Report: Ted Nugent might run for NRA president

posted at 5:55 pm on January 30, 2009 by Allahpundit

Just the man gun-rights advocates need to counter the left’s stereotype of them as belligerent, wild-eyed cranks.

But Nugent tells Whispers he stands ready to battle the antigunners in Washington. “Clearly, the NRA is the ultimate ‘we the people,’ family, grass-roots organization for what is clearly Job 1 for free men everywhere: to guarantee our God-given right to keep and bear arms and defend ourselves,” he tells our Suzi Parker. “To be so honored to participate in any way, as an NRA board member or the ultimate honor of serving as president, would surely be a duty I would put my heart and soul into. I am genuinely moved that it is even being discussed. I am ready, willing, and able to serve if the good NRA members call upon me.”

From August 2007, here’s the would-be chief executive displaying his lobbying skills. Content warning.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

Wow. You’re really… stupid.

A full-auto used by the military is a “machine gun”, but the same weapon if used by a civilian isn’t? Or a full auto only becomes a “machine gun” if adopted by the military?

Hollowpoint on January 30, 2009 at 11:05 PM

Your insult says more about your lack of knowledge than mine.

Am I going to have to copy and paste a link of an image of a “machine gun” so that some of you slower types may catch on?

toliver on January 30, 2009 at 11:17 PM

Best part I love about this thread is that any liberal evesdropper (que Obama squad) is probably throwing up right now over discussions about what a ‘machine gun’ is.

cntrlfrk on January 30, 2009 at 11:21 PM

Am I going to have to copy and paste a link of an image of a “machine gun” so that some of you slower types may catch on?

toliver on January 30, 2009 at 11:17 PM

Not that you answered my last question, but will this picture be of a sub, light, medium, or heavy machine gun?

- The Cat

MirCat on January 30, 2009 at 11:25 PM

That was a little over the top Ted!!

beachkatie on January 30, 2009 at 11:26 PM

I have to have my conceal weapon licence renew by march!

beachkatie on January 30, 2009 at 11:28 PM

Not that you answered my last question, but will this picture be of a sub, light, medium, or heavy machine gun?

- The Cat

MirCat on January 30, 2009 at 11:25 PM

It sure as hell won’t be an image of crazy Ted’s stage props.

toliver on January 30, 2009 at 11:31 PM

The ever-indulgent wife and I (both Life Members) would happily vote for Ted.

He’s an enthusiastic, knowledgable and well-spoken advocate for the Second Amendment.

As noted in the video, he’s also a spirited entertainer who knows his audience.

When he heard that the Make A Wish Foundation wouldn’t do a hunt for a dying child he started having regular hunts for sick / injured children. The events include thorough safety training, of course, as well as Ted doing his best to pass along his enthusiasm for the great outdoors.

Tom Selleck is also a good choice but he would only provide the sober and informed spokesman. Ted gives you that plus the option of wild-eyed gonzo as needed.

KCSteve on January 30, 2009 at 11:32 PM

Not that you answered my last question, but will this picture be of a sub, light, medium, or heavy machine gun?

- The Cat

MirCat on January 30, 2009 at 11:25 PM

According to R. Lee Ermey’s prodigy over there, it won’t matter unless it’s owned by the US government. As soon as it passes into civilian hands, which they legally can(although our friend doesn’t seem to want to admit this), the molecules reform into something that does exactly the same thing, but has a different name. Isn’t it amazing? My legally owned M249, fully automatic Chinese SKS, fully automatic MP5, and even fully automatic Glock 17 are all…um…automatic non-machine guns! Who knew such wonders existed?

MadisonConservative on January 30, 2009 at 11:32 PM

It sure as hell won’t be an image of crazy Ted’s stage props.

toliver on January 30, 2009 at 11:31 PM

So wait, now they’re stage props? They weren’t even real guns? Then why are you worried about where they were being pointed?

MadisonConservative on January 30, 2009 at 11:35 PM

Sub

Tommy, MP5, and my fav P90

Light

Bren, .30 Browning

Medium

M240G

Heavy

Big ol’ Humvee mounted

Not A Machine Gun

Lama

- The Cat

MirCat on January 30, 2009 at 11:37 PM

Yep ! ! Guns, Arrows and rock-n-roll.

Ted is just the ticket. Makes my babies ( Remember
that guy Joe Biden) go prrrrrrr.

Texyank on January 30, 2009 at 11:39 PM

hmm too many links. Lemme try it this way.

