Vince Neil Calls For Gun Control

He fell out with gun-toting fans on his Twitter over the issue, and banned them from attending Motley Crue shows if they ever "put guns in front of kids." What's your view on the issue, in light of the Connecticut massacre?

Ultimate Guitar

Vince Neil took to Twitter in a rant about gun control after the Connecticut massacre, but didn't expect so many of his followers to hit back at him.

Now he has banned fans from Motley Crue shows if they "put guns in front of kids."

Almost 30 people died in the shootings at a school last week, with most victims being children. There is now a widespread debate about whether assault weapons should be banned, and whether private sales should be banned.

As Noisecreep notes, Neil's thoughts are not linear and appear to follow his "random thoughts," but in general he raises concerns that more could be done to protect children from this kind of tragic event.

Sad day today. Prayers to all the families. Gun Control!!!

Vince Neil (@TheVinceNeil) December 14, 2012

He was quickly outraged by the number of followers who put more value on the second amendment than on the lives of children:

Why is everyone so concerned with guns? What about the CHILDREN that were MURDERED today! Get your priorities straight!! Come on people!!

Vince Neil (@TheVinceNeil) December 14, 2012

I did say gun control but I didn't think 90% of you would care more about your gun than dead children!!!

Vince Neil (@TheVinceNeil) December 14, 2012

He finished with this: "F--K YOU to EVERYONE who puts guns in front of kids!! Do not come to ANY shows! You are sick!!"

It's a powerful debate that can't seriously be condensed into a few casual tweets, but we're interested in hearing your views.

Should there be stricter gun controls, or is it too late? Could anything else be done to prevent these devastating events? Let us know what you think in the comments.

