Article – “Why Did it Have to be … Guns?”

Once in a blue moon, people ask me how I vote and what the hot-button issues are for me. People assume I’m a single-issue voter..I vote for people based on how they stand on my gun ownership. This is true to a degree, but not in the way most people think. Yes, I am a single-issue voter and the issue is guns. But not because I want to keep unfettered access to guns, but because many times the candidate who sees eye-to-eye with me on guns will probably (but not always) be on the same page as me on a lot of the other issues. So, by and large, if I see a candidate is feeling the same way about guns as I do, then I can be reasonably confident he’ll feel the same as me on many other important topics as well.

It’s hard for me to articulate that principle and explain it to people. Fortunately, someone else already has. L. Neil Smith, author of some fame and staunch ‘big L’ Libertarian has this interesting litmus test that sums it up.

Again, I’ve yet to find a candidate that is 100% on the issues same as me, but often how they stand on the gun issue tells me how they’ll stand on several other issues that are important to me.


2 thoughts on “Article – “Why Did it Have to be … Guns?”

  1. this year it was more about the supreme court to me than guns. i figure if they were in favor of stacking the court in the constitutions favor, guns would be safe by default. but frankly, i care not what tptb do about guns, i will do what is God given. yes, i will stress a bit less for the next 4 years but i have no illusion that tptb are finished with their agenda. heck, we still have to make it to january 20th, and beyond. merry Christmas to you and yours.

Comments are closed.