Sub

Tommy, MP5, and my fav P90

MirCat on January 30, 2009 at 11:42 PM

Light

Bren, .30 Browning

MirCat on January 30, 2009 at 11:42 PM

Medium

M240G

Heavy

Big ol’ Humvee mounted

Not A Machine Gun

Lama

- The Cat

MirCat on January 30, 2009 at 11:42 PM

So wait, now they’re stage props? They weren’t even real guns? Then why are you worried about where they were being pointed?

MadisonConservative on January 30, 2009 at 11:35 PM

Brandon Bruce Lee was killed by a stage prop. An actor in FL was shot in the head by a stage prop last month.

The simple fact remains that Ted Nugent wasn’t waving around “machine guns”, but that’s a side issue.

The central issue that will prevent that jackass from reaching his desired office is that he made a fatal mistake that night.

toliver on January 30, 2009 at 11:50 PM

How could anyone consider any of these things to be machine guns?

They must all be owned by the military.

MadisonConservative on January 30, 2009 at 11:50 PM

MirCat on January 30, 2009 at 11:42 PM

Thank you for making my case. Are you people intoxicated?

toliver on January 30, 2009 at 11:51 PM

The simple fact remains that Ted Nugent wasn’t waving around “machine guns”, but that’s a side issue.

toliver on January 30, 2009 at 11:50 PM

We’re still waiting for you to provide a single iota of evidence to back up your claim that the weapons he was holding up were not machine guns. One of them appears to be an AR variant(available in either auto or semi-auto), and one of them looks like a Thompson submachine gun(also available in both). You haven’t provided a single thing other than unsubstantiated claims on what a machine gun is.

MadisonConservative on January 30, 2009 at 11:54 PM

It’s like talking to Costello

- The Cat

MirCat on January 30, 2009 at 11:57 PM

How about MachineGun.com? Will that work?

Here’s a picture from their “machine gun shoot”. Oh dear, what are all those non-machine-gun things on the table there?

MadisonConservative on January 30, 2009 at 11:58 PM

Did you see all the other images of real “machine guns” from the link you provided? Seems like you were pretty selective in the image [that proves nothing] you provided. It’s similar to the wiki link you provided. Still you embarrass yourself.

Assault rifle =/= “machine gun”.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 12:10 AM

It looks like the bottom line here is the coin. You know,the two sided kook coin. On one side, we have the Kossacks et al, and on the other side we have our own.

Both sides are filled with irrationality and hate.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 12:13 AM

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 12:10 AM

Assault Rifle is not an engineering term but a political one.

- The Cat

P.S. Selective in images? How many freaking pictures do you need?

Here’s another one

MirCat on January 31, 2009 at 12:16 AM

Being that a machine gun is a fully automatic firearm, and the US Army states that any assault rifle must have selective fire, and therefore an automatic mode, yes actually, assault rifles do = “machine gun”.

This is fun. You state something blatantly wrong about firearms, I correct you with sources, and you just ignore it and try some other inaccurate claim. It’s like playing catch with a dog.

MadisonConservative on January 31, 2009 at 12:20 AM

Have fun with him, Cat. I need some sleep.

MadisonConservative on January 31, 2009 at 12:24 AM

Assault Rifle is not an engineering term but a political one.

- The Cat

P.S. Selective in images? How many freaking pictures do you need?

Here’s another one

MirCat on January 31, 2009 at 12:16 AM

Yes, selective images.

Here are some more “machine guns” [from MadConservative's own link]:

Look at the machine gun!

http://www.machinegun.com/index.php?option=com_rsgallery2&Itemid=40&page=inline&catid=1&id=4&limit=1&limitstart=4

Here’s another one!

http://www.machinegun.com/index.php?option=com_rsgallery2&Itemid=40&page=inline&catid=1&id=8&limit=1&limitstart=8

I could go on and on.

Assault rifle =/= “machine gun”.

Ted Nugent =/= responsible firearm owner or adult

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 12:29 AM

And just in time for HR 45:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.45:

…..llegal to own a firearm unless it is registered with the database in Washington D.C. As a gun owner you will have to be finger printed, you will be required to provide your DL#, SS#, you must maintain a valid address at all times, submit mental and physical health records being put on file. You will also be required to file any address changes and you must report any ownership changes even if private sale.

Each update will cost $25 and if you fail to comply you will lose your right to own firearms and be subject to criminal penalties.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2175425/posts?page=1

LegendHasIt on January 31, 2009 at 12:31 AM

Mooseman on January 30, 2009 at 10:38 PM

Mooseman, I’m a Benefactor member, but as far as voting rights go that doesn’t give me any special sway over Patrons, Endowments, Lifers, or 5-year members. All of us have the same voting rights…we vote in the members of the Board of Directors.

