[Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2016-03: Gun Rights Resolution

Mon Aug 15 01:25:19 EDT 2016

Ahhh you are right.  I am thinking of something entirely different, pardon
me, *and thank you for the correction!*  I thought I read something similar
in a past convention that did not pass.

My other points remain.  We have had similar resolutions.  Including
inviting people to join the Party by restating our commitment to
self-ownership and non-aggression.

-- 
*In Liberty,*
*Caryn Ann Harlos*
Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona,
Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
Harlos at LP.org
Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
<http://www.lpcolorado.org/>
Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
<http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org/>

On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 11:22 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com
> wrote:

> Hmm perhaps my mistake.  Let me take a look.  I am thinking of something
> else.
>
> On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 11:14 PM, Alicia Mattson <agmattson at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Me:  "When the Bylaws and Rules Committee proposed the amendment which
>> is now Article 11.7..."
>>
>> CAH:  "Which failed.  And thus is a presupposition in favour. As I noted
>> before we have had resolutions restating numerous things before."
>>
>> ??? No, it was adopted, which is why it is now in the bylaws...
>>
>> -Alicia
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 9:43 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
>> carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> My response to Alicia:
>>>
>>> ==When the Bylaws and Rules Committee proposed the amendment which is
>>> now Article 11.7, (The National Committee may adopt public policy
>>> resolutions by a ¾ vote with previous notice or by unanimous consent
>>> without previous notice.) the rationale for setting the bar so high was to
>>> discourage the LNC from spending time congratulating itself over
>>> restatements of the platform instead of doing more productive tasks.  We
>>> could pass a resolution about each plank in the platform, but that's not a
>>> good use of our time.==
>>>
>>> Which failed.  And thus is a presupposition in favour. As I noted before
>>> we have had resolutions restating numerous things before.
>>>
>>>
>>> ==In this particular case, it seems the motivation is to (politely on
>>> 2016-03, but less politely on 2016-04) throw stones at our presidential
>>> ticket.===
>>>
>>> Interesting that standing for our Platform is throwing stones.  Is the
>>> proposed contract being negotiated by Chair Sarwark asking for a pledge to
>>> uphold our Platform throwing stones too?
>>>
>>> == Our delegates knew at the convention that there were certain
>>> subjects where the nominees weren't completely aligned with platform, but
>>> they nominated them anyway.  I don't want the LNC to spend the next three
>>> months passing a series of resolutions picking fights with our presidential
>>> ticket.  It's poor form.==
>>>
>>> and no one suggested a series, but in fact, our Bylaws (the same Bylaws
>>> that delegates agreed to) uphold us to be committed to support as long as
>>> the Campaigns are conducted in accordance with the Platform of the Party.
>>> And the rest of the Bylaws binds us to the Statement of Principles.
>>>
>>> However, this resolution came out of Colorado, and I can authoratatively
>>> say that Colorado (and this is confirmed by an upcoming interview with the
>>> State Chair in The Coloradoan) was speaking not only of the recent
>>> statements by Weld but also of Obama and Clinton and Trump.
>>>
>>> ==Many of our members disagree with at least one aspect of our
>>> platform, but we have a tent big enough to still work together for progress
>>> in the right direction.  ===
>>>
>>> And terrorist watch lists are a step in the right direction precisely
>>> how?
>>>
>>> ==If Ron Paul were our nominee, would the LNC attack his pro-life
>>> stance from the sidelines during the campaign?===
>>>
>>> If the public were becoming confused on the LP position?  ABSOLUTELY.
>>>
>>> ==  Sometimes we are our own worst enemy.==
>>>
>>> Yes, by not making sure that we support our principles.
>>>
>>> ==It only takes a handful of "no" votes to stop the trend before it
>>> starts.===
>>>
>>> and enough yeses to perhaps stop the growing tide of member concern that
>>> is demanding a disqualification vote.  I already have been put on notice
>>> that members of Region 1 are going to petition me to bring one.  I want to
>>> avoid that and fulfill our duties to the Bylaws.
>>>
>>> --
>>> *In Liberty,*
>>> *Caryn Ann Harlos*
>>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
>>> Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
>>> Harlos at LP.org
>>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
