“Dudley Brown and his ‘National Association for Gun Rights’ (NAGR) have built a reputation by attacking every other major gun rights organization and even pro-gun politicians, to the detriment of the gun rights movement.” So begins Second Amendment Foundation jefe Alan Gottleib’s attack on Dudley Brown’s attack on him. I know: why can’t we all just get along? Because Dudley dissed Alan, claiming that the SAF was pro-gun registration. Which isn’t entirely true. Nor entirely false. Anyway, grab some popcorn and make the jump for SAF’s press release in the SAF vs. NAGR throwdown. Like it or not, this one is set to run and run. As they say in the movie trailers, this time it’s personal . . .

Dudley Brown and his “National Association for Gun Rights” (NAGR) have built a reputation by attacking every other major gun rights organization and even pro-gun politicians, to the detriment of the gun rights movement.

His rhetoric has done more to marginalize Second Amendment activism than all of the slanders from gun prohibition lobbying groups combined.

Now Dudley has spewed his venom toward Alan Gottlieb, a true champion of Second Amendment advocacy with a proven track record of accomplishment. Gottlieb is founder and executive vice president of the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), and chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA).

In his latest effort to raise money for his own self-aggrandizement, Dudley Brown has launched a vicious canard against Alan Gottlieb, accusing the veteran gun rights advocate of “Leading the fight for national gun registration.”

Alan Gottlieb has never advocated for gun registration in his life. His legislative efforts have been to prevent that, and Dudley knows it.

Sean Tonner, deputy chief of staff for former Republican Colorado Gov. Bill Owens, was quoted by The Denver Magazine , asserting, “All Dudley wanted to do was create controversy. He makes his money when there’s turmoil, real or perceived, because that’s what gets his members to write him checks.”

It is time to call Dudley what he is, a political bomb-throwing bully whose stock in trade is to incite distrust and discontent within the ranks of the gun rights movement to enhance his own fund-raising efforts and power base.

Instead of directing his energies toward fighting the real enemy, Dudley Brown has attacked other gun rights organizations in an effort to elevate his own group, but at what cost to gun rights?

Perhaps he believes the only way to raise his own status outside the borders of Colorado is to trample on people and organizations with whom he should be allied for the common cause of advancing Second Amendment rights, rather than inflating his own ego.

When anti-gunners see people in the gun rights movement attacking one another they cheer. Such vicious attacks provide aid and comfort to the enemies of the Second Amendment.

WHERE WAS DUDLEY?

The Second Amendment Foundation has championed gun rights legal actions and won in federal courts and the U.S. Supreme Court. Remember, it was SAF that took McDonald v. City of Chicago to the Supreme Court and won. Where was Dudley?

SAF and CCRKBA have conducted the annual Gun Rights Policy Conference for more than 25 years, bringing together major gun rights leaders with grassroots activists to unify and expand the gun rights movement. Where was Dudley?

When SAF and the National Rifle Association joined forces to stop the unconstitutional gun grab in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina, where was Dudley?

When SAF and NRA joined forces to defeat the San Francisco gun ban, where was Dudley?

When SAF, NRA and CCRKBA joined forces to defeat the City of Seattle’s parks gun ban – thus strengthening state preemption in Washington state and providing a lesson for anyone who might challenge other states’ preemption laws, where was Dudley?

When the International Association for the Protection of Civilian Arms Rights (IAPCAR) was created, Alan Gottlieb was there to help bring together an organization that now has member groups from every continent and several nations. Where was Dudley?

When multi-national gun rights organizations gather in Europe to resist global gun control efforts, Alan Gottlieb is there, but where is Dudley?

Where is Dudley? We’ll ask again: WHERE – IS – DUDLEY? He is AWOL!

