Ted Nugent discusses the 2nd Amendment

[natty bumppo 297]

Perhaps you can write to the military for training their soldiers the improper way of directing the muzzle down?

combat conditions vs. civilian life standing next to the house ???

apples & oranges ...

No offense to your expertise, Natty, but seriously, my brother is far more knowledgeable and skilled with firearms than you. That's not an insult but a mere fact. He's been in real combat as well (in Iraq). He's currently an instructor at the Police Academy. While I can see it's hard to take your firearm instructor hat off when discussing guns, in this case, you're way off your mark.

Steve … you are reaching for straws so badly …

Since you have zero knowledge of the depth of my firearm expertise or skill level … how do you propose anyone to believe the tripe you just spewed ???

You are using your non-expert opinion and trying to compare one “maybe known” (brothers skills) to an unknown (you don’t know my skills or depth of knowledge) … this is pure and simple spewing #######.

I realize you are proud of your brother … and I do respect him and thank him for his service. To your brother .. thank you.

fwiw: no offense taken ... I know the depth of my knowledge /skills and I feel confident your brother will respect them.

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

Perhaps you can write to the military for training their soldiers the improper way of directing the muzzle down?

combat conditions vs. civilian life standing next to the house ???

apples & oranges ...

No offense to your expertise, Natty, but seriously, my brother is far more knowledgeable and skilled with firearms than you. That's not an insult but a mere fact. He's been in real combat as well (in Iraq). He's currently an instructor at the Police Academy. While I can see it's hard to take your firearm instructor hat off when discussing guns, in this case, you're way off your mark.

Steve … you are reaching for straws so badly …

Since you have zero knowledge of the depth of my firearm expertise or skill level … how do you propose anyone to believe the tripe you just spewed ???

You are using your non-expert opinion and trying to compare one “maybe known” (brothers skills) to an unknown (you don’t know my skills or depth of knowledge) … this is pure and simple spewing #######.

I realize you are proud of your brother … and I do respect him and thank him for his service. To your brother .. thank you.

fwiw: no offense taken ... I know the depth of my knowledge /skills and I feel confident your brother will respect them.

You're right...that was mere speculation on my part and I apologize. I'm not pretending to be an expert on the proper handling of firearms - the issue came up over whether I'm even qualified to argue over the common sense required to apply the 2nd Amendment. I don't think that my experience or lack of really has any bearing on the argument over the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment. I'm also not keen on the idea that we can just legislate all the problems out of the misuse of firearms. My argument is that we need to approach gun legislation with common sense and reason, devoid of paranoia from all sides.

[natty bumppo 297]

You're right...that was mere speculation on my part and I apologize. I'm not pretending to be an expert on the proper handling of firearms - the issue came up over whether I'm even qualified to argue over the common sense required to apply the 2nd Amendment. I don't think that my experience or lack of really has any bearing on the argument over the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment. I'm also not keen on the idea that we can just legislate all the problems out of the misuse of firearms. My argument is that we need to approach gun legislation with common sense and reason, devoid of paranoia from all sides.

Thanks ... as I said ... no offense taken ... we're cool. ok ?

It has been suggested many times to enforce existing laws first and administer the punishments for breaking those laws ... before enacting new ones.

Otherwise how do you know if more are really needed?

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

You're right...that was mere speculation on my part and I apologize. I'm not pretending to be an expert on the proper handling of firearms - the issue came up over whether I'm even qualified to argue over the common sense required to apply the 2nd Amendment. I don't think that my experience or lack of really has any bearing on the argument over the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment. I'm also not keen on the idea that we can just legislate all the problems out of the misuse of firearms. My argument is that we need to approach gun legislation with common sense and reason, devoid of paranoia from all sides.

Thanks ... as I said ... no offense taken ... we're cool. ok ?

It has been suggested many times to enforce existing laws first and administer the punishments for breaking those laws ... before enacting new ones.

Otherwise how do you know if more are really needed?

One particular issue that I have is with guns in homes where there are children. I think it's perfectly reasonable and can be proven way of prevention, to require trigger locks for the guns. It would be a preventable measure, not to keep some criminal from using your gun, but to keep children from gaining access to guns.

Edited October 14, 2007 by Mister Fancypants

[natty bumppo 297]

And oh by the way all male citizens in Switzerland are issued a fullu automatic rifel magazines and ammunition by the government ...

... worth mentioning here would be that the government issued ammunition is sealed and inspected regularly to ensure no unauthorized use thereof.

just curious ... what's to stop the individual from purchasing their own ammo and using the firearm?

this way the governments ammunition is always where it supposed to be ... and in the proper quantity.

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

Perhaps you can write to the military for training their soldiers the improper way of directing the muzzle down?

combat conditions vs. civilian life standing next to the house ???

apples & oranges ...

No offense to your expertise, Natty, but seriously, my brother is far more knowledgeable and skilled with firearms than you. That's not an insult but a mere fact. He's been in real combat as well (in Iraq). He's currently an instructor at the Police Academy. While I can see it's hard to take your firearm instructor hat off when discussing guns, in this case, you're way off your mark.

actually, steven, he's right on the mark - about the differences in clips, magazines, and the pointing of a firearm along with the basic rules he cited.

[natty bumppo 297]

One particular issue that I have is with guns in homes where there are children. I think it's perfectly reasonable and can be proven way of prevention, to require trigger locks for the guns. It would a be preventable measure, not to keep some criminal from using your gun, but to keep children from gaining access to guns.

for children present ...

first there is education ... just like teaching about power outlets, knives, running with scissors, hot stove tops, knives in toasters ... etc. if YOU don't teach/ educate then YOU are a huge part of the problem.

if a firearm is for home/ personal protection it needs to be secured in a fashion that enables the firearm to be quickly accessed and enabled by authorized users.