I just checked my copy of the NRA bylaws, and the relevant portion is Article IV section 2. I won’t quote it here, but in a nutshell the Board of Directors elects the President, however many Vice Presidents it wants, and the Executive Vice President from its own number (ie the President has to be on the Board)…this is the change I was thinking of. Prior to the latest Bylaw change (which was April 16, 2007 the President didn’t have to be a Board member.

So…we 5 years, Lifers, and above elect the Board and the Board elects the President.

As for duties…well, actual running of the Association falls to the Executive Vice President per Article V section 2. The President basically presides at all Association meetings, BOD meetings, and Executive Committee meetings. He/She also serves as an ex officio member of all committees, with full voting rights. Lastly, he/she appoints all standing and special committees.

Other than that…well, the President writes a monthly column in American Rifleman and generally serves as the public face of the Association.

In light of all that, I definitely think The Nuge is perfect on the Board, and is an asset to a number of standing committees. As President, I’m not so sure he’d be as effective.

JohnTant on January 31, 2009 at 1:06 AM

Hollowpoint on January 30, 2009 at 11:05 PM

Most weapons owned by civilians, even though they look like military weapons, are not fully automatic. You must have a class c federal firearms license to own a fully automatic weapon.
When I was in the military, we refered to a belt fed weapon as a machine gun. The automatic rifles were refered to as just that; as in Browning Automic Rifle. The exception was the Thompson sub-machine gun. We also had the M1A1 Carbine which had a selector switch for fully automatic fire. All were fully automatic, but the “machine guns” usually were more powerfull ; 30 caliber, 50 caliber, 20 millimeter.

Johan Klaus on January 31, 2009 at 1:20 AM

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 12:29 AM

You’re trying to say that an apple isn’t a fruit because it’s not a banana.

- The Cat

P.S. A cherry tomato is still a tomato

MirCat on January 31, 2009 at 1:41 AM

We could’ve done worse than a straight shooter like Ted…

Gohawgs on January 31, 2009 at 1:43 AM

MirCat on January 31, 2009 at 1:41 AM

I see you all have been have fun with the scold. Later.

baldilocks on January 31, 2009 at 3:16 AM

You’re trying to say that an apple isn’t a fruit because it’s not a banana.

- The Cat

P.S. A cherry tomato is still a tomato

MirCat on January 31, 2009 at 1:41 AM

No, I’m saying that calling Obama a “worthless douchebag” while inviting him to suck on a rifle is poor form. I’m saying that Senator Clinton with a firearm up her vagina is something that we should not wish for. I’m saying that Ted Nugent is a malformed adult, pretending to be an adolescent.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 3:23 AM

No, I’m saying that calling Obama a “worthless douchebag” while inviting him to suck on a rifle is poor form. I’m saying that Senator Clinton with a firearm up her vagina is something that we should not wish for. I’m saying that Ted Nugent is a malformed adult, pretending to be an adolescent.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 3:23 AM

Now that I have listened to the video, I’d have to say that you and Allah are right in that Nugent is nuts but not that we should make our decisions based on what the Left thinks. Oh and you could have said this to me without all of that rigamaroll about my being off topic, especially since being off topic was the first this that I mentioned.

baldilocks on January 31, 2009 at 4:28 AM

To all you pedants (don’t worry, I’m one too. I have a ‘takes-one-to-know-one’ exemption card) involved in the whole correct/incorrect machine gun terminology usage, has it occured to you that one doesn’t necessarily have to be holding the specific item at the given time that he/she claims to own said item.

I understand he says, “suck on this…” while waiving around whatever proper gun terminology-item of your choice and then he says, ” suck on my machine gun…”. There is no rule that I am aware of that dictates he must be speaking of the same item that he currently is holding.

Phew…

I feel better. Carry on.

anuts on January 31, 2009 at 4:45 AM

No, I’m saying that calling Obama a “worthless douchebag” while inviting him to suck on a rifle is poor form. I’m saying that Senator Clinton with a firearm up her vagina is something that we should not wish for. I’m saying that Ted Nugent is a malformed adult, pretending to be an adolescent.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 3:23 AM

So I see you’ve finally figured out that he did indeed have machine guns since you re-red herringed back to the original discussion.

Now apologize to Baldilocks for scolding her for being off topic. :)

- The Cat

P.S. I said way early on that I didn’t think he’d be a good choice and 2nded DAT60A3′s opinion that Tom Selleck would be a better choice.

P.P.S. I also agreed with Baldi that the decision be not dictated by what the left thinks.

anuts on January 31, 2009 at 4:45 AM

You’re obviously correct on all points. And he wasn’t even talking about his ‘guns’ when he said it either, wink wink nudge nudge. I just haven’t played with a troll for a while.

