• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Gives us a bad name

The Truth

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
1,972
Location
Henrico
The Nuge is quite the eccentric figure head. I'm not a fan of the NRA, but I'm not surprised that the NRA embraces The Nuge to connect with their people. It's an appeal to emotion in a way, and it works because people keep giving the NRA their money.
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
Unless Ted is being introduced as a spokesperson of the organization he is but one lone opinion being given an opportunity to share that with the world.

Ted is purposely out there at the edge of the envelope (or beyond it) because he always stimulates discussion.

Shannon Watts is the Ted Nugent of the anti-rights crowd but I don't hear those who would like to see 'reasonable restrictions" complaining because what she says is so outlandish. Maybe it's because they see the utility of having an extreme outer limit that they can fall back from?

I see the problem as being that we are already with our backs against the wall. There are no concessions we can make - unless you consider giving up more rights in exchange for not getting anything in return a "consession". So Ted swings for the fences and I think it is designed to give some maneuvering room. (I may not support the precise things he says, but I do support what I believe is the notion behind them.)

It's between Ted nugent and a John Kerry-like spokesperson. Which do you want?

stay safe.
 

deepdiver

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
5,820
Location
Southeast, Missouri, USA
Unless Ted is being introduced as a spokesperson of the organization he is but one lone opinion being given an opportunity to share that with the world.

Ted is purposely out there at the edge of the envelope (or beyond it) because he always stimulates discussion.

Shannon Watts is the Ted Nugent of the anti-rights crowd but I don't hear those who would like to see 'reasonable restrictions" complaining because what she says is so outlandish. Maybe it's because they see the utility of having an extreme outer limit that they can fall back from?

I see the problem as being that we are already with our backs against the wall. There are no concessions we can make - unless you consider giving up more rights in exchange for not getting anything in return a "consession". So Ted swings for the fences and I think it is designed to give some maneuvering room. (I may not support the precise things he says, but I do support what I believe is the notion behind them.)

It's between Ted nugent and a John Kerry-like spokesperson. Which do you want?

stay safe.
Very insightful comments, skidmark. I had never thought about it in that way. Excellent food for thought!
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
Very insightful comments, skidmark. I had never thought about it in that way. Excellent food for thought!

Chew on some of Lawdog's cake, too. He calls it "compromise". Same thing as "concessions".

stay safe.

http://thelawdogfiles.blogspot.com/2010/09/ok-ill-play.html

Q (from anti-rights person): Will you continue a reasonable discussion towards an end that might lead somewhere or is this an exercise in futility?

Lawdog's A: Since what you consider to be reasonable isn't even in the same plane of reality with what I consider reasonable, probably not.

Allow me to explain.

I hear a lot about "compromise" from your camp ... except, it's not compromise.

Let's say I have this cake. It is a very nice cake, with "GUN RIGHTS" written across the top in lovely floral icing. Along you come and say, "Give me that cake."

I say, "No, it's my cake."

You say, "Let's compromise. Give me half." I respond by asking what I get out of this compromise, and you reply that I get to keep half of my cake.

Okay, we compromise. Let us call this compromise The National Firearms Act of 1934.

There I am with my half of the cake, and you walk back up and say, "Give me that cake."

I say, "No, it's my cake."

You say, "Let's compromise." What do I get out of this compromise? Why, I get to keep half of what's left of the cake I already own.

So, we have your compromise -- let us call this one the Gun Control Act of 1968 -- and I'm left holding what is now just a quarter of my cake.

And I'm sitting in the corner with my quarter piece of cake, and here you come again. You want my cake. Again.

This time you take several bites -- we'll call this compromise the Clinton Executive Orders -- and I'm left with about a tenth of what has always been MY DAMN CAKE and you've got nine-tenths of it.

Then we compromised with the Lautenberg Act (nibble, nibble), the HUD/Smith and Wesson agreement (nibble, nibble), the Brady Law (NOM NOM NOM), the School Safety and Law Enforcement Improvement Act (sweet tap-dancing Freyja, my finger!)

I'm left holding crumbs of what was once a large and satisfying cake, and you're standing there with most of MY CAKE, making anime eyes and whining about being "reasonable", and wondering "why we won't compromise".

I'm done with being reasonable, and I'm done with compromise. Nothing about gun control in this country has ever been "reasonable" nor a genuine "compromise".

LawDog
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
SNIP Who's this "us".

You individual you! C'mon. Get with the socialist program. Didn't you know you were collective-ized? Just because the rest of the socialists said so; not because you had any say in the matter. What's the matter with you, anyway?

:p:)

(PS: I know that's not really what the OPer meant; he was talking more in the sense of a team. But, I couldn't pass up the chance to razz SVG.)
 
Last edited:

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
You individual you! C'mon. Get with the socialist program. Didn't you know you were collective-ized? Just because the rest of the socialists said so; not because you had any say in the matter. What's the matter with you, anyway?

:p:)

(PS: I know that's not really what the OPer meant; he was talking more in the sense of a team. But, I couldn't pass up the chance to razz SVG.)

Haha...I have been called a

Confrontational
Anarchist
Radical
Extremist................CARE (much better than DARE) because I care....or am totally insane...:p
 

Elhuero

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2012
Messages
24
Location
Colorado Springs
I love it when Ted Nugent speaks.

A thick skin is a must in a free society.

If his words irritate you then you need to gain a better grasp of what freedom really means and foment a stronger mental attitude.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
I love it when Ted Nugent speaks.

A thick skin is a must in a free society.

If his words irritate you then you need to gain a better grasp of what freedom really means and foment a stronger mental attitude.

<chuckle>

You probably didn't realize this, but you aimed your comment at one of the most liberty-minded members of the forum. Check out his post history.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Sarcastic comes to mind...have you washed that t-shirt? ;)

I know you didn't mean it this way OCforME; I'm just using your comment as a springboard.


SVG's shirt was washed in the blood of innocent Native-American woodcarver John T. Williams by Officer Ian Birk. It will never need to be washed again--not until America recovers its Liberty.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dt1mFQG3tJg

Warning: the video provides off-screen audio of the killing of John T. Williams.
 
Last edited:

HP995

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2012
Messages
730
Location
MO, USA
We're looking for accurate information and high moral ground in Salon?

While awake and sober?

You have to read the whole article to get the quote in context.

And then you see it's quite different than the opener. It's a squirrely article. As expected.
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
I know you didn't mean it this way OCforME; I'm just using your comment as a springboard.


SVG's shirt was washed in the blood of innocent Native-American woodcarver John T. Williams by Officer Ian Birk. It will never need to be washed again--not until America recovers its Liberty.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dt1mFQG3tJg

Warning: the video provides off-screen audio of the killing of John T. Williams.

+1
 

The Truth

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
1,972
Location
Henrico
In discussing a subject that is always going to lead to compromise, if you aren't presenting the extreme segment of your side, any compromise will leave you with nothing. The other side is not hesitant to present the extreme of their position. Being "reasonable", "moderate" and "polite" has gotten us the the awful position that we are in now.

+1,000,000,000,000,000,000

Best post I've seen in months on any subject!
 
Top