Ted Nugent slams 'mushy brained' Parkland survivors: 'They have no soul'

[Luk]

Eagles Of Death Metal’s Jesse Hughes Apologizes For Slamming Student Gun Control Protesters

“Recently I made some posts on my Instagram that did not communicate how I feel about a variety of topics.

What I had intended to be a statement about the hijacking by any side of the aisle of the beautiful agenda of a movement our nation’s youth came off like a mean-spirited, personal attack and slight of the youth themselves and even a personal attack of its leadership.

I wanna be clear, I never intended for that to happen. I was not attempting to impugn the youth of America and this beautiful thing they’ve accomplished. I truly am sorry. I did not mean to hurt anyone or cause any harm. As someone who’s watched their friends shot in front of their eyes and seen people killed that they love, I should have handled this a lot more maturely and responsibly, and I did not do that and I messed up.

And I hope that you’re able to forgive, me but please know that I did not mean to do what it seems like it was I was doing.”

 

[RobDownSouth]

His anger, like yours, is based on bullshit and racism. You're borderline Alex Jones, Ishtard.

LOL...."borderline".

 

[Not Normal]

No it isn't....it's not even close to what hypoxia is saying (and you by backing it).

2A doesn't even suggest "If you want to bear arms in public, be a vetted member of a well-regulated militia. " or that the right to bear arms is that of the militia granted at the discretion of congress as Hypoxia also seems to believe.


Hypoxia is totally ignoring "the right of the people" part of 2A or is pretending that actually means "the right of the government" because SCOTUS got that wrong and people don't have rights, only the government does.

Are you like Hypoxia in holding the believe the Bill of Rights is a list of rights of the government holds over the people and not a list of individual rights the government isn't supposed to violate??

I'm pointing out the actual wording of 2A that says gun ownership is for members of a "well regulated militia." You're interpreting my calling out of a falsehood by another poster as a blanket policy that I A) in no way am saying and B) something YOU think is the worst possible things, which is any type of government oversight.

 

[Hypoxia]

I'm pointing out the actual wording of 2A that says gun ownership is for members of a "well regulated militia."

The second specifically says the people may 'bear' arms. Ownership of arms isn't mentioned. In the Army, I 'bore' weapons I didn't own, for sure! Article I Section 8 empowers Congress to organize, arm, and discipline the Militia, whose job is national security and defense: "to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions..." Arms are thus to be supplied by Congress. That's what it says.

In all mention of 'rights' in the Constitution, only bearing arms is prefixed with a justification. All other granted rights are explicit. Note the difference.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Dana Loesch tried and failed.
Laura Ingraham tried and failed.
It therefore fell upon Ted Nugent to deliver the NRA's Easter Missive.

 

[adrina]

Dana Loesch tried and failed.
Laura Ingraham tried and failed.
It therefore fell upon Ted Nugent to deliver the NRA's Easter Missive.

Time to pull a Zumi.

https://media1.tenor.com/images/b8104a8c5daf9a2856b4342485313c77/tenor.gif?itemid=11090403

 

[richard_daily]

http://constitutionus.com -- find MILITIA -- 6 occurrences


The well-regulated militia was conceived as an integral part of the nation's defence and security forces, in place of a standing army. That's the reason for arms-bearing expressed in the 2nd's first two clauses, the words you dismiss. Do you trust a fucking UNregulated militia "to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions"??

Piss up another tree. Your arms-bearing is already quite infringed upon. You don't get to bear missiles, nukes, mustard gas, morningstars, bazookas, grenades, or switchblades. Laws specify your current allowed weaponry. Future laws can specify what, where, and when you can carry. You think such laws won't be enacted? What're you smoking?

Sorry, I missed the part where the 2nd amendment or any supporting documents state that the right to own guns are the rights of the militia, rather than the rights of the people.

Did you want to let me know where that was, or do you want to concede the argument? Or maybe you'll try to change the subject?

Let me know how you'd like to proceed.

 

[richard_daily]

I'm pointing out the actual wording of 2A that says gun ownership is for members of a "well regulated militia." You're interpreting my calling out of a falsehood by another poster as a blanket policy that I A) in no way am saying and B) something YOU think is the worst possible things, which is any type of government oversight.

And constitutional law and SCOTUS cases have already determined that the wording at the start of the 2nd amendment are the proposal clause, and that the right to own guns are the rights of the people. If you'll actually listen, read, or watch, I'll provide you with tons of links, but if you want to be like hyproxia and ignore them, there's no point.

 

[Sean]

And constitutional law and SCOTUS cases have already determined that the wording at the start of the 2nd amendment are the proposal clause, and that the right to own guns are the rights of the people. If you'll actually listen, read, or watch, I'll provide you with tons of links, but if you want to be like hyproxia and ignore them, there's no point.

And that only happened ten years ago in a 5-4 decision of a Conservative SCOTUS.

 

[Hypoxia]

And that only happened ten years ago in a 5-4 decision of a Conservative SCOTUS.

