Ted Nugent flips out over calls for more gun control, misinformation

July 25, 2012

Writer

Glenn spoke with fervent 2nd Amendment supporter Ted Nugent on radio today because Ted is fired up about all the misinformation being spewed on the media about current laws, assault rifles and more. What are they getting wrong? And what does Ted think is the answer?

Full Transcript below:

GLENN: Let me go to Ted Nugent. Jeez. Another angry gun‑toting white guy.

PAT: Mmm‑hmmm.

GLENN: Ted?

NUGENT: Greetings, Glenn, from the greatest rhythm and blues rock‑and‑roll tour in the history of noise.

GLENN: Where are you today?

NUGENT: I'm in the swamps of Jackson, Michigan, cleansing my soul prior to heading for Wisconsin to continue the rock‑and‑roll celebration.

GLENN: Okay. Now, do you have to cleanse your soul after Wisconsin?

NUGENT: I do it daily anyhow, whether I need it or not.

GLENN: Okay. Just, I didn't know. Some people just cleanse their soul on, you know, Saturdays or Sundays.

NUGENT: I wash my hair on Saturday.

GLENN: Okay. Good. Ted, you have been ‑‑ and I'm sorry that I haven't had a chance to return any of your phone calls this week. It's been nuts because of the thing that we're doing this weekend, but you ‑‑ I believe you are close to a brain aneurysm on this story coming out of Aurora, Colorado.

NUGENT: Well, yes. Number one, I can't go further without saying that the Nugent family and everybody I know, I mean literally everybody says prayers for the victims and their families in the face of such a tragedy, but now we need to go on to the vile intentional misrepresentation of what did happen. And I think as soon as you can, Glenn, you need to talk to your friend Bill O'Reilly because I've never heard such nonsense in all my life and I think it epitomizes the ignorance out there when Bill O'Reilly states as a fact that anybody can go buy a bazooka and a machine gun without the government knowing it unless, of course, you're in the crips and the bloods. My God in heaven, since 1934 machine guns ‑‑ by the way, bazookas are not available this week and they never have been.

GLENN: Really?

NUGENT: But to buy a machine gun, you have to go through such a vetting, such a federal BATF and local law enforcement, national law enforcement review, background check, fill out all kinds of documents and buy a $200 transfer tax certificate per purchase if they allow it. So this kind of information is just looney. And let me state as if fact that I know for a fact that most of the damage done by this devil in Aurora was done with the number one pheasant shotgun in the world, a Remington 870. His AR‑15 Smith & Wesson rifle is now the most popular sporting rifle in America. It is the number one competition, number one in self‑defense, it's the number one sporting rifle for big game and small game. And if they keep calling it an assault weapon, I may have that aneurysm.

GLENN: You know why they call it that? Because of the way it looks. That's it. Because of ‑‑ I was out shooting, what, two weeks ago and that's exactly ‑‑ that's the gun we were using. And we were target practice. I mean, that is the gun we would use. If I was going hunting, that would be the gun that I would use.

NUGENT: Oh, and most sporters do but let me ‑‑ you talk about the way it looks. Dianne Feinstein and her ‑‑ by the way, Dianne Feinstein who's just literally going berserk on the misinformation about the weapons and the ammunition. This is the woman who had a concealed weapons permit but denied California citizens the right to have a concealed weapons permit. She demonized the concept of concealed weapon permit when she had one, Glenn, and she sat in a room with a friend of mine who will remain unnamed, unidentified, a Democrat congressman from one of my favorite states and she took out a copy of shotgun news. This is a publication that, you know, lists the different types of firearms available, legal firearms, and she got out a Sharpie and circled the ones she wanted banned in the original assault weapon ban and she circled ones that were black with folding stocks when, in fact, the exact same weapon, exact same rate of fire, exact same caliber, everything was the same but it was made out of wood. She didn't want to ban those. This is lunacy. And remember, Glenn, this monster in Aurora took 20 minutes to do his evil. In 20 minutes you don't need an assault weapon, you don't need a machine gun, which he didn't have either of, but you could do more damage with a single shot or a bolt action because he had 20 minutes.

GLENN: You know, here's the thing. If ‑‑ and nobody I hear is talking about this except people like us: If you had more people carrying a weapon. If people had a gun in their back and they were ‑‑ and they were licensed to carry it, that guy wouldn't have gotten off more than four shots.

NUGENT: And I'm sure you've covered it because there was a shooting like that in a church in Aurora this year earlier.

GLENN: Yep.