269 comments sorted by best / new / date

comments policy
    Sheep Shagger
    I wonder if he supports drunk driver control too?
    Yup, guns kill children (and people in general) but so do drunk drivers, which Vince Neil knows a thing or two about from experience
    if guns kill people, than spoons and forks make people fat. people kill people. sick, disturbed people. if people would follow some of Texas' lead in letting principals, counsilers, etc... concealed carry, than maybe this can be stopped. taking guns away from the other 99.9% of people who use them for protection and/or hunting isn't the right move. bring on the dislikes
    "taking guns away from the other 99.9% of people who use them for protection and/or hunting isn't the right move" I hunt with assault rifles. I'm a terrible shot.
    You really have no concept of what an assault rifle is, do you?
    a semi/fully automatic weapon designed to only kill humans? Do they make sexual assault rifles? Should look into that.
    Fully auto weapons are illegal and not sold to civilians.
    Full auto weapons are legal to the public, but only if they were made before the 80's (not sure of the exact date). They are extremely hard to find, and you can't find one for less than ten grand. You have to sort through a mess of paperwork, that takes about 2 months to complete, but they are legal.
    First time I've ever actually said "HA!" after reading something on the internet. You deserve that medal.
    I liked your post mainly because of your Icon and because the Gold comment was so true!
    Seriously. By his logic, we should all lose our ability to drive because his drunk ass got behind the wheel...which resulted in people dying. And if he had killed a child it would have brought about the exact same response. Hey Vince, do us all a favor and stop playing politics. One Dave Mustaine is enough, we dont need musicians pushing politics.
    This is the bad thing about working all day. Someone gets to write this before I do.
    "We must reject the idea that every time the law's broken, society is guilty rather then the lawbreaker. It's time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions" Ronald Reagan
    Honestly...the rest of the world is looking at america and thinking "WTF ARE YOU DOING" No one needs a gun, unless you need to kill the military .
    Conceal and carry permits-statistically proven to reduce violent crime. Read John Lott. Tim McVeigh killed 168 people at once. 9/11 happened with no guns. Most gun violence occurs in urban areas where gun control is highest. The criminals don't care about the laws. Mental health is certainly a priority but in today's lawsuit-happy society, no one can remove a kid from school who appears to have this kid's problems until it's too late. The kid's mother knew he was troubled, and went ahead and gave him access to weapons. Had his school district moved to have him transferred to a place that could really help him, you know she would have fought it with lawyers as most parents do. If you want more mental health solutions, some people are going to have to be restricted and limited in how much time they spend in society at large.
    I'm for banning assault weapons, giving much more funding to mental health services, and making it much harder to attain any gun. A lot of places don't even do background checks, which is ridiculous. It should be a long process to ensure, as much as possible, the owner will be responsible. That seems reasonable to me. I realize nothing will fully stop gun violence, but we gotta do something.
    1. Look at the language of the assault weapons ban that is in place in some states. All it does is ban guns that look badass. No joke, you can buy a more powerful non-assault rifle but not a scary-looking less powerful rifle. 2. You're absolutely right that we need better mental health awareness and services. The bigger problem is the stigma that accompanies mental illness, though, and that won't just go away overnight. 3. Most gun violence is committed with guns that were obtained illegally, and almost every mass murder committed with firearms was NOT committed with assault weapons but instead with handguns and shotguns.
    Exactly, assault weapon is just a media trigger word (no pun intended) that makes people scared when they hear it.
    The explicit purpose of "assault weapons" is to kill or wound humans. It's their only purpose. That's why they want them banned. Sure, there are shitloads of powerful hunting rifles and shotguns. Their purpose however isn't necessarily to kill humans. That's the difference.
    Even with all of that, the lunatics Mom would've still gotten guns. All that would do is tie things up for normal, law abiding citizens. It would have stopped NOTHING in this certain situation.
    He calls for increased mental health funding, so hopefully the shooter would have been being properly treated.
    what about keeping multiple guns out of a house with someone who poses as a liability. the more i read about the shooter the more i see that he was obviously troubled, but he had access to multiple guns at his fingertips. like many people are saying, he could simply have taken the guns from his mom if they were banned, which he did. i realize this would be extremely hard to oversee, and im not trying to say "everyone with mental health issues poses a threat to society!". its just something ive been thinking about lately.
    Obviously you've never attempted or researched the firearm buying process here in the U.S. By federal law, every firearms dealer must perform a federal background check (per the brady gun control bill) on anyone wishing to purchase a firearm. Any criminal history of assault, domestic violence, any felony regardless of what it is, or the slightest hint of mental deficiency is an instant denial. In my state, not only is a federal check mandatory, but one must undergo a state mandated background check as well, before you may be issued a purchase permit. Sure, if you know who to talk to, those people can always purchase one illegally, but if you think you're going to stop that from happening, you're nuts.
    I'm just wondering about all these Americans claiming they need to use guns for protection - how they don't have to be afraid of anything just so long as they get to carry their gun everywhere. This kid that shot up that school - his moms gun did a whole lot to protect her towards the end.
    people in cities and such dont generally carry guns on them. i actually am for guns but disagree that the general public should be able to carry a gun in public (there are ways you can in new york for example if you can prove you walk around with a lot of money or something as part of your job). but like how tallica said, everything this kid did was illegal. if the guns were legally registered and obtained what law would have stopped this?