But hey, SCOTUS never reverses decisions, and Congress never rewrites laws, so everything will go on just as it is now, no change, no change... only more shootings the populace MUST tolerate because NRA sez so. Their right to play with allowed firearms trumps our right to live as persons born. Sure.

It's an almost comical sight. Gunpowder addicts in a row. Hands over ears. Eyes shut tight. Chanting, "never gonna change, never gonna change..."

PS: This is my LIT post #19991. Ay yi yi.

 

[HisArpy]

The second specifically says the people may 'bear' arms. Ownership of arms isn't mentioned. In the Army, I 'bore' weapons I didn't own, for sure! Article I Section 8 empowers Congress to organize, arm, and discipline the Militia, whose job is national security and defense: "to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions..." Arms are thus to be supplied by Congress. That's what it says.

In all mention of 'rights' in the Constitution, only bearing arms is prefixed with a justification. All other granted rights are explicit. Note the difference.

Nope, wrong again.

The 2A specifically says that the right of the people is to "keep and bear arms." It doesn't say "receive and bear arms in militia service."

 

[Not Normal]

The second specifically says the people may 'bear' arms. Ownership of arms isn't mentioned. In the Army, I 'bore' weapons I didn't own, for sure! Article I Section 8 empowers Congress to organize, arm, and discipline the Militia, whose job is national security and defense: "to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions..." Arms are thus to be supplied by Congress. That's what it says.

In all mention of 'rights' in the Constitution, only bearing arms is prefixed with a justification. All other granted rights are explicit. Note the difference.

Good points.

And constitutional law and SCOTUS cases have already determined that the wording at the start of the 2nd amendment are the proposal clause, and that the right to own guns are the rights of the people. If you'll actually listen, read, or watch, I'll provide you with tons of links, but if you want to be like hyproxia and ignore them, there's no point.

The constitution is (or should be) a living document. Open to interpretation and change. Perhaps another challenge, or cast will come before the court and they will agree with people who think differently.

And that only happened ten years ago in a 5-4 decision of a Conservative SCOTUS.

Should we ever not have a conservative court (which that dickhead Mitch McConnell completely completely fucked the left out of with his partisan bullshit) maybe the decision in a future case will go the other way.

I don't have much hope of that...

 

[HisArpy]

Good points.

The constitution is (or should be) a living document. Open to interpretation and change. Perhaps another challenge, or cast will come before the court and they will agree with people who think differently.


Should we ever not have a conservative court (which that dickhead Mitch McConnell completely completely fucked the left out of with his partisan bullshit) maybe the decision in a future case will go the other way.

I don't have much hope of that...

The Constitution IS a "living document". It has the mechanism for change built into it. What Libs want to do is shortcut that procedure and impose their version of Rights on society. They justify this by trying to twist and parse words to fit a narrative that is patently silly.

Win the House and the Senate this Nov. Impeach 45 and then repeal the 2A. Go ahead, do it. I dare you. See where it leads.

 

[RobDownSouth]

The Constitution IS a "living document". It has the mechanism for change built into it. What Libs want to do is shortcut that procedure and impose their version of Rights on society. They justify this by trying to twist and parse words to fit a narrative that is patently silly.

Win the House and the Senate this Nov. Impeach 45 and then repeal the 2A. Go ahead, do it. I dare you. See where it leads.

squeal like a pig!

"Ah NEEEEEED mah AR-15!!!"

Seriously, the only "short circuit" done to the Second Amendment was when "Justice" Antonin Scalia decided "a well-regulated militia" could be redefined as "an army of one".

Their Blood. Your Hands. Celebrate While You Can.

Loesch Failed.
Ingraham Failed.
Hell, even NUGENT Failed.

Didja see the pathetic editorial in RedState today begging the Parkland kids' parents to shut their fucking kids mouth?

Bottom line: Fuck your feelings, snowflake.

 

[Taint_mAnn]

squeal like a pig!

"Ah NEEEEEED mah AR-15!!!"

Seriously, the only "short circuit" done to the Second Amendment was when "Justice" Antonin Scalia decided "a well-regulated militia" could be redefined as "an army of one".

Their Blood. Your Hands. Celebrate While You Can.

Loesch Failed.
Ingraham Failed.
Hell, even NUGENT Failed.

Didja see the pathetic editorial in RedState today begging the Parkland kids' parents to shut their fucking kids mouth?

Bottom line: Fuck your feelings, snowflake.

That editorial was pathetic. I hope those kids never let up and keep the snowflakes whining.

 

[HisArpy]

squeal like a pig!

"Ah NEEEEEED mah AR-15!!!"

Seriously, the only "short circuit" done to the Second Amendment was when "Justice" Antonin Scalia decided "a well-regulated militia" could be redefined as "an army of one".

Their Blood. Your Hands. Celebrate While You Can.

Loesch Failed.
Ingraham Failed.
Hell, even NUGENT Failed.

Didja see the pathetic editorial in RedState today begging the Parkland kids' parents to shut their fucking kids mouth?

Bottom line: Fuck your feelings, snowflake.

