told the assembled NRA faithful
Ted needs to STFU and just stick to playing the guitar.
Ted Nugent – the hunter, "conservative activist" and rock guitarist whose Marshall amps probably go up to 12 – has been fined for failing to finish off a black bear he wounded with a bow and arrow. Nugent, 63, winged the creature during a 2009 hunting trip in a US national forest in southeast Alaska for his reality TV show Ted …
So I guess you don't know Mr. Nugent has been an NRA member even longer than he's been slinging guitar? And is a licensed CCW? And also deputized in his State?
Ted has every right to make public pronouncements about what he thinks.
And for the record, I only started listening to his music after I read his book <I?Ted, White and Blue</I>. Some of it I like, some of it I skip.
I said Obama, not democrats. Obama does a lot of things I can support (opposing CISPA for example) but overall I think he has done more harm than good.
Of course, my original post was actually a reply to the first poster. Telling anyone to STFU is pretty childish, so I was simply making his point in reverse back to him.
PS. Not everyone who dislikes Obama liked W.
Wait, so the set of people who dislike Obama is comprised of only the sets of those who supported Bush or are racists or both? There are plenty of things about Obama to dislike that have nothing to do with his race or his political party. Let's start with his position that the US President has the right to have anyone killed, even US citizens, who are deemed to difficult to bring to arrest and trial (Anwar al-Awlaki, for example) on his orders alone. Not even Bush did that.
Here's a list from a US leftist website: http://www.alternet.org/rights/155045/how_obama_became_a_civil_libertarian's_nightmare
Alternet are far from Republican apologists and I'm pretty sure they're not a group of racists.
Actually, in recent racial US media terminology, Mr. Obama is a White-African American.
In the US, racism is not that great a problem among Whites. Mr. Obama was elected by White people, since Blacks are a minority with insufficient numbers to swing a national election, comprising only about 10% of population. Of course, various techniques have been employed in the past by election experts who are able to inflate the voter rolls so that 2 or 3 times than a demographic's actual population get to "vote".
US Blacks, however, voted overwhelmingly for Mr. Obama, with perhaps only 2 or 3 voting for the White Republican Panamanian-born non-natural born US citizen midget who opposed him. Of course, the Blacks voting for Mr. Obama weighed all the issues and concluded that a Harvard man was superior to a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy. Race had nothing to do with it, obviously.
There is no solid data on how La Raza members (the Race) voted in 2008. However, we know that they are not at all racist..
Nugent, by the way, was not fined for failing to kill the bear he first shot. He and his guide did track the wounded bear but lost the track. He was fined for taking a second bear, which thus exceeded his limit by one, given that a wounded bear counts as a kill according the Alaska rules.
So, the author was mistaken. But, it was a Black bear.
So there ya go. Racism all over the place.
.
Surely an entire hunting season (or the latter half of one/first half of the next, etc) would be covered under "a year."
From my perspective, I might not agree with Nugent on a lot of things, but you've got to give the guy props for straight-up apologising for what he did and taking it on the chin. He didn't try to weasel out or blame anyone else, he just accepted responsibility and said sorry. Fair play.
Really? The guy pleaded guilty, accepted the fine and apologised. Compare that to other celebs, such as - oh, I dunno - Paris Hilton. The woman had a petition to stop her going to jail for repeated drunk driving offences, claiming that she should be immune because she brought excitement to otherwise mundane lives (I shit you not).
And please explain to me why a rich person should be fined more for the same offence than a less wealthy person. I'm getting rather tired of this recent notion that success = evil. "How dare you make money in exactly the way I'd love to?" The same crime requires the same punishment.*
*Between individuals. I don't believe, however, that companies should be punished on the same scale - see Google being fined $25k.
"And please explain to me why a rich person should be fined more for the same offence than a less wealthy person."
It's a question of proportionality - the *effect* of the fine should be the same, so it should be in proportion to the offender's wealth/income, cf. the "widow's mite" of the Christian parable. Nothing to do with punishing success.
That would be because you are an ignoramus. It is entirely believable that he was blindsided by it. Reading an unbiased article elsewhere (don't recall where) it turns out that state game commissions change the rules every year. The article quoted natives who run hunting camps for a living describing the need to have State Game commissioners come to the camp every year to explain the rules for the current season.
Yes, since it was for a TV show, Ted probably should have had a paid off duty game commissioner on staff to make sure everything he was doing was legal. But I think the average person seeing a "bag limit of 1" would assume that meant they got to take 1 home. Oh, and the final nail in your self-righteous hypocrisy: the judge who tried the case said he was unaware of the provision before it came to court.
