," said LPBC Chair Mike Blessing. "Second, this event was advertised and reported upon as some sort of 'public service,' in order to 'get the guns off the streets.' This is code-speak from the victim disarmament crowd for getting firearms away from private citizens, whom as 'we all know,' 'can't be trusted' with any weapon more powerful than a plastic straw loaded with spitballs."

At the event, the Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Office reportedly confiscated 333 firearms, some of them assumed to be stolen property. Criminals turning in stolen weapons were subsequently compensated – no questions asked – using taxpayer dollars, thereby creating great incentive for these lawbreakers to target law-abiding gun owners for burglary.

"The LPBC decries this waste of taxpayer money, not only the $50,000 paid out to individuals surrendering firearms but also the wages of law enforcement officers conducting the event," Blessing added. "The LPBC will continue to work to abolish this sort of nonsensical activity by our county officials."

-30-

ABOUT THE LIBERTARIAN PARTIES OF NEW MEXICO AND BERNALILLO COUNTY

Established in 1972 by Margaret Mathers in Farmington, LPNM is the third-largest political party in the state. LPNM seeks to preserve personal liberty and freedom by opposing new or more restrictive laws, new or more expensive spending programs, and new or higher taxes. Guided by the Non-Aggression Principle, which opposes the initiation of force to achieve political or social goals, Libertarians promote peace, personal freedom, and unfettered capitalism.

The Libertarian Party of Bernalillo County was started in December 1997 as a county-level affiliate of the LPNM.

Official LPNM website: http://lpnm.us

Official LPBC website: http://lpbcnm.blogpsot.com

NOTES

Reposted –
1. The Weekly Sedition – Wordpress / Yahoo!
2. Duke City Fix / Tea Party Nation

Copyright © 2013 Libertarian Party of New Mexico and Libertarian Party of Bernalillo County, New Mexico. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with Notepad++.

Wednesday, February 20, 2013

Responding to the BCSO "Buy-Back"

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Responding to the BCSO "Buy-Back"
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 00:19:37
From: Mike Blessing
To: Tom Zdunek, Debbie O'Malley, Art De La Cruz, Maggie Hart Stebbins, Lonnie C. Talbert, Wayne A. Johnson, Dan Houston

Dear Commissioners, Mr. Zdunek:

Recently I was surfing the web and found the following:

BernCo Compass: Gun Buybacks, Strip Club Rules and Downtown Housing

Here's the pertinent part:

Issue: Gun Buyback

The county conducted its first gun buyback day on Saturday, Feb. 9, in the North Valley. People who anonymously surrendered their firearms were compensated – no questions asked. If the weapons were stolen, they were to be returned to their rightful owners. Deputy County Manager Tom Swisstack said the program brought in 333 weapons, seven of which were assault rifles. The $50,000 put up by the county for purchasing the guns ran out within two hours.

Swisstack added that it’s the most successful buyback day in the state so far. He thanked Sheriff Dan Houston for doing an outstanding job, and Commissioner Debbie O’Malley for moving the program forward.

BernCo View

O’Malley thanked everyone for the compliments but said when she got to the North Valley Command Center on Saturday, she was surrounded by other gun traders in the parking lot. They waited outside harassing folks, she said, telling them they would buy the guns for more than the county was paying. She said she was surprised people could do that kind of gun trading in a parking lot without permits.

Swisstack assured that next time, the sheriff would block off the area around the substation. The next buyback day is Saturday, Feb. 23, at the South Area Command Center (2039 Isleta SW).

First, this wasn't a buy-back event at all – the word "buy-back" assumes that you originally owned them and are buying them back, when the truth is that the firearms purchased by BCSO weren't owned by Bernalillo County in the first place.

Second, this event was advertised and reported upon as some sort of "public service," in order to "get the guns off the streets." This is code-speak from the victim disarmament crowd for getting firearms away from private citizens, whom as "we all know," "can't be trusted" with any weapon more powerful than a plastic straw loaded with spitballs.

Third, the ONLY good thing about these "buy-back" events is that BCSO is apparently to return any firearms found to have been stolen back to their rightful owners.

Fourth, considering Tom Swisstack's anti-Constitutional comments of " . . . next time, the sheriff would block off the area around the substation," perhaps it's time that Bernalillo County picked out a new Deputy County Manager. As well as a new Sheriff if Dan Houston goes along with this.

It seems that I have until 1 May 2014 to gather sufficient signatures to recall Mr. Houston, and 1 May 2016 to do the same for Ms. O'Malley.

_______________________________________________________________________
Mike Blessing / Phone – 505-249-1248
State Chair, Libertarian Party of New Mexico – http://lpnm.us

Who owns you? Who runs your life? Who should – you or someone else?
Freedom is the answer – what's the question?