CCRKBA is currently fighting oppressive gun control legislation in Washington State, to prevent passage of the kind of gun laws that were adopted in Colorado, right under Dudley’s nose. Instead of isolating CCRKBA – as is Dudley’s “my way or the highway” style – Alan Gottlieb has helped bring together a coalition of organizations that includes gun collectors, hunters, competitors and law enforcement professionals. Their goal is to prevent expansion of federally-mandated background checks and state handgun registration, and prohibit government gun confiscation (a’la post-Katrina New Orleans).

Where is Dudley now? Maybe he’s trying to figure out how to exploit this battle to raise funds that would never be spent in Washington State, and perhaps even to scuttle the grassroots gun rights effort there. Remember, his forte is to create turmoil, exploit it and raise money from it, not win battles.

WHERE DUDLEY WASN’T

Two years ago, Dudley tried to claim credit for a lawsuit victory that wasn’t his, in a case he didn’t pay for.

When Students for Concealed Carry won a judgment against the University of Colorado, Dudley created the impression that it was his victory, claiming in an e-mail fund-raiser that his “National Foundation for Gun Rights” and Dudley’s Colorado-based Rocky Mountain Gun Owners (RMGO) had “successfully overturned the college campus gun ban in the Colorado Supreme Court.”

SCC President Daniel Crocker sent a blistering letter to Dudley that criticized him for “misleading remarks for the pecuniary gain of your organizations…”

In that letter, Crocker stated that Dudley’s message was “not only misleading but patently false.”

What was Dudley’s contribution to that case? RMGO provided an amicus brief. Alan Gottlieb and SAF also filed an amicus brief in that case, but they never claimed credit for winning the case.

Dudley claimed to be at the United Nations for the Arms Trade Treaty conference, yet nobody saw him in the building, but they did see Alan Gottlieb there, fighting to protect Americans’ gun rights.

IS DUDLEY BROWN A CHARLATAN?

Last year, the Minnesota Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance felt it necessary to respond to one of Brown’s e-mails regarding legislation that the MGOCRA had been supporting. Without naming him, the group posted a message on it’s Facebook page stating,;

“There is an inflammatory email being sent to Minnesotans by an out-of-state individual who has never actually accomplished anything for Minnesota gun rights (or those of any other state that we can see).

“The real purpose of this email is the same as all the rest of the emails this individual sends: to solicit donations,” the message added.

Last year, when NAGR launched an attack fund raiser against Wayne LaPierre and the National Rifle Association, gun owners in North Carolina became fed up. Some members of the NC Gun Owners forum asked questions such as;

“Where was Dudley Brown during the Senate hearing on AWB and Magazine limitations?” Another observed, “I never liked an organization or person trying to build themselves up by putting others down.” A third noted, “I have not supported them at all, as I feel they are opportunists that seem to be looking for donations more than actually helping the fight.”

While SAF has as its motto “Winning firearms freedom one lawsuit at a time,” and CCRKBA’s motto is “The Common Sense Gun Lobby,” Dudley may as well say that his motto is “Destroying the gun rights movement from within, one selfish attack at a time.”

We have never made it a practice to disparage other gun rights organizations. That’s not constructive, nor does it further the cause of Second Amendment freedom. We are all supposed to be in this fight together.

However, we cannot ignore this calumny, especially from someone whose rhetoric has gun owners constantly fighting one another, rather than uniting against a common enemy.

What Dudley Brown and NAGR have done with his e-mail attack on Alan Gottlieb is deliberately divisive, disturbingly deceitful and downright despicable.

And Alan Gottlieb isn’t asking for a penny from anyone with this e-mail. He’s just setting the record straight.

Recommended For You

64 Responses to Second Amendment Foundation’s Alan Gottleib vs. National Association for Gun Rights’ Dudley Brown

    • In working with various gun right groups I can say that there is no love loss between them and Dudley. Most groups don’t want to get anywhere near him, and for this vary reason. His FUD tactics and rhetoric are well known.
      Because of his all out attack methodology, he has made himself a pariah. This is of his own doing.

  1. Dudley Brown was a coke head turned police informant who allegedly showed his girlfriend his love by shoving her face in a toilet.

