Ted Nugent on Gun Control

Every time I read this thread I always ask myself, "What do the people in England think about their gun ban?". Finally, I googled the question and came upon this fairly interesting piece:

qGVAQOUi6ec

Excellent, excellent find and post.
40% increase in firearm crimes! wow.
One of those protesters stuck out in my mind with his sign that read "I LOVE my country, but I fear my government".

If that is not evidence that we need to keep guns, then what is?

I came up with this (http://www.gallup.com/poll/16990/Britons-Aim-Tougher-Gun-Laws.aspx).

Sorry SSG, but that article does not help your argument. OF COURSE they want stricter gun laws, look at how their crimes INCREASED. Who wouldn't want the gun laws to be stricter when crime is rampant because of short sighted politicians.
It's been said 100 times here, but the only people you will hurt with stricter gun laws are the law abiding. England is proof.

but those stats don't prove anything.

How do they not prove anything? I am all for hearing your take on this, cause it seems this argument is just about put to bed with these stats. Of course, it's hard to fully judge without a valid argument to the contrary...but so far your arguments to this have been smoke and mirrors at best. So please tell us why these stats don't prove anything.
(disclaimer, I am being 100% genuine, not sarcastic)

LOL where does this ridiculous fear of the government come from anyway? That's a pretty stupid reason to support the need for guns IMO.

Let's say hell freezes over and the gov't decides to take over... whatever the hell that means, what are you and your shotgun going to do anyway?

LOL where does this ridiculous fear of the government come from anyway? That's a pretty stupid reason to support the need for guns IMO.

Let's say hell freezes over and the gov't decides to take over... whatever the hell that means, what are you and your shotgun going to do anyway?
I just don't see that agrument being made in this conversation but some people do believe that notion. I just feel we have a right to own a gun. I myself do not own a gun but if I need one for some reason I want to be able to buy one. I don't have any problem with having manditory training, back ground checks etc... but just let me have the right to protect my family.

How do they not prove anything? I am all for hearing your take on this, cause it seems this argument is just about put to bed with these stats. Of course, it's hard to fully judge without a valid argument to the contrary...but so far your arguments to this have been smoke and mirrors at best. So please tell us why these stats don't prove anything.
(disclaimer, I am being 100% genuine, not sarcastic)

The stats do not prove anything because it does not establish a causal relationship between the gun laws and crime. If I told you that the SEC increased securties fraud prosecutions in 2007 and the weather in 2008 was much nicer than in 2007, would you believe that securities fraud prosecutions improve weather conditions?

Since you have decided to label my arguments "smoke and mirrors," let me just say that most of the arguments I've seen around here sound like cheap talking points of the NRA (e.g., "gun control laws only hurt the innocent").

Finally, I don't think you really want to get into a comparison between the U.S. and the U.K. with regard to gun control laws. In the U.S., it is extremely easy to gain access to firearms. In the U.K., it is difficult to gain access to firearms. The U.S. gun crime stats make us look like a third world country in the midst of a civil war when compared with U.K. gun crime stats.

I just don't see that agrument being made in this conversation but some people do believe that notion. I just feel we have a right to own a gun. I myself do not own a gun but if I need one for some reason I want to be able to buy one. I don't have any problem with having manditory training, back ground checks etc... but just let me have the right to protect my family.

I'm not picking on jsarno but he just said:

One of those protesters stuck out in my mind with his sign that read "I LOVE my country, but I fear my government".

If that is not evidence that we need to keep guns, then what is?

I've seen other similar opinions I just don't feel like digging through this thread right now.

I'm not trying to be a jerk I'm just curious what people are afraid of exactly regarding the gov't, and what is a gun going to do to protect yourself if the gov't was "out to get you".

I just don't see that agrument being made in this conversation but some people do believe that notion. I just feel we have a right to own a gun. I myself do not own a gun but if I need one for some reason I want to be able to buy one. I don't have any problem with having manditory training, back ground checks etc... but just let me have the right to protect my family.

That's a reasonable position. I just have serious issues with the notion that the government shouldn't be allowed to conduct background checks, must legalize fully automatic rifles, etc.

Also, there was another gun control thread in which people made impassioned posts about the possible need to rebel against the government. I was waiting for posts about how the U.N. is planning to invade our country and make us all speak Mandarin Chineses.

I'm not picking on jsarno but he just said:



I've seen other similar opinions I just don't feel like digging through this thread right now.

I'm not trying to be a jerk I'm just curious what people are afraid of exactly regarding the gov't, and what is a gun going to do to protect yourself if the gov't was "out to get you".

Just for the record, my comment about "If that is not evidence that we need to keep guns, then what is?" was about the ENTIRE post, not the guy holding the sign.
I'm not thinking the government is "out to get me", but I think the government can and does make decisions with short sighted thoughts. If people scream loudly enough, they are usually heard, but the government should be quick to look into things more thoroughly, such as how other countries have faired getting rid of their firearms, or even how certain laws being passed have affected the publics reactions. Decisions are too often made becuase of political stature, or give and take, not because the subject was debated with an open mind. Most of this problem is our governmental system, but the point still remains.

Just for the record, my comment about "If that is not evidence that we need to keep guns, then what is?" was about the ENTIRE post, not the guy holding the sign.
I'm not thinking the government is "out to get me", but I think the government can and does make decisions with short sighted thoughts. If people scream loudly enough, they are usually heard, but the government should be quick to look into things more thoroughly, such as how other countries have faired getting rid of their firearms, or even how certain laws being passed have affected the publics reactions. Decisions are too often made becuase of political stature, or give and take, not because the subject was debated with an open mind. Most of this problem is our governmental system, but the point still remains.

The way you worded it you seemed to be commenting on the sign and what it said as a reason to keep guns... but either way I still don't understand how that's a logical take on the topic.