MirCat on January 31, 2009 at 5:18 AM

F#(%!n’ ay …

Benjamin9 on January 31, 2009 at 5:49 AM

No, I’m saying that calling Obama a “worthless douchebag” while inviting him to suck on a rifle is poor form. I’m saying that Senator Clinton with a firearm up her vagina is something that we should not wish for. I’m saying that Ted Nugent is a malformed adult, pretending to be an adolescent.

So is slow erosion of our Rights and the subtle destruction of the Constitution.

Benjamin9 on January 31, 2009 at 5:51 AM

“belligerent, wild-eyed cranks”?

They’ve been that for the last 8 years…

Again…if it wasn’t such a dangerous game, it’s kind of nice not having any responsibility for once.

Go get ‘em Ted.

LtE126 on January 31, 2009 at 7:16 AM

soundz like Cat Scratch Fever to me

johnnyU on January 31, 2009 at 8:22 AM

I thought Charlton Heston was a great image, but Ted is a bit extreme. For those that hate the fact that Americans are allowed to defend themselves, it doesn’t matter who is the NRA figurehead.

The things that were said about Charlton Heston by the left were despicable. Of course he handled it like…..Charlton Heston.

Hening on January 31, 2009 at 10:30 AM

I’m surprised no on thought to go the the ‘last word’ on the definition of ‘machine gun’: the ATF. From a link there, on p 14 and 15 of this pdf:

A machine gun is an automatic gun
which, if the trigger is held down, will
fire rapidly and continuously. It is not a
semi-automatic gun for which the
trigger must be pulled for each shot.
(Classified as fully automatic for
analysis.)

You usually can’t tell from looking at a gun if it is or isn’t capable of fully automatic fire. A simple M-1 carbine, when fitted with the correct internal parts, becomes a fully automatic M-2 (oh, those parts, separate from the gun, are classified as a ‘machine gun’ for the purpose of putting one in jail for 10 years and collecting the $10K fine that possession of a fully-automatic weapon from the perp who has those parts..).

I don’t think the Nuge was dumb enough to have fully automatic weapons on any stage. Nor was he dumb enough to have weapons that could be loaded and fired quickly. I’ll bet they were props; the firing pin or something removed.

Nuge isn’t dumb. But, he’s an entertainer first. I remember him swinging from the upper deck, in the late ’70′s, at a concert at Muni Auditorium; then tearing up a guitar on “Stranglehold” and “Cat Scratch Fever”.

I’d vote for him. We’ll see. The NRA Convention this year is in May, in Phoenix; I’ll be there.

Serr8d on January 31, 2009 at 10:32 AM

MirCat on January 31, 2009 at 5:18 AM

Sorry, but you don’t know much about combat firearms.

And Ted is still a vulgar idiot.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 10:34 AM

fully automatic Chinese SKS

Madison Conservative, you better get that fixed. The SKS was never designed to be fully automatic.

Serr8d on January 31, 2009 at 10:36 AM

Nuge is perfect!

chunderroad on January 31, 2009 at 10:50 AM

Serr8d on January 31, 2009 at 10:32 AM

The ATF goes by the current law written by liberals that have distorted the language of firearms for their own purpose [to ban them].

This is an example of a “machine gun”:

http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/7418/ty554kl19yr6.jpg

And I’m sorry that you find a man that tells a sitting female senator to put a rifle up her vagina at a public event as being worthy of any national NRA chair.

I’ll bet they were props; the firing pin or something removed.

Doesn’t matter, as we are trained from a young age to treat firearms with respect. Firearms are never to be treated as props for making pseudo-threats against elected officials.

Would you want your kids using a firwarm in such a manner Serr8d?

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 10:53 AM

Nugent, regardless of whether you agree with him on issues or not, is a redneck.

keep the change on January 30, 2009 at 8:29 PM

Careful now, I might be a redneck. But in my defense I will say that I’m a high-tech-redneck, which is a little different.

Maxx on January 31, 2009 at 11:04 AM

Doesn’t matter, as we are trained from a young age to treat firearms with respect. Firearms are never to be treated as props for making pseudo-threats against elected officials.

Would you want your kids using a firwarm in such a manner Serr8d?

Got strawman?

Every time I watch TV, I see that the Hollyweird types who hate guns are using props to make noises and act like they have real guns. I don’t care for that culture; I don’t like to see the dramatization of gun violence exposed to stupid kids who have no IDEA what a ‘real’ gun sounds like or what recoil is, &c. I took my kid out very early and exposed her to the safe use of guns; she knew that a .44 Magnum was a dangerous weapon, and loud (yes, at 10 years old, she shot the thing, with lower-powered reloads).

