NRA

Uncategorized

More From The New Yorker

April 21, 2019 by 1 Comment

On my way home this afternoon from visiting my granddaughters, I chanced across The New Yorker Radio Hour. The lead story was on the NRA and Mike Spies article that ran this past week. It goes over much of what was written in the article but it also had excerpts from Spies’s interview with Aaron Davis who formerly worked in the NRA’s major gifts fundraising unit.

Bearing in mind that any interview that is broadcast is made up of excerpts and that those excerpts are chosen to make a point or enhance the story, the interview with Davis seems to illustrate how the aims of Ackerman McQueen and the aims of preserving and protecting the Second Amendment are at odds. Davis notes that many of those he worked with at Ack-Mac were, as he put it, “New York or Austin types” who were PR professionals first, foremost, and always. Unlike Davis, they were not believers in the NRA or the Second Amendment.

The other thing this audio broadcast illustrated is that Spies’ reporting depended on a lot of inside information from presumably disgruntled staff at the NRA including handwritten memos and other documents. I am not disappointed in the staff for spilling the beans. Rather, I’m disappointed that it took an article from an outsider with an anti-NRA agenda to illustrate the major internal problems that can and may put the organization itself at risk. By extension, it also puts the battle for the Second Amendment and gun rights at risk. Bloomberg himself couldn’t have done more damage than those tasked with supposedly advancing gun rights have done through their own avarice and self-dealing.

The New Yorker Radio Hour broadcasts on many public radio stations. Rather than have you have to search for a rebroadcast of it, I have embedded it here. The NRA portion of the episode runs approximately 20 minutes.

Uncategorized

The NRA Sues Their Ad Agency Ackerman McQueen (Update)

April 16, 2019 by 2 Comments

I don’t begin to know or understand all the internal politics and machinations at the National Rifle Association. I do know that advertising firm Ackerman McQueen and their PR subsidiary Mercury Group have long been considered the power behind the throne. If reports are to be believed, they are the ones who orchestrated the ascension of Wayne LaPierre and the eventual departure of the late Neal Knox. Having heard the story from multiple sources, I give them a lot of credence.

Thus, it was quite surprising to read in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal that the NRA was suing Ackerman McQueen and Mercury Group. The story has since been picked up by the New York Times, Fox News, the Washington Post, and a number of other media outlets.

The lawsuit was filed on Friday, April 12, 2019, in the Circuit Court for the City of Alexandria (Virginia). The lawsuit accuses Ackerman McQueen of impeding efforts by the NRA to inspect book and records including contracts related to the existing services agreement. This inspection is essential for the NRA Board to fulfill its fiduciary duty and to comply with New York non-for-profit law which governs the NRA’s activities since it is incorporated in that state.

The specific concerns that the NRA sought to investigate include:

  • Out of pocket expenses that lacked documentation as required by the Services Agreement
  • Lack of transparency regarding annual budgets as well as adherence to the budgets by Ackerman McQueen
  • Lack of transparency regarding “fair market value” determinations for services
  • Concerns that the NRA was being invoiced for the full salaries of NRA-Dedicated Personnel despite these people spending time on non-NRA clients
  • Refusal to provide data in writing on number of visitors, viewership numbers, and other performance metrics related to NRATV

A footnote also said that many of NRA’s stakeholders were concerned “that NRATV’s messaging – on topics far afield of the Second Amendment – deviated from the NRA’s core mission and values.” I know many of my friends in the Second Amendment community shared this concern.

I should note at this point that NRATV is owned by Ackerman McQueen and that personalities such as Cam Edwards and Ginny Simone are actually Ack-Mc employees. This, in turn, is the heart of the other major aspect of this lawsuit – the role of Oliver North with Ackerman McQueen and to whom he owes his allegiance.

The lawsuit alleges that Audit Committee of the Board of Directors sought to review the full contract between Ackerman McQueen and Col. North but was rebuffed. Moreover, North’s attorneys indicated he would only “disclose a copy of the contract to the NRA subject to AMc’s consent.”

 The NRA’s General Counsel was finally allowed to see the contract but was not allowed to have a copy. This review by the General Counsel led to many questions. These included a) was North a 3rd-party contractor or an employee of Ack-Mc with a duty of loyalty to them; b) whether previously disclosed costs borne by the NRA for the “North Contract” were accurate; and c) “whether the contract imposed obligations on Col. North that prevent him from communicating fully and honestly with other NRA fiduciaries about AMc.” Thus, the NRA says it became determined to resolve these issues.

