Posted by: fricknmaniac
Posting time: 4.5 years ago on
Last edit time: never edited.
Archived on: 2/12/2017 1:51:00 AM
Views: 252
SCP: 7
14 upvotes, 7 downvotes (67% upvoted it)
~2 user(s) here now
NSFW: No
Authorized: No
Anon: No
Private: No
Type: Default
Sort: Top
[–] pcdude 0 points 5 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago
Gary Johnson has picked a gun grabber VP and has said he is open to more gun control. I jumped his ship for Trump not too long ago.
[–] MyNameIsMud 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Bill Weld isn't coming for your guns. No one is. It's inconceivable to me how people think that is just going to happen. I'll admit Johnson's stance on guns can be confusing at times (more regulation, etc) but I honestly doubt they are going after any law abiding citizens firearms. Not only would it be political suicide but after the Oregon standoff that happened recently it would also be lots of bloodshed.
[–] Broc_Lia 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
Good for you, but just to point out: Sanders' policies are much closer to Clinton than Johnson.
[–] fricknmaniac [S] ago
You're absolutely right as far as social issues, but Hillary is totally in the pockets of corporations and so every single economic policy she pushes will just benefit corporations and not people. Combine that with her support of mass government surveillance and I'm done with Hillary before you get to anything criminal she's done.
[–] Broc_Lia 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
It's pretty much guaranteed that any regulation will be coopted, it's only a matter of time. I agree it would be sooner rather than latter with Hillary though.
Well, that's not entirely unlike sanders either: http://edition.cnn.com/2016/03/27/politics/bernie-sanders-isis-surveillance/index.html
Although, admittedly, he also said stuff about weakening surveillance, which is a bit confusing.