NUGENT: That was stopped because the guy had a gun. And I know the hysteria about teargas and it was dark in the theater. Glenn, I am not making this up. Last week my wife Shemane and I were filming a segment for our Spirit of the Wild show and we were shooting at watermelons surrounded by human silhouette targets just as kind of a competition and from 20 feet and from 20 yards and we were shooting from every imaginable angle, undercover, from sitting, from squatting, from prone position, from behind cover and from in the open, and we never hit an innocent and we never missed the watermelon. And I'm just a guitar player. If a guitar player can neutralize a watermelon from 20 feet ‑‑ and this is with live fire, by the way.

GLENN: Do you ‑‑

NUGENT: We would shoot while the other would take the target shots. So there was that tension of live fire. And this was done in a scenario ‑‑ and I understand it wasn't real bullets coming at us and it wasn't people screaming, running around.

GLENN: Please.

NUGENT: But dear God in heaven, doing nothing is not an option. Training, having a firearm to neutralize an evil gun maniac is a way to go, and we train for that. And I wish is I would have been in the theater that day.

GLENN: So do I. So do I.

NUGENT: Glenn, I don't mean to monopolize here, but heroism, warrior action was performed that day by men who dove in the line of fire to save their loved ones. They were a warrior but they were unarmed warriors.

GLENN: Look. Ted, this is the same story over and over and over again, and you know as well as I do one of the safest countries in the world is Switzerland. Because you're required to have an automatic weapon.

NUGENT: A real machine gun.

GLENN: Right. You're required to have it. Why? Because they know. The best way to defend ‑‑ why do you think Switzerland is never overrun? Because they're all defended ‑‑ every home is defended by the people in the home. And let's look at Chicago. Play the audio from Chicago, will you, Pat? Listen to this audio from Chicago. And nobody's talking about this. Here's a city that's got gun control out the wazoo.

NUGENT: It's a gun‑free zone.

GLENN: Yeah. Listen to the audio here.

VOICE: Six people are shot within 15 minutes on the city's south side. One teenager is dead.

REPORTER: Nancy Lou is at area two police headquarters. She has details.

REPORTER: The city's homicide rate is up by about 39% so far this year. Faith leaders called for a stop to the gun violence, and one pastor said bluntly, "We are tired of doing funerals." Community activist Andrew Holmes is also urging local radio stations to stop playing gangsta rap music which he believes has only encouraged all this shooting and killing.

GLENN: Of course it has. I mean, Ted, you know, does music affect people?

NUGENT: God knows it affects me, but in a beautifully positive way.

GLENN: Right.

NUGENT: And it does affect people negatively. If you talk about crime and you celebrate crime and you glorify, you know, evil and criminal activity, yeah. And it's been going on for years now.

GLENN: And nobody's talking about that. Nobody on the ‑‑ nobody in the news. They're talking about gun control, gun control, gun control. I'm not talking about music control. I'm not talking about movie control. I'm saying, can you recognize that that plays a role? Nobody ‑‑ you should be licensed. You should be licensed to make a movie. You should be licensed to make music. How ridiculous is that?

NUGENT: It's all ridiculous. Well, bottom line is Chicago is a gun‑free zone but Rahm Emanuel like Mayor Daley uses tax dollars from citizens who they force into unarmed helplessness to pay for their armed security detail. This is unbelievable.

GLENN: Okay.

NUGENT: And more people should join the NRA.

GLENN: Okay.

NUGENT: More people should do their homework about real firearms and real legality of firearms and ammunition. Everything reported about this shooter and his so‑called armor‑piercing ammo. And remember, Glenn, they wanted to ban hollow points because it does too much damage. Well, hollow points won't go through the walls because they're ‑‑ because they disrupt in the target. There's so much inform ‑‑ misinformation out there that I pray to God you'll talk to Bill O'Reilly because his ‑‑

GLENN: I'm on his show tomorrow night.

NUGENT: He's screaming that people can go to the local florist and buy a bazooka.

STU: (Laughing.)

GLENN: Okay, Ted, let me change subjects real quick. I would like you ‑‑ and just shoot me an e‑mail on this. I want you to go to TheBlaze.com and I want you to read the story on the East River monster. This is, there's three pictures of this thing. Have you guys seen this on The Blaze yet? There are three pictures of this animal that has washed up on shore from the East River and I ‑‑ and nobody knows what animal this is. I don't ‑‑ and you know animals. Maybe you'll know. It is the freakiest looking animal I've ever seen. You see that, Stu?

STU: I'm going there now, though.

GLENN: It's a freak ‑‑

NUGENT: I will freak it out because I love freakish animals, especially with garlic and butter.

