View Full Version : Millennial Voters Offer Greatest Opposition to ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban
PatrioticDisorder
11-21-17, 08:54
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/11/20/millennial-voters-offer-greatest-opposition-to-assault-weapons-ban/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social
As much crap as many give millennials, I have to say this bodes well for the future of the 2nd amendment. I am 35, most people I know in my age group seem to get it, even those who don't own firearms. I've let many shoot my rifles, pretty much all seemed to enjoy shooting them, a few even bought their own AR's. Of course I also know a few who are rabidly anti-2a, they tend to be the same who are far left on all issues and abortion tends to be the sacrament to their leftist religion.
Averageman
11-21-17, 09:09
My Son came to visit Saturday morning and during various conversations he expressed the very things this article discusses.
I am 25.
A millennial by definition, but not a coddled liberal college brainwashed millennial.
Big difference nowadays.
ETA: While I think Video Games may have an impact for some, I don't think that is a main driver. And really limits the scope of the generational thought patterns. Don't get me wrong, maybe it desensitized some, but I think a lot of the generation 18-35 is waking up to what's going on a little more every day.
Maybe, what the hell do I know? Haha.
skywalkrNCSU
11-21-17, 09:22
I think we will see millennials drive the right away from social conservatism and towards libertarianism so this doesn’t surprise me
Our generation gets a bad rap due to a few loud people who are always on TV.
I honestly believe the vast majority of a millennials are conservative(libertarian). It’s likely why Trump got elected, though the news will have you believe we stayed home- almost everyone I know voted. No one I know voted for Hillarity (Hitlery... er- Hillary).
I actually know more people who voted for Johnson.
As part of the millennial generation, I feel most is us are libertarian (even if a lot don’t know it, or don’t know the meaning of “libertarianism”).
I honestly can’t comprehend how libertarian isnt a bigger party in our nation.
Any time I find someone who is in favor of an AWB I normally show them pictures of the various models of Mini14s and ask them which should be banned, they normally point to the tactical model, I ask why, then point out their ignorance while educating them in the differences of the tactical model vs Ranch model. That normally works pretty quick to see how stupid an AWB is.
I've seen a few things about millennials being more pro-gun then a generation or two before them (don't know if I said that correctly). Hopefully they stay that way.
NYH1.
The baby boomer generation was the worst thing that happened to America.
The baby boomer generation was the worst thing that happened to America.
I tell that to my dad all the time. He counters with "I produced you and you're alright." He agrees, though.
PatrioticDisorder
11-21-17, 12:04
The baby boomer generation was the worst thing that happened to America.
I agree, but there are certainly exceptions in any generation.
The baby boomer generation was the worst thing that happened to America.
Hey now! There's more than a few boomers here.
But can't disagree a whole lot...
Dist. Expert 26
11-21-17, 20:45
I've found that outside of deeply indoctrinated college students, most people my age (I'm 25) tend to lean more towards libertarian standpoints than anything else.
Nobody who worked their ass off to attain a successful career wants to give up 30-40% of their income, nobody likes being told what to do and a lot of people just want to be left alone.
I think this bodes well not only for the 2A, but for the nation as a whole.
Libertarian is liberalism disguised as progressive-conservatism. There is a reason a lot of liberals are moving towards the libertarian party.
Dist. Expert 26
11-21-17, 20:57
Libertarian is liberalism disguised as progressive-conservatism. There is a reason a lot of liberals are moving towards the libertarian party.
Right.
"The Libertarian Party is a political party in the United States that promotes civil liberties, non-interventionism, laissez-faire capitalism and the abolition of the welfare state."
Please tell me how that aligns with leftist agenda.
Libertarian is liberalism disguised as progressive-conservatism.
How so?
The way I see libertarianism and many others as well, is the purest form of conservatism without the “Religious Right”.
I want the Government out of my life and yours.
It’s the idea of personal liberties, you want your abortions? Fine. You want your gay marriage? Fine. Do what you want, whether or not I agree with it.
IDGAF, it doesn’t matter what you do as long as I do what I want and you can’t say nothing to me about it, My Land, My Guns, My liberty.
I think bay boomers had a childhood idea of rifles with wooden stocks and no pistol grip. M1 carbine for instance.
To them the M16/AR15 pattern and look are the evil black rifle. They probably took part of this idea from the Vietnam war and its negative view.
To them the mini14 is okay because it has the look. The ar15 is evil looking.
My father sadly is one of these people. Owned a mini 14 but not an AR15. He was clearly smart enough to understand they were both effectively the same. But one looked bad.
This is how the Clinton ban happened.
Today we have a whole new generation or two who think the ar15 'has been around for ever' to them a m1 carbine is pretty much a musket.
To them the Ar15 is normalized as americas rifle. It's just your common run of the mill defense/ sporting gun. Once we get through the baby boomers we'll be better off on awb threats.
Averageman
11-21-17, 22:38
I think that it might more be an ability to look at what was and what now is and question how we ended up with two families growing our government in to the monster it's become.
The internet, though not perfect is the news media they've grown up with. Immediate access to what is happening via cellphone cameras and internet links allows them to "Spy Back" and eliminate much of the MSM hypocrisy.
So if you track thier lives through spying on thier browser and phone "for thier own good" they quickly learn about Big Brother.
Perhaps we've given birth to a generation of folks that are not believing the hype and a big part of that hype is gun control...
Libertarian theorists have the luxury of mixing and matching policies to create an imaginary utopia where everything just worked out perfectly and everyone got along. An imaginary world with political policies that both liberals and conservatives can embrace.
