Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
My right leaning political views:
- I support the first amendment which protects freedom of speech and expression
- I support the second amendment which gives the citizen the right to bear arms
- I support strong self defense rights which allow citizens to defend themselves and others
- I support abolishing the FBI, ATF, IRS and US marshals for being tyrants
- I am critical of woke movements like the feminist movement for trying to subjugate males and also dividing males and females.
"America needs fewer laws, not more prisons" - James Bovard
I also have independent political views that don't seem to shared by either the left or right:
- I support abolishing all debt collectors because they are scum of the Earth who prey upon vulnerable consumers. Abolishing debt collection would protect identity theft victims.
- Extradition to foreign countries for non violent offenses should be abolished, only violent crimes should be extraditable offenses but only if there is proof that the person was physically present in that country. Extradition between states should be abolished, instead the person should be tried and sentenced in the state they are arrested in. This would protect innocent people from being wrongly extradited.
- Most types of lawsuits in America should be abolished, since there are greedy people who like to use the court to make money. The only types that wouldn’t be abolished would be physical injury, physical damage to property, medical malpractice, domestic violence and abuse from authorities (police brutality etc).
- Either abolish the military draft or make women get drafted as well, now that's equality.
- Abolish both the Democrat and Republican parties as both parties are too authoritarian for a country that is supposed to be the "land of the free".
- Reform the police and Sheriff: I disagree with both the "Defund the police" and the "Blue lives matter" movements, instead America needs to reform both the police and Sheriff to be more like Finland's police force.
- I am a Christian(there are both left and right wing Christians)
- Just leave me alone, everyone should leave each other alone
" I prefer liberty with danger than peace with slavery" - Jean Jacques Rousseau
However I do have 3 political views that are left leaning:
- Gradually reform all jails and prisons to be more like Finland's and Germany's prisons. Separate non violent inmates from violent inmates. Non violent inmates should have more privileges than violent inmates. Non violent inmates can work normal jobs outside of jail/prison, get an education, wear their street clothes, have 3 hours of leisure time with their friends and families outside of the correctional facilities, be allowed to have a duffle bag of personal belongings with them, dormitories instead of cell blocks and house arrest would be used more often for non violent criminals. While violent inmates can wear their street clothes, have less restrictions on what personal belongings they can have and have access to at least one electronic device. Both non violent and violent inmates would have access to medical and mental health services and be receiving a rehab program designed to correct their behaviors.
- I don't have strong opinions on immigration, we are all human beings who share the same planet. I don't care who comes to this country as long as they behave.
- Better treatment for the mentally ill, they should be a protected group of people. There is no reason why the mentally ill should be treated like livestock. They are human beings as well. Many people who suffer from mental illness were born that way but unfortunately there is so much ignorance about it.
"Men in denim built this country, while men in suits destroyed it "-unknown
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
13Opinion
1: Athou I agree the feds have no business enforcing domestic laws, the U. S. marshal's original propose was as court officers and thus federal courts should largely be abolished to get rid of them and limited to disputes between state governments enforced by the President & congress.
2: Without dept collection there is no lending, so you might need an alternative such as letting Government Tax collectors collect dept instead. Then again the IRS seems quite good at losing identity information too.
3: Lawsuit reform would go a long way if you simply do what Texas and a few other states do in making the loser pay all bills. You can even go further by getting rid of private lawyers or randomizing whom they are assigned to.
4: Makes no sense to draft women given they are the reproductive bottleneck you lose your country win or lose, and most of them can't contribute enough to merit the risk.
5: Political parties can't be abolished because they are simply factions of people working together to accomplish common political goals. What we can do is make it harder for layman voters to vote party line by removing parties from ballots. Your state can do this anytime they want.
6: I don't see how finish police works but again this is something your state can do and show us.
7: The trouble with such prison reform is keeping prisoners from running away. even with modern electronic bracelets its basically impossible to keep them from taking it off and running for it. Then you have a capture and extradition issue like most other criminals on the lose.
8: People are not simply people to live together they have to cooperate with their neighbors requiring common ideas and cultural standards. Otherwise they end up fighting over too many differences and if one side does not impose upon the other they fracture and again require borders to keep the situation from repeating.
So in the medium term you don't have a viable free country without borders. You can only have a repressive empire that rules by force of the largest faction. Otherwise things fraction infinitely.
