Ted Nugent on Gun Control

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Lady Brave

What do you guys think about limiting the number of handguns a person is allowed to own? If we're only talking about protecting one's life and property, do you really need an arsenal of weapons to do that?

I for one do not think handguns should be a "collectible" item. As I said before, if your going to purchase weapons for collecting purposes you should be accountable for the amount of weapons you own (i.e. a collector's license). I know several people I deal with who literally own hundreds of handguns and they are constantly trading/selling their weapons.

Currently, I am required to report to ATF anyone who requests 4 or more handgun permits. In the beginning, I didn't typically report the older retired gentlemen who came in my office who got 10 permits at a time because they were considered collectors. To my surprise an ATF agent told me retirees were the worst offenders for selling weapons to criminal offenders and making straw man purchases. Who knew Gramps wasn't so innocent after all?

Problem is, they are collectables.
The Single Action Army is still being manufactured today, although antique Peacemakers are obviously rare and highly regarded as collectors items.

All original, good condition first generation Single Action Armies, those produced between 1873 and 1941, are among the most valuable to the collector. Especially valuable, often going for well over $10,000

Colt Single Action Army - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Lady Brave]

Originally Posted by jsarno

Problem is, they are collectables.
The Single Action Army is still being manufactured today, although antique Peacemakers are obviously rare and highly regarded as collectors items.

All original, good condition first generation Single Action Armies, those produced between 1873 and 1941, are among the most valuable to the collector. Especially valuable, often going for well over $10,000

Colt Single Action Army - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Just to clarify, I'm not talking about weapons classified as antiques, relics or curios. Those weapons are not subject to the gun control or brady act.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Lady Brave

Just to clarify, I'm not talking about weapons classified as antiques, relics or curios. Those weapons are not subject to the gun control or brady act.

But they became antiques from people not using them and letting them collect dust on a shelf. There are guns being made today that will be antiques, but you would not want to allow someone to store them.

FYI- I am for having as many guns as you want...but I am not for semi-automatic weapons or AK-47's and the like. There is no need for those in hunting. A good way for gun control activists to get rid of those is to try to pass a law that will make it illegal to use those types of weapons when hunting. Once that is passed, how can someone argue that they "need" it?