    Im curious - where do you think most "criminals" get their weapons? Do you think the majority of criminals get their hands on weapons that they made themselves or snuck into the country - or do you think that they get them from people who purchased them legally in the first place? So long as guns are available to everyone, then guns are still available for criminals to get their hands on them. That being said, I think its a bit of a stretch to use the term "criminal" for people that walk into public places and open fire. Criminals aren't the ones doing that, psychos are. Criminals are dealing drugs, stealing cars, embezzling money - psychos are losing shit and killing large groups of people.
    ethan is hot
    This has nothing to do with the gun control debate, but Vypor, I love your avatar. On the gun control side of things, I feel the way others do, the moderate way. DO I want guns outlawed? Hell no. I heard the other day that this shouldn't be about gun control, it should be about gun safety. Some things can't be avoided, but in the past 3 years alone the President has had to give national speeches about massacres involving guns. Tuscon, Aurora, and Newtown, it is obvious something needs to be done. I hate the idea of getting rid of guns all together and I hate the idea that there can never ever be a law that involves guns in any way period at all EVER, other wise you're not an American. That logic makes no sense. In any case, I think we are all in agreement that something needs to be done about situations like these.
    US has one of the most alarming crime rates of the last years, almost 70% of the crimes being related to gun violence. And not a single restriction was put that day...
    Hi Im Alex
    You can restrict them all you want but if someone wants a firearm bad enough there are plenty of ways for them to obtain them. Look at heroin, crack, heck look at pot. They are illegal yet people can still get them on a regular basis.
    but you dont see as many people smoking pot than people smoking tobaco why? because cigs are legal and pot is not, same thing for weapons, even if banning them wont make them disappear it will seriously decrease its number and the number of gun violence. Just take this kid, if he didn't have access to his mom guns, do you really think we would have taken his baseball bat and kil 27 people with it?
    lost my pick
    It's a shame to see that it takes this kind of event for people to realise that something needs to change.
    Make people realize something needs to change? Don't think this is going to make anyone burn his or her NRA card. It will make the people who always wanted to ban guns feel stronger about it. And ironically, the increased popularity of gun control will skyrocket demand for firearms and ammunition by people concerned about future availability. Therefore, those who feed the hysteria for more gun control end up unwittingly putting more guns on the street. And if they were to succeed in enacting their desired legislation, then by definition only criminals would have guns. Do we really want the only people who are armed to be the ones to be the ones that don't follow law? Where is the intellectual superiority in that approach? What about the police, you say? Im glad you asked, because I was a police officer for about a year. I am qualified to tell you that a Cop's job isn't to protect civilians from criminals, but rather to try to deter criminal activity and take reports/investigate crimes after the deterrence fails. When they're lucky, they capture a small percentage of criminals and then only lock up a fraction of them. It's extremely rare for a Cop to get an opportunity to stop a crime in progress. You're delusional if you expect police to guarantee your safety, and the law does not support you.
    To the people claiming that more gun laws wouldn't stop anyone anyway. Why do we have any laws? I mean what's the point in making any of the laws if "oh they don't care about the law. They'll just do it anyway". The point of a law isn't just to punish someone for committing a crime. It's to make it much harder for that person to be able to commit in the first place. So many cases here of people being purposely thick and ignoring logic just so they don't have to give their death dealing toys away from them.
    It makes it harder for someone to commit a crime in the first place when there's a higher probability of an average citizen being empowered to stop them. I don't consider something that can save my life and protect my family a "death dealing toy". They've already saved us several times without us even having to show them, much less kill anyone. If we hadn't had them, I might have had to kill with my bare hands or blunt objects just to defend myself. Too bad there's no way to measure the amount of lives firearms save.
    "In America, we need guns to protect ourselves!" "From what..?" "People with guns!" F*ck logic.
    End of discussion. This man said it all. EDIT: Was referring to Izzy-Sweet, in case it wasn't obvious. Finally, we can edit our comments on this goddamn site!
    Face R1pper
    If five 300 pound men come knocking down your door and running into your home, you are going to want that gun.
    Or you could decide to possibly protect children from being mass murdered by keeping one more gun out of circulation and hand over your t.v. to the "five 300 pound men" that have invaded your fantasy world.
    What if they don't want your TV, but just want to rape your daughter? I know a guy whose daughter was raped at her grandmother's house in broad daylight by a home intruder. Not anyone's fantasy world. Real life. It was one guy, not 5. And he wasn't even 200 pounds. But I guess you don't care about her; she's just one person and she wasn't even killed. No, just scarred for life.
    Face R1pper
    When you start living in the real world you will realize that people are not friendly and there are things that are more important than your TV.
    "there are things that are more important than your TV" My point exactly.....CHILDREN!!!!! Thanks for the support.
    Face R1pper
    Yes, and you protect your children by keeping weapons legal. Not taking them out of the hands of good citizens so cops and criminals will have the unrestrained ability to massacre the rest of the country.
    Sorry I have to jump in on that moronic statement! Just how many civilised countries in the world that have an armed police force have had reports of cops going on unrestrained massacring sprees? America - where paranoia and insecurities have absolute control!
    Face R1pper
    Its hilarious how uneducated Euros are regarding history, politics, and economics. But it is worrying that some Americans are starting to take them seriously. You really need to grow up if you think the purpose of police is to protect you. And you are just as uneducated if you seriously think that weapons can be effectively banned from a nation the size of the United States. Consult the war on drugs to see how that is going to work out.