GLENN: No, you don't want to eat this one. If you have any idea, maybe it's a dog? But it's ‑‑ it doesn't look like a dog. I mean, it has fingers.

STU: They had one of these that came out recently, though, and it was proven to be a fake, right? I mean, I don't believe it. The Montauk monster. That's what it was. And that one wasn't real.

GLENN: Well ‑‑

STU: Right?

GLENN: I don't know. I don't ‑‑ this looks pretty ‑‑ I mean, this is freaky looking.

STU: That is really, really ‑‑

GLENN: Very spooky.

NUGENT: If you want to save strange animals, be sure you open a hunting season on them and then we will manage them for maximum productivity.

GLENN: Ted, thanks very much. I'll talk to you soon, my friend.

NUGENT: Ytah, God speed, Glenn. Carry on, my friend.

GLENN: Have a good rest of the tour.

Colorado counselor fights back after faith declared “illegal”

Drew Angerer / Staff | Getty Images

The state is effectively silencing professionals who dare speak truths about gender and sexuality, redefining faith-guided speech as illegal.

This week, free speech is once again on the line before the U.S. Supreme Court. At stake is whether Americans still have the right to talk about faith, morality, and truth in their private practice without the government’s permission.

The case comes out of Colorado, where lawmakers in 2019 passed a ban on what they call “conversion therapy.” The law prohibits licensed counselors from trying to change a minor’s gender identity or sexual orientation, including their behaviors or gender expression. The law specifically targets Christian counselors who serve clients attempting to overcome gender dysphoria and not fall prey to the transgender ideology.

The root of this case isn’t about therapy. It’s about erasing a worldview.

The law does include one convenient exception. Counselors are free to “assist” a person who wants to transition genders but not someone who wants to affirm their biological sex. In other words, you can help a child move in one direction — one that is in line with the state’s progressive ideology — but not the other.

Think about that for a moment. The state is saying that a counselor can’t even discuss changing behavior with a client. Isn’t that the whole point of counseling?

One‑sided freedom

Kaley Chiles, a licensed professional counselor in Colorado Springs, has been one of the victims of this blatant attack on the First Amendment. Chiles has dedicated her practice to helping clients dealing with addiction, trauma, sexuality struggles, and gender dysphoria. She’s also a Christian who serves patients seeking guidance rooted in biblical teaching.

Before 2019, she could counsel minors according to her faith. She could talk about biblical morality, identity, and the path to wholeness. When the state outlawed that speech, she stopped. She followed the law — and then she sued.

Her case, Chiles v. Salazar, is now before the Supreme Court. Justices heard oral arguments on Tuesday. The question: Is counseling a form of speech or merely a government‑regulated service?

If the court rules the wrong way, it won’t just silence therapists. It could muzzle pastors, teachers, parents — anyone who believes in truth grounded in something higher than the state.

Censored belief

I believe marriage between a man and a woman is ordained by God. I believe that family — mother, father, child — is central to His design for humanity.

I believe that men and women are created in God’s image, with divine purpose and eternal worth. Gender isn’t an accessory; it’s part of who we are.

I believe the command to “be fruitful and multiply” still stands, that the power to create life is sacred, and that it belongs within marriage between a man and a woman.

And I believe that when we abandon these principles — when we treat sex as recreation, when we dissolve families, when we forget our vows — society fractures.

Are those statements controversial now? Maybe. But if this case goes against Chiles, those statements and others could soon be illegal to say aloud in public.

Faith on trial

In Colorado today, a counselor cannot sit down with a 15‑year‑old who’s struggling with gender identity and say, “You were made in God’s image, and He does not make mistakes.” That is now considered hate speech.

That’s the “freedom” the modern left is offering — freedom to affirm, but never to question. Freedom to comply, but never to dissent. The same movement that claims to champion tolerance now demands silence from anyone who disagrees. The root of this case isn’t about therapy. It’s about erasing a worldview.

The real test

No matter what happens at the Supreme Court, we cannot stop speaking the truth. These beliefs aren’t political slogans. For me, they are the product of years of wrestling, searching, and learning through pain and grace what actually leads to peace. For us, they are the fundamental principles that lead to a flourishing life. We cannot balk at standing for truth.

Maybe that’s why God allows these moments — moments when believers are pushed to the wall. They force us to ask hard questions: What is true? What is worth standing for? What is worth dying for — and living for?

If we answer those questions honestly, we’ll find not just truth, but freedom.

The state doesn’t grant real freedom — and it certainly isn’t defined by Colorado legislators. Real freedom comes from God. And the day we forget that, the First Amendment will mean nothing at all.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck joins Megyn Kelly LIVE — One night ONLY in Fort Worth!

