Ted Nugent on Gun Control

[dmek25]

i cant understand why a gun owner will not give up his gun, if it means one less person getting shot and killed. are the gun owners in agreement that there are way too many guns available?

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by dmek25

i cant understand why a gun owner will not give up his gun, if it means one less person getting shot and killed. are the gun owners in agreement that there are way too many guns available?

Because taking the guns from gun owners implies legal owners? That will not stop people from getting killed by pistol toting thugs. Legal owners do not kill others.
Are we going to ban aircraft because of the 9-11 attacks?
Are we going to ban alcohol? If you believe what you read, it is the greatest killer in vehicular death.
Are we going to ban steaks because they are responsible for over a thousand choking deaths annually?
It's not the steaks fault, or the cars, or the drink or the etc.
In this country banning things has nothing to do with the actual disappearance of the banned item. Look at what a wonderful success story the war on drugs has been for............ever.
We have a justice system problem. When we get serious about crime, punishment, and prevention, these things will cease to be an issue

"When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns"

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Hog1

Because taking the guns from gun owners implies legal owners? That will not stop people from getting killed by pistol toting thugs. Legal owners do not kill others.
Are we going to ban aircraft because of the 9-11 attacks?
Are we going to ban alcohol? If you believe what you read, it is the greatest killer in vehicular death.
Are we going to ban steaks because they are responsible for over a thousand choking deaths annually?
It's not the steaks fault, or the cars, or the drink or the etc.
In this country banning things has nothing to do with the actual disappearance of the banned item. Look at what a wonderful success story the war on drugs has been for............ever.
We have a justice system problem. When we get serious about crime, punishment, and prevention, these things will cease to be an issue

"When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns"

Exactly...great post.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Hog1

Because taking the guns from gun owners implies legal owners? That will not stop people from getting killed by pistol toting thugs. Legal owners do not kill others.
Are we going to ban aircraft because of the 9-11 attacks?
Are we going to ban alcohol? If you believe what you read, it is the greatest killer in vehicular death.
Are we going to ban steaks because they are responsible for over a thousand choking deaths annually?
It's not the steaks fault, or the cars, or the drink or the etc.
In this country banning things has nothing to do with the actual disappearance of the banned item. Look at what a wonderful success story the war on drugs has been for............ever.
We have a justice system problem. When we get serious about crime, punishment, and prevention, these things will cease to be an issue

"When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns"

You're in essence saying:

Airplanes and alcohol are dangerous.
Airplanes and alcohol are not banned.
Therefore we shouldn't ban guns either.

What an absurd and fallacious argument.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by saden1

You're in essence saying:


What an absurd and fallacious argument.

No...that's not what he's saying. He's saying there is an overraction going on. You can't use the argument that it kills people. It doesn't. People kill people.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by jsarno

No...that's not what he's saying. He's saying there is an overraction going on. You can't use the argument that it kills people. It doesn't. People kill people.

Well, that's certainly the impression I got from Hog's quote. Further, I think Saden's sentiment is correct.

Saden's point (I think) is that, even though the use of each can result in death (as correctly asserted by Hog), guns, alchohol and planes pose different problems for and different types of the threats to public safety and to assert (as Hog does) that the possible solution for the threat/problem posed by guns is equally applicable to the different threats/problems posed by planes or alchohol - is illogical.

Fact is, because of the inherent danger presented by the use and/or availability of guns, they should be heavily regulated just like any other inherently dangerous machines/objects/devices.

Last I checked the private use of airplanes is heavily regulated (FAA anybody) - Can't fly a plane through the middle of town, can you? Same with alchohol - Can't buy alchohol unless your of a certain age. can you? Given the danger presented by guns, it seems perfectly reasonable for the public to expect, just as with planes and alchohol, that limitations be placed on who can have them and restrictions exist as to the public places you can carry them.

As I said before, people kill people - guns just make it easier to do so. For that reason, their use and availability should be subject to strict regulation AND unlawful ownership or their misuse of them should be severely punished.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Well, that's certainly the impression I got from Hog's quote. Further, I think Saden's sentiment is correct.

Saden's point (I think) is that, even though the use of each can result in death (as correctly asserted by Hog), guns, alchohol and planes pose different problems for and different types of the threats to public safety and to assert (as Hog does) that the possible solution for the threat/problem posed by guns is equally applicable to the different threats/problems posed by planes or alchohol - is illogical.

Fact is, because of the inherent danger presented by the use and/or availability of guns, they should be heavily regulated just like any other inherently dangerous machines/objects/devices.

Last I checked the private use of airplanes is heavily regulated (FAA anybody) - Can't fly a plane through the middle of town, can you? Same with alchohol - Can't buy alchohol unless your of a certain age. can you? Given the danger presented by guns, it seems perfectly reasonable for the public to expect, just as with planes and alchohol, that limitations be placed on who can have them and restrictions exist as to the public places you can carry them.

