Poll

Do You Agree with Ted Nugent?

Yes48%48% - 35
No29%29% - 21
Didn't feel like reading this so I vote whatever.22%22% - 16
Total: 72
superfly_cox
soup fly mod
+717|7195

Read this then vote.  Do you agree with Ted Nugent?

Ted Nugent wrote:

Zero tolerance, huh? Gun-free zones, huh? Try this on for size: Columbine gun-free zone, New York City pizza shop gun-free zone, Luby's Cafeteria gun-free zone, Amish school in Pennsylvania gun-free zone and now Virginia Tech gun-free zone.

Anybody see what the evil Brady Campaign and other anti-gun cults have created? I personally have zero tolerance for evil and denial. And America had best wake up real fast that the brain-dead celebration of unarmed helplessness will get you killed every time, and I've about had enough of it.

Nearly a decade ago, a Springfield, Oregon, high schooler, a hunter familiar with firearms, was able to bring an unfolding rampage to an abrupt end when he identified a gunman attempting to reload his .22-caliber rifle, made the tactical decision to make a move and tackled the shooter.

A few years back, an assistant principal at Pearl High School in Mississippi, which was a gun-free zone, retrieved his legally owned Colt .45 from his car and stopped a Columbine wannabe from continuing his massacre at another school after he had killed two and wounded more at Pearl.

At an eighth-grade school dance in Pennsylvania, a boy fatally shot a teacher and wounded two students before the owner of the dance hall brought the killing to a halt with his own gun.

More recently, just a few miles up the road from Virginia Tech, two law school students ran to fetch their legally owned firearm to stop a madman from slaughtering anybody and everybody he pleased. These brave, average, armed citizens neutralized him pronto.

My hero, Dr. Suzanne Gratia Hupp, was not allowed by Texas law to carry her handgun into Luby's Cafeteria that fateful day in 1991, when due to bureaucrat-forced unarmed helplessness she could do nothing to stop satanic George Hennard from killing 23 people and wounding more than 20 others before he shot himself. Hupp was unarmed for no other reason than denial-ridden "feel good" politics.

She has since led the charge for concealed weapon upgrade in Texas, where we can now stop evil. Yet, there are still the mindless puppets of the Brady Campaign and other anti-gun organizations insisting on continuing the gun-free zone insanity by which innocents are forced into unarmed helplessness. Shame on them. Shame on America. Shame on the anti-gunners all.

No one was foolish enough to debate Ryder truck regulations or ammonia nitrate restrictions or a "cult of agriculture fertilizer" following the unabashed evil of Timothy McVeigh's heinous crime against America on that fateful day in Oklahoma City. No one faulted kitchen utensils or other hardware of choice after Jeffrey Dahmer was caught drugging, mutilating, raping, murdering and cannibalizing his victims. Nobody wanted "steak knife control" as they autopsied the dead nurses in Chicago, Illinois, as Richard Speck went on trial for mass murder.

Evil is as evil does, and laws disarming guaranteed victims make evil people very, very happy. Shame on us.

Already spineless gun control advocates are squawking like chickens with their tiny-brained heads chopped off, making political hay over this most recent, devastating Virginia Tech massacre, when in fact it is their own forced gun-free zone policy that enabled the unchallenged methodical murder of 32 people.

Thirty-two people dead on a U.S. college campus pursuing their American Dream, mowed-down over an extended period of time by a lone, non-American gunman in possession of a firearm on campus in defiance of a zero-tolerance gun ban. Feel better yet? Didn't think so.

Who doesn't get this? Who has the audacity to demand unarmed helplessness? Who likes dead good guys?

I'll tell you who. People who tramp on the Second Amendment, that's who. People who refuse to accept the self-evident truth that free people have the God-given right to keep and bear arms, to defend themselves and their loved ones. People who are so desperate in their drive to control others, so mindless in their denial that they pretend access to gas causes arson, Ryder trucks and fertilizer cause terrorism, water causes drowning, forks and spoons cause obesity, dialing 911 will somehow save your life, and that their greedy clamoring to "feel good" is more important than admitting that armed citizens are much better equipped to stop evil than unarmed, helpless ones.

Pray for the families of victims everywhere, America. Study the methodology of evil. It has a profile, a system, a preferred environment where victims cannot fight back. Embrace the facts, demand upgrade and be certain that your children's school has a better plan than Virginia Tech or Columbine. Eliminate the insanity of gun-free zones, which will never, ever be gun-free zones. They will only be good guy gun-free zones, and that is a recipe for disaster written in blood on the altar of denial. I, for one, refuse to genuflect there.
NemeSiS-Factor
Favorite Weapon? Pistol
+29|7083|Everett, WA, US
I'm down with every word in the second amendment, but a gun free zone is NOT a recipe for disaster.  HOWEVER, if a criminal illegally owns a gun, then I don't consider that a gun free zone.
Parker
isteal
+1,452|6807|The Gem Saloon
ted nugent scares me, and i LOVE firearms.
i mean that guy is just off the deep end with alot of the stuff he says....i didnt even need to read one word of that to tell you no, i dont agree with ted nugent. i have seen enough of him in the past to know that for sure.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,072|7185|PNW

Having a "gun-free zone" in America is like having a "water-free zone" at the bottom of a lake. Unless you're willing to spend the money shoring up your security, all you're really posting when you become a "gun-free zone" is words. They're not a physical barrier, and are violated as easily as a crazy ex-husband violates a restraining order to strangle his ex-wife.

