Where do you stand on gun control? Do you support increased gun ownership restrictions, or less? Do you support the civilian ownership of fully automatic weapons?
I believe that people do have the right to bear arms, but on the same token, we require background checks and a balance of what a civilian should be carrying, because no civilian needs any ludicrous military grade weaponry. I don't believe the increase in restrictions are going to help, because either way criminals are going to break the law to get them easily. Fully automatic weaponry should only be restricted to less than ludicrous military grade weapons as I mentioned before. It requires some common sense and obviously the people in the state and fed just don't have it.
Where do you stand on drug policy? Do you support the decriminalization of drugs, or the continued prohibition on them? Do you support the illegal status of marijuana?
I'm on the fence, I understand that certain drugs are extremely bad and keeping them banned would pose no greater threat, however, I do believe that certain drugs are fine to have legal, but educate people on the effects in order to give people an educated decision later on. As I mentioned before, some drugs are meant to be criminalized because they outright to excessive harm to the body and people around the user. I get that alcohol can do the same thing, but alcohol in moderation is not a problem. Cigarettes takes the educational path, explain to people the effects in order to scare them away from the bloody things or they do it and you just say, "Welp it was your choice to ruin your body". Weed, that's where I get caught, I understand the medicinal purposes of it and I'm fine with its legalization, but people need to understand the effects.
Where do you stand on affirmative action programs? Do you support the use of affirmative action programs, or are you against the use of them? Do you support the concept of equal opportunity measures like these?
Short answer, any affirmative action policies that utilizes a quota system or immediately gives opportunities to unqualified people are bullstuff and need to be outright banned.
Long answer, this is another on the fence case with me. I've been okay with trying to promote equality by bending the rules and giving minorities a chance at an equal opportunity for a job or education. But it crosses the line when it surpasses those who are more qualified or just outright qualified for that position. I would get it if the person was black and had the same education and he was given a chance over the white equivalent. However, this is when the bullstuff starts culminating, you start getting under-qualified candidates who are minorities and give them the position just because they are a minority. For example, I work in IT, I've worked my butt off for 2 years in a trade school, with 10 hours per week put into those classes to get 2 certifications and the opportunity to do IT as a career. Well I decide to apply for Comp Tech Corp. in Somewhere, Anywhere, and they have affirmative action policies. There is a minority applicant who hasn't worked as hard as me, hasn't got the same certifications, but take him due to affirmative action. This is where merit starts to be lost when it comes to those types of things, I'm a person who believe highly in looking at the merits of a person when it comes to deciding their position. If they can prove to me that they can do the job better than the next person, then I want them. If you cry and say "That's tribal", I'll just pay no attention because the other candidates did not have the merit. Either way, people do require equal opportunity, but when it comes to merit, you better hope you can muster the ability to do your job and prove your worth.