As I said before, people kill people - guns just make it easier to do so. For that reason, their use and availability should be subject to strict regulation AND unlawful ownership or their misuse of them should be severely punished.

While you make valid arguments, and I respect your view, alcohol is worse than guns. It kills and hurts more people than guns do well more than triple fold. The ONLY restriction on alcohol is to be 21. I forget what the age is for guns, but it's at least 18...maybe 21 too.
There are likely just as many if not more stabbings in america as gun related issues. Does this mean we should regulate the knives too? A 5 year old can by a set of steak knives.
Point is, anything can kill or hurt someone. I can throw a rock at your head and hurt or kill you. You don't blame the object, you blame the person. We have become a society that points the finger at anything and everything, when we need to hold each other accountable. I am for MUCH stricter penalties and like I said before, there needs to be waaaay more jails to teach people a lesson.

[Lady Brave]

Building jails and prisons is not that easy. People don't want to pay for them. Guilford County (where I work) has been told repeatedly by the State that we have to reduce overcrowding and need to build a new jail in Greensboro. However, our dumbass democratic commissioners have dug their heels in and they contend we simply need more "programs" in order to reduce overcrowding. It's all politics with them and it will most likely take one of our officers getting killed before someone will realize the seriousness of the situation.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Lady Brave

Building jails and prisons is not that easy. People don't want to pay for them. Guilford County (where I work) has been told repeatedly by the State that we have to reduce overcrowding and need to build a new jail in Greensboro. However, our dumbass democratic commissioners have dug their heels in and they contend we simply need more "programs" in order to reduce overcrowding. It's all politics with them and it will most likely take one of our officers getting killed before someone will realize the seriousness of the situation.

I don't think we should put jail in highly populated areas. We have plenty of space out here in the desert!
Also, people shouldn't be able to vote on it unless it would be within 1 mile of them, or schools. We NEED more jails...people shouldn't bitch and moan so it doesn't happen.

[Lady Brave]

Originally Posted by jsarno

I don't think we should put jail in highly populated areas. We have plenty of space out here in the desert!
Also, people shouldn't be able to vote on it unless it would be within 1 mile of them, or schools. We NEED more jails...people shouldn't bitch and moan so it doesn't happen.

You're confusing jails with prisons. Jails have to be built near a courthouse. The voters vote on bonds to build the jails. We have been trying to avoid putting it before the voters because we know it won't pass. It's not a popular issue and the press has not been on the Sheriff's side either. Our democrat commissioners want to dance around and say that we don't need a jail and that our republican sheriff doesn't care that the people will have to pay more taxes. Politics. If Guilford County keeps screwing around the Feds will eventually come in and tell us where and how we will build a jail. We won't have any say at that point and the County will end up paying more for it.

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by saden1

You're in essence saying:


What an absurd and fallacious argument.

It is pure fantasy, and fallacy, regarding my alleged absurd, and fallacious arguement.
HOWEVER, I think your outrage blinded you to the larger message. Inanimate objects are not evil, and they don't kill people. That is what people do. Until something changes with...........people, People will always find a...........weapon to kill with

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Hog1

It is pure fantasy, and fallacy, regarding my alleged absurd, and fallacious arguement.
HOWEVER, I think your outrage blinded you to the larger message. Inanimate objects are not evil, and they don't kill people. That is what people do. Until something changes with...........people, People will always find a...........weapon to kill with

Very true...so instead of blaming the object, why not blame the person and create stiffer penalties for people that abuse them?
For instance, drunk driving...those are some of the most leinant laws in the country, yet they are a driving around in a killing machine. Most of the time, a 1 time offender gets a slap on the wrist.
We need more jails, and we can afford to build and maintain them...we need to go back to chain gangs etc, and we need to make people pay for their mistakes.

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by jsarno

Very true...so instead of blaming the object, why not blame the person and create stiffer penalties for people that abuse them?
For instance, drunk driving...those are some of the most leinant laws in the country, yet they are a driving around in a killing machine. Most of the time, a 1 time offender gets a slap on the wrist.
We need more jails, and we can afford to build and maintain them...we need to go back to chain gangs etc, and we need to make people pay for their mistakes.

This guy knows......

Arizona Sheriff Uses Soldiers' Sacrifices to Rebuke Inmate Complaints - BreakTheChain.org

FOXNews.com - Arizona Sheriff Uses Anti-Smuggling Law to Target Illegal Immigrants - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Hog1

This guy knows......

Arizona Sheriff Uses Soldiers' Sacrifices to Rebuke Inmate Complaints - BreakTheChain.org

FOXNews.com - Arizona Sheriff Uses Anti-Smuggling Law to Target Illegal Immigrants - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News

NIIIICE, we need to vote him in for President!!! It's nice to know there are still people in the world that teach consequences to actions.