[LWYM425]

Below is a link to an article Ted Nugent wrote for the Washington Times. My question for discussion- How effective do you think this article is at promoting the RTKBA?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/jan/11/be-prepared-for-evil/?page=1

This post was retrieved online from Google news January 17, 2011. Please delete thread if its a repeat.

[Deltaboy]

Ted is Spot on! We need to be ready to respond anytime anywhere with up to Lethal force. :D

[milq]

That particular article, IMO, is a very effective way of promoting RKBA. Nugent tugs on the strings of personal responsibility a bit and reminds folks that the police can't always protect your family, so you should be prepared to.

Nugent, while I like him, has exhibited some "in your face" tendencies in the past and that may have turned some people off of him. While I commend his tenacity and passion for 2A, I know some people who would simply not give the above linked article a chance, preferring to think he's just a loud redneck. (Before I clicked the link I was hoping it was a well thought out article, and it is)

[bayhawk2]

Ted Nugent makes sense..We need him to help keep our gun rights.
He certainly has a voice and is not afraid to use it.He is not the
anti-gunners friend.That can be a good thing or a bad thing.
We need speakers that can convert the anti-gunners into
understanding why we need gun rights to protect our families and our
Country.How our hunters actually conserve wildlife.Ted Nugent
is doing what he can do best.Protecting the 2'nd Amendment.

[Hunt480]

Uncle Ted is always a great voice for the cause. He has attracted a lot of young people to gun sports as well as bowhunting. Always speaks the truth and I think he is a great role model.

[rajb123]

Won't Ted be the next president of the NRA?

[toejamm]

Very effective.
The Motor City Madman does not have a doctorate degree. He's not exactly what you would call a polished diplomat either.
He is, however a very bright, articulate man with no reservations about using plain english to express his opinion. Brash? Yes! Blunt? Yes! On point? Yes! Apologetic? Not a chance!
He could be considered by some to be a polarizing figure because of his, sometimes, untamed use of language. If anyone ever comes away from watching or reading an interview with him, and is unclear where he stands, well they just weren't paying enough attention. Good thing about him is he also has the facts and figures to back-up his argument.
I give the article 9 1/2 out of 10.

[milq]

Very effective.
The Motor City Madman does not have a doctorate degree. He's not exactly what you would call a polished diplomat either.
He is, however a very bright, articulate man with no reservations about using plain english to express his opinion. Brash? Yes! Blunt? Yes! On point? Yes! Apologetic? Not a chance!
He could be considered by some to be a polarizing figure because of his, sometimes, untamed use of language. If anyone ever comes away from watching or reading an interview with him, and is unclear where he stands, well they just weren't paying enough attention. Good thing about him is he also has the facts and figures to back-up his argument.
I give the article 9 1/2 out of 10.
Thanks, I think you said what I was thinking (better than I did previously).

[feedthehogs]

Theres preaching to the choir, and then theres preaching to the sinners.

The choirs already converted, its the sinners or anti gun folks that need the conversion and my experience has shown that in your face styles don't work.

These folks tend to be more educated, liberal in thinking and want to reason and understand everything that happens.

Ted touches on that core when he says he doesn't care why people commit these shootings. Problem is a good portion of those out there do and want to try and understand so they can prevent it in the future without more violence. These are the same folks who still believe you can rehabilitate violent prisoners and release them back into society.

The same ones who study the minds of serial killers hoping to recognize one before they kill. The problem is they can't.

These are the same folks who keep rereleasing a crimminal with a 5 page rap sheet back into society because they haven't committed the big one yet, instead of sticking them in a cell and throwing away the key.

As long as you have a segment of society who still wants to try and fix all the bad people, you'll have anti gunners who believe carring a gun for self protection only adds to the problem and creates wild west scenes.

The trouble is every time I ask one of these folks to give me an example of the wild west after ccw was passed or open carry is allowed, none of them can.

Teds style is more toward those who seek the rebel cool factor, which is fine as long as responsibility is also gained with it.

Adults who write the laws and pass em are less likely to fall for the rebel cool factor.

Don't look at his style from the RKBA side, look at it from the anti side.

[hardluk1]

He is our pitbull for the second amendment rights. He can be rough when he needs to be but is always spot on with his information. I don't believe any anti gun person in this country would want to have him show up to confront them

[Messenger Guard]

Ted Nugent and Charlie Daniels should be the next Independent ticket. Probably the only time I will be in complete agreement with anyone's platform.