Libertarians are on the same page as republicans on a few key issues including economic freedom, property rights, defense spending and 2nd amendment. And that's how they appeal to conservatives. But they share a lot of views with liberals including, foreign policy, personal freedom, tolerance for others, civil liberties and separation of church and state (I know a lot of libertarians are atheist). And that is how they attract liberals. And the fact that they want to remain neutral and not take a stand on issues like drugs, LGBT policies, immigration and abortion certainly make one draw the conclusion that libertarianism is more closely to liberalism than it is conservatism. What makes Libertarians so attractive to both sides of the political isle is that they embrace liberty, free markets, tolerance, rules of law, limited government, peace, individualism, and spontaneous order. Libertarians believe the fundamental weakness of the system is its fundamental premise.. that everything will work out well (or at least much better than it is now) if we just let all people be rational in their own self-interest without government telling us what to do. That is not true. Many people are irrational. Half the population is (by definition) of below-average intelligence, or below-average sense of responsibility, or below-average knowledge of basic economics and personal money-management. Basically, a lot of people are f---- stupid. That's why we have warning labels on everything. Many people are incapable of making the rational choices that would make the Libertarian utopia work. Unfortunately, the current accepted alternative is for the government to treat us all like children, as if we are all incapable of making rational decisions ourselves. Would you want a libertarian government during the 2008 financial crisis? NO! because they would let us sink and say "we told you so". Would you want a libertarian government during a natural disaster. No! because they would say "its your responsibility". Beyond that the libertarian party is split into 2 groups, left leaning and right leaning and that's why the libertarian party isn't taken seriously. Trying to play the role of "best of both worlds" and a common ground in not going to work in their favor.
Dist. Expert 26
11-21-17, 23:30
I want a libertarian government ALL the time.
The party isn't taken seriously by the media because the media has a vested interest in maintaining the status quo, as do major political donors.
Everything else you said was nothing more than ill informed opinion.
thebarracuda
11-22-17, 00:12
Millennial here as well. Politically involved, conservative/libertarian. Reason: so much of what dems/repubs fight over actually accomplishes very little, or costs more than the value gained. Gay/straight? Do not care. I defend anyone's right to get as gay as they want. Drugs? If you wanna chase the dragon, i will waste no time effort or money trying to save you. World policing? No thanks. 2nd amendment? Simple. Shall not be infringed. Free men should not seek permission from government, while Government does as it pleases.
Simply put, if my choice is to much freedom vs to much gov..... By god give me freedom. Ill assume the risks.
Perfection? Unattainable
and stop trying to "help" every damn problem, some fires need to burn themselves out.
I want a libertarian government ALL the time.
Everything else you said was nothing more than ill informed opinion.
Straight from the horses mouth.
https://www.lp.org/issues/taxes/ -Taxes
Voluntary taxes? If it was voluntary, nobody including me would pay! Why would we? If government receives no tax money, who pays for defense? Who pays interest to treasury bonds? Who pays government payroll? Who pays insurance for mortgage backed securities? Who pays workman's comp? Who maintains public property? You and me? I believe we pay too much in taxes but taxes never the less, are a necessity and vital to our economy.
https://www.lp.org/issues/the-economy/ - economy
same lecture I have heard from the billionaire Koch brothers and Warren Buffet! I own a business and the government doesn't regulate me nor are they in my way. I'm free to hire, fire, pay myself as much as I want, buy whatever I want, sell whatever I want and pretty much do whatever I want. The government doesn't force me to do anything but pay you minimum wage! Think about that! I don't pay unemployment, the government does! I don't guarantee you a retirement savings, the government does however!
https://www.lp.org/issues/crime-and-justice/ - crime and justice
Crime fits punishment i agree with, but legalize everything that isn't "force or fraud" and deal with those things outside of the courts? How? Do we elect judges or counsels? Isn't that what we already have? The War on Drugs is racist? Want to be soft on criminals! Legalize all drugs? Sounds like liberals, "just let us do what we want".
https://www.lp.org/issues/foreign-policy/ - foreign policy
They believe all Americans would stand up and fight for this country if a war was justified! Delusional! No military presence outside of US! No military intervention! Draft is slavery? Military justification only for defense? You can have a strong and powerful nation or you can have whatever the libertarians want. Sounds like a speech Obama once gave!
https://www.lp.org/issues/healthcare/ - healthcare
I agree with a lot of there points but the problem isn't the FDA or government. Its the health industry all together! Pharmaceutical companies, health care insurance companies, doctors, hospitals they all work together.
This is nothing but fantasy!! The modern day Whig Party trying to appeal to the masses! This is a party that doesn't want to be held accountable or be responsible for anything- just let things happen. There is a reason the Libertarian party has attracted so many 20-35 year olds in the last decade. Because it looks good on paper! Because on paper you get to have your cake and eat it too. You get to keep your guns and take care of your own problems and pay the government nothing and live a full meaningful life as freely as you want!
BoringGuy45
11-22-17, 03:43
Unregulated private sector can be just as bad, in some cases worse, than a socialist government. The truth is, the ONLY reason that things like workers rights exist, including the abolishment of slavery, is that laws were passed, and various oversights were established to force businesses to treat their employees fairly.
The government and the citizens need to have a relationship of mutual distrust. The people, as a whole, can't be trusted to do what's right without the threat of force should they do wrong. The government can't be trusted to respect the people's rights without answering to the people.
PatrioticDisorder
11-22-17, 07:38
Libertarian is liberalism disguised as progressive-conservatism. There is a reason a lot of liberals are moving towards the libertarian party.
https://youtu.be/bYwQxvFAIJY
Ronald Reagan disagrees with you sir.
FromMyColdDeadHand
11-22-17, 08:21
The problem with Libertarianism isn’t so much the principles, it is the anti-social a-holes it attracts. Liberterianism doesn’t mean anarchy, it means minimal govt. Libertarianism has people associated with it that don’t want to follow any laws, and that isn’t a viable social/political structure. I see a lot of those people out here in the west- they should have a big sign that says “Don’t touch me”. We’ll never have a Libertarian govt, but we can get more and more of it run on it’s principles. Get some states run more in tune with it.
The baby boomers and AR-Vietnam thing is interesting.
https://youtu.be/bYwQxvFAIJY
Ronald Reagan disagrees with you sir.
in 1983, Libertarian was a "fashionable" word. Reagan was a true republican-conservative.