The suit asks that Ackerman McQueen be found in breach of contract, that they be required to furnish the NRA copies of all AMc-Third Party NRA Contracts, that they be ordered to furnish the NRA with copies of annual budgets for the period 2016-2018, a list of all NRA-Dedicated personnel and the amount of time they devote to the NRA account, and copies of all records that would show the costs to the NRA or the NRA Foundation (from Jan 1, 2018 through April 1, 2019) incurred by North’s American Heroes series, from compensation to Col. North, from office space rented for Col. North or related staff, and whether each item was billed specifically to the NRA, the Foundation, or both.

Ackman McQueen contends this lawsuit is the work of the NRA’s outside counsel William Brewer III who is the in-law of their co-CEOs Revan and Angus McQueen. However, the lawsuit is brought by the Virginia law firm of  Briglia Hundley not by Mr. Brewer’s firm. Todd Rathner, NRA Board Member, speculates that the attack on Mr. Brewer is the work of the pro-AckMc faction of the Board in an effort to undermine Wayne LaPierre.

Board members Todd Rathner and Joel Friedman are on the record about the lawsuit with the New York Times.

The suit culminates the fracturing of a more than three-decade relationship between Ackerman and the N.R.A., going back to the shaping of such memorable lines as Charlton Heston’s proclaiming that his gun would have to be pried “from my cold, dead hands.” Wayne LaPierre, the longtime chief executive of the N.R.A., had previously been a steadfast champion of the Ackerman relationship.


“I think it says something about Wayne’s character, even though he’s had a long-term working business relationship with a vendor, he’s willing to do what is right and necessary for the N.R.A. and its members,” said Todd Rathner, a board member of the rifle association.


Joel Friedman, another board member, said he was dismayed that the documents had not been turned over.


“It leaves you questioning, and you can come up with all these potential different scenarios as to why, but none of them are good,” he said.


“My mind goes to: Are they overcharging us? That’s one,” he added. “Two, are there things charged to us that were not part of the contract? Then, No. 3, has there been a misallocation of personnel?”

It will be interesting to hear the discussion, if any, of this case at the NRA Annual Meeting which starts in little more than a week. As for me, the fact that Board members are finally questioning the costs as well as the role of Ackerman McQueen is good news. In a saner world, with a smaller board that held actual power, the Ackerman McQueen contract would have been put up for bid multiple times over the years. That it hasn’t is a disgrace.

UPDATE:  Sebastian at Shall Not Be Questioned had this to say, in part, about the lawsuit.

This is a struggle that needs to happen. Bitter and I are not as anti-Ack-Mac as some folks. We think there’s merit to some of their work, and they do some things do well. But we also believe their relationship with NRA is unhealthy, and there probably is not be any fixing it. Sometimes you’re just better off pulling the tooth, rather than trying to save it. This is probably one of those cases.

I had a call out of the blue late this afternoon from a person on the NRA Board. It was off the record and not for attribution. This person thinks that the lawsuit might be a smokescreen to protect the NRA from New York State. It gives the impression that they are taking their fiduciary and financial duties seriously. As both the lawsuit notes and I mentioned above, the State of New York revised their statutes to require not-for-profits to do more due diligence and to pay more attention to where members and donors money is being spent.

The rationale behind this being a smokescreen to protect the NRA is that, according to this person, the NRA had not been requiring any sort of invoices or other detailed record-keeping for services rendered in years gone by. In other words, Ack Mc said here is how much we want and please send us a check. God forbid that they were that slack but I believe it.

So that you can read the whole lawsuit, I’m embedding it at the bottom of this post.

Uncategorized

Standing United

March 6, 2019 by 3 Comments

The Second Amendment community is like a family. We may squabble amongst ourselves but unite when we are attacked by outsiders. This latest release from the Second Amendment Foundation and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms illustrates that. It takes aim at attempts by House Democrats to cripple the National Rifle Association through multiple investigations.

BELLEVUE, WA – Reports that the National Rifle Association is being engulfed in what one publication described as “a rapidly expanding tangle of congressional investigations” raise an important question that nobody has been asking: Is this a deliberate effort by anti-gun-rights Congressional Democrats to overwhelm the organization’s leadership and prevent NRA from fulfilling its mission to protect the Second Amendment?