[Mike J]

I don't think were going to sway the hard core anti's anyway. The people on the fence or the ones that haven't ever really given the RKBA much thought are the ones we need to pull to our side. I believe Ted could pull some of them in. He does have an over the top high energy personality & he is putting the message out there. I'm glad he is on our side.

[HGUNHNTR]

Wow, that was awful. I think Ted needs to tone down his adjective use a bit. More adjectives to descibe evil people and occurances doesn't equal a more powerful statement. That would be a fine entry in a diary, but not as a persuasive article in a newspaper.

Ted Nugent and Charlie Daniels should be the next Independent ticket---:uhoh: Oh my......

[Badlander]

I read some of the responses posted under the article. Scary how stupid people are!!!

[9mmforMe]

Yeah I wasn't really impressed with that article either. I like Ted's gun views but that seemed more appropriate for a Sunday school class of 9 year olds.

[toejamm]

feedthehogs,
I think I understand where you were going with your response to the thread and I'd probably agree with most of what you wrote. But for the record:
- In my experience, I can't say that the anti-gun, liberal, do-gooder, feel your pain faction of our society is more educated than any other cross section of Americans. They might act like it, but my experience is that lots of them are ignorant of the facts and dumb as a post.
- As far as Ted Nugent and his usefulness to the RKBA cause, from what I've noticed, Americans fall into 5 categories (Non-scientific study)
1) 10% Hopeless gun-grabbers. Don't confuse them with the facts, they've made up their minds.
2) 20% Dreamers. Don't own, never shot guns. Pie in the sky types who wish there were no guns at all.
3) 30% May or may not own guns. Haven't given the topic of RKBA much thought. On the fence.
4) 20% Gun owners, outdoors types, like the idea of gun ownership. When push comes to shove, they're with the RKBA crowd.
5) 20% Gun enthusiests. Hunters. THR NRA members etc.
I think Ted Nugent's take is wasted on #'s 1&2, but is helpful with a portion of the rest, especially #3. We still need the Charlton Heston and Wayne Lapierre types too, but I think Ted fills a niche that not many can fill.
- I agree with you regarding CCW laws and drops in crime rates. No wild wild west either. Nobody I ever talked to can combat that part of the arguement.
- Lastly, what is "The rebel cool factor?" I'm not trying to be a wiseacre. I have honestly never heard that phrase before.

[hardluk1]

I think many anti-gun people would not want to set down and debate with him. He does tend to control a discussion and make them unable to talk to or against him and his views.

[Double Naught Spy]

Theres preaching to the choir, and then theres preaching to the sinners.

Sort of reminds me of folks being so excited because Sarah Palin was on the Republican ticket and how much good she was going to do with RTKBA. The people that really liked her were already pro RTKBA. Turns out, she didn't swing too many additional votes beyond the RTKBA community. The choir voted for her and that was about it.

Effective article? If you consider preaching to the choir as a way to get sinners into church, no, not effective at all.

What most pro gun folks completely fail to understand is that their logic and views don't convince people who don't share the same logic and views to become pro gun.

Don't look at his style from the RKBA side, look at it from the anti side.

Right. Take a look at the article from an anti-gun position and what do you see? You see a pro-gun ostentatious loud mouth (sort of like Rosie O'Donnell to us) who not only notes how bad the tragedy was, but also notes several other examples of why guns are bad as evidenced by people being killed with them. So not only are anti-gun folks not going to want to read his article in the first place because of who wrote it, if they read it they will think him an idiot for explicitly laying out why guns are bad.

The trouble is every time I ask one of these folks to give me an example of the wild west after ccw was passed or open carry is allowed, none of them can.
Sadly, what pro-gun folks need is some sort of horrible event like the Giffords shooting to actually be clearly stopped stone cold dead by an actual average citizen who has a ccw, and this just hasn't materialized in a manner about which an effective argument can be made. We really don't have a shining star event. We have lots of individual events, but the generally fail to promote a sense of societal benefit even if they are shown to work very well at the individual level (which is where day in and day out that people are typically benefitted).

Pro gunners talk about how Zamudio was on scene and acted smartly, not drawing his gun, and isn't he a great example of CCW. No. He arrived on scene after the shooter was downed by unamred people. The fact that he had a gun didn't change a thing about the situation. He is a great guy for rushing to help, but then again, a lot of folks rushed to help as well that weren't armed, or if they were, nobody knew it because they didn't use their guns either and they didn't spend time on TV telling the world how they would have used their guns if they had to like Zamudio did.