Libertarian theorists have the luxury of mixing and matching policies to create an imaginary utopia where everything just worked out perfectly and everyone got along. An imaginary world with political policies that both liberals and conservatives can embrace.
Libertarians are on the same page as republicans on a few key issues including economic freedom, property rights, defense spending and 2nd amendment. And that's how they appeal to conservatives.
But they share a lot of views with liberals including, foreign policy, personal freedom, tolerance for others, civil liberties and separation of church and state (I know a lot of libertarians are atheist). And that is how they attract liberals.
And the fact that they want to remain neutral and not take a stand on issues like drugs, LGBT policies, immigration and abortion certainly make one draw the conclusion that libertarianism is more closely to liberalism than it is conservatism.
What makes Libertarians so attractive to both sides of the political isle is that they embrace liberty, free markets, tolerance, rules of law, limited government, peace, individualism, and spontaneous order. Libertarians believe the fundamental weakness of the system is its fundamental premise.. that everything will work out well (or at least much better than it is now) if we just let all people be rational in their own self-interest without government telling us what to do.
That is not true. Many people are irrational. Half the population is (by definition) of below-average intelligence, or below-average sense of responsibility, or below-average knowledge of basic economics and personal money-management. Basically, a lot of people are f---- stupid. That's why we have warning labels on everything. Many people are incapable of making the rational choices that would make the Libertarian utopia work.
Unfortunately, the current accepted alternative is for the government to treat us all like children, as if we are all incapable of making rational decisions ourselves. Would you want a libertarian government during the 2008 financial crisis? NO! because they would let us sink and say "we told you so". Would you want a libertarian government during a natural disaster. No! because they would say "its your responsibility".
Beyond that the libertarian party is split into 2 groups, left leaning and right leaning and that's why the libertarian party isn't taken seriously. Trying to play the role of "best of both worlds" and a common ground in not going to work in their favor.
You know that is a great post. I divided it to make it easier for me to read.
The major problem that I find with most people's political views is that rational thought and policies generally lose out to self-interest in decision making. Too many folks want to have limited, or no, societal/tribal responsibility, yet they want to reap the benefits of what that society/tribe offers.
WickedWillis
11-22-17, 12:38
Libertarian is liberalism disguised as progressive-conservatism. There is a reason a lot of liberals are moving towards the libertarian party.
That could be the most narrow-minded description of Libertarians I have ever seen. I personally am a Libertarian, and I just want my gay married friends to be able to protect their weed with AR-15's and not have the Government involved in every facet of their lives.
Libertarianism is about personal freedoms and rights, and not allowing Government to overstep or overreach. To add also, it's about having a Department of defense, not a Department of team America world Police.
Dist. Expert 26
11-22-17, 13:00
Straight from the horses mouth.
https://www.lp.org/issues/taxes/ -Taxes
Voluntary taxes? If it was voluntary, nobody including me would pay! Why would we? If government receives no tax money, who pays for defense? Who pays interest to treasury bonds? Who pays government payroll? Who pays insurance for mortgage backed securities? Who pays workman's comp? Who maintains public property? You and me? I believe we pay too much in taxes but taxes never the less, are a necessity and vital to our economy.
https://www.lp.org/issues/the-economy/ - economy
same lecture I have heard from the billionaire Koch brothers and Warren Buffet! I own a business and the government doesn't regulate me nor are they in my way. I'm free to hire, fire, pay myself as much as I want, buy whatever I want, sell whatever I want and pretty much do whatever I want. The government doesn't force me to do anything but pay you minimum wage! Think about that! I don't pay unemployment, the government does! I don't guarantee you a retirement savings, the government does however!
https://www.lp.org/issues/crime-and-justice/ - crime and justice
Crime fits punishment i agree with, but legalize everything that isn't "force or fraud" and deal with those things outside of the courts? How? Do we elect judges or counsels? Isn't that what we already have? The War on Drugs is racist? Want to be soft on criminals! Legalize all drugs? Sounds like liberals, "just let us do what we want".
https://www.lp.org/issues/foreign-policy/ - foreign policy
They believe all Americans would stand up and fight for this country if a war was justified! Delusional! No military presence outside of US! No military intervention! Draft is slavery? Military justification only for defense? You can have a strong and powerful nation or you can have whatever the libertarians want. Sounds like a speech Obama once gave!
https://www.lp.org/issues/healthcare/ - healthcare
I agree with a lot of there points but the problem isn't the FDA or government. Its the health industry all together! Pharmaceutical companies, health care insurance companies, doctors, hospitals they all work together.
This is nothing but fantasy!! The modern day Whig Party trying to appeal to the masses! This is a party that doesn't want to be held accountable or be responsible for anything- just let things happen. There is a reason the Libertarian party has attracted so many 20-35 year olds in the last decade. Because it looks good on paper! Because on paper you get to have your cake and eat it too. You get to keep your guns and take care of your own problems and pay the government nothing and live a full meaningful life as freely as you want!
It seems that there's a generational divide here.
Tell you what. You keep voting Republican (or Democrat, there's really no difference at this point), and keep watching the government grow out of control.
I'll vote for the only party aiming to reduce the size and scope of government because I want my son to have some semblance of freedom by the time he's an adult.
WickedWillis
11-22-17, 13:13
It seems that there's a generational divide here.
Tell you what. You keep voting Republican (or Democrat, there's really no difference at this point), and keep watching the government grow out of control.
I'll vote for the only party aiming to reduce the size and scope of government because I want my son to have some semblance of freedom by the time he's an adult.
As a wicked braindead Millennial and self identified Libertarian, I agree with this.
RetroRevolver77
11-22-17, 13:44
You know that is a great post. I divided it to make it easier for me to read.
The major problem that I find with most people's political views is that rational thought and policies generally lose out to self-interest in decision making. Too many folks want to have limited, or no, societal/tribal responsibility, yet they want to reap the benefits of what that society/tribe offers.
