guns & 'compromise'

We tend to think of compromise in terms like these:
*  On item A, you want 50% and I want 70%, we compromise at 60%
*  On item B, you want $10 billion and I want $15 billion, we compromise at $12 billion.
*  On item C, you want these 7 items banned and I want 4 of them banned, we compromise at 5 items.
*  etc.
This basically ensures that everything happens half-ass.

What about compromise in terms like these:
*  On item A, you want 50% and I want 70%, we compromise and I get this one at 70%
*  On item B, you want $10 billion and I want $15 billion, we compromise and you get this one at $10 billion.
*  On item C, you want these 7 items banned and I want 4 of them banned, we compromise and I get my 4 items.
*  etc.
This basically ensures that a full fair try is accorded to at least some remedies.

With the above in mind, I think about guns.

1) The NRA can list who they think shouldn't get guns. That's our list; everyone else gets an unquestioned right to carry.
2) Whatever circumstances the NRA thinks gunowners should have - concealed carry, open carry, churches, gov't buildings, whatever - they get (of course, private property is governed by the property owner).
3) The gun lobby gets to close all the loopholes on the registration of gun purchases; that gun show loophole is gone. Every gun that's purchase/gifted/traded is recorded as to who gave what gun to who.
4) Everyone who receives a gun (if the gun lobby wants this) must also receive mandatory firearm training beforehand or shortly afterwards. This can be such that a small percentage (cannot be >5%?) fail and will become ineligible to own a gun until they do pass the mandatory training.
5) The gun lobby gets to set whatever rules it wants on traceable ammunition, serial numbering of guns (with penalities - including loss of gun rights - for having non-compliant weapons), whatever might assist law enforcement after a crime.
6) And perhaps a traditional halfway compromise is appropriate that would ban assult weapons and armor piercing bullets; no grandfathering of what's already out there - a mandatory gun purchase program for newly illegal munitions.
7) Of course stiff penalties for violations of any of the above.

Of course this leaves untouched the whole mental health aspect. At this point, I don't know enough about that topic to offer anything useful.

youtube

If a 2018 campaign is going to be even marginally successful, I won't be doing web videos on my own. Someone with more time and expertise will need to take over at some point.  That said, initially it's probably going to be me. And 90% certain it'll be just me if there's a 2016 campaign (and web video is just one more element to "test drive" with a brief, limited-involvement 2016 run).

So....  probably ought to look into some sort of video cam (Flip cam?), maybe a decent microphone, perhaps even some lighting?? Certainly ought to set up an account on youtube, probably keeping everything uploaded there private.

you can't really expect to win, right?

Since my campaign isn't about my ability to predict election outcomes, what I expect doesn't matter.  What matters is that voters expect that the candidate with the most votes will win and I intend to be that candidate.

shouldn't've gone there in the first place

I actually think this is conceptually simple. Making all the changes to actually accomplish it....

Essentially, the government marries no one. Everyone gets civil unions.And the legal consequences of civil unions are identical to the current legal consequences of marriage. This includes all those interstate reciprocity features that civil unions don't currently have. Really the only thing that same-sex couples don't get is the word "marriage", or at least they don't get it from the government. The thing is, no one gets it any more.

If you want to be "married", you do what our forebears did generations earlier - you go to your church. And it's entirely up to your church whether they do or don't marry you. And if you do go get "married", don't forget that to the government that means nothing at all.  If you want those legal entanglements, you must separately go through the hoops for a "civil union".

This is really nothing more than re-separating church and state in an area where they became entangled.

jumping the gun?

Been thinking on & off (mostly off). Why not jump the gun, so to speak?

Let's say I retire early March '16. That would give me about 70 days to obtain ~550 (valid) signatures to get onto the Nov'16 ballot for state rep.  (actual deadline is May 23rd) The idea would be to get those 10+ sigs per day by going one-on-one with the voters either door-to-door or at events. This would be a lot cheaper than paying the filing fee and it combines petitioning with campaigning. Assuming you have your candidate website ready and some handout card ready, this is an efficient use of time. So you've got a on-ballot candidacy at a cut-rate cost but since it's all rush rush last minute stuff, what do you really expect to get out of it?

Well, a tiny headstart on the 2018 statewide effort for one thing. If your short local campaign puts extra focus on local groups affiliated with larger statewide (or national) organizations, that can be particularly useful. Also, there's no reason why a well thought out and organized ( a relative concept based on what I've observed as some pitiful efforts of recent statewide NPA on-ballot candidates) campaign for state legislature can't be pitched to potential "big fish" donors throughout Florida just as readily as a federal legislative campaign. Again, it's at least a tiny introduction to these players. It also could mean the senate campaign starts off with a small pool of volunteers rather than zero. And it's a limited investment shakedown which could prove whether I'm actually up to all this 2018 business or not.

Update:
I don't know... the current thinking is to lead in with a federal issues website morphing into candidate campaign(s). If there's going to be a 2016 campaign, it probably(?) needs to be Congress. But for that, petitioning is much much higher - ~4,500 (valid) which is going to require a very early start against the May 23, 2016 deadline. The other option (fee) is expensive. >$4,000, which pretty much guarantees FEC filing due to the $5,000 threshold for reporting.