Yep, that's what it all comes down to isn't it. I don't believe in the same things you do so every evil in society is my personal fault and you have impunity to punish me, my friends, my family, my employer, and his customers unless we obey your wishes.

Meanwhile you conveniently forget your own history. You toss out established rules and procedures. You throw temper tantrums and hurt innocents.

But, despite all that your progressive ideals have failed to achieve and which have actually CREATED the problems you lay at my feet, you say it's my fault. Ok, I can live with that. As long as you own your fair share of the blame too.

 

[cowslinger64]

The Constitution IS a "living document". It has the mechanism for change built into it. What Libs want to do is shortcut that procedure and impose their version of Rights on society. They justify this by trying to twist and parse words to fit a narrative that is patently silly.

Win the House and the Senate this Nov. Impeach 45 and then repeal the 2A. Go ahead, do it. I dare you. See where it leads.

So if Heller had gone 5 - 4 the other way, you'd be perfectly fine with that. right?

There'd be no bitching from you or the other gun nuts, I'm sure.. your hold on those "rights" seems rather tenuous..A liberal majority on the court could see things differently, make sure you support them 100 percent.. like you are with a ruling that you wish to have happened.

You guys read what you want to read, that doesn't make those that disagree with you about guns, anti gun.

 

[Sean]

Yep, that's what it all comes down to isn't it. I don't believe in the same things you do so every evil in society is my personal fault and you have impunity to punish me, my friends, my family, my employer, and his customers unless we obey your wishes.

Meanwhile you conveniently forget your own history. You toss out established rules and procedures. You throw temper tantrums and hurt innocents.

But, despite all that your progressive ideals have failed to achieve and which have actually CREATED the problems you lay at my feet, you say it's my fault. Ok, I can live with that. As long as you own your fair share of the blame too.

Do stop whining, Tim, it's unmanly.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Good lord. You people have gone Hogg wild. Hogg and his fellow "innocent victims" spent years bullying Cruz and when they reaped their reward, which got their fellow classmates shot, not them, they went out to preach the gospel of gun control, not the inherent evil of bullying. But, I know! Let's heap scorn on Ted Nugent as a symbol of gun violence as we suddenly go silent on the topic of bullying.

You tell 'em, fat boy! It's not the Parkland Kids who were victims, it was Cruz! And Nugent!

 

[Pookie]

squeal like a pig!

"Ah NEEEEEED mah AR-15!!!"

Seriously, the only "short circuit" done to the Second Amendment was when "Justice" Antonin Scalia decided "a well-regulated militia" could be redefined as "an army of one".

Their Blood. Your Hands. Celebrate While You Can.

Loesch Failed.
Ingraham Failed.
Hell, even NUGENT Failed.

Didja see the pathetic editorial in RedState today begging the Parkland kids' parents to shut their fucking kids mouth?

Bottom line: Fuck your feelings, snowflake.

http://www.dadsbigplan.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/you-pesky-kids.jpg

 

[Taint_mAnn]

You tell 'em, fat boy! It's not the Parkland Kids who were victims, it was Cruz! And Nugent!

Aj really is a piece of shit. No wonder his God made him sterile.

 

[HisArpy]

So if Heller had gone 5 - 4 the other way, you'd be perfectly fine with that. right?

There'd be no bitching from you or the other gun nuts, I'm sure.. your hold on those "rights" seems rather tenuous..A liberal majority on the court could see things differently, make sure you support them 100 percent.. like you are with a ruling that you wish to have happened.

You guys read what you want to read, that doesn't make those that disagree with you about guns, anti gun.

IF Heller had gone the other way, there would have been the following sequence of events.

1. A Congressional outcry and an impeachment of Roberts and removal of the other justices.
2. An act (or Amendment to the 2A) clarifying the language as an individual Right.
3. Failing the above within a reasonable AND SHORT period of time, an armed insurrection.

You think that would have been a good thing?

 

[Not Normal]

IF Heller had gone the other way, there would have been the following sequence of events.

1. A Congressional outcry and an impeachment of Roberts and removal of the other justices.
2. An act (or Amendment to the 2A) clarifying the language as an individual Right.
3. Failing the above within a reasonable AND SHORT period of time, an armed insurrection.

You think that would have been a good thing?

That shit is never gonna happen.

 

[phrodeau]

IF Heller had gone the other way, there would have been the following sequence of events.

1. A Congressional outcry and an impeachment of Roberts and removal of the other justices.
2. An act (or Amendment to the 2A) clarifying the language as an individual Right.
3. Failing the above within a reasonable AND SHORT period of time, an armed insurrection.

You think that would have been a good thing?

You're certainly right. The gun enthusiasts are a violent lot.

 

[Sean]

IF Heller had gone the other way, there would have been the following sequence of events.

1. A Congressional outcry and an impeachment of Roberts and removal of the other justices.
2. An act (or Amendment to the 2A) clarifying the language as an individual Right.
3. Failing the above within a reasonable AND SHORT period of time, an armed insurrection.

You think that would have been a good thing?

So you think impeaching judges because they don't agree with your politics is Ok, Tim? There's a name for that.