That’s what the Second Amendment Foundation and Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms are wondering as House Democrats are pressing their gun control agenda.

“According to The Trace, which is funded by anti-gun billionaire Michael Bloomberg, Congress has launched six investigations of the NRA,” noted SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb. “With Democrats in control of the House, promising to push a full slate of gun control measures, that seems just a little curious.”

Gottlieb, who also chairs the CCRKBA, said it is fair to question an avalanche of investigations involving the NRA at a time when its attention should be focused squarely on renewed efforts to erode the Second Amendment.

“Are these investigations legitimate,” Gottlieb wondered, “or are they a deliberately choreographed attempt to distract the NRA’s focus when it needs to be concentrating on the battle now developing on Capitol Hill?

“We’ve been delighted to work with NRA on a number of efforts,” he continued, “including our successful lawsuits against the 2005 post-Katrina gun grab in New Orleans, the San Francisco gun ban, our joint challenge of Seattle’s attempted parks gun ban and our ongoing federal lawsuit against a gun control initiative in Washington State. So, when we see this kind of congressional onslaught at the same time Beltway anti-gunners are trying to ram through an aggressive gun control agenda, let’s just say our radar is up.”

Gottlieb said that if there are legitimate issues, they need to be explained to the nation’s 100 million gun owners.

“Otherwise,” he observed, “all of this may amount to a lot of smoke and mirrors designed to not simply distract NRA but to discredit it in the eyes of its members, supporters and allies when we all should be working together to defend our fundamental rights at a time when they are under unceasing attack.”

I agree with Alan that this is “curious” at a time when more and more gun control bills are being introduced in Congress. Indeed, I read a bill this morning that would put any semi-automatic rifle including Ruger 10/22s capable of accepting a magazine under the purview of the National Firearms Act. 

Uncategorized

Scott Signs Gun Control Bill Today; NRA Sues Today

March 10, 2018 by 1 Comment

Gov. Rick Scott (R-FL) signed SB 7026, the Majory Stoneman Douglas Public Safety Act, into law today. The bill would allow some teachers to carry firearms on campus, it allocated significant funding (approximately $500 million) to school safety, it imposed a 3-day waiting period on all firearm sales, and raised the age from 18 to 21 for all firearm purchases including shotguns and rifles. It also included some items related to mental health issues.

The bill was opposed by most Democrats in the legislature because they were against letting teachers have the opportunity to defend students with more than harsh words. They were also upset that it didn’t include universal background checks and a state assault weapons ban (sic).

After the signing, the Florida Democratic Party reiterated its opposition to the bill, which was touted as bipartisan since it passed both chambers with GOP and Democratic votes. FDP chair Terrie Rizzo said the governor and Legislature didn’t go nearly far enough.

The ban on the sale of firearms to those between the ages of 18 and 21 did not apply to law enforcement, correctional officers, or those serving in the military. The law would make it a felony for a licensed individual to sell the firearm and for a person to buy the firearm. Moreover, it also prohibited the private sale of handguns to those under the age of 21.

Within an hour of Gov. Scott signing SB 7026, the National Rifle Association filed suit in US District Court for the Northern District of Florida on behalf of their members in Florida. The suit was filed against Attorney General Pam Bondi and Commissioner of the Department of Law Enforcement Rick Swearingen in their official capacities. The suit seeks declaratory and injunctive relief against the bill on the basis that it unconstitutionally discriminates against 18 to 20 years by denying them both their Second Amendment rights and their 14th Amendment Due Process rights. It also seek an order enjoining the enforcement of FLA. STAT. § 790.065(13) by the defendants, their employees, and agents and from enforcing the ban on the sales of firearms to those aged 18 to 20.

16. Independent provisions of federal law also already significantly
constrain the right of adult citizens under the age of 21 to purchase firearms. Under
18 U.S.C. § 922(b)(1), a federally licensed firearm dealer may not sell to any
individual under the age of 21 any handgun—the “quintessential self-defense
weapon” which is “the most popular weapon chosen by Americans for self-defense
in the home.” Heller, 554 U.S. at 629. Florida’s new ban broadens these
preexisting limits, by (1) extending the ban to rifles and shotguns, in addition to
handguns, and (2) prohibiting these law-abiding, adult citizens from purchasing
these firearms from any source, not just federally licensed dealers (i.e., those who

are “engaged in the business of selling firearms at wholesale or retail.” 18 U.S.C. §
921(a)(11)).

