|
THE LIBERTY POLL pt. 2 |
|
THE LIBERTY POLL Follow-up Module Part 2 In part 2 of the Liberty Poll, author Alan Korwin pursues issues in depth, primarily concerning balance of power, designed for use in direct questioning of politicians during debates and public appearances. In an introduction, Alan notes: People complain about media bias when they see constant distortion and misinformation that routinely passes for "news." But perhaps the greatest bias results from news that never appears, because important questions are never asked. Next time you see a "newsmaker" try asking some of these questions yourself, and see what happens. Where do you stand, Senator, on deterrence at schools? You know, is it legal for a person caught in one of these media-hyped killing sprees to shoot back if they are able? Is there any limit on the number of bullets they could use? Do you think they should be charged with something if they manage to stop the attack and the attacker dies in the process, or if they use a type of gun not on an approved list? Where do you stand, Senator, on tax credits for training? You know, with all the accidents and costs associated with gun violence, do you support a tax incentive to encourage Americans to take courses that teach safe handling and use of firearms? Do you think this statement is true: "Gun-safety training would cause accidents and cost lives"? Where do you stand, Senator, on poor people's right to self defense? You know, do people living in substandard housing have the same right to protect their families as suburban homeowners, or even politicians? Do you believe politicians or police officers are entitled to armed protection that poor people are not? Do you support outlawing guns that are affordable for poor people -- often derided as "junk guns" -- and how do you respond to charges that this is a racist policy with blatant effects? Where do you stand, Senator, on the civil right to self defense? You know, do you believe a person can legally fight off a mortal attack by using lethal force? If a person is truly innocent and survives such a confrontation, is the type of firearm or ammunition they use any sort of legal problem after the fact? Where do your stand, Senator, on gun laws that would disarm Jews? You know, like vice president Al Gore's plan that would make anyone attending religious services a criminal if they also keep and bear arms? Do you think a law that disarms Jews would be OK as long as it disarms other religious individuals as well? Where do you stand, Senator, on armed intervention by police? You know, are you in favor of the police being able to use deadly force to protect innocent lives from criminal attack? Do you believe a person, even one with no training at all in self protection, has any less right to defend themselves than the police do? Would you support ammunition limits for police firearms, or do you believe this might jeopardize police safety? How high or low would you set those limits? Where do you stand, Senator, on Sunshine Gun Laws? You know, gun laws that encourage decent behavior, and support training, as opposed to laws that seek to restrict the civil rights of gun owners? Do you support laws that protect people who legitimately defend themselves against crime? Where do you stand, Senator, on a Presumption of Innocence Act for abused women? You know, when a woman shoots a man already convicted of abusing her, within a court-ordered protective zone he's not supposed to enter, should her actions be illegal? Would you support a legal presumption that her acts are self defense, if there's no concrete evidence to the contrary? Would you support awarding such survivors with a civilian medal of honor? Where do you stand, Senator, on the 240 felons the FBI and BATF ignore every day under the Brady law? You know, the 240 criminals denied guns daily by the national background check. The FBI has direct personal knowledge of felony after felony, yet does not enforce the law and apprehend them. Do you support that? How do you as a politician answer the complaint that, after $250 million spent on the Brady law, you don't arrest any of the criminals you find? Do you think the "official" numbers are inflated, or did we really identify and turn loose 800,000 crooks trying to buy a gun? What purpose does it serve to leave these criminals on the street? If these criminal were arrested, would crime drop? If you seek money for new gun laws, yet admit you do not arrest gun criminals you already find under expensive existing laws, do you think the public should see this as unwise public policy? Does failure to make arrests under the Brady system help perpetuate the system's existence, and how do you respond to charges that the system is, in large measure, a federal jobs program for more than 1,000 people? Where do you stand, Senator, on a federal ID number for every American? You know, a number required by the federal government, without which you could not get or give money, make purchases, travel or be employed. Do you think this is something the government should be working on, or might this be the overbearing role of central government the founders warned us about? If not, what would be? Where exactly in the Constitution do you find language authorizing federal numbering of all people? Do you support Ron Paul's bill to prohibit federal numbering and registration of the general public? Where do you stand on registering writers, Senator, if you stand in favor of registering gun owners? You know, would you be able to justify equal procedures for all the rights under the Bill of Rights? If you don't favor registering writers, why not? If a writer is honest, why would they care? Where do you stand, Senator, on how much gun law we should have? You know, we have over 88,000 words now at the federal level, how much do you think we need? Is there an outside limit we can look forward to? When do you believe we'll have enough? Can you name any gun crimes that have victims and are not already illegal? Where do you stand, Senator, on a total gun ban for anyone who voluntarily wants to sign up for such a ban? You know, would you support a federal pledge that people could make, to be forever banned from any access to firearms, under penalty of felony charges? Do you think people who want guns banned would register to ban themselves? Would you support such a no-gun-rights class of citizenship in America if a majority in your district wanted it? Where do you stand, Senator, on encroaching on the Bill of Rights? You know, is it OK to give up some of our freedoms if it's to help prevent crime? Can you name any laws on the books take this approach? Would you support or fight such laws is you are elected? Does the government have any power to outlaw armed response to an armed attack, and if so, where is that found in the Constitution? Where do you stand, Senator, on a marksmanship component for
National Gun Safety Training Week? Contact: |
|
CLICK ON "NEXT" TO GO TO PART 3 |