End all government subsidies across the board unless active or retired military. We are $20 trillion in debt. We have 95 million unemployed. There will be a hard reset at some point and it will be ugly.
End all government subsidies across the board unless active or retired military. We are $20 trillion in debt. We have 95 million unemployed. There will be a hard reset at some point and it will be ugly.
Why do you exempt active or retired military?
BTW the 95 million number seemed way high, like 29% of the population. So I looked:
Out of the 93.8 million Americans age 16 and up who are deemed "not in the labor force," 9.7 million of them are between 16 and 19 years of age. Another 5.7 million are between 20 and 24. And 37.8 million are age 65 and over. (In fact, 17.5 million are over 75 years old.)
What’s left? This leaves 40.5 million Americans who are not in the labor force and are between the ages of 25 and 64. It’s possible to argue that this number should be a bit higher -- college typically ends at age 22, not everyone goes to college, and healthy seniors today can usually work past 65 if they wish. But right off the top, Trump’s claim significantly overstates the matter.
So what’s a better number?
The official number of unemployed Americans is 8.3 million -- less than one-tenth of what Trump says. But to give Trump the benefit of the doubt, it’s possible to expand this number using more credible economic thinking.
Gary Burtless, an economist at the Brookings Institution, says it’s not unreasonable to include:
• The 6.4 million people who haven’t looked for work recently enough to qualify as being "in the labor force," but who say they "currently want a job."
• And the 6.5 million people working part-time who would prefer to have a full-time job.
This would mean that upwards of 21 million Americans could be described with some justification as "out of work" involuntarily, either fully or partially. But that’s not even one-quarter of the number that Trump offered.
This is kind of a key point:
Burtless added that a large chunk of those suffering the plague of being "out of work" can actually be seen as benefiting from their membership in an affluent, technologically advanced society.
"The fact that these adults are jobless is not a marker of economic failure -- it is an indicator of a very prosperous society that can afford to permit the old and disabled to retire, that can invest in young adults so they can improve their skills, and that can keep some adults in the home where they can care for children or attend to other non-paying pursuits," he said.
I'd be counted in that 'electively unemployed' group, I retired at 61. My wife is 56, she plans to retire in two years, at age 58, at that point I'll be 65.
Life has been good, but I'd hate to be 18 in today's world.
Libertarian theorists have the luxury of mixing and matching policies to create an imaginary utopia where everything just worked out perfectly and everyone got along. An imaginary world with political policies that both liberals and conservatives can embrace.
Libertarians are on the same page as republicans on a few key issues including economic freedom, property rights, defense spending and 2nd amendment. And that's how they appeal to conservatives.
But they share a lot of views with liberals including, foreign policy, personal freedom, tolerance for others, civil liberties and separation of church and state (I know a lot of libertarians are atheist). And that is how they attract liberals.
And the fact that they want to remain neutral and not take a stand on issues like drugs, LGBT policies, immigration and abortion certainly make one draw the conclusion that libertarianism is more closely to liberalism than it is conservatism.
What makes Libertarians so attractive to both sides of the political isle is that they embrace liberty, free markets, tolerance, rules of law, limited government, peace, individualism, and spontaneous order. Libertarians believe the fundamental weakness of the system is its fundamental premise.. that everything will work out well (or at least much better than it is now) if we just let all people be rational in their own self-interest without government telling us what to do.
That is not true. Many people are irrational. Half the population is (by definition) of below-average intelligence, or below-average sense of responsibility, or below-average knowledge of basic economics and personal money-management. Basically, a lot of people are f---- stupid. That's why we have warning labels on everything. Many people are incapable of making the rational choices that would make the Libertarian utopia work.
Unfortunately, the current accepted alternative is for the government to treat us all like children, as if we are all incapable of making rational decisions ourselves. Would you want a libertarian government during the 2008 financial crisis? NO! because they would let us sink and say "we told you so". Would you want a libertarian government during a natural disaster. No! because they would say "its your responsibility".
Beyond that the libertarian party is split into 2 groups, left leaning and right leaning and that's why the libertarian party isn't taken seriously. Trying to play the role of "best of both worlds" and a common ground in not going to work in their favor.
You know that is a great post. I divided it to make it easier for me to read.
The major problem that I find with most people's political views is that rational thought and policies generally lose out to self-interest in decision making. Too many folks want to have limited, or no, societal/tribal responsibility, yet they want to reap the benefits of what that society/tribe offers.
elephant, you do have some good posts. However, you really do have to break them up into paragraphs my friend.
NYH1.
The baby boomer generation was the worst thing that happened to America.
Yep!
NYH1.
same lecture I have heard from the billionaire Koch brothers and Warren Buffet! I own a business and the government doesn't regulate me nor are they in my way. I'm free to hire, fire, pay myself as much as I want, buy whatever I want, sell whatever I want and pretty much do whatever I want. The government doesn't force me to do anything but pay you minimum wage! Think about that! I don't pay unemployment, the government does! I don't guarantee you a retirement savings, the government does howeve!
I have zero clue what business you are in, but my business is certainly effected by gov't interference.
You don't pay unemployment? You have no employees I assume. I contribute substantially to my employee's unemployment and FICA. If you are lucky to live in a state like me, you can hire and fire as you see fit, but that is not in every state. Lets not even get started on gov't mandated workers compensation insurance that I have to pay.
I move products by trucks. The amount of b.s. paperwork required by the gov't on my trucks is substantial. Some of the programs on safety are justified, but they also start to turn into gov't revenue streams as well.
I have zero clue what business you are in, but my business is certainly effected by gov't interference.
You don't pay unemployment? You have no employees I assume. I contribute substantially to my employee's unemployment and FICA. If you are lucky to live in a state like me, you can hire and fire as you see fit, but that is not in every state. Lets not even get started on gov't mandated workers compensation insurance that I have to pay.