17. The effect of Florida’s age-based ban is to impose a significant,
unequal, and impermissible burden on the right to keep and bear arms of a class of
millions of law-abiding 18-to-20 year-old adult citizens.

The suit seeks both a facial and as-applied declaration that the new law is unconstitutional. With regard to the as-applied challenge, the complaint says:

32.  This ban particularly infringes upon, and imposes an impermissible
burden upon, the Second Amendment rights of those NRA Members described
above who are female. Females between the ages of 18 and 21 pose a relatively
slight risk of perpetrating a school shooting such as the one that occurred at
Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, or, for that matter, a violent crime of any
kind. For example, in 2015, women in this age group accounted for only 1.8% of
arrests for violent crime, while males in the same age bracket accounted for 8.7%
of such arrests—and males between the ages of 21 and 24, who may lawfully
purchase firearms under current law, accounted for 9.2%. See Federal Bureau of
Investigation, Crime in the United States: 2015 tbls. 39 and 40, available at
https://goo.gl/8pVWnb; see also BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, WOMEN
OFFENDERS at 2, 13 (2009) (female offenders responsible for only 14% of violent
crimes, and only 10% of female offenders aged 18-20), available at
https://goo.gl/3qAJXu. Regardless of its facial validity, Florida’s ban is therefore
unconstitutional, void, and invalid as applied to women between the ages of 18 and
21.

The full complaint can be found here.

Uncategorized

How To Destroy Business Using Twitter

February 23, 2018 by 2 Comments

Enterprise Rent A Car provided an affiliation group discount to NRA members for car rentals. As you can see from the tweet below, that ends effective March 26th as they kowtow to an organized campaign from the gun prohibitionists.

In case you are wondering what are the Enterprise brands, they are Enterprise, Alamo, and National car rentals. I have used all three in the past. Any future rentals will be with a company that has a bit more spine.

If the Enterprise conglomerate is this wimpy in the face of the anti-gunners, imagine how well they’d stand behind you if you got into an accident at which you weren’t at fault.

As a final aside, I find it illustrative that @mamabear64 uses a Stalinist style icon of Hillary as her avatar.

UPDATE: Well, you can add Hertz, Avis, and Budget to the list.

Uncategorized

Is The NRA Making A Grand Trade Or Merely Punting?

October 5, 2017 by 7 Comments

Bump fire stocks have come under increased scrutiny since the mass casualty even in Las Vegas where it appears the killer used them in his violent rampage. There have been bills introduced as well as increasing calls for them to be banned. They were originally approved by BATFE during the Obama Administration when it was concluded that they did not convert a semi-auto firearm into a full-auto firearm.

This afternoon the NRA released a joint statement from Wayne LaPierre and Chris Cox which called upon BATFE to re-review bump fire stocks and to subject them to additional regulations.

(FAIRFAX, VA) – The National Rifle Association today issued the following statement:

“In the aftermath of the evil and senseless attack in Las Vegas, the American people are looking for answers as to how future tragedies can be prevented. Unfortunately, the first response from some politicians has been to call for more gun control. Banning guns from law-abiding Americans based on the criminal act of a madman will do nothing to prevent future attacks. This is a fact that has been proven time and again in countries across the world. In Las Vegas, reports indicate that certain devices were used to modify the firearms involved. Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law. The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations. In an increasingly dangerous world, the NRA remains focused on our mission: strengthening Americans’ Second Amendment freedom to defend themselves, their families and their communities. To that end, on behalf of our five million members across the country, we urge Congress to pass National Right-to-Carry reciprocity, which will allow law-abiding Americans to defend themselves and their families from acts of violence.”

This statement leads to the question of the day: is the NRA trading a bump fire stock ban for national right-to-carry reciprocity or are they merely punting in the face of opposition to them from even some in the GOP who had been supportive of gun rights?

The NRA has always engaged in realpolitik in recent years. This may be a case of appearing to be willing to deal on the regulation of one gun-related item in exchange for loosening another. If so, they are trading a novelty item for something rather substantial. My only fear is that they could get out-maneuvered by trying to placate the gun prohibitionists on this one item.

I don’t care about bump fire stocks. I’m never going to buy one or put one on my AR.  However, if bump fire stocks are banned now what is to say that other gun parts such as adjustable stocks or standard capacity magazines won’t be banned later. If you open the door to the ban on one thing, don’t you open the door to the ban of anything firearm related?

