Learning From The Gun Prohibitionists

Lee Williams aka The Gun Writer has a post up today about a new anti-gun group called “Legislators for Safer Communities.” It is about gun prohibitionist legislators in 43 states coming together to form a coalition to work for gun control. What struck me about this story was not yet another astroturf gun control organization being formed. Rather that it was being supported by all the major gun prohibitionist groups.

From their press release:

Legislators for Safer Communities will serve as a hub for collaboration, partnership, shared resources, strategy, research, and peer networking. The coalition will work in partnership with Brady, Community Justice, Everytown, GIFFORDS, and March For Our Lives.

You have Brady, you have Everytown (and presumably their subgroups), and you have the Cult of Personality known as Giffords. While they take different approaches, they are all on the same page in fighting firearms rights, promoting the monopoly of violence by the state, and seeking more control over our lives.

Unfortunately, too many in the pro-rights community don’t play well together whether through philosophical differences or mere jealousy. One need not look too hard to find examples of that.

Here in North Carolina, a bill to allow permitless concealed carry which came from Grass Roots North Carolina and Gun Owners of America was killed when the NRA objected to it due to a provision that required a class on the use of deadly force. The bill was certainly not perfect and that provision was a requirement from House Speaker Tim Moore to move the bill. The thinking by its backers was that moving the bill was more important than the objectionable provision which might well be removed later.

The actual question was whether the NRA objected to the bill because of the provision or because it had not originated with them. This mindset has driven me up the wall for years. Unlike the Second Amendment Foundation and the Firearms Policy Coalition, I rarely see the NRA join with other groups as co-plaintiffs in cases. This needs to change! Resources are finite and are even more so now that the NRA has spent almost $200 million on Bill Brewer’s legal “services”.

If I am elected to the NRA Board of Directors, I plan to be a voice for working with other groups. It should not matter if the group is NRA affiliated or not. Coalitions need to be formed with groups like GRNC, Virginia Citizens Defense League, AzCDL, Commonwealth 2A, and the list goes on. The NRA should work with these groups on the state and local level just as much as they do with their affiliates so that NRA-ILA can do more within the halls of Congress with the resources they have. Sad to say but the non-NRA state affiliates are often more effective and more resolute in their push for gun rights.

Litigation needs to be coordinated where possible with SAF, FPC, NSSF, and the various foundations like the Mountain States Legal Foundation. You see it somewhat on amicus briefs but it needs to go beyond that. I remember reading about then NRA President Charles Cotton complaining about all the 2A cases brought by other plaintiffs after the NRA’s win in Bruen. The complaint should not have been that these groups were bringing cases based upon the Bruen decision but rather that the NRA had failed to follow up on its own win. Smaller organizations like SAF and FPC are always nimbler and inertia is always a problem with a larger, more bureaucratic, organization like the NRA. The smart thing would have been to give support to the nimbler organizations by either being co-plaintiffs or even funders of their efforts instead of just whining about it.

Everyone and every organization wants to get the credit for a win. That is understandable. However, is it more important to get the credit or get the win for firearm rights and freedom?

I know where I stand.

No Comment

The gun control industry is always pushing for new laws and regulations. You would think that they would also be interested in seeing existing laws being enforced as well as seeing equal justice under the law for “gun crimes”.

Given the release yesterday of news about Hunter Biden’s plea deal regarding his lying on the Form 4473 about his drug use, you would think that the major players such as Everytown, Giffords, and Brady would have something to say about it. Biden and prosecutors agreed to a Pretrial Diversion Agreement whereby the felony charge is dismissed if he complies with the agreement.

It seems that the gun control industry did have stuff to say yesterday but none of it involving the President’s wayward son.

Everytown said the shootings on Juneteenth highlighted the need “for action on gun violence (sic)”. On Twitter, they talked about stuff like so-called safe storage laws, urged the Senate to not to vote against Biden’s pistol brace ban, and touted the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. Nothing was said about Hunter Biden nor was anything said about how an African-American mom was facing a probable 2-year sentence for the same crime as Biden.

Moving on to the Cult of Personality known as Giffords, what did they have to say about Biden. Nothing. Rather they lauded the Oregon legislature for passing legislation against DIY firearms which they call “ghost guns” (sic). On Twitter, the only mention of Biden by them was to say they knew the President would make good on his promise to work against “gun violence” (sic).

Finally, there is Brady United. Their only press releases were to say they are suing a gun store in Michigan regarding a straw purchase and that they have a new initiative to “harness ad agency and media company talent” to change America’s “gun culture narrative.” Herr Goebbels was not available for comment on the new initiative. Their Twitter feed had nothing about either Biden but a few posts on “Ask Day” which demands that parents ask other parents if they have firearms. Personally, I think they should be pushing for 100% tax credits for gun safes with no dollar limit but that’s just me.