9: How do you define mentally Ill vs someone faking it to avoid responsibility?
1.) They are tyrants who enforce liens and levies on identity theft victims.
2.) Debt collectors are scum of the Earth who sometimes try to collect from identity theft victims
3.) No, too many people take advantage of the system
4.) Feminists are constantly talking about equality
5.) I don't think anyone is going to remove democrats and Republicans from ballots, they are very powerful parties
6.) There significantly less cases of police brutality in Finland than in America. American law enforcement acts like the gestapo.
7.) They wouldn't be tempted to run away, since they have so many privileges and because only non violent inmates would have the privilege of spending time outside of prison. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l554kV12Wuo
8.) I never said anything about a borderless world only that I don't have a strong opinion on immigration.
9.) The problem with America is the other way around. Too many mentally ill people are neglected because ignorant people think they are "faking it". The mentally ill are a persecuted group of people.
America is supposed to be the ""land of the free" but it's more of an authoritarian regime.
Having the loser pay all the bills puts those with money at an advantage to take advantage. It dont matter how solid a case can be , it doesn't guarantee a win. The mere thought if having to pay at the minimum thousands of dollars if you lose will refrain from people that dont have money from seeking compensation. Its already that way, most people can't afford a lawyer and rely on contingency.
@kmg9150
Greedy elitists still take advantage of the system.
Fortunately I've never been involved in any kind of legal issues and I don't ever want to be. However there are stories of other people who have been preyed upon by greedy elitists,
like when scumbag debt collectors prey on identity theft victims, it's disgusting.
@ADFSDF1996
1. The 'Federal' 'law enforcement' is by nature in our congressional system largely unaccountable. So abuse of individuals is as common as said indiviual is obscurely distance from any electorally consequential majority. While the only courts who might refuse to enforce said abusive behavior are appointed by the same people who benefit from such abuse and give such order.
This was never NOT in our 11 page constitution for this reason.
2. Many people share your historic view on dept collectors particular the Romans who's collectors were very abusive. That said if you don't have dept collectors you don't have loans which means you better pay cash for everything including your house and car.
3. The system is build after 200 years of for and by lawyers who happen to be a plurality if not outright majority of most 'elected' politicians. The answer however is not simply demanding a particular standard of harm which would be ignored and/or claimed in every case. But rather creating a more competitive system of jurisdictions to allow people to flee abusive systems as they are fleeing New York's.
4. Doesn't mean you should destroy our civilization in giving it to them.
5. It can happen at state & local levels and does happen on some elections.
7. If your not tempted to run away your not being punished for your crime. I don't see such a system working outside of a small homogeneous culture where everyone knows each-other.
8. Lots of people don't care about things until they can't ignore its consequences. As someone who grew up in Border states. There are consequences to effectively open borders you cannot iqnore.
9. In a large heterogenous country where nobody knows anyone else it is very difficult to tell if anyone is faking anything given how different and unknown to you they are. We use to handle this better when and where we were more homogeneous.
@kmg9150 A man who can afford to lose money just to hurt someone else is always going to be at an advantage, whether he is doing it with 'courts' or doing it with gangsters.
The difference is with courts' to whatever extent justice is blind and you can make it more blind by forbidding direct testimony, and non-random lawyer selection. If they lose then they pay for the attempt.
Even still far too many things are subject to civil court disputes.
1. Feds are the modern day KGB, they are more interested in monitoring the American citizens than they are in protecting them.
2. At least there would be no debt collectors
3. Not sure I understand you, Are you saying New York's system is abusive?
4. Not destroying, it's more like letting them experience what men have to go through, maybe then they will stop calling themselves feminists.
5. Yet there is no Libertarian president
7. That's the problem with the US justice system. It's more focused on punishing than correcting. Punishing is not the same as correcting. How do you expect all those people to change their ways if they are being treated like livestock? That's why Finland's and Norway's justice systems are better because they focus more on correction than punishment.
8.) I was born in a border state but I still don't have a strong opinion on immigration. Sure we shouldn't let dangerous people in but the other ones who are simply trying to find better opportunities and try to assimilate are ok.