UPDATE: Chris Cox of the NRA-ILA went on Fox’s Tucker Carlson Tonight to explain the NRA’s position and to call for national carry reciprocity. I’ll let you make the call whether it is a good idea or not.

Uncategorized

NRA ≠ Nazi

August 14, 2017 by 5 Comments

I was reading Prof. William Jacobson’s Legal Insurrection this morning. He had a post about the clash in Charlottesville this past weekend. He had a link to this tweet by Markos Moulitsas of Daily Kos.

I hate to disappoint Mr. Moulitsas but he is wrong in so many ways.

First, it has to be pointed out that conservatives and Nazis are not one and the same. In fact their beliefs are antithetical to one another. A conservative generally believes in smaller government while Nazis (from their origin in German) believe in a strong national government that pervades all aspects of life.

Second, while the NRA is generally a conservative organization, they are accepting of people from all walks of life. They have liberals and conservatives as members. They have gays and straights as members. They have Democrats and Republicans as members. Indeed, when the president of the NRA Pete Brownell has a scheduled phone conversation with Erin Palette of Operation Blazing Sword and asks how they can work together, I think that says it all in terms of acceptance.

I will grant you that there might be a member of the NRA who holds Nazi and/or fascist beliefs. But I would say that any mass organization of 5 million members with open membership is liable to have a few outliers within its membership rolls.

Uncategorized

While I Was Away – No. 3

July 24, 2017 by 1 Comment

The National Rifle Association’s Youth Education Summit (YES) starts today in Washington, DC. It is a seven-day educational experience for selected students from around the country. They will be visiting various places in our nation’s capital, will participate in discussions related to current events, and will have the opportunity to win college scholarships. The goal of the program is to promote active citizenship.

Congratulations to those selected from around the country.

From the NRA on the summit:

FAIRFAX, Va. – The National Rifle Association is
pleased to announce the students selected to attend the 2017 Youth
Education Summit (Y.E.S.), a seven-day educational experience in
Washington, D.C., scheduled for July 24-30, 2017.  

As part of Y.E.S., students from across the United States learn the
significance of the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the
importance of being an active citizen as they visit memorials and
monuments throughout the nation’s capital. Scheduled stops include the
Capitol Building, the National Museum of American History, and the
National Museum of the Marine Corps, the National Archives, the Newseum,
Mount Vernon, and a safe introduction to the shooting sports at NRA
Headquarters. Students will also participate in discussion about current
events to have them learn from each other, to learn more about new
topics. Additionally students will be assigned a team debate topic,
which is meant to foster teamwork abilities, research capabilities, and
leadership skills. 

Students who excel in the week’s activities through demonstrating
strong leadership, public speaking, and debate skills will be awarded up
to $15,000 in college scholarships at the summit’s closing ceremony.
Following Y.E.S., an additional $25,000 in scholarships will be made
available through the Y.E.S. Grand Scholarship, which encourages
attendees to create a portfolio detailing the promotion of NRA programs,
like Eddie Eagle GunSafe® and Refuse To Be A Victim®, in their
communities.  

Any high school sophomore or junior in the United States is welcome
to apply to Y.E.S. The summit’s application process includes a written
essay on the Second Amendment, personal statement, transcript affirming a
minimum 3.00 grade point average, and three personal recommendations.
This year’s class of 46 was selected from hundreds of qualified
applicants. This year we are excited to have students from 35 states,
including both Alaska and Hawaii! 

The National Rifle Association launched the Youth Education Summit in
1996 (The state-level program started in 2002) to encourage America’s
youth to become active and knowledgeable citizens at both the national
and local levels. More than $500,000 in scholarships have been awarded
throughout the program’s 20-year history. Funding for Y.E.S. is provided
through The NRA Foundation from monies raised by Friends of NRA, a grassroots fund-raising program in support of the shooting sports.

