http://biggeekdaddy.com/miscvideos/TedNugent.html
video speaks for itself, nothing more I can think to add to it.
video speaks for itself, nothing more I can think to add to it.
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Ted Nugent, how does this not make sense to you?? (self defense)
Self defence doesn't require you, me and everyone else to carry a gun. It's as simple as that.
Yeah, he makes a reasonable argument for concealed carry. lol"Let's pretend brave families didn't leave the tyrants and the slave drivers of Europe, so that they could practice the religion of their choice and they could speak out without being murdered. That they could produce wool without the Kings men coming and taking it every harvest."
Pretty sure that's been posted aaaaages ago. I don't really have a lot to say about it though.
you are correct, it only requires you to carry one if you need to defend yourself, successfully.AussieReaper wrote:
Self defence doesn't require you, me and everyone else to carry a gun. It's as simple as that.Yeah, he makes a reasonable argument for concealed carry. lol"Let's pretend brave families didn't leave the tyrants and the slave drivers of Europe, so that they could practice the religion of their choice and they could speak out without being murdered. That they could produce wool without the Kings men coming and taking it every harvest."
as for your second paragraph, try denying what he said when you put it in context, instead of trying to cherry pick
because you agree with it? Or you can not argue against it?ghettoperson wrote:
Pretty sure that's been posted aaaaages ago. I don't really have a lot to say about it though.
i agree with the basic message, not so much with the presentation
I agree that I'd rather criminals ended up dead than old ladies, however I don't believe that in a lot of the examples he provided an old lady was simply going to be able to bust out her pistol and put a couple of rounds through his head. I also think Ted Nugent is a massive douchebag.lowing wrote:
because you agree with it? Or you can not argue against it?ghettoperson wrote:
Pretty sure that's been posted aaaaages ago. I don't really have a lot to say about it though.
Why, you are used to a little more PC?krazed wrote:
i agree with the basic message, not so much with the presentation
Old ladies can and do carry hand guns.ghettoperson wrote:
I agree that I'd rather criminals ended up dead than old ladies, however I don't believe that in a lot of the examples he provided an old lady was simply going to be able to bust out her pistol and put a couple of rounds through his head. I also think Ted Nugent is a massive douchebag.lowing wrote:
because you agree with it? Or you can not argue against it?ghettoperson wrote:
Pretty sure that's been posted aaaaages ago. I don't really have a lot to say about it though.
He does not do drugs, does not drink, runs a youth camp, , is pro-conservation, never been arrested or in jail, yeah, he is a real pice of shit all right.
Well i for one only watched a quarter of that vid as i couldn't resist clicking on the babes .
I think no one should carry guns unless they have a genuine professional need for one. Guns are for killing people. The general public don't need to have it made any easier for them to kill people.
Ted Nugent is a great and patriotic american. The man needs to run for office. posted from a 767 ready to taxi.
What the fuck are you talking about? Nowhere in that post did I say that old ladies didn't carry, I said that I didn't think if they got thrown out of their car into the road and got the shit kicked out of them they'd be able to pull a gun out on their attacker.lowing wrote:
Old ladies can and do carry hand guns.ghettoperson wrote:
I agree that I'd rather criminals ended up dead than old ladies, however I don't believe that in a lot of the examples he provided an old lady was simply going to be able to bust out her pistol and put a couple of rounds through his head. I also think Ted Nugent is a massive douchebag.lowing wrote:
because you agree with it? Or you can not argue against it?
He does not do drugs, does not drink, runs a youth camp, , is pro-conservation, never been arrested or in jail, yeah, he is a real pice of shit all right.
Lowing, you can be a fucking saint in terms of your actions for all I care, but the way he gave that little talk he came off as nothing but a grade A douchebag.
no, because giving speeches like that is what gets even more restrictions put in place thanks to the easily scared and manipulated publiclowing wrote:
Why, you are used to a little more PC?krazed wrote:
i agree with the basic message, not so much with the presentation
you know, like the people who call an AR-15 an "assault weapon" but a Ruger mini 14 a hunting rifle
i.e. people who don't know shit about firearms, but pass/support laws restricting them anyway
the same people who just can't see that a gun can have any other use than murdering babies and children
I doubt many could pull a gun and shoot, AFTER they have been thrown out of a car and gotten the shit kicked out of them. the premise being you pull the gun and defend yourself BEFORE you get pulled out of the car and beat to death.ghettoperson wrote:
What the fuck are you talking about? Nowhere in that post did I say that old ladies didn't carry, I said that I didn't think if they got thrown out of their car into the road and got the shit kicked out of them they'd be able to pull a gun out on their attacker.lowing wrote:
Old ladies can and do carry hand guns.ghettoperson wrote:
I agree that I'd rather criminals ended up dead than old ladies, however I don't believe that in a lot of the examples he provided an old lady was simply going to be able to bust out her pistol and put a couple of rounds through his head. I also think Ted Nugent is a massive douchebag.
He does not do drugs, does not drink, runs a youth camp, , is pro-conservation, never been arrested or in jail, yeah, he is a real pice of shit all right.
Lowing, you can be a fucking saint in terms of your actions for all I care, but the way he gave that little talk he came off as nothing but a grade A douchebag.