But kids see movie and TV actors playing like ‘heroes’ with guns, what do you expect?

Do this: next time your favorite TV show comes on, 24 or whatever, visualize, instead of a gun, a big yellow banana in the hands of the ‘hero’. See what that does for you.

Nuge, on that stage, was an actor with a prop. Nothing more.

Serr8d on January 31, 2009 at 11:16 AM

I don’t know why the ATF site is loading so slowly. There’s a great set of images and the corresponding definitions: (Part 1, Part 2) for identification of firearms.

Serr8d on January 31, 2009 at 11:33 AM

Really Serr8d? Make illogical comparisons much?

A drama portrayed on the big or small screen follows a story. Some plots involve violence. There is no logical comparison.

Waving a rifle around at a rock concert inciting young minds full of much with nasty and near illegal propositions aimed at elected officials is not in the same ballpark or zip code.

What would you think of Marageret Cho or Mike Moore waving around a weapon and barking out expletives against the former First Lady or Kay Bailey Hutchison?

No sane person would accept that, as no sane person should accept Ted’s BS.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 11:37 AM

I don’t know why the ATF site is loading so slowly. There’s a great set of images and the corresponding definitions: (Part 1, Part 2) for identification of firearms.

Serr8d on January 31, 2009 at 11:33 AM

Those are not military definitions. Those definitions are written by Barney Frank. A “machine gun” is a military wep. Assault rifles are not referred to as “machine guns” in the military.

For fun, why don’t you look up Ted Kennedy’s definition of an “assault rifle”?

Get off of Nugent’s jock.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 11:40 AM

Madison Conservative, you better get that fixed. The SKS was never designed to be fully automatic.

Serr8d on January 31, 2009 at 10:36 AM

True, but it took roughly 6 days before someone got ahold of it and started modding it, not to mention how many people bump fire the thing. The larger point was that machine guns are most certainly not limited to the military, nor must they be tripod-mounted belt-fed support arms. Even an automatic pistol like a modified Glock or Taurus qualifies.

Do this: next time your favorite TV show comes on, 24 or whatever, visualize, instead of a gun, a big yellow banana in the hands of the ‘hero’. See what that does for you.

Nuge, on that stage, was an actor with a prop. Nothing more.

Serr8d on January 31, 2009 at 11:16 AM

Not to mention that Jack Bauer doesn’t appear to know the meaning of “trigger discipline”. Between him and The Nuge in that video, The Nuge was holding those firearms much more safely, and therefore showing a better form to children. Oh, unless he drops the guns and they “go off when they hit the floor”, something that magically happens in television and movies but conspicuously fails to happen in real life.

By the way, why the outrage at presenting a very tongue-in-cheek “threat” to government leaders? I thought that was what the whole second amendment was for: giving us the option of armed resistance if the government got tyrannical. Are we now admitting that option is entirely unacceptable, regardless of how oppressive the government gets, because mentioning it might offend some people? If so, then that pretty much means everything bad that happens in this country will just get worse, and every right they trample on will eventually disappear.

MadisonConservative on January 31, 2009 at 11:45 AM

Nugent, regardless of whether you agree with him on issues or not, is a redneck.

keep the change on January 30, 2009 at 8:29 PM

Careful now, I might be a redneck. But in my defense I will say that I’m a high-tech-redneck, which is a little different.

Maxx on January 31, 2009 at 11:04 AM

I am a redneck!

Johan Klaus on January 31, 2009 at 11:47 AM

A “machine gun” is a military wep.

Again, no it’s not. Tons of machine guns are civilian-owned.

Assault rifles are not referred to as “machine guns” in the military.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 11:40 AM

Assault rifles must have selective fire according to the US Army, which means an automatic mode, and hence are automatic weapons. Automatic weapons are machine guns.

Why does this trouble you so? It’s not hard logic. No, the military is not the only entity with machine guns. We have them too, and Ted owns a bundle.

MadisonConservative on January 31, 2009 at 11:53 AM

Do you even read your links? You make my point yet again.

People “in the business” don’t call an assault rifle a machine gun. You might as well call your rifle a “gun”.

Now go get together with Representive Frank and conjure up some more poor definitions while intentionally shooting the ceiling.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 12:02 PM

You can’t be this thick of skull. You made my point again. Yeah, let’s be done with this.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 12:20 PM

Oh, and for note, you can take an AR that was produced since the 1986 ban, purchase a pre-ban auto sear, register the sear and the weapon, get the stamp, and install it, creating a legal full-auto AR. So there are always more, as well as repairing broken machine guns from pre-1986, though the parts may be a pain to find.