2017 Y.E.S. Participants

Alaska: Grayson Davey
Alaska: Sophia Puliafico
Arkansas: Alex Henry
Arizona: Kira Dean
Arizona: Cristian Lee
California: Emily Cupp
California: Brent Hinchcliff
California: Isabella Orozco
Colorado: Gage Paris
Florida: Dennis Hull
Florida: Peter Leonard
Georgia: Sawyer Williams
Hawaii: Iceley Andaya
Illinois: Krzysztof Gajda
Illinois: Natalie Seaman
Indiana: Matthew Burton
Kentucky: Andrew Sisson
Kentucky: Allen Slaughter
Louisiana: Canlin Dionne
Louisiana: Jonah Finley
Massachusetts: Amby Tierney
Maryland: Madeleine Sateri
Minnesota: Therese Minwegen
Missouri: Mary (Mikey) Schad
Montana: Hanna Antonsen
North Carolina: Jared Lockhart
Nebraska: Jamison Sapp
New Jersey: Zelan Von Kaenel
New Mexico: David Velez
New York: Reade Ben
New York: Gianna Guzzo
Ohio: Quinton Taylor
Oklahoma: Jonathan McCormick Jr.
Oregon: Owen Vredenburg
Pennsylvania: Lauren Klima
South Carolina: Brad Lehman
Tennessee: Lincoln Dillman
Texas: Kaitlyn Callaway
Texas: Stephen Garner
Texas: Denise Shaffer
Utah: Marlie Root
Virginia: Rylie Pennell
Washington: Simon Sefzik
Wisconsin: Emily Rasmussen
West Virginia: Katelyn Sette
Wyoming: Kaden Gaukel
Uncategorized

NRA And CRPA Sue California Over Assault Weapons Control Act

April 24, 2017 by

I have not seen the complaint yet but the NRA and the California Rifle and Pistol Association are plaintiffs in a lawsuit against the State of California that seeks to have the Assault Weapons Control Act declared unconstitutional. Attorney Chuck Michel said the complaint would be up soon.

I think this is just the beginning of the lawsuits to come against the new gun control laws enacted in 2016 plus by Prop 63.

From the NRA-ILA on the lawsuit:

Fairfax, Va.— The National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) today announced it is supporting, along with the California Rifle and Pistol Association (CRPA), an important Second Amendment lawsuit challenging California’s newly expanded Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA).

The suit, Rupp v. Becerra, seeks to have the courts declare the AWCA unconstitutional because the ill-conceived law will do nothing to stop terrorists or violent criminals, and infringes on the right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment.

The AWCA makes it illegal to manufacture, sell, transport, import or transfer hundreds of popular and commonly owned semi-automatic firearms the law inappropriately demonizes and condemns as “assault weapons.” This means it is illegal for owners to transfer or sell these firearms to anyone in California, including to their own children or heirs upon death. And owners themselves will be violating the law by continuing to possess their firearms unless they register them as “assault weapons” with the state.

The Rupp case was filed in direct response to a number of anti-gun-owner laws, including the expanded “assault weapon” statute, which were signed by Gov. Jerry Brown in July 2016. Collectively, those new gun bans have become known as “gunmageddon” among California’s roughly 10 million gun owners. The Rupp case challenges those restrictions, as well as California’s broader statutory scheme, which arbitrarily and unconstitutionally restricts the use and possession of the most commonly owned firearms in the United States.

Multiple lawsuits challenging other aspects of the unconstitutional laws passed last year are also in the works and will be filed in the coming weeks. Rupp is the first of a number of NRA/CRPA sponsored lawsuits soon to be filed that will challenge the “gunmageddon” bills, as well as the new laws enacted by Proposition 63 — which was overwhelmingly opposed by law enforcement.

Uncategorized

NRA On Sessions Confirmation As Attorney General

February 9, 2017 by 1 Comment

The NRA-ILA went all in on the nomination of Sen. Jeff Sessions for Attorney General. It was made a graded vote and I think it will come back to haunt certain Democrats who are running for re-election in 2018. The only Democrat who voted for Sessions was Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) who must have been reading the political tea leaves in his home state.

Last night, by a vote of 52 to 47, Sessions was confirmed as Attorney General.

The NRA-ILA released this statement:

NRA Statement on Confirmation of Jeff Sessions as Attorney General

Fairfax, Va.— The National Rifle Association today issued the following statement from Chris W. Cox, executive director of the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA), applauding the U.S. Senate’s confirmation of Sen. Jeff Sessions as the 84th attorney general of the United States:

“The NRA and our five million members would like to congratulate Jeff Sessions on his confirmation as attorney general. He will make America a safer place by prosecuting violent criminals while protecting the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding gun owners.”

The U.S. Senate confirmed Attorney General Sessions by a bi-partisan 52 to 47 vote.

I, for one, am happy to have an Attorney General who respects the Second Amendment and who I know in my heart of hearts won’t be authorizing another Operation Gun Walker aka Fast and Furious.

​