That would be because you are an ignoramus... Yes, since it was for a TV show, Ted probably should have had a paid off duty game commissioner on staff to make sure everything he was doing was legal. But I think the average person seeing a "bag limit of 1" would assume that meant they got to take 1 home. Oh, and the final nail in your self-righteous hypocrisy: the judge who tried the case said he was unaware of the provision before it came to court.
Whoa, put those six-shooters away and calm down, cowboy! If you're gonna go out killing animals, the onus is on you to know the rules and follow them. Ignorance is no excuse, right?
As for your "final nail", by your logic a 'hunter' can go into the woods with a machine gun and kill everything he sees, just so long as he only takes one home?
Spoken like someone who isn't even peripherally aware of hunting laws. It's a calendar year and it is any hunting. Most game have different seasons. He doesn't get to hunt any of it for an entire year. And most states have reciprocity agreements that mean he won't be able to hunt in those states either. Unlike most of us, most of the food Ted puts on his table he hunts for himself. That ruling will make it difficult for him to do so. Yeah, he may be able to just buy it at the grocery store like the rest of us, but for Ted that's a pretty big sacrifice.
The way I read the article you're allowed to kill one bear in any given region. He'd already killed two so should at least get a two year hunting ban or maybe a life ban on bear hunting seeing as he can't be trusted to follow the rules. Also as has been pointed out, if the guy really wants to go hunting I'm sure he can go somewhere the ban doesn't apply.
As to accepting guilt, yes, good on him, but let's say he'd murdered a person then said, "Yup, twas me", should he get a lighter sentence?
He should be tossed in jail and all hunting privileges revoked . He has been caught poaching in California.
"Ted Nugent, musician and hunting fanatic, was brought up on 11 charges of poaching, including baiting and killing a deer too young to be legally hunted. Ted Nugent pleaded no contest to the poaching charges and was fined $1,750 by the state of California."
Oh by they way in Califonia you must wait 48 hours to hunt in a place that has been baited.
http://news.change.org/stories/ted-nugent-caught-poaching-on-the-outdoor-channel
If anyone think that the choice between Obama and ${Republican} matters they are severely deluded. While they might say different things, they don't act significantly differently. Significantly different options are required so make any meaningful difference.
May as well argue Coke vs Pepsi when you know you should really be drinking water of fruit juice.
This post has been deleted by its author
Question: What did the secret service say to Ted Nugent after his insane rant against President Obama?
Answer 1: Now that you have established yourself as a prominent Obama-hater, it is considered likely that you may be contacted by people who are actually dangerous. If so, and you do not inform us immediately, then here are the penalties you could face...
Answer 2: Because of Answer 1, we are also monitoring all of your telephone calls and all of your email, and you are STILL subject to the penalties...
Answer 3: For a good time in Columbia, call...
Yeah, it's a terrible joke, but I think he deserves worse.
Greetings and Salutations;
Hum...Kind of a shame about this. Nugent claims to be the "mighty hunter", yet, to have let a wounded animal go without tracking it down is a big breach of those rules. To do it when one is being FILMED is the height of stupidity. Overall, I would say he got off pretty lightly, considering, but, I hope the next time he will do the animal the honor of tracking it and finishing the kill.
Pleasant dreams
bee man dave
And I'm sure he was loudly cheered for expressing those sentiments. There are a good number of nutjobs in the US who think it's just fine - even a democratic right - to pop a cap in those who have a different view to themselves and there's always someone to encourage them or incite them. When it happens they of course don't accept any responsibility for it.
America - where else in the western world can you see armed fascist thugs wearing swastikas and giving Nazi salutes on the streets with that right protected as freedom of speech?
While not hunting, Ted has taken a stance against Obama which got him invited to a meeting with the Secret Service who thanked him for his comments and left. If America re-elects Obama they will continue their downward economic and ethical spiral to Hell.
As per my previous post... Changing from Obama to a Republican won't make any difference to the biggest problem facing USA: out of control debt and spending.
As the old saying goes: "Sell the sizzle, not the steak".
While Obama and the Republicans might have sold different "sizzle", the steak (ie. the substantive part of their actions) are hard to tell apart. There might be some fiddling with the side dishes and trimmings, but nobody is addressing the real issue: winding in the debt.
It is pointless blaming the politicians though. Politics in a democracy is market driven. People get offered what they buy. No wonder the offerings tend to be so similar. The people want to keep on spending and increasing their consumption. They don't want to tighten their belts and face reality.