Ted Nugent on Gun Control

[dmek25]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

First, you must have access to some top secret information, because the precise scope and nature of the secret wiretapping program has not been made public. What we do know is that AG Gonzalez said they were wiretapping the lines of "people who the government had a reasonable basis to believe were involved in terrorist activities." Every lawyer will tell you that "reasonable basis" is an INCREDIBLY easy threshhold to satisfy.

Second, the merits of the wiretapping program is not at issue. What is at issue is how many conservatives narrow the scope of Constitutional protections when it comes to the war on terrorism and very broadly define it when dealing with the 2nd Amendment.

great post sheriff. right on point

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

Second, the merits of the wiretapping program is not at issue. What is at issue is how many conservatives narrow the scope of Constitutional protections when it comes to the war on terrorism and very broadly define it when dealing with the 2nd Amendment.

That pretty much sums it up right there.

[724Skinsfan]

True. I think a good stat would be showing, as a percentage, whether the number of gun related deaths/injuries went up or down since 1997. Quick. Someone tech savvy find that out and report back.

[MTK]

LOL where does this ridiculous fear of the government come from anyway? That's a pretty stupid reason to support the need for guns IMO.

Let's say hell freezes over and the gov't decides to take over... whatever the hell that means, what are you and your shotgun going to do anyway?

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

LOL where does this ridiculous fear of the government come from anyway? That's a pretty stupid reason to support the need for guns IMO.

Let's say hell freezes over and the gov't decides to take over... whatever the hell that means, what are you and your shotgun going to do anyway?

I just don't see that agrument being made in this conversation but some people do believe that notion. I just feel we have a right to own a gun. I myself do not own a gun but if I need one for some reason I want to be able to buy one. I don't have any problem with having manditory training, back ground checks etc... but just let me have the right to protect my family.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I just don't see that agrument being made in this conversation but some people do believe that notion. I just feel we have a right to own a gun. I myself do not own a gun but if I need one for some reason I want to be able to buy one. I don't have any problem with having manditory training, back ground checks etc... but just let me have the right to protect my family.

I'm not picking on jsarno but he just said:

One of those protesters stuck out in my mind with his sign that read "I LOVE my country, but I fear my government".

If that is not evidence that we need to keep guns, then what is?

I've seen other similar opinions I just don't feel like digging through this thread right now.

I'm not trying to be a jerk I'm just curious what people are afraid of exactly regarding the gov't, and what is a gun going to do to protect yourself if the gov't was "out to get you".

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I'm not picking on jsarno but he just said:



I've seen other similar opinions I just don't feel like digging through this thread right now.

I'm not trying to be a jerk I'm just curious what people are afraid of exactly regarding the gov't, and what is a gun going to do to protect yourself if the gov't was "out to get you".

Just for the record, my comment about "If that is not evidence that we need to keep guns, then what is?" was about the ENTIRE post, not the guy holding the sign.
I'm not thinking the government is "out to get me", but I think the government can and does make decisions with short sighted thoughts. If people scream loudly enough, they are usually heard, but the government should be quick to look into things more thoroughly, such as how other countries have faired getting rid of their firearms, or even how certain laws being passed have affected the publics reactions. Decisions are too often made becuase of political stature, or give and take, not because the subject was debated with an open mind. Most of this problem is our governmental system, but the point still remains.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by jsarno

Just for the record, my comment about "If that is not evidence that we need to keep guns, then what is?" was about the ENTIRE post, not the guy holding the sign.
I'm not thinking the government is "out to get me", but I think the government can and does make decisions with short sighted thoughts. If people scream loudly enough, they are usually heard, but the government should be quick to look into things more thoroughly, such as how other countries have faired getting rid of their firearms, or even how certain laws being passed have affected the publics reactions. Decisions are too often made becuase of political stature, or give and take, not because the subject was debated with an open mind. Most of this problem is our governmental system, but the point still remains.

The way you worded it you seemed to be commenting on the sign and what it said as a reason to keep guns... but either way I still don't understand how that's a logical take on the topic.

[steveo395]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I'm not picking on jsarno but he just said:



I've seen other similar opinions I just don't feel like digging through this thread right now.

I'm not trying to be a jerk I'm just curious what people are afraid of exactly regarding the gov't, and what is a gun going to do to protect yourself if the gov't was "out to get you".

A gun can be used to fight back if the government becomes oppressive. This isn't happening now, but you never know what could happen sometime in the future. Thats the reason why this was put in the Bill of Rights.

How do you think Hitler rounded up all of the jews? He confiscated all of their guns so they couldn't fight back.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I just don't see that agrument being made in this conversation but some people do believe that notion. I just feel we have a right to own a gun. I myself do not own a gun but if I need one for some reason I want to be able to buy one. I don't have any problem with having manditory training, back ground checks etc... but just let me have the right to protect my family.

That's a reasonable position. I just have serious issues with the notion that the government shouldn't be allowed to conduct background checks, must legalize fully automatic rifles, etc.

Also, there was another gun control thread in which people made impassioned posts about the possible need to rebel against the government. I was waiting for posts about how the U.N. is planning to invade our country and make us all speak Mandarin Chineses.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

That's a reasonable position. I just have serious issues with the notion that the government shouldn't be allowed to conduct background checks, must legalize fully automatic rifles, etc.

For the record, I am all for background checks, and a waiting period for any gun, rifle or not. I am against taking guns out of the hands of the innocent, and if you truly are innocent, then a background check won't hurt you.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

LOL where does this ridiculous fear of the government come from anyway? That's a pretty stupid reason to support the need for guns IMO.

Let's say hell freezes over and the gov't decides to take over... whatever the hell that means, what are you and your shotgun going to do anyway?

Exactly. Angry people will stop an oppressive government -- armed or not. Guns aren't necessary (or effective) for that.

I am a gun supporter. I own a handgun. I have no noble reason for owning it. I certainly didn't buy it to "protect" myself. I might not even be able to use it against someone, if the need should ever arise. My biggest fear is that it could be used against me. I would never carry it "just in case" -- it's too risky.

However, I enjoy target shooting. That's fair.

I would never support a government ban on guns. Regulation is fine. I would probably never support a government ban on anything. In my opinion, that is not within the government's rights. I don't believe they should have the power to ban something -- only regulate.

It's a dangerous situation when the government starts banning something. Just the arrogance of such a thought is disturbing. Regulation is one thing, but banning is totally different.

For the record, I support regulation.

<<waits for bashing>>

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

I would probably never support a government ban on anything. In my opinion, that is not within the government's rights. I don't believe they should have the power to ban something -- only regulate.

The government bans all sorts of things, including access to nukes, tanks, mines, crack, meth, junk, etc.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

The government bans all sorts of things, including access to nukes, tanks, mines, crack, meth, junk, etc.

I realize government bans lots of things. I just don't really support the idea. Extreme regulation is acceptable for me. If I want to own a tank, I should be allowed to. Sure, I'd have to prove my competence, and I probably wouldn't have any legal place to drive it (other than my own land), but I don't think the government has the right to say I can't buy one -- or build one myself.

The bottom line is, I think the government has the authority to impose restrictions to protect the people, and facilitate commerce. Beyond that, they have no just reason to impose a law. So, unless they could prove that me owning a tank would threaten the safety of others, I don't think they have any right to prevent me from doing so.

[724Skinsfan]

Here's an article that talks about gun related crime in the UK. Gun related crime actually increase and higher now than 10 years ago. Surprisingly, there were only 49 gun related deaths last year there.

Here's the full report by the British government.