I should note here that both the National Shooting Sports Foundation and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms issued strongly worded statements denouncing the plea deal. Both pointed out the failure of the Biden Justice Department to uphold the law when it involved the President’s son.

So to sum it up, when the gun control industry had a chance to speak out about the failure to keep a firearm out of the hands of a person under the influence of drugs, they punted. They did not want to upset their cozy relationship with the Biden Administration by casting any aspersions upon either Biden father or Biden son.

Hypocrisy today, hypocrisy tomorrow, hypocrisy forever is their motto.

Hey, I Support Commonsense Gun Laws

The cult of personality known as Giffords is making an effort to get gun owners onboard with their organization. They are calling it Gun Owners for Safety. I think you even get a fancy t-shirt like the one below.

I think when you get down to it that I and most of my readers do actually support commonsense gun laws.

Here are some of the commonsense gun laws I could and would support:

Removal of suppressors from the NFA.

Unlike with the Hearing Protection Act, I would make them available over the counter without any Form 4473 or NICS check. Protecting a person’s hearing is about safety which is why OSHA has so many rules for business and industry about hearing protection.

Removal of short barrel rifles and short barrel shotguns from the NFA.

These firearms were included in the NFA only by accident as the original intention was to ban handguns and the Roosevelt Administration wanted to make sure you could not claim your handgun was a rifle. From a safety aspect, it makes use of either more ergonomic within the confines of a home.

Overturning the Hughes Amendment

Modern firearms are made with better materials, can withstand higher pressures, and have more safety features than many of the old firearms. It only makes sense from that standpoint to allow the registration of machine guns made after 1986. While collectors stand to lose some residual value of their existing pre-1986 machine guns, the rest of us would now have access to modern firearms.

Federal tax credit for gun safes and safe rooms

If I can get a tax credit for buying an electric vehicle due to “climate change”, I don’t see why a similar tax credit should not be given for purchasing a gun safe or building a safe room in my house. The gun prohibitionists want “safe storage” laws so make them pay for it. This Federal tax credit would be funded with a 20% excise tax on all donations to any gun control group or related PACs.

Nationwide Reciprocity

This is a no-brainer. If you have a carry permit in your home state or your home state has permitless carry, then all other states would have to recognize your status while carrying in their state. They give full faith and credit to your driver’s license so why not your carry status. Ideally, all states would allow permitless carry but I’ll leave that for another day.

Federal Support for FASTER type programs nationwide

The states of Ohio and Colorado have excellent firearms training programs for teachers and other school personnel. An armed and trained teacher, administrator, custodian, or other school employee is going to be on the scene immediately unlike an outside police force. It should be noted the shooting qualification standards to pass these programs is higher than for sworn law enforcement. Funding to pay for this program would come from shifting money already allocated to support red flag programs in the states to the Department of Education.

Firearms Safety Training for all students

Just as some states have hunter safety training as part of the middle and/or high school curriculum, so too should states implement firearms safety training. The goal would not be to make the student into a shooter but rather to train them how to properly handle a loaded firearm.

I could keep going and going. Feel free to offer your own suggestions on commonsense gun laws in the comments. I’d love to read them.

Taliban – You Don’t Need Weapons For Personal Protection

As the Taliban consolidate their power in Kabul, Afghanistan, they have started going door to door collecting weapons from private citizens.

From Reuters:

Taliban fighters in the Afghan capital, Kabul, started collecting weapons from civilians on Monday because people no longer need them for personal protection, a Taliban official said.

“We understand people kept weapons for personal safety. They can now feel safe. We are not here to harm innocent civilians,” the official told Reuters.

The Taliban also believe in a strict interpretation of Muslim law including women should not leave their homes unless accompanied by a male relative and to be fully covered in a burqa. There are numerous stories of how they have killed or beaten innocent women as they moved back to power.

This leads me to ponder on the the conundrum facing American gun prohibitionists like Everytown, Moms Demand Action, Giffords, and the Brady Campaign. On the one hand you have a group that brutally subjugates women like it was the 7th Century. On the other hand, they want to ban the private possession of firearms saying, in essence, the state will protect you.

Choices are tough.

Raising Money Based Upon Lies

The Cult of Personality known as Giffords sent out a fundraising email yesterday before the quarter-end Federal Elections Commission reporting deadline. Politicians and PACs always push for more money at the end of a quarter so they can use their fundraising to say, “see, they agree with us!”