MadisonConservative on January 31, 2009 at 12:21 PM

Read your own links for Christ’s sake.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_gun

Wiki is junk, but read the first paragraph.

Find me a pic there of anything close to what Ted was flailing around.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 12:27 PM

Rednecks talking about guns, go figure! Nascar and Sarah Palin references are sure to be made soon.

Vernon Hardapple on January 31, 2009 at 1:03 PM

Wiki is junk, but read the first paragraph.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 12:27 PM

*sigh* Okay:

A machine gun is a fully automatic mounted or portable firearm, usually designed to fire rifle cartridges in quick succession from an ammunition belt or large-capacity magazine, typically at a rate of several hundred rounds per minute. The first machine gun was the Maxim Gun, invented by Sir Hiram Maxim in 1884.

He was holding an AR variant and a Thompson submachine gun. Both are designed to be fully automatic, and it is legal to own full-auto versions of both. They both fire in quick succession from large capacity magazines(50-round drum or 30-round magazine), at the rate of several hundred rounds per minute.

So, what Ted had on stage were machine guns, by the first paragraph you advised me to read, from the link you provided, and I initially provided to make this point originally. I thought we were done with this, but go ahead and once more tell me I’m wrong without giving me any explanation of why I’m wrong other than “it’s not military”, which your link doesn’t say machine guns are.

MadisonConservative on January 31, 2009 at 1:06 PM

Rednecks talking about guns, go figure! Nascar and Sarah Palin references are sure to be made soon.

Vernon Hardapple on January 31, 2009 at 1:03 PM

Just because you wet your pants when someone even levels a squirt gun at you doesn’t mean you have to hold so much hostility to those who respect these life-saving machines.

MadisonConservative on January 31, 2009 at 1:08 PM

You are officially a gloid. Sorry.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 2:17 PM

You are officially a gloid. Sorry.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 2:17 PM

I’m assuming that’s derogatory, so you’ve sunk to name-calling. Great. Since you apparently haven’t the foggiest idea what you’re talking about when it comes to weapons, as evidenced by your utter refusal to posit even a fundamental argument to support your assertion that machine guns are only owned by the military and only mounted and only belt-fed, go right ahead. If you can’t win with facts and logic, you can always win with slurs.

MadisonConservative on January 31, 2009 at 2:23 PM

Interesting … at the last Albany Rifle range Machinegun shoot I was att, there were plenty of fully automatic belt fed machineguns owned by us mere civilians.

Counter five M2 .50s, a Vickers, and a bunch of M1917s and M1919s.

And even one old Colt Potato Digger belt-fed.

I brought my 20mm Lahti, a Galil full-auto Assault Rifle, and a PPSH-41 SMG.

Yep, quite a few machineguns there in civilian hands, even if you use the ridiculously restricted definition of MG that you insist on. And the shoot in Albany OR is a small one …

You don’t need a “license” to own an MG in the US … you merely need to pay for it, fill out the Form 4, pay the $200 tax, and live in a state that doesn’t forbid civilian ownership ( most of them ).

You can avoid getting an LEO signature on the Form 4 by having an LLC or a revocable Trust buy the MG, and list yourself as the “responsible person” on the front of the form.

Kristopher on January 31, 2009 at 2:36 PM

While I do think he went over the top in the video, it would be great to have him as the NRA President just to see how much it would piss the left of.

lavell12 on January 31, 2009 at 2:37 PM

Really dude, go to your nearest place where vets congregate, and call their rifles “machine guns”. No amount of linking can change the fact that you you will be laughed off as another civilian that’s just plain ignorant in these matters.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 2:37 PM

If not Nugent how about Cheney?

lavell12 on January 31, 2009 at 2:40 PM

Marine and Infantyman small arms will be referred to as “rifles” by soldiers until the end of time … even when they switch to lasers or somesuch, with no trace of rifling.

Not a valid argument there.

Kristopher on January 31, 2009 at 2:46 PM

Really dude, go to your nearest place where vets congregate, and call their rifles “machine guns”. No amount of linking can change the fact that you you will be laughed off as another civilian that’s just plain ignorant in these matters.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 2:37 PM

Really dude, go to your nearest range and claim that their full-auto FN FAL isn’t a machine gun. Tip: When a person says “Uh-huh”, looks at the rest of the group with wide eyes, and ignores you for the rest of the day, that’s not actually agreement.

MadisonConservative on January 31, 2009 at 2:49 PM

Kristopher on January 31, 2009 at 2:36 PM

Read your laws again. Ted doesn’t qualify.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 2:50 PM

Kristopher on January 31, 2009 at 2:46 PM

I hear many people refer to muskets as rifles as well, even though their barrels were not.