I move products by trucks. The amount of b.s. paperwork required by the gov't on my trucks is substantial. Some of the programs on safety are justified, but they also start to turn into gov't revenue streams as well.
I'm not trying to start anything here just a question for a business owner: If tomorrow the gov said you don't have to pay anything in on unemployment, or FICA, would you:
1. bank the money
2. give your employees a moderate raise and bank some of the money
3. give your employees a token raise and bank most of the money
3. figure, what the heck, I was making it okay paying this out, and give it all to your employees in raises
Just curious.
I'm not trying to start anything here just a question for a business owner: If tomorrow the gov said you don't have to pay anything in on unemployment, or FICA, would you:
1. bank the money
2. give your employees a moderate raise and bank some of the money
3. give your employees a token raise and bank most of the money
3. figure, what the heck, I was making it okay paying this out, and give it all to your employees in raises
Just curious.
Keep the money in the business and give my employees a better performance-based bonus.
The official definition of what constitutes a "millennial" paints too broad a stroke. Like the OP, I am also 35 and also believe myself to have libertarian views. And this is fundamentally because those are at least a bit over 30 really did grow up differently, vastly I would say, over someone who is currently in their 20s. For starters, I was already in the military when I was 17, pre 9/11. Although I can't boast to have done anything significant in my service, I am definitely a part of the GWOT generation. Going back a bit further, I can honestly say that I had to use hard book encyclopedias, had to use the library for school, used floppy and hard disks, had to memorize phone numbers and addresses, used a typewriter (electronic), among many other things. Someone currently in their 20s has no frame of reference for any of that.
Secondly, and less to do with my age, I am the product of fairly recent immigrants, first generation. I was physically disciplined as a child. Unlike the loudest and proudest Liberals out there, my parents were actually oppressed by a totalitarian government. This shapes my view that I hardly ever have any sympathy for someone that doesn't work, be it with the mind or with the body. I see an able bodied person with a sign asking for money and I don't feel sympathy, I feel disgust. I feel that more often than not, if a younger person has Left leanings, it is because they came from comfort, if not outright privilege. My parents worked menial jobs, my older brother is still blue collar to a T, my sister and I are the only ones that went to college and could be considered "career professionals" in the modern sense. One can only feel sympathy when they didn't have to worry about their (or family's) own struggle.
I can't be in the same category as someone who doesn't remember these things with a clear conscience, namely 9/11.
I'm not trying to start anything here just a question for a business owner: If tomorrow the gov said you don't have to pay anything in on unemployment, or FICA, would you:
1. bank the money
2. give your employees a moderate raise and bank some of the money
3. give your employees a token raise and bank most of the money
3. figure, what the heck, I was making it okay paying this out, and give it all to your employees in raises
Just curious.
I would likely increase my current contribution to their health insurance and put the rest towards purchasing more equipment for my rental business. Obviously, every business is going to look at it differently.
I've kept my salary fairly low throughout the ownership of my company. I tend to roll every dime extra back into proven segments of my business that I have not saturated the market in yet. My employees already receive performance bonuses based on a sales and gross profit calculation, tied in with mandatory punctuality and attendence. They love it when I buy new inventory that sells rapidly, or new equipment that increases rental income because the sales and gross profits grow and that usually ends up in a bonus for them.
I have zero clue what business you are in, but my business is certainly effected by gov't interference.
You don't pay unemployment? You have no employees I assume. I contribute substantially to my employee's unemployment and FICA. If you are lucky to live in a state like me, you can hire and fire as you see fit, but that is not in every state. Lets not even get started on gov't mandated workers compensation insurance that I have to pay.
I move products by trucks. The amount of b.s. paperwork required by the gov't on my trucks is substantial. Some of the programs on safety are justified, but they also start to turn into gov't revenue streams as well.
I have over 100 employees and over 25 trucks. Workers comp is a good insurance program, especially considering you and I don't have to pay out of pocket. You cant look at your employees like liabilities. No matter how much they appear to be. You would want your employer to have insurance to pay you if you had a work related injury that made you miss work. I pay payroll taxes which is unemployment tax, but that not the same as having to pay unemployment- you don't come to me when you lose your job. Yes I pay 43% income tax, I pay payroll tax, franchise tax, property tax, inventory tax, I pay city tax, county tax, mileage tax on vehicles and I have little deductions.
However, the government doesn't ridicule me for marking up my products 600-8000%. They never say I charge too much or I make too much. Paying taxes isn't regulation its just part of life.
I'm not trying to start anything here just a question for a business owner: If tomorrow the gov said you don't have to pay anything in on unemployment, or FICA, would you:
1. bank the money
2. give your employees a moderate raise and bank some of the money
3. give your employees a token raise and bank most of the money
3. figure, what the heck, I was making it okay paying this out, and give it all to your employees in raises
Just curious.
Depends? if your employee gets hurt on the job and has to miss work for a few weeks or a few months, who pays them so they can keep there home and there car and eat?
If I give them a raise and I am going through hard times, do I ask for the raise back or do I just let them go? And then what? Are they eligible for unemployment to keep from being homeless? And if so, who pays for that?
If I just give my employees all the money, what happens when someone equally skilled comes along and is willing to work for less? Maybe a young single person who doesn't have kids in tee ball, tumbling, soccer and a wife who stays at home. Now I have a hard choice, do what best for the company or what's best for 1 employee? That choice is easy to make.
The best thing is in reality, what we already have. Welfare needs a lot of reform, but those who work need the current programs that exist. Its really for everyone's benefit. In countries like France, Italy, Germany, Amsterdam, Norway etc. You cannot fire someone without written permission from the government and you have to provide them something saying that you gave the employee 3 verbal warnings and 3 written warnings and when you fire them, you still have to pay them until they find another job. In China, Singapore, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Mexico, Honduras if you get hurt on the job and have to miss work, too bad! And that is not right!