Giffords made this three claims as why it was important to give:

As Americans have dealt with a global pandemic, they’ve also had to face a worsening gun violence crisis.

In order to prevent tragedies like the ones that took place in Atlanta or Boulder, we need the Senate to pass universal background checks.

The best way we can do that is by hitting our goals so we can keep the pressure on the Senate to act.

The first thing I learned in statistics is that correlation is not causation. Indeed, through the first half of 2020, overall violent crime was actually down from the previous year which was down from the year before that. Murder rates did increase but causal factors such as the psychological impact of quarantines and the defund the police movement could lie at the core of this.

In both Atlanta and Boulder, the murderer passed a FBI NICS check. They were not buying their firearms in some back alley from an “unlicensed dealer” (sic). Indeed, Colorado has had the aforementioned panacea of universal background checks since 2013! As the law makes clear, it does apply not only to purchases but transfers. So the argument that a nationwide law regulating private sales of firearms would have prevented a mass casualty event just doesn’t hold water. Even in Newtown, the murderer first killed his own mother in order to steal her legally-purchased firearms.

Their final claim is that they need your money so they can keep lobbying the Senate to pass meaningless laws. I’m sure they do want your money as do their political consultants, their direct mail firms, their ad agencies, and others in their progressive orbit.

The one thing they won’t say and cannot say is that the only way for universal background checks to work is with universal gun registration.

An Inconvenient Truth

The Cult of Personality Known as Giffords sent out an email this morning. As might be expected on the anniversary of the murders at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, they called for more gun control.

We took it upon ourselves to fight for change by electing a gun safety majority in the House. They passed H.R. 8, the background checks bill, but it sat on Mitch McConnell’s desk every day since.

But that’s about to change. With a newly elected gun safety president and gun safety majorities in both the House and Senate, it’s finally time to make universal background checks the law of the land. And today’s a great day to say you’re still in the fight.

The inconvenient truth is that the killer obtained his firearm after passing a FBI background check. In other words, a universal background check or mandated checks on private firearm sales would not have made one bit of difference.

The killer had no criminal record because of an arrangement between the Broward County school system and the sheriff’s office. This despite being expelled for bringing a weapon to school along with other run-ins that should have resulted in a criminal record.

As noted at the time by Max Eden in the City-Journal:

But the explicit aim of Broward’s new approach to school safety was to keep students like <killer> off the police’s radar. If the Sheriff’s department didn’t know about his deeply troubling behavior, perhaps it was because they were no longer supposed to know about it.

So instead of dealing with the inconvenient truths and the deeper issues at play, the Cult of Personality Known as Giffords and their like-minded brethren including President Biden will just call for more gun control – even though none of it will stop the next mass casualty event.

“Gun Owners for Safety”

The Cult of Personality known as Giffords is creating another astroturf organization called Gun Owners for Safety. As you can tell for their description of it below, it is supposed to be composed of gun owners, hunters, collectors, and sport shooters who support “commonsense gun laws”.

The gun control industry always tries to come up with these organizations before an election. I think they want anti-gun politicians to be able to say, “I support the Second Amendment and this organization of real gun owners supports me.” We in the gun culture and the gun rights community recognize it as a crock but there will always be some that are gullible.

From the announcement:

We are excited to announce the launch of our newest nationwide initiative: Giffords Gun Owners for Safety! We hope you’ll join us for a special launch event.

Here at Giffords we know that the vast majority of Americans support safer communities—including gun owners. We know that preventing gun violence and responsible gun ownership go hand-in-hand. That’s why we’re launching Gun Owners for Safety, which unites hunters, sport shooters, and collectors who support commonsense gun laws like background checks.

Together, we will rally support from all corners of the country to fight for lifesaving laws and promote responsible gun ownership.

The event details are below and you can RSVP for FREE. During the event, you’ll be able to hear directly from our founder, Gabby Giffords, about how we plan to work together to make our communities safer from gun violence.

Join us for our Gun Owners for Safety National Launch Event

Date: Friday, October 16th
Time: 3pm ET
Location: Online Event
Cost: FREE

If you follow the embedded link, it will take you to the sign-up page. I find it interesting that they are targeting Colorado, Michigan, and Texas. Michigan and Texas could or should end up going for the Republicans and I think they are trying to prevent that.

An Alternative Scenario

Now let me give you an alternative scenario about why they are creating such a group. It may sound a bit like a conspiracy theory but so be it.

Let’s say that NY Attorney General Letitia James is ultimately successful in dissolving the National Rifle Association. As this article from the anti-gun, anti-NRA, Washington Post makes clear, the assets must be distributed to a like organization.