Seattle Mall? Dan McCowan, not a good example. He was there and he acted in some of the most absurd ways resulting in him getting shot multiple times and is now crippled.

Tyler, TX? Mark Wilson lost his life trying to protect others and was heralded for his efforts by several folks, saving lives, but nobody wants to promote the extreme risk of loss of life in protecting others via CCW. Not only that, Wilson wasn't a normal CCW person. He had owned a gun range and had been a firearms self defense instructor.

Colorado Springs church shootings? The gunman was stopped by a CCW person. A lone female with a pistol stopped a man with a rifle during the course of his killing spree. Wow, that sounds like a shining star for us, but the female wasn't your average female CCW person like my mom or yours. It was Jeanne Assam who was specifically in place to act as church security. It was voluntary, but she was a guard for the service in which the gunman came in, having attended another service as a patron. Not only that, but Assam was a former police officer and said in multiple TV interviews that she didn't shoot the gunman per se, that it was "all God" and that "God Guided Me and Protected Me." http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/14817480/detail.html All things considered, I don't think the argument for the RTKBA is going to benefit from the argument that when the time comes, God will be the one really running the gun and not the rest of us. We all home for Divine Intervention, but thusfar it has not proven to be a reliable and recognizable factor.

So it has been a bit hard to come up with great counter-arguments based on hero figures that we can showcase as really saving the public, or our children, via RTKBA. No dbout that guns are used to save lives every day in every state of our country, but the vast majority of the events are singular and small, impacting individuals and families, but not whole communities or the nation like many of the mass shootings do.

So what about Nugent as a spokesperson for RTKBA?
Good thing about him is he also has the facts and figures to back-up his argument.

Ted Nugent has a lot of facts like the anti-gunners have facts. He is not one you should consider as making factual statements until you verify his claims on a fact by fact basis.

Appalachian School of Law? This is another event Ted commented on and one where he misrepresented the facts. I see above where another person has mentioned that the antis don't believe facts. Many facts really aren't. The shooting took place in 2002. In 2007 he was on CNN and spoke of it. http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/19/commentary.nugent/index.html He noted...

More recently, just a few miles up the road from Virginia Tech, two law school students ran to fetch their legally owned firearm to stop a madman from slaughtering anybody and everybody he pleased. These brave, average, armed citizens neutralized him pronto.

Nice misrepresentation, Ted. He neglected to mention a few related facts about the incident. He neglected to mention the unarmed students who actually physically engaged the shooter. He neglected to mention that the two brave, average armed citizens were not actually all that pronto. They showed up late. He neglected to tell us that the two average students were law enforcement officers, one current and one retired. He neglected to tell us that one also put on a ballistic vest. Lastly, he neglected to tell us that the shooter was already disarmed and had his hands in the air by the time the pronto brave average citizens arrived with their guns. http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~lambert/guns/appalachian/nd/tackle/gun/054.html No doubt that Nugent had the right information. He probably knows this stuff better than the rest of us, but he did not tell the truth and he twisted the information in a manner to favor a pro-gun position, something that we abhor when anti-gunners do it.

In that CNN interview, Nugent also noted that the owner of a dance hall brought the shooting of a school dance to a halt with his shotgun. This is another misrepresentation (Edinboro, Penn). James Strand did own the facility where the dance was being held. He did confront the gunman with a shotgun and actually held him at bay until the police arrived. What Nugent didn't tell you was that the shooter had fled the scene after the shooting and that Strand gave pursuit, catching him in a nearby field. In other words, the shooting spree at the dance was over. The shooter was making his escape when caught by Strand. Strand did a great job, no doubt, but he didn't stop the shooting at the dance as claimed. http://edition.cnn.com/US/9804/25/school.shooting.pm/

So when was the last time y'all can remember that a pro-gun person was convinced by the likes of Rosie O'Donnell about the "validity" of the anti-gun position and the facts she provides? Then why would anyone think that Nugent's words would be any more effective?

Aside from those mentioned, do we have any shining events? Sort of. We have the CCW patron at this bar in Nevada that stopped a shooter who was on his second magazine of shooting people.
http://www.kolotv.com/home/headlines/19251374.html
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2021752/posts

Of course, a lot of people think that guns and drinking don't mix and would be slow to use this as an example of a CCW person doing a good job at a critical time. Anti-gunners would argue that drinking is what contributed to the start of the shootings.