(I left this a little vague on purpose as every home has a different set of circumstances that requires a slightly different approach to securing the firearm ... eg. stay-at-home mom ... latch-key-children ... etc)

long term storage ...

I see nothing wrong with a structured storage method. Examples: locked in a secured room, secured closet, safe, etc. with ammunition stored in a different location. After all, firearms are expensive items and nobody wants a B&E to result in the loss of them.

as I mentioned before ... trigger locks can be easily defeated with basic tools and are not 100% reliable. I think most determined teenagers will have no problem defeating a trigger lock.

This topic has been discussed at lenght between my wife and I in regards to children in the home. Our solution will probably be a little different than yours would be and our child will be safe.

Edited October 14, 2007 by Natty Bumppo

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Custer was an idiot. He would have done his men a favour if he'd just shot himself in the head.

He was definitively not in the right there ... his men probably didn't shoot him at first because they needed all the help they could get at the time.

doesn't chage the point .. this was a defensive use.

Was it really? My albeit limited understanding of the Battle of the Little Big Horn tells me that it was Custer who attacked the Indian camp out of naive stupidity, not realising that it was actually much larger than he thought it was.

Meanwhile Corporal Benteen (I think his name was) is even today considered a shameful figure for deciding not to help Custer and saving the few men under his command.

Edited October 14, 2007 by Number 6

[natty bumppo 297]

Custer was an idiot. He would have done his men a favour if he'd just shot himself in the head.

He was definitively not in the right there ... his men probably didn't shoot him at first because they needed all the help they could get at the time.

doesn't chage the point .. this was a defensive use.

Was it really? My albeit limited understanding of the Battle of the Little Big Horn tells me that it was Custer who attacked the Indian camp out of naive stupidity, not realising that it was actually much larger than he thought it was.

Meanwhile Corporal Benteen (I think his name was) is even today considered a shameful figure for deciding not to help Custer and saving the few men under his command.

Let me repeat this ... He was definitively not in the right there

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Custer was an idiot. He would have done his men a favour if he'd just shot himself in the head.

He was definitively not in the right there ... his men probably didn't shoot him at first because they needed all the help they could get at the time.

doesn't chage the point .. this was a defensive use.

Was it really? My albeit limited understanding of the Battle of the Little Big Horn tells me that it was Custer who attacked the Indian camp out of naive stupidity, not realising that it was actually much larger than he thought it was.

Meanwhile Corporal Benteen (I think his name was) is even today considered a shameful figure for deciding not to help Custer and saving the few men under his command.

Let me repeat this ... He was definitively not in the right there

Whether he was right or not - he initiated the situation that got him and his men butchered. Calling it "defense" isn't exactly accurate.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

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

teehee

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

Custer was an idiot. He would have done his men a favour if he'd just shot himself in the head.

He was definitively not in the right there ... his men probably didn't shoot him at first because they needed all the help they could get at the time.

doesn't chage the point .. this was a defensive use.

Was it really? My albeit limited understanding of the Battle of the Little Big Horn tells me that it was Custer who attacked the Indian camp out of naive stupidity, not realising that it was actually much larger than he thought it was.

Meanwhile Corporal Benteen (I think his name was) is even today considered a shameful figure for deciding not to help Custer and saving the few men under his command.

actually, he split his forces (bad move) and then attacked without any information from any scouts. another real bad move. all mistakes that one would expect from an amateur.

[natty bumppo 297]

Whether he was right or not - he initiated the situation that got him and his men butchered. Calling it "defense" isn't exactly accurate.

lets try this again .. he screwed up big time ... then fought a defensive battle until annihilation. you're saying being surrounded by hostiles trying to kill you is not defensive??

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Whether he was right or not - he initiated the situation that got him and his men butchered. Calling it "defense" isn't exactly accurate.

lets try this again .. he screwed up big time ... then fought a defensive battle until annihilation. you're saying being surrounded by hostiles trying to kill you is not defensive??

Sure it is. But he initiated the situation that got him and his men killed - by attacking a vastly superior force. That it went tits up on him doesn't change the fact that he could have avoided that by not attacking in the first place.

Rather like if I attack a police station with handguns, its a fair bet someone will turn the tables on me.

Edited October 14, 2007 by Number 6

[natty bumppo 297]

Whether he was right or not - he initiated the situation that got him and his men butchered. Calling it "defense" isn't exactly accurate.

lets try this again .. he screwed up big time ... then fought a defensive battle until annihilation. you're saying being surrounded by hostiles trying to kill you is not defensive??

Sure it is. But he initiated the situation that got him and his men killed - by attacking a vastly superior force. That it went tits up on him doesn't change the fact that he could have avoided that by not attacking in the first place.

Rather like if I attack a police station with handguns, its a fair bet someone will turn the tables on me.

this was just a reference example to the comment that guns are made for attack (offense) ... not defense.

Custer placed himself and his men into a position to use their guns for defense .. even … if the end result was to simply live a few minutes longer. (or maybe Custer should have ordered his men to put the guns down when the tables turned ... because they were no good for defensive purposes)

when you attack the police station .. your gun is being used in an offensive manner. When the tables turn on you ... and you continue to fight back ... your gun is now being used defensively.

Which brings it all back to ... no firearm is designed only for offense ... or only for defense. It is designed for both. It all depends on the application at the moment.

Are we done fixating on Custer?