Yeah I know, he tells it like it is and does not sugar coat the facts with PC. Offensive maybe to some, but can you argue against it? That is the question
Yer correct.krazed wrote:
no, because giving speeches like that is what gets even more restrictions put in place thanks to the easily scared and manipulated publiclowing wrote:
Why, you are used to a little more PC?krazed wrote:
i agree with the basic message, not so much with the presentation
you know, like the people who call an AR-15 an "assault weapon" but a Ruger mini 14 a hunting rifle
i.e. people who don't know shit about firearms, but pass/support laws restricting them anyway
the same people who just can't see that a gun can have any other use than murdering babies and children
Does not make sense to me, however, I will take plain language over political ambiguity any day
I think the guy is right, in principle. Maybe it isn't brought in a nice way, but it is the truth.
Law obiding people, with no conviction on their record, should be able to purchase a gun without any questions, just some permit from their local policedepartment.
Law obiding people, with no conviction on their record, should be able to purchase a gun without any questions, just some permit from their local policedepartment.
I also like his notion that the second amendment already gives him the right to conceal carry. Makes sense.Pierre wrote:
I think the guy is right, in principle. Maybe it isn't brought in a nice way, but it is the truth.
Law obiding people, with no conviction on their record, should be able to purchase a gun without any questions, just some permit from their local policedepartment.
that's the way it's done here... it seems to be working quite wellPierre wrote:
I think the guy is right, in principle. Maybe it isn't brought in a nice way, but it is the truth.
Law obiding people, with no conviction on their record, should be able to purchase a gun without any questions, just some permit from their local policedepartment.
there's a mandatory safety course you need to take (or just challenge it, fill out the test, and be done with it like i did) i support this because common sense isn't common
I couldn't agree more with Ted if I were him.
Hmmmmmmmmmmm, no traffic, one bump to see if it accidentally fell of radar, or if the pacifists really can not counter the argument.
Or we don't care/agree/mostly agree/saw the video 3 years ago
Study by John Lott/David Mustard of University of Chicago(1997 Journal of Legal Studies) studied impact of Right to Carry Concealed Handgun Laws on Crime rate between 1977 and 1992: Reduced murder 8.5%, reduced rape 5%, and reduced severe assaults 7%. During that time, if right to carry had been common in US, there would have been 1,600 less murders, 4,200 less rapes, and 60,000 less severe assaults.
Vermont 1980(most freedom to carry concealed weapons): murder rate: 22% of National Avg., robbery rate: 15% of National Avg.
Trained Concealed Carry Permit Holders shoot innocents in error 1/3 as many times as Police annually.
Effect of "Shall Issue" Concealed Handgun laws in US: multi-victim public shootings down 84%, death in said shootings down 90%, injury in said shootings down 82%
Dade County, Florida created a tracking system to track the frequency of crimes committed by their 21,000 Concealed Weapon Permit Holders in 1987, between then and 1992, 4 crimes were committed by permit holders, none involving injuries, no innocents were harmed by a permit holder. The program was abandoned in 1992 because there were too few crimes to render it useful. The entire state of Florida recorded a total of 18 crimes by permit holders between 1987 and 1994. As of 1998, there was one incident when a permit holder shot someone after a traffic accident, but the shooter was determined to be acting is self defense. As of 1998, no permit holder had shot a police officer, while there were several cases of permit holders saving the life of an officer.
The Supreme Court and various lower courts have held that "police are not obligated to protect individuals from crime".
I can email all sources to anyone who wishes to dispute this information. (I did a research paper on the topic of Gun Control)
*I posted this once before
Vermont 1980(most freedom to carry concealed weapons): murder rate: 22% of National Avg., robbery rate: 15% of National Avg.
Trained Concealed Carry Permit Holders shoot innocents in error 1/3 as many times as Police annually.
Effect of "Shall Issue" Concealed Handgun laws in US: multi-victim public shootings down 84%, death in said shootings down 90%, injury in said shootings down 82%
Dade County, Florida created a tracking system to track the frequency of crimes committed by their 21,000 Concealed Weapon Permit Holders in 1987, between then and 1992, 4 crimes were committed by permit holders, none involving injuries, no innocents were harmed by a permit holder. The program was abandoned in 1992 because there were too few crimes to render it useful. The entire state of Florida recorded a total of 18 crimes by permit holders between 1987 and 1994. As of 1998, there was one incident when a permit holder shot someone after a traffic accident, but the shooter was determined to be acting is self defense. As of 1998, no permit holder had shot a police officer, while there were several cases of permit holders saving the life of an officer.
The Supreme Court and various lower courts have held that "police are not obligated to protect individuals from crime".
I can email all sources to anyone who wishes to dispute this information. (I did a research paper on the topic of Gun Control)
*I posted this once before
Ted Nugent for President... If a criminal thought everyone was packing... he might think twice about
robbing or attacking them. Ted tells it like it is and it may seem a little over the top...but I have driven across country
and been in many states... there are many like him... including myself....
robbing or attacking them. Ted tells it like it is and it may seem a little over the top...but I have driven across country
and been in many states... there are many like him... including myself....
Love is the answer
I support the right to bear arms, but I'm not going to pretend that self defense always requires a gun or that the state doesn't have the right to limit when you can and can't use lethal force.
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Ted Nugent, how does this not make sense to you?? (self defense)