9.) In the 1950s the mentally ill were being treated like guinea pigs. All kinds atrocious experiments were being performed on them by shrinks that acted like Josef Mengele. That's why asylums were shut down because of all the disgusting things done to mentally ill patients. It's actually scary that many Republicans want to bring back asylums. Nowadays mental health experts can tell who is faking it and who actually has mental illness. There are even technologies that can scan the chemicals in the brain.
@ADFSDF1996
1. At what point was the FBI not a domestic spying agency? True there was a brief post J Hoover period in the 70s,80s, and 90s where they were allegedly a little better but the organization was from day one created as a kind of spying and intelligence agency and its leaders have long abuse this power for their own ends and the ends of those politicians they serve.
The problem is not 1 federal election has ever been held on the subject of this ongoing abuse, and it would need to be the subject of every election if the corrupting power were to be resisted.
3. Yes, New York's court's are epicly corrupt and abusive, build for, by and of lawyers. This is why new York has more lawyers per-capita than every other state, twice as many as California and 3 times as many as Texas. It pays to be a lawyers there.
4. Women by studies are far less happy than they have ever been having lost the environment and support systems for which nature inclines them to love and instead put into a unnatural world. I don't see the remote possibility of being forced to fight against their will changing that.
5. If libertarians are to take the presidency they would need to do it within one of the existing parties in primaries. Even then Libertarian goals are far better served by crippling the office then ever holding it.
In a Congressional system this is best done by withdraw cooperation. Winning the presidency just gives you a little more freedom for a short time, losing by default.
7. We have historically done both system and are still doing it in different combinations. Neither actuary work because people work on the basis of self-interest. The less homogeneous or simply larger a population the less self-interest there is in the good of everyone else.
8. Too many immigrants and they don't assimilate to your culture but rather change your culture into the one they fled, too many immigrants from many different places and you end up with ever more bitter rivalries.
I don't have an opinion on your take, I'll just share with you how on the list of reported posts on this site I found your mytake, some retard reported you for "grammar" even after admins promoted your post. ďľ
I see no grammar issues here. Whoever reported you is a retard.
did you reely say "share the same planet. I don't care who comes to this country as long as they behave"? don't you know undocumanted is itself breaking laws violations not behaved... and countries don't share... every other country has borders except ours.
You have great points. I would like to see the democrat and republican parties abolished. Mostly they campaign what he/she did wrong and very little in what they are going to do to make our country better and saver.
The extremist left will call you right wing, the extremist right will call you a coward, but libertarians will quietly watch as you become one of us. Even if you're in denial right now.
This is well thought out and very well spoken. I agree with just about all of your views
I'm kind of the same way. I hate both sides quite a bit and I don't fall into either category.
Agree on USA adopting Germany's government. We also have way fewer prisons, no drug epidemic, and fewer crimes. However, I understand that USA is bigger, with more land mass and people, has different money scales, and more diverse population.
I don't agree with the immigration part but everything else 👍🏻
Consider yourself Libertarian?
Ah, yes. The "I'm not like other Americans" American.
I support abolishing politics and replacing it with evidence based laws and policies.
I'd say a lot of people would be centrist but stupid political party things push them to being super liberal or conservative
I support killing anyone that says they are an authority and putting absolutely everything on a block chain.
You sound like a Populist Conservative.
Looks good
You are republican.
Nope.
POSIWID
I don't know what that means.
If it walks like a duck, swims like a duck, lays eggs like a duck, and quacks like a duck, what functional purpose is there to calling it anything other than a duck? You say and do (and im guessing vote) precisely what proud republicans say and do. How you identify doesn't change your actions.
Googling "POSIWID" only shows this en.wikipedia.org/.../The_purpose_of_a_system_is_what_it_does
Never heard that acronym.
Anybody who has a slightly different opinion than you is a Republican.
Opinions may be "slightly different" but your conclusions are not. Your conclusions are precisely the conclusions republicans have spent billions of dollars telling people to have. Not rocket science..
Democrats think i'm a Republican
Republicans think I'm a Democrat.
communists think I'm a nazi
Nazis think I'm a communist
Still don't know why you mentioned "POSIWID". en.wikipedia.org/.../The_purpose_of_a_system_is_what_it_does
Unless you are just talking about looks like a duck quacks like a duck.
I use POSIWID as shorthand for the "if it walks like a duck" thing. In other words it doesn't really matter what your stated motives or reasons are - what you do is further the republican agenda. And the purpose of a system is what it does.