What if the courts decide the like organization isn’t a true gun rights organization like the Second Amendment Foundation, GOA, FPC, or the like but rather Gun Owners for Safety. The NRA is composed of gun owners and they promote safe handling of firearms. Doesn’t Gun Owners for Safety do the same thing as evidenced by their name? I could see Letitia James colluding with the gun control industry to push this line of thinking.

It turns out I’m not the only one thinking along these lines. Walter Olson writing in the Cato Institute blog came to the same conclusion in August.

Would anyone be surprised, given her record, if James asked for the funds to go to groups at fundamental odds with the organization’s Second Amendment advocacy mission? You can just imagine the line her office and her allies would take — the NRA always claimed to be a leading voice for gun safety and the outdoors, so let’s use their money to fund this group promoting “safe storage” along with this other group that represents our sort of hunters, the right sort.

Let’s say Giffords has a staffer doing opposition research and this staffer just happens to read the Cato column. Do you think it would be a real stretch for that staffer to propose to create Gun Owners for Safety for electoral purposes now and to get the NRA’s assets later? I’d say not much of a stretch at all.

If Giffords can come up with it, then I doubt Brady and Everytown are that far behind. I’m not saying it is going to happen but it does bear watching.

I Don’t Think That Headline Means What You Think It Means

The online version of Newsweek magazine had the most misleading headline ever related to the recent panic buying of firearms. Since I don’t think merely quoting it does it justice, here is a screen shot of it.

Do they mean gun rights advocacy groups like the National Rifle Association, the Second Amendment Foundation, Gun Owners of America, the Firearms Policy Coaliton, or one of the many state-level groups?

Umm. No.

Once you start reading the article you come across comments from these “gun advocacy” luminaries.

“Fear has been the motivation for much of the increases in firearms purchases,” David Chipman, Senior Policy Advisor for gun control advocate group Giffords, told Newsweek.

“A small percentage of the marketing to gun owners has been to encourage preparation for end times scenarios and zombie apocalypses.”

Chipman said the country’s current gun laws allow people to hoard weapons in the same way they are able to mass buy toilet paper.

Chipman, of the Cult of Personality Known As Giffords, goes on to say he is a gun owner himself. Of course he is.

Not to be out done is this advocate is the co-president of Brady United.

Kris Brown, President of the Brady gun control campaign group, also said she is “very fearful” that the number of friendly fire incidents involving children could also dramatically increase as millions of children who are not currently at school will be present in their homes with these new weapons.

Brown said the feeling of short term security and safety that is provided by purchasing a weapon is masking the actual risk that will be dramatically increased.

“I understand in any time of crisis there is fear, the desire to do something to try and create a sense of security, and safety is paramount. The same instinct as fight or flight is what’s kicking in here,” she told Newsweek.

“The reality is the purchase of a gun is actually going right into harm’s way.”

It’s always “for the children” with them.

Last but not least is that “stay at home mom of five” and former corporate PR flack Shannon Watts herself.

“Right now, there’s no question that everyone is worried about their family’s safety. We know there are risks associated with having a gun in the home, especially when kids are involved, which is why responsible gun owners store their guns locked, unloaded and separate from ammunition.”

Watts added the presence of guns in a house also increases the risks of suicide and domestic violence.

“The NRA has spent decades selling a myth that more guns make us safer, but if that were true, the U.S. would be the safest nation on earth,” she said. “Instead, we have a gun homicide rate that’s 25 times higher than the average of other developed nations.”

Watts suggested if people truly want to protect their families during these unsettled times, they should “wash their hands and lock up their guns.”

While I can’t disagree with Mrs. Watts on the importance of hand washing, the rest of her statement is all too typical of her.

The best thing I can say about that headline is that they didn’t characterize these gun prohibitionists as “gun safety groups”. Indeed, the author of this article specifically refers to both Giffords and Brady as “gun control advocate” or “gun control campaign” groups.

Oh! The Horror!

Magpul donated 1,000 30-round PMags for the NRA to give out to those who attended the January 13th NRA rally at the Virginia State Capitol. Duane Liptak, Magpul’s Executive VP, is a member of the NRA Board of Directors. Bear in mind that a magazine ban is one of the agenda items for anti-gun Democrats in the Virginia General Assembly. A magazine ban, I should add, that has no grandfathering.

Giving out 30-round PMags was reminiscent of what Magpul did for rallies in Vermont in 2018 and in Colorado in 2013. In other words it was nothing new. Nonetheless, the gun prohibitionists at the Cult of Personality known as Giffords have their panties in a wad over this.

