Gun-free zones are recipe for disaster

Nugent: Gun-free zones are recipe for disaster

POSTED: 11:25 a.m. EDT, April 20, 2007

By Ted Nugent
Special to CNN

Adjust font size:
http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/.element/img/1.5/story/misc/icon.minus.dim.gifhttp://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/.element/img/1.5/story/misc/icon.minus.gif
http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/.element/img/1.5/story/misc/icon.plus.gifhttp://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/.element/img/1.5/story/misc/icon.plus.dim.gif

[I]Editor’s note: Rock guitarist Ted Nugent has sold more than 30 million albums. He’s also a gun rights activist and serves on the board of directors of the National Rifle Association. His program, “Ted Nugent Spirit of the Wild,” can be seen on the Outdoor Channel.

WACO, Texas (CNN) – Zero tolerance, huh? Gun-free zones, huh? Try this on for size: Columbine gun-free zone, New York City pizza shop gun-free zone, Luby’s Cafeteria gun-free zone, Amish school in Pennsylvania gun-free zone and now Virginia Tech gun-free zone.
Anybody see what theevil Brady Campaign and other anti-gun cults have created? I personally have zero tolerance for evil and denial. And America had best wake up real fast that the brain-dead celebration of unarmed helplessness will get you killed every time, and I’ve about had enough of it.
Nearly a decade ago, a Springfield, Oregon, high schooler, a hunter familiar with firearms, was able to bring an unfolding rampage to an abrupt end when he identified a gunman attempting to reload his .22-caliber rifle, made the tactical decision to make a move and tackled the shooter.
A few years back, an assistant principal at Pearl High School in Mississippi, which was a gun-free zone, retrieved his legally owned Colt .45 from his car and stopped a Columbine wannabe from continuing his massacre at another school after he had killed two and wounded more at Pearl.
At an eighth-grade school dance in Pennsylvania, a boy fatally shot a teacher and wounded two students before the owner of the dance hall brought the killing to a halt with his own gun.
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.

My hero, Dr. Suzanne Gratia Hupp, was not allowed by Texas law to carry her handgun into Luby’s Cafeteria that fateful day in 1991, when due to bureaucrat-forced unarmed helplessness she could do nothing to stop satanic George Hennard from killing 23 people and wounding more than 20 others before he shot himself. Hupp was unarmed for no other reason than denial-ridden “feel good” politics.
She has since led the charge for concealed weapon upgrade in Texas, where we can now stop evil. Yet, there are still the mindless puppets of the Brady Campaign and other anti-gun organizations insisting on continuing the gun-free zone insanity by which innocents are forced into unarmed helplessness. Shame on them. Shame on America. Shame on the anti-gunners all.

No one was foolish enough to debate Ryder truck regulations or ammonia nitrate restrictions or a “cult of agriculture fertilizer” following the unabashed evil of Timothy McVeigh’s heinous crime against America on that fateful day in Oklahoma City. No one faulted kitchen utensils or other hardware of choice after Jeffrey Dahmer was caught drugging, mutilating, raping, murdering and cannibalizing his victims. Nobody wanted “steak knife control” as they autopsied the dead nurses in Chicago, Illinois, as Richard Speck went on trial for mass murder.
Evil is as evil does, and laws disarming guaranteed victims make evil people very, very happy. Shame on us.
Already spineless gun control advocates are squawking like chickens with their tiny-brained heads chopped off, making political hay over this most recent, devastating Virginia Tech massacre, when in fact it is their own forced gun-free zone policy that enabled the unchallenged methodical murder of 32 people.
Thirty-two people dead on a U.S. college campus pursuing their American Dream, mowed-down over an extended period of time by a lone, non-American gunman in illegal possession of a firearm on campus in defiance of a zero-tolerance gun law. Feel better yet? Didn’t think so.
Who doesn’t get this? Who has the audacity to demand unarmed helplessness? Who likes dead good guys?
I’ll tell you who. People who tramp on the Second Amendment, that’s who. People who refuse to accept the self-evident truth that free people have the God-given right to keep and bear arms, to defend themselves and their loved ones. People who are so desperate in their drive to control others, so mindless in their denial that they pretend access to gas causes arson, Ryder trucks and fertilizer cause terrorism, water causes drowning, forks and spoons cause obesity, dialing 911 will somehow save your life, and that their greedy clamoring to “feel good” is more important than admitting that armed citizens are much better equipped to stop evil than unarmed, helpless ones.
Pray for the families of victims everywhere, America. Study the methodology of evil. It has a profile, a system, a preferred environment where victims cannot fight back. Embrace the facts, demand upgrade and be certain that your children’s school has a better plan than Virginia Tech or Columbine. Eliminate the insanity of gun-free zones, which will never, ever be gun-free zones. They will only be good guy gun-free zones, and that is a recipe for disaster written in blood on the altar of denial. I, for one, refuse to genuflect there.

i agree with Ted :tup:

I fully agree

[quote=“The_Russian,post:2,topic:27976"”]

I fully agree

[/quote]

.

