Ted Nugent discusses the 2nd Amendment

[natty bumppo 297]

To answer your question ... if I'm attacked by bigger ... stronger person(s) I want the ability to have the upper hand and survive the issue, I'll take the gun and let the attacker wish they had stayed home and watched Opra. I want to live and enjoy my wife and child. (fwiw: If all that is available is my wife's purse ... I'll fight them off with that ... bludgeon them to death )

Which would you rather have when attacked? A gun or butter knife?

Note: It's you or the other person ... there are only two choices here. 911 only arrives after the fact .. if you lived to call them

Forgot to add ....

Edited October 14, 2007 by Natty Bumppo

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Agreed. That is why common sense comes into play here when we talk about requiring a license, gun locks, certain weapons being banned, etc. I'm glad we can agree on that - that the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment requires some common sense.

when you actually take the time to research gun locks and hold one ... and think about ways to defeat the lock ... the ways are really quite easy. your basic toolbox contents will normally hold the keys.

ban certain weapons ... like ? those you've claimed to have shot? by caliber? cosmetic appearance? media hype? hollywood? what criteria will be used? and why?

etc, etc ....

I think you've validated my point and that is that the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment is open for debate, whether some of you like that or not. Quit carrying on as if common sense dictates with obvious certainty as to what is or isn't reasonable in terms of exercising one's right to protect themselves. It's really silly to fall back on the 2nd Amendment when people talk about requiring a license or background checks, etc., as if any regulation of guns is an infringement on that right. I would agree that there needs to be balance of common sense and reason with regard to maintaining the integrity of 2nd Amendment.

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

I think you misunderstood. I would rather meet a crazy person who was holding a butter knife than meet a crazy person who was holding a gun.

even if that is jeffrey dahmer and in the other hand is bbq sauce?

[Jenn! 918]

I think you misunderstood. I would rather meet a crazy person who was holding a butter knife than meet a crazy person who was holding a gun.

even if that is jeffrey dahmer and in the other hand is bbq sauce?

I think I'd be better with teriyaki.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Agreed. That is why common sense comes into play here when we talk about requiring a license, gun locks, certain weapons being banned, etc. I'm glad we can agree on that - that the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment requires some common sense.

when you actually take the time to research gun locks and hold one ... and think about ways to defeat the lock ... the ways are really quite easy. your basic toolbox contents will normally hold the keys.

ban certain weapons ... like ? those you've claimed to have shot? by caliber? cosmetic appearance? media hype? hollywood? what criteria will be used? and why?

etc, etc ....

Common sense from people who have never held a gun is like men debating abortion.

Really?

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

Agreed. That is why common sense comes into play here when we talk about requiring a license, gun locks, certain weapons being banned, etc. I'm glad we can agree on that - that the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment requires some common sense.

when you actually take the time to research gun locks and hold one ... and think about ways to defeat the lock ... the ways are really quite easy. your basic toolbox contents will normally hold the keys.

ban certain weapons ... like ? those you've claimed to have shot? by caliber? cosmetic appearance? media hype? hollywood? what criteria will be used? and why?

etc, etc ....

Common sense from people who have never held a gun is like men debating abortion.

Really?

i'm so glad you posted that steven. i wonder what the other 2 in that pic would think about your desire to remove their right to own a firearm.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Really?

i'm so glad you posted that steven. i wonder what the other 2 in that pic would think about your desire to remove their right to own a firearm.

When did Steven advocate that?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Agreed. That is why common sense comes into play here when we talk about requiring a license, gun locks, certain weapons being banned, etc. I'm glad we can agree on that - that the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment requires some common sense.

when you actually take the time to research gun locks and hold one ... and think about ways to defeat the lock ... the ways are really quite easy. your basic toolbox contents will normally hold the keys.

ban certain weapons ... like ? those you've claimed to have shot? by caliber? cosmetic appearance? media hype? hollywood? what criteria will be used? and why?

etc, etc ....

Common sense from people who have never held a gun is like men debating abortion.

Really?

i'm so glad you posted that steven. i wonder what the other 2 in that pic would think about your desire to remove their right to own a firearm.

LOL...nice spin, Charles. By that logic then, you also wish to remove their right to own a nuclear weapon. The 2nd Amendment's interpretation is open for debate - you're just chasing your tail if you don't recognize that reality.

[natty bumppo 297]

Agreed. That is why common sense comes into play here when we talk about requiring a license, gun locks, certain weapons being banned, etc. I'm glad we can agree on that - that the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment requires some common sense.

when you actually take the time to research gun locks and hold one ... and think about ways to defeat the lock ... the ways are really quite easy. your basic toolbox contents will normally hold the keys.

ban certain weapons ... like ? those you've claimed to have shot? by caliber? cosmetic appearance? media hype? hollywood? what criteria will be used? and why?

etc, etc ....