Of course, maybe I'm wrong. We could put up "claw-free zones" in parts of Africa to save some zebra herds from the malignant attentions of lions. I'm sure the latter would obey.

NemeSiS-Factor wrote:

I'm down with every word in the second amendment, but a gun free zone is NOT a recipe for disaster.  HOWEVER, if a criminal illegally owns a gun, then I don't consider that a gun free zone.
Your second statement disagrees with your first. Sitting in a gun-free zone, trusting that if a madman walks over the line, that he'll first leave his gun in the car is a recipe for disaster.

some_random_panda wrote:

In Australia gun-shootings are rare.  If those psychos don't have guns, it pretty hard for them to shoot them (unless they clench their hands with second finger extended saying "peow peow").

Gun free zones in a relatively gun free country work perfectly, thank you.

(Emphasis on the gun free country)
The thread is about gun-free zones in a gun-laden country, not ones in a country where guns are banned. Read below:

superfly_cox wrote:

However, in a country where firearms are plentiful and easy1 to attain, what is the point of a gun-free zone?  That's the issue at hand.
1Yeah...depending on what type. But the rest of that is dead-on.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2007-04-20 23:06:33)

superfly_cox
soup fly mod
+717|7195

Parker wrote:

ted nugent scares me, and i LOVE firearms.
i mean that guy is just off the deep end with alot of the stuff he says....i didnt even need to read one word of that to tell you no, i dont agree with ted nugent. i have seen enough of him in the past to know that for sure.
not asking if you agree with his political views, just if you agree with what he wrote.  i don't own a gun, will never own a gun and don't like mr. nugent very much.  However, in a country where firearms are plentiful and easy to attain, what is the point of a gun-free zone?  That's the issue at hand.
some_random_panda
Flamesuit essential
+454|6804

In Australia gun-shootings are rare.  If those psychos don't have guns, it pretty hard for them to shoot them (unless they clench their hands with second finger extended saying "peow peow").

Gun free zones in a relatively gun free country work perfectly, thank you.

(Emphasis on the gun free country)

Last edited by some_random_panda (2007-04-20 23:01:36)

superfly_cox
soup fly mod
+717|7195

let me emphasize again that i don't own nor really support gun ownership.

having said that, this isn't a debate about gun ownership.  if the US didn't have so many firearms then stuff like Virginia Tech probably wouldn't happen as often.  i agree with that. 

the question is does it make sense to have gun free zones in a gun rich country?  seems to me that all you're doing is providing a massacre-rich environment for crazy people with deathwishes.
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6975
So, instead you don't have them, which means on the one hand that there won't be so many large scale massacres, but on the other hand there'll be many more individual shooting deaths.
agent146
Member
+127|6800|Jesus Land aka Canada
if its going to be a gun free zone then atleast make sure the illegal guns dont' make it in circulation.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,072|7185|PNW

Bubbalo wrote:

So, instead you don't have them, which means on the one hand that there won't be so many large scale massacres, but on the other hand there'll be many more individual shooting deaths.
How do you mean? My house isn't a gun-free zone, but there haven't been individual shooting deaths.
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6975
Does your house have hundreds of people who don't necessarily agree with or like each other forced to live in it?
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,072|7185|PNW

Bubbalo wrote:

Does your house have hundreds of people who don't necessarily agree with or like each other forced to live in it?
The ones who do live here do get into arguments now and then. Also, three cats. Widening the area a bit, neighbors around here can absolutely disagree with each other and hate one anothers' guts, but as far as I can tell there hasn't been single homicides or mass-murders. The wider city, on the other hand has a few shootings, though they seem to be outnumbered by stabbings and the occasional fistfight.

Perhaps we could ban fingers and put all our fears to rest.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2007-04-20 23:31:11)

Eboreus
Member of Foamy's Card Cult
+46|7061

some_random_panda wrote:

In Australia gun-shootings are rare.  If those psychos don't have guns, it pretty hard for them to shoot them (unless they clench their hands with second finger extended saying "peow peow").

Gun free zones in a relatively gun free country work perfectly, thank you.

