We do love that people keep giving platforms to Ted Nugent to talk about gun rights as the more the pro-gun lobby parades violent, ignorant, paranoids to represent them, the better the 'why do you need an assault rifle' side looks.
Nugent had gone to Western Michigan University to speak up for guns:
Not, of course, that there's any link between violence and gun-ownership. It's just unfortunate that Nugent seems incapable of debating his point without lurching into violent imagery.
Is Nugent sure that he wants leaders who are uncompromising on the Constitution? Only the right to bear arms wasn't in the original constitution, was it? It was, in itself, an ammendment and presumably an absolutist view of the constitution would refuse the possibility of any amending?