"If you wanna live long on your own terms
You gotta be willing to crash and burn"
– Motley Crue, "Primal Scream"

Tuesday, January 29, 2013

Musings of a Libertarian Buddhist

Musings of a Libertarian Buddhist
by Ish Calleros

Recently, I was challenged by an Obama supporter friend of mine. A fellow "Buddhist" as to my views on gun control. The fact that I thought guns kept people safe from criminal and tyrannical activity apparently disqualified me from walking as did The Buddha.

This statement already illustrates the problem at hand. Coercion.

Libertarian values at their core center around the idea of non-aggression. Non-coercion. It is this idea that attracted me to the Libertarian political philosophy. Simply put, do not coerce others in any way, shape, or form. Religion, in my opinion is one of biggest forms in which people attempt to coerce people. By trade, I am a martial arts instructor. I tell my students all the time that bullying can occur physically, mentally or spiritually. I teach them to watch for signs of bullying and to never fall victim to it. Spiritual bullying can be very intense in nature. It can lead to murder, mass murder, or genocide.

That being said, what attracted me to Buddhism as a spiritual practice (read: not religion) was the idea of letting go of judgment as a way to improve the self. When you take the ideas of Siddhartha Gautama the man (The Buddha), he was very wise in leaving room for questioning his teachings. "If you find The Buddha, kill The Buddha" being one of my personal favorites, he encouraged revolutionary thought. Even if it were against his own ideas. He very carefully closed the door on any who would make a deity out of him.

Yet many did. Many do. To the point where when you mix Buddhism with modern "Democrat" beliefs, you get coercion. "You can't believe in gun rights and The Buddha's teachings at the same time." I disagree. In fact, if you look at the evidence, it would appear that Buddhism as a philosophy is more geared to Libertarian thought than other forms of spiritual practices while still leaving room for others who have different spiritual inclinations. Example: The Buddha said, "no one saves us but ourselves. No one can and no one may. We ourselves must walk the path." Were he a statesman saying this exact line, it might come at a time just before he gets rid of entitlement programs. In fact, that single line almost excludes Democrats from his teachings, not Libertarians. He goes on to say; "The whole secret of existence is to have no fear. Never fear what will become of you. Depend on no one. Only the moment you reject all help are you freed." I can assure you, right along with my Buddhist principles, I will not be taking any handouts soon. Seems pretty downright Libertarian to me.

I am not the only one who believes the belief systems are seamlessly compatible. Robert A. Meyer calls it "The Way of the Libertarian Warrior." His writings blend his idea of the Zen Buddhist – a peaceful warrior-with hard-hitting Libertarian edge: "When Patrick Henry said 'give me liberty or give me death,' he wasn't joking. He understood an eternal truth. Government subjugation of an individual's body, mind, and spirit amount to a living death."

The man understands the biggest bully known to man: The Government, and he will not take it lightly. Not a man lacking in diligence. And what did The Buddha say about diligence? "To be idle is a short road to death and to be diligent is a way of life; foolish people are idle, wise people are diligent."

Moving on to compassion, another Buddhist principle, I will give you a peek into my martial arts classroom. I tell the children as well as adults, "self-reliance is compassion in action. Loving yourself so much that you will defend yourself is actually the highest form of love. How can you love another human or be compassionate with one if you have none for yourself? Love yourself. You deserve it." Any compassion that you are capable of giving is because you are self-reliant to have something to give. When giving of your own free will, that is true compassion. Plus, the person receiving gets to feel true gratitude. How spiritually devoid is a transaction then when coercion is involved? In fact, the spiritually inclined man in me believes that coerced giving is "evil." You promote resentment from the giver. The person on the receiving end does not feel gratitude but entitlement. And the receiving party actually resents the giver for having more. When done in freedom, there is gratitude and compassion sprung forth into the universe. The government wants us to feel that the evil is not wanting to be forced to give. Again, I will refer back to the Buddha here: "virtue is persecuted more by the wicked than it is loved by the good."

The more I study and feel from within, I know that no other political philosophy can actually make sense to my Buddhist principles other than the Libertarian party. So I am grateful to the person who questioned my positions on gun control and the Buddha. It inspired a deeper introspection that reaffirmed my already solid principles.

Ish Calleros is the owner and operator of Kung Fu San Soo of Albuquerque

Copyright © 2013 Libertarian Party of New Mexico, Libertarian Party of Bernalillo County, New Mexico and Ish Calleros. All rights reserved.

Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises. Webmaster Mike Blessing. This blog entry created with Notepad++.