Now I just want to elaborate here. I'm 35, ill be 36 next month. This thread was about millennials who oppose assault weapons ban, the problem is that the word "millennial" has a derogatory meaning in a lot of modern day usage. The term "Millennial" is generally used and associated when describing someone who has a sense of entitlement, disconnected with reality, emotional thinker, rash, victim mentality, condescending, and overall has a anti-attitude towards tradition and values. And for many years, peoples as young as 20 have been described as being a millennial. Millennial are thrown into different groups depending on the source. Some say those who reached adulthood in the 21st century, some claim to be born between 1978-1994, while others claim years 1980-2000. I was born in 1981 so I am GenX but could also be described as a millennial by definition. But I think that when they use the term "millennial" they are referring to males between the ages of 18-40. Considering the Quinnipiac University Poll that supports these statements claim that those ages 18-34 grew up on first person shooter games such as Halo, COD, GTA etc. and out of those, many were unaffected by recent mass shooting both mentally and emotionally. Also, they say that recent mass shootings had little to no impact on there thoughts towards military style weapons or the ability for civilians to own such rifles.
David Yamane, a sociologist at Wake Forest University in North Carolina, who studies the culture of legal gun ownership in America says: “There does seem to be something in particular about assault weapons, and it could be due to the normality of assault weapons for people who have come of age playing first-person shooter games like Call of Duty,” he said.
For younger Americans, “these are guns that, as long as they’ve been part of the gun culture, have been very common and fairly typical guns, and that’s less true with somebody who was, say, born in 1930,” said Dave Kopel, a gun rights advocate and firearms law expert at the Independence Institute in Colorado.
People who grew up with the gun culture of the 1950s might be more accustomed to brown wooden hunting-rifles, while younger gun owners may be more used to the black polymer rifles that are often categorized as “assault weapons”, Kopel said.
The evaluation of the 1994 national assault weapon ban found no clear evidence that the ban reduced violence and concluded that a renewed ban would likely have, at best, a very small impact on reducing deaths and injuries. Limiting high-capacity ammunition magazines in particular, which were used in a far greater share of gun crimes than “assault weapons” themselves, might have a modest but nontrivial impact on reducing gunshot victimizations, the study found. - Professor Calvert-University of California- Department of Sociology
I think a lot of that is true. No one really thinks of M1 Garand and Thompson machine guns as "assault rifles" these days because they are not mainstream, they are out of production and out of usage. The AR or variant like a SCAR for a lot of younger people has become in some way, a part of life through video games, news coverage, tv shows and movies. In the 1990s, Tec-9's were mentioned in just about every rap song and also used in the Columbine high school shooting. Guns are truly a generational subject that is subject to each generation. And yes, those who play first person shooters would most likely oppose an assault rifle ban just as anyone of you would.
PatrioticDisorder
11-23-17, 09:02
The official definition of what constitutes a "millennial" paints too broad a stroke. Like the OP, I am also 35 and also believe myself to have libertarian views. And this is fundamentally because those are at least a bit over 30 really did grow up differently, vastly I would say, over someone who is currently in their 20s. For starters, I was already in the military when I was 17, pre 9/11. Although I can't boast to have done anything significant in my service, I am definitely a part of the GWOT generation. Going back a bit further, I can honestly say that I had to use hard book encyclopedias, had to use the library for school, used floppy and hard disks, had to memorize phone numbers and addresses, used a typewriter (electronic), among many other things. Someone currently in their 20s has no frame of reference for any of that.
I am 35 as well, we were at the tip of that millennial spear and it definitely makes us a little different than a millennial,in their 20s. I was a "free range" child, most of my childhood friends my age were as well, but siblings just 3-4 years younger were not, it was interesting to see those changes. I was 9 years old and my father would leave me on my own to make breakfast, clean up, get ready for school and then get to school on time. From around age 10/11 I also had access to a Glock 19 when I was home, my father taught me gun safety, taught me how to shoot and wanted to me to have access, in case it was needed. I cannot imagine the same would be true for many of those younger than me, but I'd be willing to bet many of those older than me could relate.
I only learned how to type in high school, but kids today, typing is more important than knowing how to write. Thank God I know how to type fast, with the advent of EMRs you have 2 options, type or use dragon dictation (which sucks). I am able to complete my notes during the day as I move along. The other doc where I work struggles to complete his notes and he's often still working on notes until 9-10 at night using dragon (older guy).
It is definitely an interesting perspective we both have at our age, every generation has events and advances in technology that help to mold them, we were able to see many changes occur rapidly before our very eyes, more so than many other generations.
I would likely increase my current contribution to their health insurance and put the rest towards purchasing more equipment for my rental business. Obviously, every business is going to look at it differently.
I've kept my salary fairly low throughout the ownership of my company. I tend to roll every dime extra back into proven segments of my business that I have not saturated the market in yet. My employees already receive performance bonuses based on a sales and gross profit calculation, tied in with mandatory punctuality and attendence. They love it when I buy new inventory that sells rapidly, or new equipment that increases rental income because the sales and gross profits grow and that usually ends up in a bonus for them.
Thanks for your response. Sounds like a plan for success - for all parties involved.
RetroRevolver77
11-23-17, 13:49
Why do you exempt active or retired military?
BTW the 95 million number seemed way high, like 29% of the population. So I looked:
Out of the 93.8 million Americans age 16 and up who are deemed "not in the labor force," 9.7 million of them are between 16 and 19 years of age. Another 5.7 million are between 20 and 24. And 37.8 million are age 65 and over. (In fact, 17.5 million are over 75 years old.)
What’s left? This leaves 40.5 million Americans who are not in the labor force and are between the ages of 25 and 64. It’s possible to argue that this number should be a bit higher -- college typically ends at age 22, not everyone goes to college, and healthy seniors today can usually work past 65 if they wish. But right off the top, Trump’s claim significantly overstates the matter.
So what’s a better number?
The official number of unemployed Americans is 8.3 million -- less than one-tenth of what Trump says. But to give Trump the benefit of the doubt, it’s possible to expand this number using more credible economic thinking.
