Ted Nugent on Gun Control

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Hog1

The point you make Saden is obviously shared by many. The philosophy with "everybody packing" puts everyone (thugs, and non) on an even playing field. Thugs are like any other predator, they generally look for the weakest prey. That is a fact that has any con will support. That's why you don't see bad ass's getting assaulted much. If you got an AK in your purse, they'll look elsewhere.
While Ted does have the wrap of being a wildman, much of what he says is fact. Our prison/justice system does not work. Check out ANY success's it is having......it's a disgrace. I do not condone all he advocates, but repeat offenders is BS. The Con's have all the rights. What about that is wrong??????

Well said, and I agree. I just don't see a way of fixing the actual problem. Taking away guns is not the answer cause the thugs of the world will still find a way of getting their hands on them...giving too many guns to everyone could cause an issue of some kid that normally wouldn't do anything stupid the opportunity to do something stupid. Throw in the crowded jail system and we just have an ugly mess.
I still hold to the thought "you can have my gun when you pry it out of my cold dead fingers".

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Hog1

The point you make Saden is obviously shared by many. The philosophy with "everybody packing" puts everyone (thugs, and non) on an even playing field. Thugs are like any other predator, they generally look for the weakest prey. That is a fact that has any con will support. That's why you don't see bad ass's getting assaulted much. If you got an AK in your purse, they'll look elsewhere.
While Ted does have the wrap of being a wildman, much of what he says is fact. Our prison/justice system does not work. Check out ANY success's it is having......it's a disgrace. I do not condone all he advocates, but repeat offenders is BS. The Con's have all the rights. What about that is wrong??????

What's wrong with the following statement? If you can't spot the fallacy then we'll just have to agree to disagree.

The government isn't doing a good job of keeping offenders in jail. Therefore every citizen should own a gun to protect themselves.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by saden1

What's wrong with the following statement? If you can't spot the fallacy then we'll just have to agree to disagree.

The government isn't doing a good job of keeping offenders in jail. Therefore every citizen should own a gun to protect themselves.

I think what he's trying to say is that in the end, each individual is ultimately responsible for protecting himself. 9 times out of 10, the government and the police are there to apprehend and incarcerate those who have already committed a crime. By then, it's too late for the victim.

The key here is individual rights. You have the right to protect yourself and your family with deadly force, if faced by an aggressor with a deadly weapon. No, the good guys don't always win. Surprise is the advantage of the attacker. And many times, that can be the deciding factor. But it's far better to be armed with fighting chance, than to be unarmed with no chance at all.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by saden1

Clearly you don't get it. The point I was trying to make is you can not defend yourself by carrying a gun. If everyone is packing you have absolutely no advantage whatsoever.

The argument that somehow carrying a gun eliminates or reduces the incentive for someone wanting to off you is absurd. They'll simply go about it smarter.


I like guns, I go to the gun range a few times a year but I really don't think we should play laissez-faire with guns and go back to the wild wild west.

Yes but if the assailant is crrying a gun and you are not then are clearly at a disadvantage. As has been said those looking to hurt me of my family are probably not too keen on following gun laws. Being able to have a gun to defend myself from them should be a natural right.


Anwyas I tend to agree with you but thought you were a little off base with that initial statement. I don't advocate a totally uncontrolled gun population either. I just find the arguments that guns aren't really protective silly.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

Yes but if the assailant is crrying a gun and you are not then are clearly at a disadvantage. As has been said those looking to hurt me of my family are probably not too keen on following gun laws. Being able to have a gun to defend myself from them should be a natural right.


Anwyas I tend to agree with you but thought you were a little off base with that initial statement. I don't advocate a totally uncontrolled gun population either. I just find the arguments that guns aren't really protective silly.

If someone wants to kill you're always at a disadvantage, whether you're packing or not.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by saden1

If someone wants to kill you're always at a disadvantage, whether you're packing or not.

So you'd rather be at a bigger disadvantage? You're not making sense.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

So you'd rather be at a bigger disadvantage? You're not making sense.

In the context of day to day life I'd rather not carry a gun. If that's a disadvantage, that's a chance I'm willing to take. I think the negatives associated with carrying a gun outweighs the advantages of being able to "protect yourself."

[mheisig]

Originally Posted by saden1

Clearly you don't get it. The point I was trying to make is you can not defend yourself by carrying a gun. If everyone is packing you have absolutely no advantage whatsoever.

The argument that somehow carrying a gun eliminates or reduces the incentive for someone wanting to off you is absurd. They'll simply go about it smarter.


I like guns, I go to the gun range a few times a year but I really don't think we should play laissez-faire with guns and go back to the wild wild west.

This is totally a side note, but the criminals ARE packing.

Like I said, completely irrelevant, unrelated...

[saden1]

Originally Posted by mheisig

This is totally a side note, but the criminals ARE packing.

Like I said, completely irrelevant, unrelated...

And your point is?

[That Guy]

gun control only controls guns for those that abide by laws in the first place.

If you're going to kill someone anyways, i doubt a weapons charge is really going to make you think twice.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by That Guy

gun control only controls guns for those that abide by laws in the first place.

If you're going to kill someone anyways, i doubt a weapons charge is really going to make you think twice.

Absolutely agree.

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by That Guy

gun control only controls guns for those that abide by laws in the first place.

If you're going to kill someone anyways, i doubt a weapons charge is really going to make you think twice.

Totally!
If anyone thinks stricter or more gun controls will help in the control of illegal firearms, take a look at the success with the war on drugs in this country lo' these many years.
We have WAY to many laws on the books now. We need to ENFORCE what we have. The justice system is unjust

[Hog1]

Geez, I HATE these tests! Just like the damn SAT!
I personally don't believe the gov't is doing a good job of almost anything in the justice system.

Oh shit, there's a part B:
I honestly don't know if every citizen should own a gun. While cons are citizens, I would not advocate their gun ownership. While persons having been judged, or demonstrated to be incompetent, violent, or just to F...n crazy, I would not advocate the ownership of a gun.

[djnemo65]

Well all you have to do is compare the murder rate in the US with other modern industrial countries in which guns are prohibited. The US is significantly higher. For those who argue that guns deter crime, how do you explain that discrepancy?

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by djnemo65

Well all you have to do is compare the murder rate in the US with other modern industrial countries in which guns are prohibited. The US is significantly higher. For those who argue that guns deter crime, how do you explain that discrepancy?

I don't think anyone is saying that. Crime and murder will always exist, regardless of the availability of firearms.

The question I have for you is, do you have the right to defend yourself?