I love Ted Nuggent

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/LCHtw6WbbnM&rel=0&color1=0x6699&color2=0x54abd6&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/LCHtw6WbbnM&rel=0&color1=0x6699&color2=0x54abd6&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

That was just what I needed at the end of a busy day... perfect night cap.  Thanks for that.

EK

Word!!!

I love Uncle Ted!

Talk about hitting the nail on the head.  It's amazing how simple things should be....

Ahmen brother ted - Ahmen!!!!!!!
One of these days some one will actually hear the truth and there will be true freedom in America

  .....and  .

I don't like repeat offenders. I like dead offenders.

That pretty much sums it all up for me.

I LOVE it! If you have ever had a family member go through something terrible like this you could do nothing but agree!!!!! BTW, this would really help out OUR economy; lower the $$$$ used to house them.

Love hearing from the Nuge.

Nice but he lost me at the no limits thing. So people should be able to run around with car mounted full auto .50 cals? What about RPGs, landmines, nukes and attack helicopters? This point has always puzzled me. Can someone enlighten me on this?

Please no flame wars either, I would really like to understand.

I played the vid back and it sounded like Ted was talking about individuals carrying handguns for their personal self-defense. He gave two examples of people who's lives were lost because they did not. Criminals are going to be packing no matter what. I wish the criminals would help themselves to the landmines.....I mean in the minefield. jim

Ted was talking strictly in the self-defense context and I agree with what he said in that context. While I believe the Second Amendment was clearly about maintaining an armed local militia for local and national defense (like the Minute Men), I do think we have a right to defend ourselves so if misreading it allows us to stay armed, that's fine with me. While I agree with everything he did say in that narrow context, he glossed over something that is the real tough issue: he's talking about reasonable people using guns reasonably and responsibly--something I agree we have a right to do. But that's not the issue at all--the real issue is how we keep unreasonable and irresponsible people from using them on us, our children, their children, and letting their children have them to kill other children, teachers, etc. And I don't mean criminals either. I believe the irresponsible use of handguns outweighs the responsible uses in most suburbs and cities--hunting excluded--and that's our problem. But I don't think restricting our rights will solve it either. As NRA says, the problem is people.

Setting aside the fact that criminals will always have weapons and gun control methods proposed and implemented to date don't address that very well at all, the above is the really difficult issue that no one has adequately discussed let alone addressed.
The gun control folks are focusing on the threats from people going "postal" and a willing to reduce our capacity to defend ourselves to do it--I personally think our capacity to defend ourselves is too steep a price to pay for that illusion of safety--I am pretty sure many more people are killed by DUI drivers than "postal" gunmen. Even when you add in accidental shootings by children, people "going Columbine", and crime against innocents (not gangs and drug-dealer shoot outs), I still think the number is less than DUI fatalities or permanent injuries.

But just like shark attacks, the fear of the event blows it's probabilities out of proportion. And a lot of politicians love to cater to voters fears--it the next best thing to wrapping themselves in the flag and pandering to patriotism to get votes. I think it was Samuel Johnson who said patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel--but I'd add pandering to unreasonable fears is the second to last. That is how we got that Bank Bailouts going. Aside: Of the $150 billion in bailout money, only $50 billion has been paid back but $32 billion in bonuses have been paid out this year--but I digress.

We do have to figure out how to address that issue. I don't want my children dying at school because some free man let his teenager get his gun. I'd like to hear Ted address that. The NRA so far has no answer that works and until they do, gun control will keep coming up because fear is stronger than reason and there are plenty of politicians who find that an opportunity they just cannot pass up.

Bill,  I agree that Ted was talking about defense, but there is a valid argument that the founding fathers were not talking strictly about personal defense or hunting...  they were more likely than not thinking about how to keep the new govt. in check, given the circumstances.  That's why many are of the opinion that the right to bear arms should include gear equal to current police and military gear.

I'm not sure I agree, but it does make a certain amount of sense.  I mean, who draws the line, and why?  And why shouldn't a responsible citizen be able to have a tank if he can afford it?

Besides, that stuff you mentioned is so expensive it's not likely to be used in crime.

And why shouldn't a responsible citizen be able to have a tank if he can afford it?

There are two words in the above that are the root of the issues our society is grappling with: "responsible"--what does that mean and how does a society enforce that restriction and "afford"--if wealth really the criterion we want to use to decide who get the greatest number and most powerful arms? That hasn't been working out so well in Africa lately--particularly Somalia. We don't need a legal Blackwater operating in the US--but that's where I see that leading.

I'm not sure I agree, but it does make a certain amount of sense.  I mean, who draws the line, and why?  And why shouldn't a responsible citizen be able to have a tank if he can afford it?

Besides, that stuff you mentioned is so expensive it's not likely to be used in crime.
[/quote]


YES! More than 9 outa 10 gun crimes are with cheap or stolen hand guns. I have baught AR15 and AK47's BRAND NEW from the store to later be told to register them as an assult weapon (WTF)! I baught them brand new from a store! Now they're are sold and I can't afford the new ones, which btw are basically the same thing!
 Don't let the mainstream media throw out that kids are killing kids because of honest gun owners leaving guns around there house. Those so called kids are usually GANG members and the look at the area's that all those killings take place.
       Guns are bad, but there sales went up after Obama; is that in support of him???