MadisonConservative on January 31, 2009 at 2:51 PM

Marine and Infantyman small arms will be referred to as “rifles” by soldiers until the end of time … even when they switch to lasers or somesuch, with no trace of rifling.

Not a valid argument there.

Kristopher on January 31, 2009 at 2:46 PM

And that’s the terminology to be used.

Like I said several times, other bastardized definitions are written by liberals, who wish to degrade are rights. Shall we side with the military, or liberals in congress?

Civilians own military aircraft, but they don’t get to name them.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 2:55 PM

“are rights” = our rights.

Hey, perhaps i can redefine spelling?

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 2:56 PM

full-auto FN FAL

That’s a rifle.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 2:57 PM

I’ll stick to the correct US military terminology for issue weapons like the M-4. Everything else can be referred to using common usage.

If you look to the dictionaries, anything that goes bang more than once when you put your boogerhook on the bang switch is an MG. We NFA regestered firearm collecting ‘tards refer to them ALL as MGs, providing they meet that criteria.

I prefer to actually communicate with folks, and spend less time correcting them … especially when that correction is un-needed.

Kristopher on January 31, 2009 at 3:04 PM

That’s a rifle.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 2:57 PM

Yup. So is a bolt-action Remington. The FN is also a machine gun. The Remington is not. See how that works?

Like I said several times, other bastardized definitions are written by liberals, who wish to degrade are rights. Shall we side with the military, or liberals in congress?

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 2:55 PM

How about the people who make and sell the guns? Why are they not an option? What about the gunsmiths and engineers?

And…if a firearm has no rifling, but the military calls it a rifle, how is it “liberal bastardization” to claim an unrifled firearm is not a rifle?

MadisonConservative on January 31, 2009 at 3:06 PM

Rednecks talking about guns, go figure! Nascar and Sarah Palin references are sure to be made soon.

Vernon Hardapple on January 31, 2009 at 1:03 PM

So, you don’t think that U.S. citizens should own guns.

Johan Klaus on January 31, 2009 at 3:11 PM

I prefer to actually communicate with folks, and spend less time correcting them … especially when that correction is un-needed.

Kristopher on January 31, 2009 at 3:04 PM

Understood and agreed.

Do you know where this little side kerfuffle cam from?

Last night, while expressing my disgust at Nugent’s unacceptable behavior, I mentioned his terminology was off. We’ve been sidetracked ever since.

Again, I “get” your quoted point.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 3:14 PM

Do you know where this little side kerfuffle cam from?

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 3:14 PM

You claimed his terminology was off. I claimed it wasn’t. You told me to stop “sniffing his jock”, and in the same post bemoaned “unacceptable” behavior. Something like that.

MadisonConservative on January 31, 2009 at 3:19 PM

I’m sorry for calling you a “gloid” and the “jock sniffing” comment as well.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 3:29 PM

I’m sorry for calling you a “gloid” and the “jock sniffing” comment as well.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 3:29 PM

Accepted. Let’s bury the hatchet.

MadisonConservative on January 31, 2009 at 3:32 PM

Thanx … less friendly fire casualties are needed right now.

Kristopher on January 31, 2009 at 3:38 PM

Cool.

Too bad this site may close before we can get all lovey-dovey.

How is it that all these hideous lefty/pinko sites prosper, but a quality site like this has problems?

I am truly saddened.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 3:38 PM

I don’t know why the ATF site is loading so slowly. There’s a great set of images and the corresponding definitions: (Part 1, Part 2) for identification of firearms.

Serr8d on January 31, 2009 at 11:33 AM

Those are not military definitions. Those definitions are written by Barney Frank. A “machine gun” is a military wep. Assault rifles are not referred to as “machine guns” in the military.

Urm, the ATF is the entity designed to enforce firearms laws. You have to understand that, and use their definition, to stay on the right side of the law.

When is a machine gun a ‘machine gun’? Whenever they say it is.

Serr8d on January 31, 2009 at 3:40 PM

How is it that all these hideous lefty/pinko sites prosper, but a quality site like this has problems?

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 3:38 PM

Two reasons:

1. A giant shadowy figure like George Soros behind the scenes(and in the movies his character is always inexplicably Republican).

2. The majority of those hanging at left-wing sites are living off the state, living off of unearned wealth, or living off their parents. There’s always more of that. Those of us who earn every dollar are a bit more choosy with our funds.

MadisonConservative on January 31, 2009 at 3:41 PM

Two reasons:

1. A giant shadowy figure like George Soros behind the scenes(and in the movies his character is always inexplicably Republican).

