04.28.12

Nugent called out in Alaska

Posted in Extremism, Ted Nugent at 12:30 pm by George Smith

An press website in Alaska published an interesting column today, one with the no nonsense title: How Ted Nugent proved a coward — or liar — during illegal Alaska hunt fiasco.

It features a long argument by Craig Medred stating the Nugent was either lying about what he knew of Alaskan hunting regulations — ignorance being the reason he claims to have broken the law, or is a “coward” for claiming fighting a misdemeanor case in court would have bankrupted him.

Medred goes on to reason that Nugent may have instead chosen not to fight the case because he was looking at a potential felony conviction under the Lacey Act. A felony case would have ended his career, at least in the short term.

It’s a nuanced argument, as well as one that condemns Nugent in no uncertain terms. It is also very fair.

Excerpted:

And here is how Nugent spun [his ifnration] all that to Handguns [magazine]:

“Just like in California, to fight the corrupt system would have bankrupted me, taken me away from my life support careers for God knows how long, and I don’t trust our court system. This Alaska charge was an unintentional technical violation of an unprecedented, never-before-heard-of law, only in the southeast region of Alaska, where if your bullet or arrow shows any sign of hitting a bear, then your tag is invalidated. I still can’t find anyone who has ever heard of such a regulation, even amongst lifetime Alaska resident hunters, guides and outfitters, even the judge in Ketchikan stated on record during the court hearing that he had never heard of such a law. I was blindsided by this, and to my knowledge, the only person to ever be charged under this bizarre regulation.”

“The corrupt system?” “An unprecedented, never-before-heard of law?” “Blindsided?” “A bizarre regulation?”

Anyone who truly believes these things fights the charge in court, or he is a coward, no two ways about it. And trust me, I’m not blowing smoke. I once spent thousands of dollars fighting the Alaska Railroad in court because of a “bizarre regulation.”


So [Nugent is] either a coward who backed away from the fight or he’s a liar when he says he violated a “never-before-heard-of law, only in the southeast region of Alaska, where if your bullet or arrow shows any sign of hitting a bear, then your tag is invalidated. I still can’t find anyone who has ever heard of such a regulation …”

He hasn’t looked very hard. I found a fair number of Alaska hunters who have heard of the regulation. Some of them are suspicious Nugent himself knew of the regulation. It was, they say, big talk among bowhunters at the time of enactment.


[The wounded-bear-as-bag-filled] law is awfully hard to enforce. Either your hunting buddies have to rat you out, or you have to save some video showing exactly what you did, which was apparently the case with Nugent. He saved the evidence that he broke the law. And he broke the law. And if he broke it knowing he was breaking it and then shipped the bear hide out of state, then the Feds can potentially slap a felony Lacey Act violation.

Nugent did not get charged with a felony. He settled with the Feds for a misdemeanor Lacey Act violation. Whether he was threatened with a felony charge nobody is saying. But if I was Nugent, and I was threatened with a federal felony charge, I would be afraid — very, very afraid. Nugent has some foundation when he says “I don’t trust our court system.”

Reads like the writer has come very close to the truth of the matter. The article, again, is here.


Threatening the President is also a felony and that is why Ted Nugent received a visit from the US Secret Service the same week he pleaded in the Alaska case.

Comments are closed.