Ted Nugent Pays Fine for Hunting Violation

In this 2010 photo, Ted Nugent waits for hunting dogs to retrieve a pheasant he shot. (AP Photo/Rapid City Journal, Aaron Rosenblatt) via Mad Mike's America

Ted Nugent is a nasty, vicious human being, who has far less worth than the animals he regularly slaughters just for the fun of it.  Nugent, a member of the board of the National Rifle Association (NRA), recently made the news for indirectly threatening the life of President Obama.

He is not only a rabid republican but he is also a passionate hater of all things liberal.  He has uttered threats and roundly criticized the OWS movements, along with the government of the United States.  His big mouth and powerful friends didn’t protect him from the law however, as this Newser story summary points out:

More gun fun with the Motor City Madman. Ted Nugent has agreed to a $10,000 fine for illegally shooting and transporting a black bear in Alaska in 2009, according to a plea he signed with prosecutors there, reports the Anchorage Daily News

.

The Man Who Quit Money

John McCain on Mitt Romney

via Fuck Conservatives 

The Evolution of the 2nd Amendment

WBEZ reports

The evolution of the Second Amendment is expertly detailed in a spellbinding New Yorker story, “Battleground America," in the current issue.  Here are some highlights.

6.“In 1957, when the N.R.A. moved into new headquarters, its motto, at the building’s entrance, read, ‘Firearms Safety Education, Marksmanship Training, Shooting for Recreation.’ It didn’t say anything about freedom, or self-defense, or rights.” 

12.“According to the constitutional-law scholar Carl Bogus, at least sixteen of the twenty-seven law-review articles published between 1970 and 1989 that were favorable to the N.R.A.’s interpretation of the Second Amendment were ‘written by lawyers who had been directly employed by or represented the N.R.A. or other gun-rights organizations.’ In an interview, former Chief Justice Warren Burger said that the new interpretation of the Second Amendment was ‘one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word ‘fraud,’ on the American public by special-interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime’.” 

14.“There are nearly three hundred million privately owned firearms in the United States: a hundred and six million handguns, a hundred and five million rifles, and eighty-three million shotguns. That works out to about one gun for every American.” 

15.“According to the General Social Survey, conducted by the National Policy Opinion Center at the University of Chicago, the prevalence of gun ownership has declined steadily in the past few decades. In 1973, there were guns in roughly one in two households in the United States; in 2010, one in three. In 1980, nearly one in three Americans owned a gun; in 2010, that figure had dropped to one in five.”

All Right, All Right, the NRA is not Intentionally Alarmist

The Daily News published a fascinating article on whether the alarmist talk of La Pierre and others is justified or not.

Nelson Shields, the founder of the organization which later became Handgun Control Inc., said in 1976: "Our ultimate goal - total control of handguns in the United States - is going to take time. My estimate is from seven to ten years. 

The first problem is to slow down the increasing number of handguns being produced and sold in this country. The second problem is to get handguns registered. And the final problem is to make the possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition - except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs and licensed gun collectors - totally illegal." "Intentionally alarmist"? 

In a 1993 editorial, a major newspaper urged Congress to outlaw almost all firearms: "Only by slicing away at this nation's already vast and deadly arsenal of guns will we reduce the violence and the fear. You will not feel safe, your children will not be safe, until there are almost no guns on the streets and in homes. 

No guns, period, except for those held by law enforcement officials and a few others, including qualified hunters and collectors. Can Congress impose such a ban? Federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, have consistently upheld a variety of firearms restrictions, even prohibitions, over the last 60 years."

Wow, those are some statements. No wonder the gun-rights folks are worried.

What's your opinion? Do the sentiments of Nelson Shields represent the gun control movement at large? Did his ideas trickle down through Gun Control Inc., and into the Brady Campaign? Has his message simply evolved into a secret agenda?

What do you think? Please leave a comment.

After Trayvon It's All Downhill for Gun Rights

Christian Science Monitor

Will Americans leery of a decade of gun rights expansions stand their ground over the Trayvon Martin case?

The Feb. 26 shooting of the unarmed teenager in Sanford, Fla., by neighborhood watch captain George Zimmerman, and the initial police decision not to charge Mr. Zimmerman, sparked a national debate about race and violence in American society.

But so far, Trayvon’s death is having the biggest impact on the national gun policy debate.

The shooting, some say, may have set a potential high-water mark for gun rights after a decade of legislative expansion, which included measures like concealed carry and no-duty-to-retreat in public laws, and the landmark Florida “Stand Your Ground” law that’s been cited in the Trayvon Martin case.

What do you think? Please leave a comment.

Video Games and Mass Killers

CNN reports

Norway's alleged mass killer testified on Thursday that he played video games as a way to train for a shooting spree that killed 77 people last summer. In particular, Anders Behring Breivik said at his trial that he played "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2" as a means of shooting practice, according to CNN's report.

The confessed shooter also said he once played the online game "World of Warcraft," a role-playing adventure with multiple players from around the world, for as many as 16 hours a day.

For people who have long suspected that there is some link between violent video games and real-world violence, the statement offered frightening new evidence for why the video-game industry should be more strictly regulated.

What's your opinion? Is it possible that those extremely violent games add the the problem?

In Breivik's case though, do you think there's a pattern developing?  First he said his acts were self-defense because of the Islamic infiltration of Scandinavia and the leftist governments failure to stop it. That's like blaming it on something, isn't it?  Now it's the fault of the video games.

What do you think?  Please leave a comment.