Political
Party: Libertarian
Office you are running for: Colorado House of Representatives,
District 38
State: Colorado
County: Arapahoe
1.) Do you believe that the Second Amendment
confirms the individual right of every American citizen to possess and use
(update of keep and bear) militia/military weapons for individual self-defense,
as well as for the defense of the State/National defense?
Yes. But I do draw the line at weapons of mass destruction being in
the hands of the citizenry. Such weapons should never be used on our own soil,
against our own neighbors.
2.) If elected would you support legislation for
the removal of firearm laws and regulations?
If your answer is yes, and if you are elected, what specific legislation
would you propose/support to ensure that this individual right is protected? Which current laws which infringe upon this
individual right would you seek to repeal?
Yes. I support the repeal of all unconstitutional laws. It used to
be that legislators were very cognizant of the constitution in their
deliberations, but now it seems that they view the constitution as something to
be circumvented, if they view it at all. Currently, the legislators pass
unconstitutional laws that sit on the books and causes trouble for a great mass
of people until someone with enough guts and money to take on the government
challenges its constitutionality to the Supreme Court. This is wasteful and costly to our society
on so many levels. I would propose a mechanism by which all laws must pass
“Constitutional Muster” before they are even voted upon.
3.) What do you consider are “legitimate”
reasons to own a firearm?
__ Personal defense
__ Home defense
__ Defense of you country
(unorganized Militia)
__ Hunting
__ Farm use
__ Informal sport shooting
__ Informal target practice
and/or plinking
__ Collecting
__ Constitutional rights
__ Other _____
X All of the above
__ None of the above
4.) Would you support the banning of some
firearms or ammunition? (i.e. Saturday night specials, “assault weapons,”
Hollow points, and “Safety Slugs”) Why and to what extent?
Personally, I believe that if
it is just not possible to use a weapon in self defense without causing
indiscriminant and irreparable harm
to unintentional persons or property (i.e. weapons of mass destruction), then
access should be restricted to the military and prohibited to both police and
citizens. If a weapon can be used to defend yourself without causing
indiscriminant and irreparable harm
to unintended persons or property then access should be unrestricted. For
example, mace and tear gas are OK, but nerve gas isn't. Also for example, its
just not possible to use an atomic bomb to defend yourself without causing
damage or harm to property or to people that are not the target.
5.) Do you believe that firearms and/or firearm
owners should be registered? Which ones and why?
No. Ninety five percent of armed criminals get their guns illegally
anyway. And criminals don’t care if law abiding citizens or their guns are
registered or not. Every individual (the criminal and the law abiding) needs to
be held accountable and responsible for their use of any personal defense
weapon. Accountability and responsibility will be the mechanism that ensures
safe gun use, not registration.
6.) Do you support equal rights for all citizens
of the United States regardless of the person’s sexuality/orientation and/or
gender identity/expression?
Yes. Absolutely and without equivocation. The Constitution of the
United States, the Bill of Rights and all subsequent Amendments establishes
equal rights for all citizens and
makes no exception concerning these matters.
7.) Which of the following would you be willing
to support in regards to same-gender and/or polyamorous marriages and/or civil
unions?
__ Domestic partnerships for
same-sex couples
__ Domestic partnerships for
opposite-sex couples
__ Domestic partnerships for
polyamorous (more than two consenting adults)
__ Same-sex marriages
__ Opposite-sex marriages
(What we have now)
__ Polyamorous marriages
(between more than two consenting adults)
X All of the above. Everyone should have equal rights under the law.
X None of the above. Government has no role in defining a marriage.
__ Leave it to the church.
__ Other ________
All of the above and None of the above. Everyone should have equal
rights under the law (no question), and the Government should have no role in
defining a marriage (that is for the individuals involved to decide for
themselves).
8.) Do you support the right for people to act
as they wish in a private setting, with other consenting adults?
Absolutely. Adults acting
with “free will” or “free choice” should not be enjoined or protected from
accepting the consequences or responsibilities of their choices (good or
bad). We, not the government, have
sovereignty over our own bodies.
9.) In July 2000 the Police Dept. of Attleboro Massachusetts
entered a private party without a search warrant. The party was not open to the public or in the business to make a
profit. Any donations given were used
to pay rent. When the police entered,
they arrested two people. The first
person who was arrested organized the event.
The second person arrested was arrested because she spanked her
consenting adult partner with a wooden spoon.
Do you support the actions of the Attleboro police as given in this
example? Why?
No, I don’t agree with their actions as you describe them. What the Attleboro police did in this case
was just plain wrong. There was no search warrant, it was a private party,
there was no harm committed against anyone, and they were consenting adults.
Just what did the police think was harmful to the general public about such a
gathering anyway?
10.) Do you support equal immigration rights for
partners of US residents, regardless of their sexuality/orientation and/or
gender identity/expression?
Yes. None of these issues are accurate
indicators of an individual’s good character.
A good person is one who is law abiding and hard working, whose goal is
to contribute to the economy and society of our nation.