Ted Nugent on Gun Control

Just to clarify, I'm not talking about weapons classified as antiques, relics or curios. Those weapons are not subject to the gun control or brady act.

But they became antiques from people not using them and letting them collect dust on a shelf. There are guns being made today that will be antiques, but you would not want to allow someone to store them.

FYI- I am for having as many guns as you want...but I am not for semi-automatic weapons or AK-47's and the like. There is no need for those in hunting. A good way for gun control activists to get rid of those is to try to pass a law that will make it illegal to use those types of weapons when hunting. Once that is passed, how can someone argue that they "need" it?

Alright...since we obviously can't fix the local jails, how about more state institutions? They are overcrowded too.
I'm all for more state prisons. Another thing we need is more mental health facilities. A good portion of the inmate population consists of individuals that need treatment for mental health problems. A psych doctor stopping by the facility a few times a week doesn't cut it.

It is funny. Kinda weird, but funny. :)



that was hilarious...it reminds me of all the smack i talk and the flack i get for it at work.

I'm all for more state prisons. Another thing we need is more mental health facilities. A good portion of the inmate population consists of individuals that need treatment for mental health problems. A psych doctor stopping by the facility a few times a week doesn't cut it.

I'll take your word for that, cause I would guess there are a lot that are "faking it". If they had a lawyer worth their salt, they would have argued insanity.
I think the country needs more capital punishment. I also think we could use more public hangings in town squares. Show people the consequences to actions. There is a reason those countries that cut off hands when you steal have low theft rates.

I'll take your word for that, cause I would guess there are a lot that are "faking it". If they had a lawyer worth their salt, they would have argued insanity.
I think the country needs more corporal punishment. I also think we could use more public hangings in town squares. Show people the consequences to actions. There is a reason those countries that cut off hands when you steal have low theft rates.
Corporal punishment? You want us to spank them too? LOL, I'm just messing with you.

I don't have a problem with capital punishment. I do have a problem with the amount of time it takes for the appeals process. Around here, you're gonna sit on death row at least 10-15 years.

Corporal punishment? You want us to spank them too? LOL, I'm just messing with you.

Ummm, I don't know what you're talking about, it says capital punishment in my last post. LOL.
I didn't even notice I did that until you said it.

I don't have a problem with capital punishment. I do have a problem with the amount of time it takes for the appeals process. Around here, you're gonna sit on death row at least 10-15 years.

I agree. That is beyond moronic that we the tax payers spend all that money to keep them alive. If they are convicted, they should be on death row no longer than 1 year.
I say not longer than 2 months to get their affairs in order.

I agree. That is beyond moronic that we the tax payers spend all that money to keep them alive. If they are convicted, they should be on death row no longer than 1 year.
I say not longer than 2 months to get their affairs in order.

I wasn't against capital punishment until I did a report on it a few years ago and found out that it's not a deterrent. If it won't keep more people from dying, then what is the point? Revenge? That's a pretty useless reason for the government to kill someone. I just don't see the point in it. I do think there are people who do things that deserve to have them killed, I would have killed Saddam and I would kill Usama if given the chance, but they have committed far more atrocity than most people on death row.

Now, what people will misunderstand (and probably try to imply) is that, in no way, am I saying we should be softer on crime. However, if capital punishment is not a deterrent, what is the point? Plus, capital punishment is ridiculously expensive, the following is from a Duke University study:

The death penalty costs North Carolina $2.16 million per execution over the costs of a non-death penalty murder case with a sentence of imprisonment for life.

So, it costs more and doesn't deter crimes. What is the advantage again?

People may say that, but they never vote on initiatives that would benefit education (especially here in CA). Anything related to education that would raise taxes gets shot down pretty quickly. I wish it were different... if we could spend more money on education, i think the trickle-down effect on a bunch of other problems would be positive.
This country allready spends over 10 grand a year on each child per year and see what we get. I sent my daughter to a private school for less than that and she only had about 20 kids in each class and received a much better education. Just spending more money on something thats not working does not correct the problem.

I wasn't against capital punishment until I did a report on it a few years ago and found out that it's not a deterrent. If it won't keep more people from dying, then what is the point? Revenge? That's a pretty useless reason for the government to kill someone. I just don't see the point in it. I do think there are people who do things that deserve to have them killed, I would have killed Saddam and I would kill Usama if given the chance, but they have committed far more atrocity than most people on death row.

Now, what people will misunderstand (and probably try to imply) is that, in no way, am I saying we should be softer on crime. However, if capital punishment is not a deterrent, what is the point? Plus, capital punishment is ridiculously expensive, the following is from a Duke University study:



So, it costs more and doesn't deter crimes. What is the advantage again?

While at it's current rate, I can understand your point. However, we're talking about the scum of the scum. So if it costs 2+ mil after 10-15 years on death row, what would it cost if the man or woman after 40 or 50 years. Obviously they are too dangerous to let out, so they will be in prison for life and we're paying for that.
Also, like I said, we need to execute them right away, but even at the current way of doing this, he should still be executed. 1- he did something so vile that he deserves death, 2- justification for the vitims family, 3- they are a leech on society, and don't deserve the life they get in prison. What is the reason for keeping him alive? If death isn't a deterant, then keeping him in prison is not a deterant either.

I also think we could use more public hangings in town squares. Show people the consequences to actions. There is a reason those countries that cut off hands when you steal have low theft rates.

Wow, so you think the Saudi justice system is one to be emulated?