Gary Burtless, an economist at the Brookings Institution, says it’s not unreasonable to include:
• The 6.4 million people who haven’t looked for work recently enough to qualify as being "in the labor force," but who say they "currently want a job."
• And the 6.5 million people working part-time who would prefer to have a full-time job.
This would mean that upwards of 21 million Americans could be described with some justification as "out of work" involuntarily, either fully or partially. But that’s not even one-quarter of the number that Trump offered.
This is kind of a key point:
Burtless added that a large chunk of those suffering the plague of being "out of work" can actually be seen as benefiting from their membership in an affluent, technologically advanced society.
"The fact that these adults are jobless is not a marker of economic failure -- it is an indicator of a very prosperous society that can afford to permit the old and disabled to retire, that can invest in young adults so they can improve their skills, and that can keep some adults in the home where they can care for children or attend to other non-paying pursuits," he said.
I'd be counted in that 'electively unemployed' group, I retired at 61. My wife is 56, she plans to retire in two years, at age 58, at that point I'll be 65.
Life has been good, but I'd hate to be 18 in today's world.
I actually pulled the "95 million unemployed" number from those between the ages of 18 and 65 who are collecting some type of Welfare benefit, which translates into unemployed or under employed. Working two days a week at McDonald's so you can collect a Welfare check, use an EBT card, and have WIC for your children isn't employed. Eliminating all handout subsidies would do a few different things, first it would force people to vote to support a strong economic system finally killing the parasitic socialist political parties off for good, second it would bring industrial labor back to the US since buying foreign would once again have the negative stigma that it should, third it would free up a huge portion of our budget which can be applied to our debt, and finally- it would allow us to reverse a trend that will only lead to economic collapse. In addition, with Americans having to actually compete for jobs will ultimately lead to labor fights with anyone hiring illegals. With no social benefits or anyone willing to hire them, most illegals would either self deport or become tax paying productive US citizens.
I actually pulled the "95 million unemployed" number from those between the ages of 18 and 65 who are collecting some type of Welfare benefit, which translates into unemployed or under employed. Working two days a week at McDonald's so you can collect a Welfare check, use an EBT card, and have WIC for your children isn't employed. Eliminating all handout subsidies would do a few different things, first it would force people to vote to support a strong economic system finally killing the parasitic socialist political parties off for good, second it would bring industrial labor back to the US since buying foreign would once again have the negative stigma that it should, third it would free up a huge portion of our budget which can be applied to our debt, and finally- it would allow us to reverse a trend that will only lead to economic collapse. In addition, with Americans having to actually compete for jobs will ultimately lead to labor fights with anyone hiring illegals. With no social benefits or anyone willing to hire them, most illegals would either self deport or become tax paying productive US citizens.
That is all good, but my question was why do you exempt military or retired military?
RetroRevolver77
11-23-17, 20:20
That is all good, but my question was why do you exempt military or retired military?
Who serves our national interests more? Bureaucrats or military? That's basically the question.
Who serves our national interests more? Bureaucrats or military? That's basically the question.
I guess based on this statement: End all government subsidies across the board unless active or retired military and your response(s) we probably need to define what we mean by subsidy.
I don't see why you would single out active and retired military, unless you consider care and retirement subsidies, which I do not.
RetroRevolver77
11-23-17, 23:20
I guess based on this statement: End all government subsidies across the board unless active or retired military and your response(s) we probably need to define what we mean by subsidy.
I don't see why you would single out active and retired military, unless you consider care and retirement subsidies, which I do not.
Any government pension plans paid for by taxpayers would be considered subsidies.
I only learned how to type in high school, but kids today, typing is more important than knowing how to write. Thank God I know how to type fast, with the advent of EMRs you have 2 options, type or use dragon dictation (which sucks). I am able to complete my notes during the day as I move along. The other doc where I work struggles to complete his notes and he's often still working on notes until 9-10 at night using dragon (older guy).
I am surprised the older guy doesn't know how to type. I am closing in on 49. Typing (on actual typewriters)was a required class when I was a high school student.
To everyone ginning up generational warfare:
It's never too late to be a good role model and its never too late to learn something new.
And its never, ever to late nor too soon to be any kind of example.
"Healthy" changes everyday. Do what feels natural.
I grew up under the spectre of the superpowers, experienced the world as it relaxed its sphincter, saw a rise of optimism unlike anything and saw a whole new era of restriction, paranoia, and fear. Saw people going from getting along to wanting to separate. Saw people lose their minds over an election that really shouldnt affect the individual.
Then saw it again only worse.
I wonder what will happen tomorrow. Maybe good, maybe bad.
If you ever think your generation or your youth was too good or too bad then you are wrong.
While I'm just above the millennial age cut-off, I relate to that age group very easily. As Firefly mentioned, it would help to be good role models to those younger than us. Anytime I hangout with "kids" younger than me, I always educate them about the proper use of firearms. Most of them are actually very receptive as long as you set a good example and present logical facts.
My younger brother, on the other hand is a millennial and mostly anti-gun. He's never gone to the range with me although I offered many times. Although we were raised similarly, he didn't take the same Pro-2A views as I.
Being anti-gun can also be due to a person's nature/personality and life experiences, no just age group.
RetroRevolver77
11-24-17, 15:20
I grew up under the spectre of the superpowers, experienced the world as it relaxed its sphincter, saw a rise of optimism unlike anything and saw a whole new era of restriction, paranoia, and fear. Saw people going from getting along to wanting to separate. Saw people lose their minds over an election that really shouldnt affect the individual.
Then saw it again only worse.
I wonder what will happen tomorrow. Maybe good, maybe bad.
If you ever think your generation or your youth was too good or too bad then you are wrong.
Which election are you talking about?
The one that was stolen to elect the first foreign born, gay, black, Muslim community agitator Barry Soetoro?
Or the one that was a necessary over-correction to elect the Supreme Leader MAGA Shitlord of Defiance otherwise known simply as God Emperor Trump?