    As far as Dudley and his professional standing, he has none, no democrat in Colorado will touch him with a 50 foot pole. AND when republicans ran Colorado, he was asleep at the wheel (living off of operating expenses from his group).

    It took a guy from Washington to sue for non-resident licenses (lost in 10 cir. Ct. Of appeals) because Dudley had better things to do than improve CO’s gun laws when he had the chance.

    Bloomberg and Watts don’t have to bother throwing $$$ at Colorado because until another RKBA group can fix the damage Dudley do Right has done, CO is lost.

    Colorado illustrates the dangers of what happens when a gun group ruins things.

  2. At one point in time, someone signed me up for Dudley’s emails. I sure wish they did not. I probably should try to figure out how to block my email. I wonder if he If he is the same Dudley from Revenged of the Nerds. Dudley AKA Booger.

  3. Now Dudley has spewed his venom toward Alan Gottlieb, a true champion of Second Amendment advocacy with a proven track record of accomplishment.

    Wow, just wow. Not a single mention in this article that Alan Gottlieb worked with none other than Chuck Schumer to write the Manchin-Toomey universal background check/universal gun registration bill. Robert Farago, don’t you think it’s relevant that Mr. Gottlieb tried to stab us in the back – and continues to insist that pushing Manchin-Toomey was the right thing to do? Isn’t that at least worth a mention??? Alan Gottlieb is not to be trusted anymore.

    • The intro offers both an indication of Mr. Gottleib’s “grand bargain” and a link to a TTAG article that goes into it in some depth.

      • I think from the second paragraph onwards this is actually an SAF press release. It’s hard to tell where the transition occurs. In other words, where do your words end and SAF’s begin?

  4. While I am not a big fan of Alan Gottlieb for getting suckered into the Toomey-Manchin debacle,

    I do understand why SAF has to pushback if there is a problem person or entity out there, misrepresenting them, or playing off some contrived fight to generate money, as its alleged here.

    And, not to get too carried away with internet forums and gossips, but rather the facts, I googled up the “dudlby brown coke head turned informant” allegation mentioned above, out of fairness, and found an interesting discussion, here:
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?81739-What-the-HELL-is-up-with-RMGO&s=ac4d9696a18eaeea2cab75eae9d3b4f0&p=1375740&viewfull=1#post1375740

    Gray Peterson is a long-time poster at Calguns, who has been thru the flame wars, and I generally find his opinion and facts useful, FWIW. I believe he helped TTAG dodge the bullet on getting sucked into Charles Nichols nonsense, a few weeks back.

    RF you trouble maker you!

    • I considered joining but I never figured out how they do anything but give away free guns with astronomically low odds of winning. If you’ve ever clicked on an Aaron Spuler gun giveaway list you’ve tried your hand with Dude bulb up there. You try for the free gun and fail but the fine print says memberships are the carrot to give you more chances to win the free guns. You still don’t get to have one because the stick in this equation says a bunch of guys have done what you did and multiplied your chances of losing yet again. So, if you ever do win, you will have paid twice over for whatever you get by the time you win a raffle.

  5. Gottleib has done a lot of good for us, so while I’m not giving him pass for the Manchin-Toomey debacle, I did put him on parole.

    Dudley Brown is a poser.

  6. I must correct one of the above comments. I never worked with Senator Schumer. In fact he tried to kill all the protections against gun registration that I was trying to get into the federal legislation. Schumer also opposed various gun owner protection amendments to the bill that I had proposed and he got Senator Harry Reid to not allow the main one (restoration of rights) to even be introduced. As I result I walked away from the bill.

    • Yes, you got suckered by Schumer, and anyone should know not to get in bed with the likes of him. Then more recently you got on board another anti-gun scheme. I was patient on the first lack of sense, but this more recent lapse has me convinced that something is not right in SAF.

      • Dudley Brown is only interested in one thing: collecting money for Dudley Brown’s lifestyle.

        Every penny you morons donate to NAGR goes to feed his “big fish in a little pond” dreams.