>>> <http://www.lpcolorado.org/>
>>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
>>> <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 9:52 PM, Alicia Mattson <agmattson at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I vote no on this motion.
>>>>
>>>> My opposition isn't because I disagree with the sentiments of the
>>>> resolution.  I agree with Mr. Bittner that our platform already positions
>>>> the party on this subject.
>>>>
>>>> When the Bylaws and Rules Committee proposed the amendment which is now
>>>> Article 11.7, (The National Committee may adopt public policy
>>>> resolutions by a ¾ vote with previous notice or by unanimous consent
>>>> without previous notice.) the rationale for setting the bar so high was to
>>>> discourage the LNC from spending time congratulating itself over
>>>> restatements of the platform instead of doing more productive tasks.  We
>>>> could pass a resolution about each plank in the platform, but that's not a
>>>> good use of our time.
>>>>
>>>> In this particular case, it seems the motivation is to (politely on
>>>> 2016-03, but less politely on 2016-04) throw stones at our presidential
>>>> ticket.  Our delegates knew at the convention that there were certain
>>>> subjects where the nominees weren't completely aligned with platform, but
>>>> they nominated them anyway.  I don't want the LNC to spend the next three
>>>> months passing a series of resolutions picking fights with our presidential
>>>> ticket.  It's poor form.
>>>>
>>>> Many of our members disagree with at least one aspect of our platform,
>>>> but we have a tent big enough to still work together for progress in the
>>>> right direction.  If Ron Paul were our nominee, would the LNC attack his
>>>> pro-life stance from the sidelines during the campaign?  Sometimes we are
>>>> our own worst enemy.
>>>>
>>>> It only takes a handful of "no" votes to stop the trend before it
>>>> starts.
>>>>
>>>> -Alicia
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 8:40 PM, Alicia Mattson <agmattson at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> We have an electronic mail ballot.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by August 22, 2016 at
>>>>> 11:59:59pm Pacific time.*
>>>>> *Co-Sponsors:*  Harlos, Katz, Hayes, Goldstein, Vohra
>>>>>
>>>>> *Motion:*
>>>>>
>>>>> WHEREAS, Libertarians affirm that self-defense is an inherent human
>>>>> right;
>>>>>
>>>>> WHEREAS, the Platform of the Libertarian Party opposes all laws at any
>>>>> level of government restricting, registering, or monitoring the ownership,
>>>>> manufacture, or transfer of firearms or ammunition;
>>>>>
>>>>> WHEREAS, the Platform of the Libertarian Party affirms the right of
>>>>> due process and deny the legitimacy of “victimless crimes”;
>>>>>
>>>>> WHEREAS, the government has steadily encroached upon these rights by
>>>>> illegitimately regulating and restricting access for firearms and
>>>>> ammunition and may further seek to deprive people who have been convicted
>>>>> of no crime of their inherent right to full self-defense by denying their
>>>>> civil and inherent rights to obtain firearms and ammunition;
>>>>>
>>>>> BE IT RESOLVED that the Libertarian National Committee opposes any
>>>>> policy which would deny access to any firearms or ammunition to any person
>>>>> simply for being placed on any government watch or no-fly list and
>>>>> reaffirms its call to repeal and oppose any existing or proposed firearm
>>>>> and ammunition regulations.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -Alicia
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *In Liberty,*
>>> *Caryn Ann Harlos*
>>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
>>> Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
>>> Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org>
>>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
>>> <http://www.lpcolorado.org>
>>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
>>> <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lnc-business mailing list
>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *In Liberty,*
> *Caryn Ann Harlos*
> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona,
> Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
> Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org>
> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
> <http://www.lpcolorado.org>
> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
> <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org>
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
*In Liberty,*
*Caryn Ann Harlos*
Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona,
Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org>
Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
<http://www.lpcolorado.org>
Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
<http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20160814/07f41857/attachment-0002.html>