2. The majority of those hanging at left-wing sites are living off the state, living off of unearned wealth, or living off their parents. There’s always more of that. Those of us who earn every dollar are a bit more choosy with our funds.

MadisonConservative on January 31, 2009 at 3:41 PM

This puts us at a distinct disadvantage you know.

Added to that we’ll have more than half the population not paying Federal income taxes soon.

Oh, and the entitlement structure will collapse the budget even w/out all the Obama add-ons.

http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/9493/tohellwithit2hy6.jpg

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 3:45 PM

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 3:45 PM

Hence why some conservatives want to see drugs legalized. Might as well go out happy.

MadisonConservative on January 31, 2009 at 3:48 PM

Then there’s this guy:

http://img258.imageshack.us/img258/9954/senatoralfrankense7.jpg

I’m not a “drunk”, but I’m going to commiserate with some like-minded friends now at the bar.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 3:54 PM

I’m sorry for calling you a “gloid” and the “jock sniffing” comment as well.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 3:29 PM

hey, I don’t sniff no stinkin’ jocks either!

But I do like the occasional piece of pie… )

Serr8d on January 31, 2009 at 3:55 PM

hey, I don’t sniff no stinkin’ jocks either!

But I do like the occasional piece of pie… )

Serr8d on January 31, 2009 at 3:55 PM

Aw hell, did I do it to you too?

Sorry dude.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 3:58 PM

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/serr8d/Friday%20Photos/AZCardsCheerleader.jpg

I hereby change my Super Bowl allegiance from the Steelers to the Cards.

toliver on January 31, 2009 at 4:00 PM

Well the guy is a draft-dodger, so he is qualified in the same vein as W, Cheney, Rove, Newt, Limbaugh . . . ad nauseam.

benny shakar on January 31, 2009 at 4:20 PM

Nugent pissed away any credibility he had as a legitimate conservative.

I wish he’d just crawl under a stump and dine on slugs for the rest of his wango-tango days and stay the hell out of public view.

Spiritk9 on January 31, 2009 at 6:31 PM

Ted is just being Ted. He’s also a certifiable rocker, as in “Drugs, Sex & Rock-n-Roll”, minus the drugs but over the top Gonzo nonetheless. That’s been his gimmick since the 60s, and to him, everything is a metaphor for sex.

1st time I heard of him was as a pre-teen when I saw concert posters all over Berlin with him blasting away on his guitar-cum-shotgun. The tongue-in-cheek video fits right in with his body of work; such as ‘Cat-Scratch Fever’, ‘Wang Dang’, ‘Hibernation’, ‘Great White Buffalo’ among many others.

Methinks, either one is offended by all of Ted Nugent’s music as a matter of taste/principle. Or one is offended only because of whom his broadside was aimed at; had it been aimed at Booosh, they’d cheered. But I think it would be hypocritical to dig “Wango Tango” yet be upset at the video in question.

AH_C on January 31, 2009 at 6:42 PM

INFORMAL POLL:

STRANGLEHOLD as Best Slow, Comfortable Screw Song EVAH.

Do I hear a Second?……..

seejanemom on January 31, 2009 at 7:16 PM

Hmmmm . . . a man who fathered kids with three different women out of wedlock and left the mothers, not to mention the kids he had with two women that were his wives–that’s seven kids with five different women; a man who then wrote a book telling Black Americans they need better sexual values when he needs to look in the mirror on this; a man who got his teen underaged girlfriends’ parents to sign her over to him so he could child-molest her and she could parent his kids while he was on tour; a man who dodged the draft, then blamed it on his dead father (who did serve) and bad public school education–YUP, SOUNDS LIKE A GREAT NRA PREZ!!!

AP, you are right on target on this. Read more about this hypocrite scumbag called Ted Nugent and what a faux-conservative he is. The article is low on his out-of-wedlock kid count: It’s three (w/ three different women), not one or two.

Debbie Schlussel on January 31, 2009 at 7:49 PM

Debbie….nice to see you are on top of the game.

And they call ME the strident, legalistic bitch around here.

I have no opinion of his personal life, because frankly, I didn’t KNOW those details….but that man can throw down the mojo.

And Deb….why you no voteeee in my INFORMAL POLL?

seejanemom on January 31, 2009 at 8:23 PM

DEBBIE…why you no voteee in my INFORMAL POLL????

He may be a preachy hypocrite, but the due can through down the Mojo…..no?

As much as I love The Nuge, I think Deb is right….he should just shut up and sing.

seejanemom on January 31, 2009 at 8:25 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4