Ted Nugent is a whack job…

though I agree gun-free zones are stupid…

gun control and responsible ownership are very good things…

everything in moderation, banning guns is completely dumb, but allowing whoever to own one (or as many as they’d like) is just as bad

Sure gun legislation won’t do anything to curb violence, but doing something is better than doing nothing at all. :roll2: Kind of like the downtown casino and bass pro. Makes people feel good that something’s happening, even though it won’t work.

hell yea. If a few ppl at VT had weapons of their own i doubt the killer would have taken down 32 innocent unarmed people

[quote=“OfficerK,post:4,topic:27976"”]

everything in moderation, banning guns is completely dumb, but allowing whoever to own one (or as many as they’d like) is just as bad

[/quote]

Somebody told me that Cho had bought his guns legally. Is this true? I really don’t want to believe that our gun legislation would allow someone who has been institutionalized recently for violent tendencies to buy hand guns.

His purchases were legal.

Having the guns in the “gun free zone” was illegal.

But yeah, even a big gun rights guy like me says something is wrong with Virginia laws if someone with his history can legally buy firearms.

Finally, while Ted raises some good points he is a terrible writer and does not help the cause of gun rights with his personal attacks.

you cant just do a 180 on the whole thing. Its not just guns for everyone who wants one. Its the ability for law abiding SANE people to own them to protect themselves and people around them. That is one of the major problems even with assault weapons bans, they ban them from the people who want to obtain them legally, but all the ones in the gangs in the inner city still exist. Cho should have never been allowed to buy a firearm given his mental history, but virginia has very loose gun laws aside from the gun free zones. West virginia is even looser.

Ted makes good points, but gets a little to rant ish. the comparisons were moderate at best but the point was made. everyone sees guns as the root of all evil, the general public isnt that intelligent.

:jawdrop:

Wait… that was a well thought out and expressed arguement. Who stole your screen name? :wink:

i cannot stand the media or pussy legislature with regards to this stuff.

anyone see that vid of mccarthy discussing her proposed ban??

Here’s another fun read. The former editor of the LA Times claiming that we need to “lay down our guns.” Nicely written, but doesn’t really say anything at all to support his position. Well, he does reference John Lennon being shot in 1980 and a movie from 1953. If that’s not conclusive proof I don’t know what is. :gotme:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/18/commentary.plate/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

I got about 1/3rd through his article and just couldn’t read any farther. I will say this… further proof that the US would be better off if an earthquake sent that city off into the Pacific. :slight_smile:

JayS, Its one of the topics that i feel strongly about. New york has some of the strictest gun laws in the states.

the US has the most guns per person, and also has more gun deaths per year then every other country in the world.

Lets give the NRA full control of gun legislation including penalties for gun crimes. Tell them that if gun crime isn’t down 50% after their first 5 years that all firearms in this country will become illegal.

Obviously that will never happen but I bet it would work like a charm. :slight_smile:

Ok but if you look at australia and england, if you remove guns, then knife violence skyrockets. It doesnt change the violence rate. It just changes how many people die, since guns are more effective at killing than knives are. When australia banned guns, Violence with knives went up 300%. same thing happened in england but not so extreme. Of course its harder to go on a rampage with knives, or swords, but it can be done.

[quote=“The_Russian,post:17,topic:27976"”]

if you remove guns, then knife violence skyrockets. It doesnt change the violence rate. It just changes how many people die, since guns are more effective at killing than knives are.

[/quote]

Don’t you think you just kinda shot yourself in the foot? (har har)

[quote=“The_Russian,post:17,topic:27976"”]

Ok but if you look at australia and england, if you remove guns, then knife violence skyrockets. It doesnt change the violence rate. It just changes how many people die, since guns are more effective at killing than knives are. When australia banned guns, Violence with knives went up 300%. same thing happened in england but not so extreme. Of course its harder to go on a rampage with knives, or swords, but it can be done.

[/quote]

as it was said in another thread…

you do run faster when you have your knife out

oh and you don’t run out of ammo

With a knives though a lot less ‘innocent’ people get killed. Yes you may have some nut go on a rampage…but I for one would consider trying to stop a knife-wielding maniac rather than some gun carrying lulu

Comparing other countries gun death rates is pointless because there are so many other variables.

Class
Gangs
Drugs
Population density
Police coverage
General morals (aka, the current ghetto mentality that puts almost zero value on a human life. I’ll kill you to rob you of $20).

Besides that, you will NEVER get illegal guns out of the US now so even if the comparisons were legitimate it’s a moot point. There are too many out there and they are far to easy to get, even if you have to go outside the country for them. By making gun ownership criminal you insure that only criminals will own guns.