Get ready for sparks to fly. For the first time in years, Glenn will come face-to-face with Megyn Kelly — and this time, he’s the one in the hot seat. On October 25, 2025, at Dickies Arena in Fort Worth, Texas, Glenn joins Megyn on her “Megyn Kelly Live Tour” for a no-holds-barred conversation that promises laughs, surprises, and maybe even a few uncomfortable questions.

What will happen when two of America’s sharpest voices collide under the spotlight? Will Glenn finally reveal the major announcement he’s been teasing on the radio for weeks? You’ll have to be there to find out.

This promises to be more than just an interview — it’s a live showdown packed with wit, honesty, and the kind of energy you can only feel if you are in the room. Tickets are selling fast, so don’t miss your chance to see Glenn like you’ve never seen him before.

Get your tickets NOW at www.MegynKelly.com before they’re gone!

What our response to Israel reveals about us

JOSEPH PREZIOSO / Contributor | Getty Images

I have been honored to receive the Defender of Israel Award from Prime Minister Netanyahu.

The Jerusalem Post recently named me one of the strongest Christian voices in support of Israel.

And yet, my support is not blind loyalty. It’s not a rubber stamp for any government or policy. I support Israel because I believe it is my duty — first as a Christian, but even if I weren’t a believer, I would still support her as a man of reason, morality, and common sense.

Because faith isn’t required to understand this: Israel’s existence is not just about one nation’s survival — it is about the survival of Western civilization itself.

It is a lone beacon of shared values in the Middle East. It is a bulwark standing against radical Islam — the same evil that seeks to dismantle our own nation from within.

And my support is not rooted in politics. It is rooted in something simpler and older than politics: a people’s moral and historical right to their homeland, and their right to live in peace.

Israel has that right — and the right to defend herself against those who openly, repeatedly vow her destruction.

Let’s make it personal: if someone told me again and again that they wanted to kill me and my entire family — and then acted on that threat — would I not defend myself? Wouldn’t you? If Hamas were Canada, and we were Israel, and they did to us what Hamas has done to them, there wouldn’t be a single building left standing north of our border. That’s not a question of morality.

That’s just the truth. All people — every people — have a God-given right to protect themselves. And Israel is doing exactly that.

My support for Israel’s right to finish the fight against Hamas comes after eighty years of rejected peace offers and failed two-state solutions. Hamas has never hidden its mission — the eradication of Israel. That’s not a political disagreement.

That’s not a land dispute. That is an annihilationist ideology. And while I do not believe this is America’s war to fight, I do believe — with every fiber of my being — that it is Israel’s right, and moral duty, to defend her people.

Criticism of military tactics is fair. That’s not antisemitism. But denying Israel’s right to exist, or excusing — even celebrating — the barbarity of Hamas? That’s something far darker.

We saw it on October 7th — the face of evil itself. Women and children slaughtered. Babies burned alive. Innocent people raped and dragged through the streets. And now, to see our own fellow citizens march in defense of that evil… that is nothing short of a moral collapse.

If the chants in our streets were, “Hamas, return the hostages — Israel, stop the bombing,” we could have a conversation.

But that’s not what we hear.

What we hear is open sympathy for genocidal hatred. And that is a chasm — not just from decency, but from humanity itself. And here lies the danger: that same hatred is taking root here — in Dearborn, in London, in Paris — not as horror, but as heroism. If we are not vigilant, the enemy Israel faces today will be the enemy the free world faces tomorrow.

This isn’t about politics. It’s about truth. It’s about the courage to call evil by its name and to say “Never again” — and mean it.

And you don’t have to open a Bible to understand this. But if you do — if you are a believer — then this issue cuts even deeper. Because the question becomes: what did God promise, and does He keep His word?

He told Abraham, “I will bless those who bless you, and curse those who curse you.” He promised to make Abraham the father of many nations and to give him “the whole land of Canaan.” And though Abraham had other sons, God reaffirmed that promise through Isaac. And then again through Isaac’s son, Jacob — Israel — saying: “The land I gave to Abraham and Isaac I give to you and to your descendants after you.”

That’s an everlasting promise.

And from those descendants came a child — born in Bethlehem — who claimed to be the Savior of the world. Jesus never rejected His title as “son of David,” the great King of Israel.

He said plainly that He came “for the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” And when He returns, Scripture says He will return as “the Lion of the tribe of Judah.” And where do you think He will go? Back to His homeland — Israel.

