Nugent at the NRA meeting.

[mljdeckard]

All news is biased. The difference is, Fox's coverage is much more complete. They will run stories that the other networks won't mention at all until they look foolish for ignoring them in the first place. It is up to every viewer of all news to filter the bull and make their own decisions.

 

[xXxplosive]

So what would you rather have hime do.....

Stand outside a polling place with bats and intimidate voters as the come to vote.
Place a $10,000.00 bounty on a man's head in violation of the Rico Statute.

Whether you agree or not he excercised his 1st A right...at least he didn't break any Federal Laws and have them give another pass as they do to there brothers.

 

[General Tso]

But RKBA is different than right and left. Both side will sell us out. Look at the stupid gun laws on the books now. Why don't they fight more to get rid of those? I think Nugent is more about partisan politics than RKBA. Bush 41, 43, Reagan, Clinton, Romney, Obama are all anti-gun. Look at legislation they support. Sometimes it's *Better the devil you know than the one you don't*.

 

[General Tso]

I just think that type of speech does more harm than good.

 

[opsman]

Whether you like Mr. Nugent or not he has the right to his opinion where ever he happens to be, just the same as you and I have the right to ours. I believe Mr. Nugent tells it like it is, and obviously is not politically correct, but if you do not like what he has to say then do not listen. I don't like a lot of things that our current president says, along with a lot of the elected officials. I wish I had the microphone where millions could hear what I have to say.

 

[JRH6856]

I just think that type of speech does more harm than good.

I may disagree with what you say, but I don't deny your right to say it.

 

[Nushif]

I may disagree with what you say, but I don't deny your right to say it.

I don't think at this point the discussion is about the "right to say" anything. The point of discussion at this point is what this INVITED GUEST SPEAKER of a NON-PARTISAN organization said, which you know, wasn't very non-partisan. That's what peeves me, personally.
But all this aside, we're talking right now about the effect this will have on our continued fight for constitutional carry everywhere in the US. And I don't think it was a net bonus.

Remember. Ted Nugent as far as I'm aware didn't step out of the crowd and grab the mic. He was an invited guest speaker. This means that whatever he says at a certain point is backed by the host, in this case the NRA.

He has the right to say whatever he wants, as do all of us. But that doesn't mean it's gonna help our case, or be of a net positive.

[edit]
Constitutional carry and gun ownership in the US is our goal, right? I mean, everyone, right? Or am I missing something here?

 

[rajb123]

There have never been any NRA leaders who have made controversial statements in public!

Chuck Heston: "You will take my guns from my cold dead hands"

Wayne Lapierre: "ATF agents are jack-booted government thugs"


Did I miss anyone? The point is that these kind of statements are often made by NRA bigs to rally the troops, raise money, make waves and cause people to think.

 

[jcwit]

Remember. Ted Nugent as far as I'm aware didn't step out of the crowd and grab the mic. He was an invited guest speaker. This means that whatever he says at a certain point is backed by the host, in this case the NRA.

In case you missed it, he also is on the board of directors, elected to that office by the membership. So I doubt the word "guest" applies here.

 

[JRH6856]

I don't think at this point the discussion is about the "right to say" anything. The point of discussion at this point is what this INVITED GUEST SPEAKER of a NON-PARTISAN organization said, which you know, wasn't very non-partisan. That's what peeves me, personally.
But all this aside, we're talking right now about the effect this will have on our continued fight for constitutional carry everywhere in the US. And I don't think it was a net bonus.

Remember. Ted Nugent as far as I'm aware didn't step out of the crowd and grab the mic. He was an invited guest speaker. This means that whatever he says at a certain point is backed by the host, in this case the NRA.

He has the right to say whatever he wants, as do all of us. But that doesn't mean it's gonna help our case, or be of a net positive.

[edit]
Constitutional carry and gun ownership in the US is our goal, right? I mean, everyone, right? Or am I missing something here?

You say the NRA is non partisan yet you say as a guest speaker, TN represents the views of the NRA. Doesn't sound so non-partisan if that is true. I think you will find a disclaimer published somewhere to the effect that "the views of NRA members are their own and do not represent the views of the NRA" even though they may to some exent.

The protection and extension the the Second Amendment is one goal, certainly, but I suspect most of us have others, as well. One of mine is the defeat at the polls of any politician that has shown himself or herself to be more of a threat to the Constitution than a Protector and Defender of that document. Otherwise the 2A won't mean much. You may have other, differing goals and that is your right.

 

[Nushif]

[...] So I doubt the word "guest" applies here.

Very true!

Which makes it even worse. He's an ELECTED OFFICIAL of the NRA and continues doing what he seems to do best. So not only is he a guest speaker that some guy who did the inviting agrees with, but some kind of majority of the member base agrees with it.

Are you seeing where I'm going with this, or is this really not getting through? This isn't good for our shared cause. This is very, very tangibly bad for enhancing private gun ownership. Not like Z-Max bullets or Tacticool. This is an ELECTED OFFICIAL causing damage.

 

[Guillermo]

I have never been more embarrassed by some of my fellow High-Roaders.

Please Mr. Moderator...having a thread just bashing Ted Nugent, a very popular pro-gun personality is

A- not high road
B- serves no purpose
C- is nauseating

PLEASE LOCK THIS THREAD

 

[Walkalong]

We are in a non shooting war for our freedoms. obama hates Capitalism and loves Marxism. That is why he will not salute our flag but held his hand over his heart for mother russia's.

Nugent is definitely inflammatory at times, but I love his steadfast championing of gun rights and freedom.

If that makes me a right wing nut job, that's OK. I prefer Patriot, but what the heck.

A- not high road
B- serves no purpose

Cannot disagree with this.

 

[rajb123]

I thought Ted's analogy was inspiring and I don't beleive it hurts the cause of gun owners at all.

The NRA is a now a political organization that raises funds and gives them to candidates that support their cause. Their role as a fighter of bad gun control laws in the courts is minimal and other organizations are much more effective in doing this function.

The real battle against bad gun control laws is being faught in the federal, state and local courts and the NRA is playing a very minor role here.

 

[Guillermo]

Nugent is definitely inflammatory at times, but I love his steadfast championing of gun rights and freedom.

Totally true, which is why 3 pages of bashing him is bad.

Also, this is activism...there is the call to action?

 

[Guillermo]

federal, state and local courts and the NRA is playing a very minor role here

Heller?

 

[Tom609]

He has the right to his opinion, but it sure isn't mine. I'm in the camp with those that see him as a detriment to the cause. He rallies the base, but alienates those we would like to convert.

 

[hso]

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=270671

no plan of action