Ted Nugent discusses the 2nd Amendment

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

I'm using the most extreme example of owning a weapon which you agree is absurd. Now the issue is finding middle ground - by recognizing that we must use logic and reason with interpreting the 2nd Amendment and not pretend we can just take it for face value. The question is - when does ownership of a weapon become too extreme - beyond the reason of the intent and purpose of the 2nd Amendment?

actually, it's a moot point since while you've been busy acquiring a nuclear weapon, i've parked a klingon dreadnaught in earth orbit and blasted all nuclear weapons.

now when you're ready to come back to the real world, lemme know

Aye, Charles...duck and dodge, duck and dodge. Just tell me what is and isn't a reasonable method of a person exercising their 2nd Amendment right? I'm not trying to trap you, I'm trying to find middle ground on what we can agree on. I fully support the 2nd Amendment but waiting for you to acknowledge that you can't simply take it for face value - some logic and reason is involved given the ambiguity of the 2nd Amendment.

i don't really see the point in discussing something so ludicrous as you having your very own nuke.

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

I always liked parallel parking. Hill starts are fun in a manual too. Emergency stops, three point turns, reversing round a corner anyone?

nessa's driving test was way easier than the one i took 29 years ago. and nothing like a european driving test.

if i was the driving instructor i woulda flunked her

Your a meany to your wife :devil: :lol:

i'd have failed myself if i drove that way too.

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

I'm using the most extreme example of owning a weapon which you agree is absurd. Now the issue is finding middle ground - by recognizing that we must use logic and reason with interpreting the 2nd Amendment and not pretend we can just take it for face value. The question is - when does ownership of a weapon become too extreme - beyond the reason of the intent and purpose of the 2nd Amendment?

actually, it's a moot point since while you've been busy acquiring a nuclear weapon, i've parked a klingon dreadnaught in earth orbit and blasted all nuclear weapons.

now when you're ready to come back to the real world, lemme know

Aye, Charles...duck and dodge, duck and dodge. Just tell me what is and isn't a reasonable method of a person exercising their 2nd Amendment right? I'm not trying to trap you, I'm trying to find middle ground on what we can agree on. I fully support the 2nd Amendment but waiting for you to acknowledge that you can't simply take it for face value - some logic and reason is involved given the ambiguity of the 2nd Amendment.

i don't really see the point in discussing something so ludicrous as you having your very own nuke.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I'm using the most extreme example of owning a weapon which you agree is absurd. Now the issue is finding middle ground - by recognizing that we must use logic and reason with interpreting the 2nd Amendment and not pretend we can just take it for face value. The question is - when does ownership of a weapon become too extreme - beyond the reason of the intent and purpose of the 2nd Amendment?

actually, it's a moot point since while you've been busy acquiring a nuclear weapon, i've parked a klingon dreadnaught in earth orbit and blasted all nuclear weapons.

now when you're ready to come back to the real world, lemme know

Aye, Charles...duck and dodge, duck and dodge. Just tell me what is and isn't a reasonable method of a person exercising their 2nd Amendment right? I'm not trying to trap you, I'm trying to find middle ground on what we can agree on. I fully support the 2nd Amendment but waiting for you to acknowledge that you can't simply take it for face value - some logic and reason is involved given the ambiguity of the 2nd Amendment.

i don't really see the point in discussing something so ludicrous as you having your very own nuke.

Well, to be fair, he did downgrade to land mines. What about land mines?

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

I'm using the most extreme example of owning a weapon which you agree is absurd. Now the issue is finding middle ground - by recognizing that we must use logic and reason with interpreting the 2nd Amendment and not pretend we can just take it for face value. The question is - when does ownership of a weapon become too extreme - beyond the reason of the intent and purpose of the 2nd Amendment?

actually, it's a moot point since while you've been busy acquiring a nuclear weapon, i've parked a klingon dreadnaught in earth orbit and blasted all nuclear weapons.

now when you're ready to come back to the real world, lemme know

Aye, Charles...duck and dodge, duck and dodge. Just tell me what is and isn't a reasonable method of a person exercising their 2nd Amendment right? I'm not trying to trap you, I'm trying to find middle ground on what we can agree on. I fully support the 2nd Amendment but waiting for you to acknowledge that you can't simply take it for face value - some logic and reason is involved given the ambiguity of the 2nd Amendment.

i don't really see the point in discussing something so ludicrous as you having your very own nuke.