Common sense from people who have never held a gun is like men debating abortion.

Really?

i'm so glad you posted that steven. i wonder what the other 2 in that pic would think about your desire to remove their right to own a firearm.

I'd like to have a review of their class III license ... and storage procedures ...etc. Or are these government owned ... you know ... you a private citizen handling a weapon owned by the government ... without permission from the gov't.

If all three are personally owned true class III firearms ... looks like about $15k worth of hardware.

fwiw: looks like you held .. are these Class III or Semi or models (you do live in So. Cal. ... near hollywood yes)?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Agreed. That is why common sense comes into play here when we talk about requiring a license, gun locks, certain weapons being banned, etc. I'm glad we can agree on that - that the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment requires some common sense.

when you actually take the time to research gun locks and hold one ... and think about ways to defeat the lock ... the ways are really quite easy. your basic toolbox contents will normally hold the keys.

ban certain weapons ... like ? those you've claimed to have shot? by caliber? cosmetic appearance? media hype? hollywood? what criteria will be used? and why?

etc, etc ....

Common sense from people who have never held a gun is like men debating abortion.

Really?

i'm so glad you posted that steven. i wonder what the other 2 in that pic would think about your desire to remove their right to own a firearm.

I'd like to have a review of their class III license ... and storage procedures ...etc. Or are these government owned ... you know ... you a private citizen handling a weapon owned by the government ... without permission from the gov't.

If all three are personally owned true class III firearms ... looks like about $15k worth of hardware.

fwiw: looks like you held .. are these Class III or Semi or models (you do live in So. Cal. ... near hollywood yes)?

That was in Arizona - about 5 yrs. ago. My brother in the middle is in law enforcement and at the time was on the SWAT team. The MP5 Navy that I'm holding is his own.

[Fandango 1,439]

Posing with a gun is a lot different than owning and being responsible for one!

[natty bumppo 297]

Forgot to add:

Everyone's firearms handling skills suk

The bolts are closed ... magazines are inserted ... and it appears you are indoors and the muzzles are facing in the general direction of the photographer.

(where is your safe direction?)

Real nice photo exhibiting why you and others in the picture really don't know how to be safe.

You guys have a lot to learn about firearm safety ... (one of the persons a police officer ? that's pathetic ... he should be an example with all his SWAT training)

And with so much information available on the internet about safe firearm handling skills .....

Example: Basic Safety

Edited October 14, 2007 by Natty Bumppo

[natty bumppo 297]

Posing with a gun is a lot different than owning and being responsible for one!

For anybody .... the second you touch/ handle a gun ... you are responsible for that gun.

(it is in your control ... possession)

If it is in fact a real gun ... the basic firearm safety rules apply at all times !!! Geez !!!

These have to be props ... because no self respecting police officer (SWAT) would permit a picture like this on the internet which exhibits such poor firearm handling skills.

(appearance is that these guns are loaded and ready to fire)

Note: for people that don't know about firearms and what to tell your children:

"If you see a gun, STOP! Don't Touch. Leave the Area. Tell an Adult." Eddie Eagle

Edited October 14, 2007 by Natty Bumppo

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Common sense tells me that the ability to dispense multiple rounds a second is not exactly a feature of a defensive weapon. That might not be clear to you but it's fairly clear to me.

Multiple rounds a second? You don't know the first thing about semi-automatic weapons. Are you talking fully automatic weapons? Do you know the difference?

The fully automatic is the only gun I ever held. You said that you were looking for the common sense not from someone that never held a gun but from a man that has held a gun. So there you have it.

Fully auto is not common and I'll agree not something for everyone.

[natty bumppo 297]

Common sense tells me that the ability to dispense multiple rounds a second is not exactly a feature of a defensive weapon. That might not be clear to you but it's fairly clear to me.

Multiple rounds a second? You don't know the first thing about semi-automatic weapons. Are you talking fully automatic weapons? Do you know the difference?

The fully automatic is the only gun I ever held. You said that you were looking for the common sense not from someone that never held a gun but from a man that has held a gun. So there you have it.

Fully auto is not common and I'll agree not something for everyone.

Or what everyone can afford. Legal ownership of fully automatic firearms comes with a steep price tag.

People who Illegally possess fully automatic firearms ... it's simple ... build the jail on top of those persons.

Edited October 14, 2007 by Natty Bumppo