Gun rights advocates from around the country are urging armed protesters to descend on Virginia’s capital before the General Assembly’s first legislative session of 2020 to stop Democrats from passing gun-control bills.

The NRA is even getting involved by offering to hand out 30 round magazines to protesters for free if they show up.

Tweet from the NRA: EMERGENCY AIRLIFT: @Magpul_HQ sent us 1,000 30 Round PMAGs to hand out tomorrow in Richmond to NRA members who show up to fight Northam's extreme gun ban! We'll see everyone TOMORROW at the General Assembly Building in Senate Sub-Committee Room1 on the 5th Floor at 8am!

A 30 round magazine was used to shoot this organization’s co-founder, Gabby Giffords, kill six people and injure 12 others in Tucson.

First off no magazine of any size can be used “to shoot” anyone. A magazine is merely a container. It, more importantly, just like a firearm is an inanimate object that cannot do anything unless it is used by human being.

In Ms. Giffords’ case, the murderer in Tucson had a Glock pistol as his weapon of choice. He did have a Glock 18 knock-off magazine that jammed when he was reloading allowing heroic bystanders to end his rampage.

The killer bought it legally after passing a FBI NICS check. That he was able to pass such a check despite evidence of mental issues was due to the failure of school authorities to report his behavior and due to the Pima County Sheriff’s Department ignoring his actions. The latter was due to a friendly relationship between the killer’s mother and Sheriff Clarence Dupnik.

Giffords and other such organizations who send out these pleas for money rely on shock value and the decay of memory with regard to past events. That it is dishonest has never stopped them in the past and won’t stop them in the future. Fortunately, there are both the Internet and those of us with long memories to set the record straight.

More NY Subpoenas For The NRA

Danny Hakim of The New York Times is reporting that NY Attorney General Letitia James (D-NY) issued new subpoenas to the National Rifle Association last week. While I have been keeping up with issues related to the NRA, I missed this.

The subpoena, which was described to The New York Times, was issued last week and covers at least four areas, including campaign finance, payments made to board members and tax compliance. Because the N.R.A. is chartered in New York and the office of the attorney general, Letitia James, has a range of enforcement options, the investigation has alarmed N.R.A. officials already grappling with infighting and litigation. The same office brought a case last year that led to the shuttering of President Trump’s foundation.

Among the documents sought by the subpoena are records related to transfers among N.R.A.-controlled entities, including the N.R.A. Foundation, an affiliated charity. Recent tax filings show that the N.R.A. diverted $36 million last year from the foundation in various ways, far more than ever before, raising concerns among tax experts. The transfers came as the N.R.A. experienced financial strains and challenges from gun-control groups, which outspent the organization in the 2018 midterm elections. An earlier analysis by The Times found that the foundation had transferred more than $200 million to the N.R.A. between 2010 and 2017.

The NRA Foundation, you may remember, is now under an investigation by District of Columbia Attorney General Karl Racine (D-DC). The NRA Foundation is chartered in the District of Columbia.

The New York investigation also is seeking internal documents related to the NRA’s filings with the Federal Election Commission as well as to communication with two political consulting firms. Those firms, Starboard Strategic and OnMessage, are somewhat intertwined. The Cult of Personality known as Giffords has sued the FEC alleging that the NRA paid money to Starboard Strategic as a means to funnel money to Republicans using OnMessage.

The New York Attorney General’s Office had no comments on the subpoenas.

However, NBC reports this response from the NRA outside counsel William Brewer III.

“Of course, the financial records of the NRA and affiliates were audited and reported in tax filings, in accordance with state and federal regulations — a fact that underscores the Association’s commitment to good governance,” Brewer said. “It is easy to understand why the NRA believes that the NYAG’s zeal with respect to this inquiry reflects the investigation’s partisan purpose — not an actual concern that the NRA is not effectively using its assets to pursue its members interests.”

“Regrettably, the NYAG seems to credit hollow rants by a handful of actors who are no longer associated with the NRA,” Brewer continued.

While Brewer seems to dismiss the actions of the NY Attorney General and her office saying it has “a partisan purpose”, she does have extraordinary powers when it comes to non-profit organizations chartered in the state. This includes substantial fines and even the possible dissolution of the NRA. If any of the current or former member of the Board are just sloughing this off as a partisan witch hunt, they are doing so at their peril.

This is serious business. I can’t say that it would not have come up if the Board had been doing their due diligence and taking their fiduciary responsibilities seriously. However, it would have been easier to dismiss as having a “partisan purpose.”