Well, to be fair, he did downgrade to land mines. What about land mines?

steven and land mines? right.........mr defend the un till death and beyond

you two done with fantasy land yet?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I'm using the most extreme example of owning a weapon which you agree is absurd. Now the issue is finding middle ground - by recognizing that we must use logic and reason with interpreting the 2nd Amendment and not pretend we can just take it for face value. The question is - when does ownership of a weapon become too extreme - beyond the reason of the intent and purpose of the 2nd Amendment?

actually, it's a moot point since while you've been busy acquiring a nuclear weapon, i've parked a klingon dreadnaught in earth orbit and blasted all nuclear weapons.

now when you're ready to come back to the real world, lemme know

Aye, Charles...duck and dodge, duck and dodge. Just tell me what is and isn't a reasonable method of a person exercising their 2nd Amendment right? I'm not trying to trap you, I'm trying to find middle ground on what we can agree on. I fully support the 2nd Amendment but waiting for you to acknowledge that you can't simply take it for face value - some logic and reason is involved given the ambiguity of the 2nd Amendment.

i don't really see the point in discussing something so ludicrous as you having your very own nuke.

Well, to be fair, he did downgrade to land mines. What about land mines?

steven and land mines? right.........mr defend the un till death and beyond

you two done with fantasy land yet?

The crocodiles?

[isleta521 5]

I'm using the most extreme example of owning a weapon which you agree is absurd. Now the issue is finding middle ground - by recognizing that we must use logic and reason with interpreting the 2nd Amendment and not pretend we can just take it for face value. The question is - when does ownership of a weapon become too extreme - beyond the reason of the intent and purpose of the 2nd Amendment?

actually, it's a moot point since while you've been busy acquiring a nuclear weapon, i've parked a klingon dreadnaught in earth orbit and blasted all nuclear weapons.

now when you're ready to come back to the real world, lemme know

Aye, Charles...duck and dodge, duck and dodge. Just tell me what is and isn't a reasonable method of a person exercising their 2nd Amendment right? I'm not trying to trap you, I'm trying to find middle ground on what we can agree on. I fully support the 2nd Amendment but waiting for you to acknowledge that you can't simply take it for face value - some logic and reason is involved given the ambiguity of the 2nd Amendment.

i don't really see the point in discussing something so ludicrous as you having your very own nuke.

Well, to be fair, he did downgrade to land mines. What about land mines?

steven and land mines? right.........mr defend the un till death and beyond

you two done with fantasy land yet?

The crocodiles?

wearing them

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

I'm using the most extreme example of owning a weapon which you agree is absurd. Now the issue is finding middle ground - by recognizing that we must use logic and reason with interpreting the 2nd Amendment and not pretend we can just take it for face value. The question is - when does ownership of a weapon become too extreme - beyond the reason of the intent and purpose of the 2nd Amendment?

actually, it's a moot point since while you've been busy acquiring a nuclear weapon, i've parked a klingon dreadnaught in earth orbit and blasted all nuclear weapons.

now when you're ready to come back to the real world, lemme know

Aye, Charles...duck and dodge, duck and dodge. Just tell me what is and isn't a reasonable method of a person exercising their 2nd Amendment right? I'm not trying to trap you, I'm trying to find middle ground on what we can agree on. I fully support the 2nd Amendment but waiting for you to acknowledge that you can't simply take it for face value - some logic and reason is involved given the ambiguity of the 2nd Amendment.

Steven,

Buy an actual gun before thinking about owning a nuke. You can even keep your evil gun locked up down at the shooting range. Have you ever fired a gun? Never mind owning one. I think you would like it.

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

I'm using the most extreme example of owning a weapon which you agree is absurd. Now the issue is finding middle ground - by recognizing that we must use logic and reason with interpreting the 2nd Amendment and not pretend we can just take it for face value. The question is - when does ownership of a weapon become too extreme - beyond the reason of the intent and purpose of the 2nd Amendment?

actually, it's a moot point since while you've been busy acquiring a nuclear weapon, i've parked a klingon dreadnaught in earth orbit and blasted all nuclear weapons.

now when you're ready to come back to the real world, lemme know

Aye, Charles...duck and dodge, duck and dodge. Just tell me what is and isn't a reasonable method of a person exercising their 2nd Amendment right? I'm not trying to trap you, I'm trying to find middle ground on what we can agree on. I fully support the 2nd Amendment but waiting for you to acknowledge that you can't simply take it for face value - some logic and reason is involved given the ambiguity of the 2nd Amendment.