How about shooting a derranged archer? CCW did a good job in this case...
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/6219604.html

How about the aftermath for the principal who stopped Luke Woodham. Is he considered a reveered hero? Not really. Despite his quick thinking a good work, a lot of people who actually appreciate how he did what he did. http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=1343

[hardluk1]

Do you feel better now!! Wow. I would hope maybe if i ever have to have the ability to defend our selves if thing go bad. As fas all the rest of this i know that Hardly anyone gets the info right any more are just twist it some to help with the point there try'n to get across. Why not get your ducks in a row and become a speaker for pro-gun agenda's. Sounds like your ready.

[toejamm]

Double Naught Spy,

Since I don't have the time today to review your information and check the particulars of each item you listed above, I won't question your "Facts," yet. Unlike some people, I read up on a subject before I dispute it with someone. I'll do so when I have ample time.

That aside, I see you are very capable of pointing out the validity, or lack thereof, of peoples actions and arguements. What I don't see is any suggestions or tactics on how to convince folks that the RKBA is necessasary and constitutional.
Anyone can sit back in their Lazy-Boy and point out that the football team isn't doing something right. Few actually can make informed statements about "Specifically" what to do different, to make the team get better and win.

Hey, you've got an opinion and you're entitled to it.
All I'm asking is where's your solution?
Who do you want to speak on behalf of the RKBA crowd?
What exactly do you think they should say?
What facts would you use to convince people?

[Double Naught Spy]

Okay, well Woodham indeed may have been planning on shooting up another school. Still, it doesn't bode well for Nugent being a guy of fact. Of course, Woodham was planning on living in Cuba as well. So I removed that part, but feel free to check the facts. That is what they are there for, checking.

Guns most definitely do save lives, no doubt about it, hence why I don't understand the need to fabricate information to try to sell the notion better.

What I don't see is any suggestions or tactics on how to convince folks that the RKBA is necessasary and constitutional.

I am sorry. I thought my point was more clear, but I will spell it out for you. Nugent isn't convincing anybody to be pro-gun with with demeanor or made up information. He does look good to a lot of pro gun folks who like the fact that a celebrity is on our side bother to actually look at what he says and does.

We would be a lot better off if when presenting the information if we didn't make up "facts" to make our point of view sound better. Yes, the antis do it and we consider them terribly dishonest, unreliable, and use other sorts of insulting terminology to describe them for their transgression. We get considered in the same manner when we commit the same behaviors and yet we wonder why the antis don't believe out "facts."

If you actually present factual information, it will go a lot further and work a lot better than made up garbage.

So specifically, don't lie.

Next time Ted Nugent says that the Constitution or the 2nd Amendment is his carry permit, know that he is misrepresenting his position yet again. He may not have any carry permits and travel with a gun anywhere in the US but it isn't because the Constitution or 2nd Amendmend is letting him do it.

Go to 1:35 and see where he says that the Bill of Rights and the 2nd Amendment are his concealed weapons permit, period!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_QjEL0uUgo

Do you know why he can get away with saying that and carrying a gun pretty much anywhere in the US. It it because he is a free man? Nope. Is it really because of the 2nd Amendment? Nope. If we use that argument without being in his position, are we going to get busted if caught? Oh hell yes.

Here, let him explain his unique position when he is trying to make the argument for why cops need to be able to carry. All of a sudden, Nugent's position about the 2nd Amendment being his concealed weapons permit goes down the toilet.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wv5HJkp5sY0

Sure enough, Ted, if you are a cop, it isn't the 2nd Amendment letting you carry all over the country, is it?

What were his words?

I get to carry a gun nationwide because of the House Resolution 218 that we passed.

It isn't because of the 2nd Amendment at all that Ted isn't getting busted for weapons violations around the country. His concealed weapons permit is his law enforcement credentials.

[toejamm]

DNS,
Thanks. I will check them out. No disrespect intended.
What about the questions though?

[toejamm]

You're right.
Facts and statistics can be manipulated to prove anything one wants. A tweek here and there and almost anything can happen.

[Double Naught Spy]

So if we are right, if our cause is true, then why would we need to manipulate the information to make our point? That would be dishonest, would it not?

[robhof]

As far as truth goes; the liberal media is definitely biased Anti-gun and don't bother to check any story to their benefit, but they would be much inclined to check every detail of the Pro side and use it to further their cause, so I'm also for truth on our side; there's plenty of examples, the NRA mags have verified examples every month.