(Emphasis on the gun free country)
100% agreed

just because some countries are gun-free zones people are not necessarily put 'to the mercy of criminals'. as long as there are guns anywhere on the world people will get killed - no matter if there are gun-free zones or not. the thing about those amok-guys is: they dont give a damn about that. and even if there were no gun-free zones, would you bring your gun to the university every single day? i wouldnt. if i had to worry getting shot at my university by my fellow students i might as well search another place to live.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,072|7185|PNW

Eboreus wrote:

as long as there are guns anywhere on the world people will get killed
As long as there are people anywhere on the world people will get killed.
Parker
isteal
+1,452|6807|The Gem Saloon
"They will only be good guy gun-free zones"
ok so i agree with him for once.
i follow the rules; when i go places that have the sign that says no concealed weapons, i put it in my lock box under my seat and go in and do my business. i dont break the rules, thats why i have a CCW permit and my pistol has a license to go with it.

if i were a criminal, that would not be the case. i wouldnt care where i took my shitty .22 revolver because its small and who gives a shit, its stolen anyway and cant be traced back to me.


thats the only problem there is with gun free zones.....actually enforce it....i mean really guarantee that no one there is armed, and it will work, otherwise this is bound to happen again.
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6975

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

The ones who do live here do get into arguments now and then. Also, three cats. Widening the area a bit, neighbors around here can absolutely disagree with each other and hate one anothers' guts, but as far as I can tell there hasn't been single homicides or mass-murders. The wider city, on the other hand has a few shootings, though they seem to be outnumbered by stabbings and the occasional fistfight.

Perhaps we could ban fingers and put all our fears to rest.
Yeah, but neighbours who don't like each other aren't forced to sit in the same room, or put up with each other much.  Fact is, if a fight breaks out and people have guns, they will use them.
Parker
isteal
+1,452|6807|The Gem Saloon

Bubbalo wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

The ones who do live here do get into arguments now and then. Also, three cats. Widening the area a bit, neighbors around here can absolutely disagree with each other and hate one anothers' guts, but as far as I can tell there hasn't been single homicides or mass-murders. The wider city, on the other hand has a few shootings, though they seem to be outnumbered by stabbings and the occasional fistfight.

Perhaps we could ban fingers and put all our fears to rest.
Yeah, but neighbours who don't like each other aren't forced to sit in the same room, or put up with each other much.  Fact is, if a fight breaks out and people have guns, they will use them.
not a fact. people that carry firearms LEGALLY avoid fights as part of their responsibility. you are taught to make sure you have room to move away, you cant get into fist fights anymore....if you get knocked out and your gun comes out, your pretty screwed.
didnt you talk about "after talking to instructors, retreat is the best action" or some shit in a different thread?
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6975
Uh-huh.  I have absolute faith that the majority of America, particularly it's young males, will do everything they can to avoid a fight.


No slight against America, I have the same opinion about Australians, British, French, Russians, Argentinians, Iranians........................but not Penguins.
Parker
isteal
+1,452|6807|The Gem Saloon

Bubbalo wrote:

Uh-huh.  I have absolute faith that the majority of America, particularly it's young males, will do everything they can to avoid a fight.


No slight against America, I have the same opinion about Australians, British, French, Russians, Argentinians, Iranians........................but not Penguins.
thats fine, i didnt say "majority of america"  i said people that carry guns LEGALLY....thats why i capitalized it the first time so you wouldnt try some lame argument like this.



edit: you are starting to become predictable bubbs.....

Last edited by Parker (2007-04-21 01:06:25)

Eboreus
Member of Foamy's Card Cult
+46|7061
predictable but he's right. if i take a look at german streets I see a bunch of boys which just turned 18 and they try to pick a fight where ever they can.
a gun is too dangerous to hope that everyone acts reasonable and follows his responsibilities (again imo)

oh and unnamednewbie you are right
Parker
isteal
+1,452|6807|The Gem Saloon
you dont understand my point.
when i turned 18 i loved to fight also, thats why no one sells 18 year olds handguns legally.

when you train for your concealed carry permit, they tell you to not fight, its on you if you fight and someone gets shot with your gun.

am i saying there arent irresponsible people out there? no, thats ridiculous.
but what i am saying is that THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE THAT CARRY FIREARMS LEGALLY ARE RESPONSIBLE. sorry for the caps, but i just wanted to make sure everyone saw that. what that means is that they will avoid fights in order to not have to use their weapon because of poor judgment on their part.

Last edited by Parker (2007-04-21 01:18:31)

Eboreus
Member of Foamy's Card Cult
+46|7061
you didnt say that there are no irresponsible people out there - but the point is that we have a different point of view. I think that there are TOO MANY irresponsible people out there and that the RISK of them using their guns is too high in my opinion. Oh and 18 or 21 doesnt matter for me, most of those brawlers are full of shit even in their mid 20s

i would love to believe you. i'd love to see only well educated, responsible and intelligent people out in the streets. but as soon as I leave my appartment I just cant.
Parker
isteal
+1,452|6807|The Gem Saloon
i understand what you are saying.



i would love to see some form of graph that shows illegal gun use vs. legal guns used in illegal ways.


do you live in america?
Eboreus
Member of Foamy's Card Cult
+46|7061
yeah would be quite interesting and on top of that (to get a back on topic ) use of guns in gun-free and non-gun-free zones. but I guess both sides would use the data for their arguments

I live in germany, in a town called frankfurt which is (tudahh) the city with highest crime rate. we have a bunch of problems with groups of young unemployed, always starting fights and trying to drag 'innocent people' into it. the mere thought of them carrying guns makes me shudder.
Parker
isteal
+1,452|6807|The Gem Saloon
coincidence, i live in st louis missouri, #1 most dangerous city in america.



what are the weapons laws in germany, as far as guns and knives?

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard