Even the NRA, right wing nuts as they are, have to know Ted Nugent is an idiot!

[Logical]

How can the NRA expect any credibility when Ted Nugent is on their board of directors? He is a nut. Maybe insane.

So don't give me any more "The NRA is not a political organization" crap!

If they were not a right wing group, they would immediately remove Ted from their board. They do not because it would piss most of their members, which lean HARD right.

We need an liberal pro-Gun organization in the USA. One that promotes gun rights without needing scare tactics like the NRA provides.

My prediction is that no one in the USA will lose ANY gun rights from Obama during his 2nd term. Sure, some senate or house liberals might propose some gun control laws but I do not see them going anywhere.

Guns in this country are safe!

[fightthegoodfightnow]

1. Agree

....but I suspect there are many DU gun owners who agree with Ted. I don't.

[Logical]

3. I doubt many DUers like Ted. If they do I would love them to post here and say so.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

8. Oh I Agree

....but it's a very small minority of DU members who are gun owners!

[Eleanors38]

23. Oh, perhaps half, maybe more. You seem fascinated with nugget.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

30. Fascinated?

LOL. No.

You seem embarrassed.

[Eleanors38]

31. Embarrassed. Such passion. Now, I like Annie Oakley

Good docs out there, bios, etc. Known to use Stevens arms, but unsure as to models.Everyone fumbling over who would describe her as the first pop superstar. Jeeez, just make, model and year.

[hack89]

57. About 40 percent if DU are typical Democrats. nt

[Brainstormy]

10. Sorry

Nugent is an idiot, but I'm very anti-gun. (OK, full disclosure, anti-gun most everything). I' hope you're wrong, but suspect you're right. We seem to be on a track where guns will be issued, and go home with, the baby and the birth certificate. I'll never get it. I don't understand any of it. It disappoints and grieves me greatly. But I suspect you're right.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

12. Well

I agree with you 100%.

It's crazy.

And I am pro-gun control 100%. And your birth certificate and gun ownership analogy is regrettably not far from the truth.

[Logical]

14. You sound as nutty as the pro-gun crazies talking about taking over the government.

[ThatPoetGuy]

20. Not even close.

[Eleanors38]

26. Oh, that's the sarcasm of the banal.

[Atman]

51. I have to agree with Logical

This talk of "issuing guns with birth certificates" is crazy talk...sounds like something straight out of a parallel universe Cave, like Obama is going to personally force every woman to have an abortion. You can make a point without the hyperbolic lunacy.

[Eleanors38]

25. Birth Certificate. I'll use my Kenyan one.

[Loudly]

2. Liberal pro-gun? On what basis?? To go to war with your government???

You're either in favor of going to war with your government or shooting your fellow Americans to death.

Thanks, but I think you're barking up the wrong tree.

[Logical]

5. You do not think you can be pro-gun and a liberal?

[Loudly]

9. Go ahead and state your case. You need guns to shoot Nazi's with?

Please.

[Logical]

13. Hunting. Sport shooting. Self defense. Honestly......

Please explain how you plan on removing guns from the USA. You could not find 10 Democratic senate/house members how would vote to do it. Much less the GOP!

The damn government cannot keep heroin off the fucking streets. And it is ILLEGAL to possess, manufacturer and sell.

Guns are legal to possess, sell and manufacturer. And you think you can control them?

[Loudly]

15. May I suggest to you a significant difference between heroin and guns?

Heroin is voluntarily consumed.

Caps in your ass are not.

[Logical]

16. LOL, owning guns is voluntary! And you have not told me your grand plan to remove them from the USA.

[Loudly]

17. Owning guns may be, but being shot by them is not.

The grand plan is to make them as wholesome as child porn.

[Logical]

18. Typical emotional response. No real answer. No logic. Just silly comments.

[Loudly]

19. Bullet wounds deserve an emotional response.

Attempting to explain them rationally is for sadists and fools.

[Glaug-Eldare]

22. Lots of things do

Stab wounds, chemical burns, drownings, electrocutions, choking, car crashes, plane crashes, train derailments, fires, lung cancer...

The <0.1% outliers do not justify removing the rights of the >99.9%

When have emotional reactions, without any rational examination, advanced a progressive agenda? When I think of indefensible emotional reactions, I think of the right's assault on gay rights (those homos are disgusting!), minority rights (they need to learn their place!), religious freedom (Papists are unamerican!), labor rights (Greedy thugs need to get out of my way!), public healthcare (Obama's gonna set up death panels!), etc.

Using that skull meat is the answer.

[Logical]

29. And it solves no issues. But thanks for playing!

[ThatPoetGuy]

24. I'm always bemused by your username.

It would be like me calling myself "Short." (I'm very tall.)

You're demanding a logical argument, while engaging in deceptive non-sequiturs.

The discussion at hand was whether gun proliferation is a good thing. Yet you are demanding an answer to the question as to how it can be eliminated.

It's a non-sequitur.

Person A: I think pollution is bad.

Person B: I disagree! After all, you haven't said how you plan to solve the problem. Therefore pollution is good!

[Loudly]

27. In my view, you're making the pollution is good argument.

I'll take pollution is bad. Unhealthful, dangerous, and indiscriminate in its victims.

[Logical]

28. LOL, who says they are "very tall" unless they are sensitive about it? Anyway......

You are again, changing the topic and trying to attack my methods to stop from answering the question.

Well, no one who has told me pollution was bad had ZERO solutions to the problem like you do with guns. And those same people did't say silly little radical comments about pollution. They usually have a game plan in their head.

Lets say we both agree gun proliferation is horrible! The worst thing ever to happen in the USA.

Please tell me the steps you would take to BEGIN to solve the problem.

[beevul]

36. Whos grand plan? N/T

[friendly_iconoclast]

47. So you're going to convince 20-25% of the population that they're perverts?

[friendly_iconoclast]

46. Back when he was sharesunited, it was with the help of foreign armies.

Who were going to going to help collect guns- while unarmed...

[Glaug-Eldare]

7. Oh, right, I forgot.

The only thing you can shoot with a gun is a person, and nothing good ever came of shooting anybody. Can't believe it slipped my mind!

[Glaug-Eldare]

4. I would love to see an alternative,

the current national groups complain about "socialism" (ooh, scary!) and such far too much for me to align with them.

[rrneck]

6. Nugent is a circus geek in the employ of a lobbying organization.

They're in it for the money. If they can make money off progressive politics, they will.

[bmbmd]

11. How about the Outdoor Channel???

Nugent, a known pedophile, drug abuser, draft dodger, and a guy who actively condones rebellion, revolution, and harm to a sitting US president, get to keep his terrible show. Jim Zumbo, a life-long hunter, environmentalist, scholar, and conservationist loses his because of his opinion that semi-automatic assault type weapons may not be required for hunting.

[Eleanors38]

21. What happened ro Zumbo was unjust, and evidence

Of the split between some gun factions and the fudds.IMO, there was a big-time inet virus which swept up the NRA, who was more than willing to throw him under the bus. (Petzal at Field & Stream was threatened as well, but that mag is made of sterner stuff.)

[former-republican]

35. It was a dumb thing to say by him.

AR15's AR 10's AR15 6.5 AR 15 6.8 and a host of other calibers have grown immensely in the hunting world .

It was a stupid uninformed thing to say as a gun writer and hunter.

[Eleanors38]

38. Yep. His problem was not in keeping up with gun technology

but in keeping up with social & inet media technology.

[gejohnston]

32. you forgot poacher

http://www.jesseshunting.com/forums/showthread.php/228686-Serial-Poacher-Ted-Nugent-pleads-guilty-to-another-illegal-kill.

[bmbmd]

55. My point exactly-

He was fired not for breaking the law, but for sharing an opinion.

[gejohnston]

56. Kind of like the backlash against Cooper Firearms founder

Dan Cooper when USA Today listed him as an Obama supporter or Bill Ruger.

[PavePusher]

45. Zumbo's commentary was considerably stronger than that...

...in fact echoing what many Anti's here seem to believe, that such firearms are useful to and owned primarily by criminals and "terrorists".

But I'm sure you knew that. You can look it up quite easily.

[Starboard Tack]

33. You say "Guns in this country are safe!"

What exactly do you mean by that? The guns are safe? The people are safe because there are so many guns around? Those who own guns are safe? Those killed by guns are safe? Our society is safe?

[gejohnston]

34. safe from

Carrie Nation's ax.

[glacierbay]

37. Safe as in

the govt. isn't coming to your home to confiscate them.
Even if all guns were banned tomorrow, I don't know how the govt. would confiscate them, every cop I know would tell the govt. to go fuck themselves and I don't see the military doing it, so, yes, our firearms are safe.

[Starboard Tack]

41. I agree 100%

[Logical]

39. No one is going to take anyone firearms. So scare tactics should not work.

[Starboard Tack]

42. Thanks for clarifying. And I agree. Gun ownership is safe.

[safeinOhio]

48. You are 100% right,

even if all handguns were registered.

[Logical]

49. I agree. I am not too paranoid about registering my guns. Many are. But...

not sure I see any value in registering a gun in preventing their misuse. Guns are stolen and used by criminals. No way to stop it.

[safeinOhio]

50. A handgun will not prevent you from being a victim of gun crime.

It may increase your chances of preventing that crime. So, because it is not 100% sure to stop it, do you not carry?

Registration will make it harder for one to get a handgun if they can not do it legally. Would make it much harder for straw purchaser. If your handgun is stolen, there is a good chance you'll never see it again. It can be sold in most states with no check to see if it is stolen or used in a crime. If it is used in a crime there is now little to no way to trace it to the last owner, making it harder for police to find out how the criminal obtained the handgun.
Then toss in a few more years in jail for possession of an unregistered handgun.

Note, I only suggest the registration of handguns, not long guns.

[Logical]

53. see your point. I would have no problem with it actually. I do not think the government....

knowing I own a gun would lead to the possibility of them going door to door and taking them away from me. Many here will disagree with me.

But in this current state of the political status on guns, I see no way this gets implemented.

[safeinOhio]

54. I don,t see it happening soon,

I Think current events play a large part in public opinion. These things change.

[Eleanors38]

40. Ahhh, such a bracing cup of obliqueness in the morning!

[Starboard Tack]

43. Obliqueness? Clarification is a good thing.

Guns are inherently, neither safe, nor unsafe. Their safety depends on the who and the how and the where of their use.

[hack89]

44. What are liberal pro-gun positions? Besides tactics how would they differ from the NRA's?

Would that liberal pro-gun organization oppose an AWB, support expansion of CCW, support national CCW reciprocity?

Or is it to be a gun control organization in sheep's clothing?

[ellisonz]

52. Where are those to tell me that the small percentage that the NRA gives to some Dems...

...makes support of the NRA A-OK? X-Digger, I'm waiting.