SeriousStudent
11-24-17, 15:43
Lower the temperature, everybody.
Which election are you talking about?
The one that was stolen to elect the first foreign born, gay, black, Muslim community agitator Barry Soetoro?
Or the one that was a necessary over-correction to elect the Supreme Leader MAGA Shitlord of Defiance otherwise known simply as God Emperor Trump?
We just call him Donald around here.
I'm not particularly surprised by the OP. I was born, raised and still live just south of Seattle so needless to say I'm surrounded by a lot of the anti 2A type. I am 30 years old and most of my friends are within 2-3 years of me on either side. Some of my most liberal friends are gun owners and understand that an AWB would not fix anything.
I would like to add in that not everybody has to like or care about guns. I would like for us as a society to respect others' rights but trying to convert or besmirch others is lame.
I been around guns my whole life and honestly here lately I been getting sick of them. Like I could almost unload all but an heirloom and a wheelgun.
I guess its peoples attitudes. No middle ground. You either read American Rifleman like the Bible or you want to zomg ban everything.
I wouldn't do what a lot of people do but they can have at it.
I seriously doubt anybody is going to mess with me. Yall dunno me well enough, but its true. And anything I was gonna do, I've already done.
I just want people to respect my rights, not necessarily agree with them.
I mean....wearing a Multicam combat shirt when you are not military and are noticeably obese is a turnoff. Wearing Kryptek. Kinda posery. Nobody real uses Kryptek. I cannot respect anyone wearing Kryptek.
If we returned to the old days of flannel and courduroy then people might take us more seriously. Maybe recapture the innocence and the fun.
I dont know. I wish people knew how to get along again.
Dist. Expert 26
11-24-17, 21:05
I'll pass over the Kryptek comment because I really like my rain jacket I got from them last year. To be fair though that's as far as I go with it.
But as far as getting sick of it, I totally feel you dude. AR's do nothing for me these days. They're overplayed and the fact that everyone and their brother has one kills it for me. Nobody outside of the internet really appreciates a quality build or has any desire to train on a serious level. The entire culture around the rifle is nauseating.
I got drug to a gun show today and hardly even glanced at the tables lined with $500 frakengun ARs. Did see a numbers matching 8mm German Mauser that was pretty cool though.
These days I spend way more time behind a bolt gun than anything else, and the only other thing I shoot regularly is my 1911. I guess I'm getting old.
I'm not particularly surprised by the OP. I was born, raised and still live just south of Seattle so needless to say I'm surrounded by a lot of the anti 2A type. I am 30 years old and most of my friends are within 2-3 years of me on either side. Some of my most liberal friends are gun owners and understand that an AWB would not fix anything.
I think truly that a lot of gun owners would say that they do NOT feel safe having a gun, but having one, makes them feel better. And I think the same is true with the anti-2A people, they have to know that an AWB or even a serious change in legislation on the 2A will not make them feel safe, but would most likely make them feel better. Someone on here mentioned that the gun culture in America has gotten almost intolerable, even for us. And I'm assuming they are referring to men wearing 5.11, Blackhawk, multicam, "tactical operator" type clothing, "don't tread on me" & "come and take it" shirts and have an "special ops" mentality. I think if a lot of people on this forum were locked in a room together for several hours we probably wouldn't even talk about guns, hell, I don't think we would talk about guns in the middle of a gun fight, I think we would most likely talk about life in general. It becomes a problem when the 2A becomes your only identity. And I don't mean that in a bad way but it is bad in a way. I posted a thread on here a while back asking what people were into besides guns and I was surprised how many people had 3-4 major hobbies not including guns. But the 1-3% of out gun culture out there that are "gun nuts", are the ones giving the rest of us a bad image. Firefly said something like "you don't have to like guns but respect that I like them" or something like that. And that's true, the only way someone will respect your rights is if you don't throw it in there face.
We just call him Donald around here.
I call him President Trump, he is the elected leader of my Nation. As was President Obama, and President Bush before him, annnd President Clinton before him. None of whom I much cared for, but they were the elected leaders of our Nation.
Theoretically, our government is constructed so the President can't do too much mischief without the support of the legislative branch. Supposedly.
Theoretically, our government is constructed so the President can't do too much mischief without the support of the legislative branch. Supposedly.
Our constitution certainly allows one to draw that conclusion but its worth noting that politics does have the upper hand. I see what your saying though, I like Trump, always have, he might not be "presidential" with his antics and rhetoric he proudly displays, which seems to generate a lot of support and backlash, but I do feel that he is a good "turn around" president. I wouldn't compare him to anyone that has held the office of president before him, but I think he will turn out to be a great leader.
Though, I don't think Trump has a leadership mentality, I believe he has an, "I'm in charge" mentality and I wont say if that is good or bad, I have the same mentality. But I will say that Trump has surrounded himself with what appears to be experts, professionals, men and women who I consider to have integrity, values, morals and character traits that are worth imitating. He knows who his supporters are and I haven't heard of anyone who said that they voted for him but now regret it.
There are a lot of left leaning new sites and blogs that are now starting to add some positive Trump stories and talk about some of his achievements that are worth publicizing. So, instead of publishing news that is 100% negative, they are publishing news that is around 90% negative and I consider that to be strong results considering where a lot of these news sites stood just a few months ago.
The baby boomer generation was the worst thing that happened to America. I think so, but the boomer got the brunt of the drugs are a victim less crime . Sex every where in every way. Don't listen to the parents. I am a baby boomer and had great parents and relatives and I am John Birch Society conservative. And just the day before yesterdayat the range I heard a familiar noise I Knew there were a bunch of young teen types and I put my pistol in my holster and went over two bays and saw a guy around my age teaching a bunch of his relative kids, may be friends as well and 2 moms shoot his full auto rifle. I watch and was so impressed at the kids/ mom impressive gun handling ability, safe and mature. I watched for a while and left the area with a huge smile as that was how it was done..
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.