Tamir Kalifa / Stringer | Getty Images

And what will He find when He gets there? His brothers — or his brothers’ enemies? Will the roads where He once walked be preserved? Or will they lie in rubble, as Gaza does today? If what He finds looks like the aftermath of October 7th, then tell me — what will be my defense as a Christian?

Some Christians argue that God’s promises to Israel have been transferred exclusively to the Church. I don’t believe that. But even if you do, then ask yourself this: if we’ve inherited the promises, do we not also inherit the land? Can we claim the birthright and then, like Esau, treat it as worthless when the world tries to steal it?

So, when terrorists come to slaughter Israelis simply for living in the land promised to Abraham, will we stand by? Or will we step forward — into the line of fire — and say,

“Take me instead”?

Because this is not just about Israel’s right to exist.

It’s about whether we still know the difference between good and evil.

It’s about whether we still have the courage to stand where God stands.

And if we cannot — if we will not — then maybe the question isn’t whether Israel will survive. Maybe the question is whether we will.

America’s moral erosion: How we were conditioned to accept the unthinkable

MATHIEU LEWIS-ROLLAND / Contributor | Getty Images

Every time we look away from lawlessness, we tell the next mob it can go a little further.

Chicago, Portland, and other American cities are showing us what happens when the rule of law breaks down. These cities have become openly lawless — and that’s not hyperbole.

When a governor declares she doesn’t believe federal agents about a credible threat to their lives, when Chicago orders its police not to assist federal officers, and when cartels print wanted posters offering bounties for the deaths of U.S. immigration agents, you’re looking at a country flirting with anarchy.

Two dangers face us now: the intimidation of federal officers and the normalization of soldiers as street police. Accept either, and we lose the republic.

This isn’t a matter of partisan politics. The struggle we’re watching now is not between Democrats and Republicans. It’s between good and evil, right and wrong, self‑government and chaos.

Moral erosion

For generations, Americans have inherited a republic based on law, liberty, and moral responsibility. That legacy is now under assault by extremists who openly seek to collapse the system and replace it with something darker.

Antifa, well‑financed by the left, isn’t an isolated fringe any more than Occupy Wall Street was. As with Occupy, big money and global interests are quietly aligned with “anti‑establishment” radicals. The goal is disruption, not reform.

And they’ve learned how to condition us. Twenty‑five years ago, few Americans would have supported drag shows in elementary schools, biological males in women’s sports, forced vaccinations, or government partnerships with mega‑corporations to decide which businesses live or die. Few would have tolerated cartels threatening federal agents or tolerated mobs doxxing political opponents. Yet today, many shrug — or cheer.

How did we get here? What evidence convinced so many people to reverse themselves on fundamental questions of morality, liberty, and law? Those long laboring to disrupt our republic have sought to condition people to believe that the ends justify the means.

Promoting “tolerance” justifies women losing to biological men in sports. “Compassion” justifies harboring illegal immigrants, even violent criminals. Whatever deluded ideals Antifa espouses is supposed to somehow justify targeting federal agents and overturning the rule of law. Our culture has been conditioned for this moment.

The buck stops with us

That’s why the debate over using troops to restore order in American cities matters so much. I’ve never supported soldiers executing civilian law, and I still don’t. But we need to speak honestly about what the Constitution allows and why. The Posse Comitatus Act sharply limits the use of the military for domestic policing. The Insurrection Act, however, exists for rare emergencies — when federal law truly can’t be enforced by ordinary means and when mobs, cartels, or coordinated violence block the courts.

Even then, the Constitution demands limits: a public proclamation ordering offenders to disperse, transparency about the mission, a narrow scope, temporary duration, and judicial oversight.

Soldiers fight wars. Cops enforce laws. We blur that line at our peril.

But we also cannot allow intimidation of federal officers or tolerate local officials who openly obstruct federal enforcement. Both extremes — lawlessness on one side and militarization on the other — endanger the republic.

The only way out is the Constitution itself. Protect civil liberty. Enforce the rule of law. Demand transparency. Reject the temptation to justify any tactic because “our side” is winning. We’ve already seen how fear after 9/11 led to the Patriot Act and years of surveillance.

KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

Two dangers face us now: the intimidation of federal officers and the normalization of soldiers as street police. Accept either, and we lose the republic. The left cannot be allowed to shut down enforcement, and the right cannot be allowed to abandon constitutional restraint.

The real threat to the republic isn’t just the mobs or the cartels. It’s us — citizens who stop caring about truth and constitutional limits. Anything can be justified when fear takes over. Everything collapses when enough people decide “the ends justify the means.”

We must choose differently. Uphold the rule of law. Guard civil liberties. And remember that the only way to preserve a government of, by, and for the people is to act like the people still want it.