Steven,

Buy an actual gun before thinking about owning a nuke. You can even keep your evil gun locked up down at the shooting range. Have you ever fired a gun? Never mind owning one. I think you would like it.

Aye, Rich. This argument isn't about whether we should be able to own guns or not. I support the 2nd Amendment and actually have been contemplating buying a handgun at some point. The issue, which Mr. Nugent brought up - what is a reasonable means of self protection and what isn't? So far, nobody is willing to step up to the plate and define that. The 2nd Amendment is ambiguous, so the attitude that just some common sense and citizens can decide for themselves what is appropriate or not, doesn't fly ....at least not if you are going to say that having a personal nuclear weapon for protection is NOT covered by the 2nd Amendment. How about a tank? A .50 calibur machine gun mounted on the top of my car for protection? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

[GaryC 7]

I'm using the most extreme example of owning a weapon which you agree is absurd. Now the issue is finding middle ground - by recognizing that we must use logic and reason with interpreting the 2nd Amendment and not pretend we can just take it for face value. The question is - when does ownership of a weapon become too extreme - beyond the reason of the intent and purpose of the 2nd Amendment?

actually, it's a moot point since while you've been busy acquiring a nuclear weapon, i've parked a klingon dreadnaught in earth orbit and blasted all nuclear weapons.

now when you're ready to come back to the real world, lemme know

Aye, Charles...duck and dodge, duck and dodge. Just tell me what is and isn't a reasonable method of a person exercising their 2nd Amendment right? I'm not trying to trap you, I'm trying to find middle ground on what we can agree on. I fully support the 2nd Amendment but waiting for you to acknowledge that you can't simply take it for face value - some logic and reason is involved given the ambiguity of the 2nd Amendment.

Steven,

Buy an actual gun before thinking about owning a nuke. You can even keep your evil gun locked up down at the shooting range. Have you ever fired a gun? Never mind owning one. I think you would like it.

Aye, Rich. This argument isn't about whether we should be able to own guns or not. I support the 2nd Amendment and actually have been contemplating buying a handgun at some point. The issue, which Mr. Nugent brought up - what is a reasonable means of self protection and what isn't? So far, nobody is willing to step up to the plate and define that. The 2nd Amendment is ambiguous, so the attitude that just some common sense and citizens can decide for themselves what is appropriate or not, doesn't fly ....at least not if you are going to say that having a personal nuclear weapon for protection is NOT covered by the 2nd Amendment. How about a tank? A .50 calibur machine gun mounted on the top of my car for protection? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

If you would limit your questions to the things that people are really talking about, handguns, shotguns and rifles, you would get answers to your questions. Your trying to get someone to say yes or no to a totally dumb question. Your not going to get it.

[eric&gen 0]

Ted Nugent rocks have you ever watch him live on stage man he knows how to tear it up. One crazy mofo.

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

If you would limit your questions to the things that people are really talking about, handguns, shotguns and rifles, you would get answers to your questions. Your trying to get someone to say yes or no to a totally dumb question. Your not going to get it.

Did you watch the video above? Ted's argument is that we as human beings have a fundamental right to protect ourselves and our family...agreed. The 2nd Amendment declares that right...agreed. What the 2nd Amendment doesn't say is just how much or how far we should be able to go in protecting ourselves. That's not a ridiculous argument and actually I find it amusing that noone here is willing to define that, given the ambiguity of the 2nd Amendment. Kind of puts you at odds with your, 'just follow the Constitution' idea, doesn't it?

[pedroh 21]

i wanna gun now..

[GaryC 7]

If you would limit your questions to the things that people are really talking about, handguns, shotguns and rifles, you would get answers to your questions. Your trying to get someone to say yes or no to a totally dumb question. Your not going to get it.

Did you watch the video above? Ted's argument is that we as human beings have a fundamental right to protect ourselves and our family...agreed. The 2nd Amendment declares that right...agreed. What the 2nd Amendment doesn't say is just how much or how far we should be able to go in protecting ourselves. That's not a ridiculous argument and actually I find it amusing that noone here is willing to define that, given the ambiguity of the 2nd Amendment. Kind of puts you at odds with your, 'just follow the Constitution' idea, doesn't it?

No it does not. People have the right to bear arms. That means guns. No one is advocating the right to own nuclear bombs or tanks. It's just a dumb argument.

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

i wanna gun now..

post the intended use of it and you'll get some free advice on what to buy