Tourists,
My position that he's a kook comes from his contradicting positions on the constitution. While on the surface it sounds like he knows what he's talking about while defending guns (and you must know I hate guns) and he defends the second amendment as if GOD himself ordered it, he also blatantly argues against the constitution in the same paragraph.
Well, you need to clear your head and listen to what the man is saying and not assume he is saying something different, forget your bias for a few minutes and THINK. He started a sentence with " God giv...." then stopped and redirected his thoughts to the Constitution and law. His point was, even without the constitution or any law, it is a person's right to defend themselves.
When he says that a "victim" should have the right to "shoot" the offending person, then he's argueing against himself. No where in the second amendment does it say anyone can kill anyone, it says "in defense of the state", it also does not say "for personal protection", more specifically, the use of guns in the second amendment states the use of the gun shall be against "a tyrannical goverment" not a rapist, not a burgular, not a child molester. These are things that gun owners have used to modify the second amendments meanings.
No where in his statement that he said the Second Amendment gave anyone the right to kill, just that we have the right to own and carry a firearm. I've owned firearms for many many years and have NEVER said the Second Amendment gave me the right ti shoot anyone. In fact I have heard very few that tried to use that argument, I would have corrected them if that happened.
Additionally, Ted is asking for instant justice, as in the wild wild west. What about due process? What about the presumtion of innocense? If we just settled our injustices on the streets by arming the whole society, why would we need police officers? Ted's positions are "more guns will solve crimes"
In cases as he mentioned, instant justice is about the only way to save your own life or that of a family member. When a person is caught in the act of raping a child the is no such thing as a presumption of innocence, when someone breaks into your house and come into your bedroom, they are friggen guilty. I never heard Ted say "more guns will solve crimes.
In fact, we have the most guns on the streets now of any nation and that has translated into the highest crimes rates in the world for a domesticated society. More guns isnt the answer.
Stats show, time after time, when new legislation is passed that gives law abiding citizens more self protection rights, crime in those areas decreases.
In all his examples, he solves them with a gun. Rape a woman, shoot the man, molest a child, walk in and shoot the man, steal my bike, whip out my 38 and crank off 6 rounds into the guy. Do you see the slippery slope in this argument?
Now you're turning into you canuck buddy, making crap up. TN, never mentions a bike in his statement. In fact when he mentioned the .38 and 6 rounds in the chest he was speaking of an actual event when a parolee beat a woman to near death with a whiskey bottle while her grand child watched. The slippery slope I see is giving criminals free reign to commit more crimes against innocent people without fear of having to pay for their actions.
Eventually, we would shoot people for stealing the paper off our lawns or for looking at us the wrong way.
Evidently you care more for your paper than I do. This is a ridiculous assumption based on nothing.
More guns is NEVER going to be the answer. Just look at school shootings, why in the history of this country have school shootings only accelerated after 1980 along with the overjustification for guns in republican party politics?
Since the republicans made this issue a political hot button in each campaign, more mass shootings have taken place each year. In schools , in restaurants and in the workplace. Only since it became a focus for votes has gun violence spiked in the country to a level where its unsafe in many places.
I would like to see some proof that any school shooting had a damn thing to do with any justification of gun from the republican party. Yes, in some areas there has been increases in gun violence in the last 30 years or so. To draw a direct line from that to the republican stance on gun ownership is absurd. In that same 30 years, nearly every category of crime has increased as has the population in every income bracket. None of which can be proven a sole cause of gun violence.
Personally, I find there are too many people with guns that shouldnt have them. True, there are sportsman whose guns are used for competition and I support that, and there are those that truly go out in the woods and kill an innocent animal and hopefully eat them but moreover, most gun owners are just plain wierdos who stockpile weapons for the great domestic apocolypse that they are told is coming.
I do shoot target from time to time, mainly to make sure the sights on the guns haven't gotten out of proper settings. I do hunt game animals, but only the ones that I will eat the meat from. Hunting game animals has nothing to do with innocence or guilt, that's just laughable. In some areas of Texas, more deer die from starvation than from hunting because of bag limits being too small and not enough hunters. Where do you get the justification is stating that most gun owners are weirdos who stockpile weapons for any reason, or are you making crap up again? The apocalypse ? HAHAHAHA. Now that's funny.
In inner cities (where i grew up) guns are everywhere. People there shoot each other just for walking down the wrong street. The percentage of homes with guns in the inner cities far exceeds where I live today and by comparison, I live in a crime free zone. The inner city however, with all the guns available and using Ted Nugents theory, is the most violent place to live.
Inner city, gangs, drugs, prostitution and countless other crimes all add to the killings in those areas(whether by gun or some other means). Being from the inner city you should understand that better than anyone.
I prefer to live in an area where a gun isnt needed.
I bet most of the people in the inner city would prefer that too, you need to ask some of them to move in with you.
Peace.
disingenuous .