[Murphy4570]

Nugent is a Man's Man in my book. 1950's style traditional.

I still need to buy his Kill it and Grill it book. Mmm Tasty.

[toejamm]

Double Naught Spy,
Ok, I get it.
My opinion is that Ted Nugent does far more good for the RKBA cause than harm.
You've taken plenty of time to trash him and his tactics. Now, how about taking some time answering the questions I asked you before:
Who do you want to speak on behalf of the RKBA crowd?
What exactly do you think they should say?
What "Facts" would YOU use to convince people?

I am genuinely interested in your thoughts on this. "IF" we're on the same side regarding the RKBA and you can provide helpful information, feel free to offer whatever you can. I know I would like to have as many facts at my disposal as possible. I'm sure lots of others reading this thread would as well.

[stickhauler]

Ted never claimed to have a college degree, he said he was too busy learning to go to college. Granted, Ted is in-your-face to an extent, and frankly, given the way our society is right now, I think we need a ton of in-your-face folks out there speaking their minds. Myself, I'm tired of being called names because I disagree with some people's political agendas.

I just wonder how long the people of this country will continue to allow our leaders to force-feed us what they think we need, while refusing to listen to us?

Love the Nuge or hate him, you got to respect him for speaking his mind. Too few of us do that these days, and that's led us to where we are now.

Personally, I'm proud to call him a brother!

[toejamm]

Well Double Naught Spy,
I did do some checking on your assertions regarding Nugent.
- You didn't reference what interview Nugent was engaged in, when making his alleged statements. That would be helpful because you are accusing him of not being truthful. Until you direct me to the exact interview, I can't take your word for your claims.
- That said, you referenced the shootings at Appalachian School of Law and the Edinboro dance for Parker Middle School. I did some reading beyond your sources at CNN. It seems:
#1 The shooting in Edinboro at Nick's Place where 14 year old Andrew Jerome fled after his shooting spree was in fact chased down outside and disarmed of his .25 caliber pistol by owner James Strand who was in posession of a shotgun. Mr. Strand didn't know if the boy was out of ammo, had other weapons outside, or was on his way to werak more havoc somewhere else. Yes he was courageous in doing what he did. He had no idea what could have happened to himself. No, Mr. strand didn't stop the shooting inside, but he did stop the kid from possibly coming back, and/or doing more damage elsewhere.
What did Ted Nugent say "Exactly?" Please forward the info on the interview. I would very much like to know.
#2 Applachian School of Law. There are two very different reports on what happened. One is similar to what you stated in an earlier reply. The othe is quite different. It says that the two men with guns approached the shooter and he gave up by putting his hands in the air. He subsequently was subdued by the students and handcuffed. Just because the one report fits your arguement, you relay it. No mention of the other report. Why?

Are you sure your facts are straight?
CNN is not always fair and balanced.

[Hunt480]

I just wonder how long the people of this country will continue to allow our leaders to force-feed us what they think we need, while refusing to listen to us?

Love the Nuge or hate him, you got to respect him for speaking his mind. Too few of us do that these days, and that's led us to where we are now.

Personally, I'm proud to call him a brother!

++1

[HGUNHNTR]

I just wonder how long the people of this country will continue to allow our leaders to force-feed us what they think we need, while refusing to listen to us?

In a democracy you have a vote. Being in the majority has it's benefits. If you want to influence people to vote for pro second amendment issues, you must first find out what resonates with those folks that typically don't vote in that manner. Ted Nugent's personality is probably the polar opposite of what could be considered effective marketing to these large groups of people. Liberals are not the enemy of the second amendment, in fact the liberal doctrine is much more in line with personal freedoms than is the conservative doctrine. I have found that using the argument of preserving basic human rights of self preservation, and teaching gun safety to parents and children that live in a world where 60% of the homes where their children will go for a play date is essential. Liberals are the champions of personal freedoms, it just takes some tactful discussion to illuminate that facet of liberalism. This is why I don't believe characters like Ted N are the best spokespeople for continuing to protect second amendment rights. We as pro second amendment supporters need to stop drawing lines of distinction and creating adversaries where we should be trying to win votes.

Check out the following link to get some ideas of how to present the 2nd amendment to you liberal friends. You may just find it is more effective than quoting old cliche's, parroting statistics, and certainly more effective than a poorly written article in a local newspaper.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/7/4/881431/-Why-liberals-should-love-the-Second-Amendment