        Alan Gottleib and the SAF have done a million times more for our gun rights than Dudley and his coke-habit have or ever will.

    • Alan we all ready have universal background checks I know this because the people the gun store here asked me about a handgun I had Bought in Florida back in the late 80’s they wanted to know if I still owned that firearm I told them I did not own it any more and they said fine and asked to talk to the gun store owner and I walked out with another handgun I haven’t been asked any question since then and have bought several firearms since then . I was surprised that they not only knew of a firearm I owned years ago I was suprised they knew because I live in another state now to think that we don’t all ready have universal background checks is ridiculous because of what happened to me if we don’t all ready have universal back ground checks how would they even know about a hand gun I owned in the 80’s and in a totally Different state . I wouldn’t even know if I wasn’t asked over the phone by some one who works for NICS about my first hand gun I ever bought .

        • Maybe Alan would like to respond to the fact that he IGNORED the request for help from a LIFE MEMBER in BOTH of his organizations? Could it be that he does not want to damage the golden goose, John ‘GUN SHOW BANDIT” Rodabaugh, President of WAC, Prosecutor in the traffic camera capital of Washington that funnels money to him? Aren’t you the least bit nervous that this DISHONEST LAWYER (I know, whodathunk?) could tarnish your sterling reputation? You didn’t get any of your funds from the $3 MILLION missing from the building fund, didja? That might be considered “improper” if not downright FELONIOUS

          http://www.usobserver.com/archive/nov-10/gun-show-bandit.html
          http://www.usobserver.com/archive/july-13/gsb-john-rodabaugh.htm

    • Alan, you know that the only way “universal background checks” can be enforced is via registration. You also willingly aided in writing the Manchin-Toomey Gun Registration Bill. You claimed it was to “make the best of a bad situation”, but instead of standing strong with everyone else, you sided with those who want a complete ban on all guns (outside of government hands, of course). Many of us who had donated to SAF were leery of you after that, but willing to give you a second chance. However, your most recent push for registration and a ban on private sales has given away your true position. There is no looming ban about to be passed for you to claim “I was trying to mitigate the damage”, you came out on your own with this idea. You support registration and requiring government approval for all gun sales / transfers and no rational gun owner will trust you again.

    • Alan Gottlieb – thank you for taking the time to respond to the comments here.

      Re: Manchin-Toomey – when it was announced, the media and DC had all but given up on new gun control legislation. They were just about to put the final nail in the coffin when along came Joe Manchin and Pat Toomey to tout a gun control bill – your gun control bill, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. My only guess is that you guys figured that since you’d all put so much time into it, it would be a shame to just let all that work go to waste. And, besides, if it passed, Manchin and Toomey (and surely Schumer and SAF) could all trumpet their respective successes in getting “reasonable” gun legislation passed.

      But it wasn’t reasonable. And if you ever expected anything reasonable to come out of working on gun control with Chuck Schumer, then you’re dangerously naive. And yet you’re still pushing universal background checks:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2oRWMxfTcfs

      Suppose you get a perfect bill. All you’ve done is created a framework to turn it into a draconian bill. You say we need to “lead and not follow”. So the answer to the threat of more gun control is to make it ourselves? The Executive and half of the Legislative branches are rabidly anti-gun, and the Supreme Court is one heartbeat away from joining them. Even if I believed that we should “lead” the push for more gun control, this is not the time. We should be calling out this and every other administration for failing to implement existing laws. Every time they say “Background checks have prevented X million criminals and mentally ill from buying guns”, we ask why only a few dozen of those people were charged with anything, and why they left the other X million to go and get their guns somewhere else.

      Or better yet, when there’s yet another gang-related shooting in Chicago or Philly or NYC or wherever, why not take a full-page ad out in the paper listing the long criminal history of the perp once he’s caught? Anyone who’s ever looked knows that violent criminals have long violent arrest records, often involving guns. Where I live, the gun charges are the first ones plea bargained away. They don’t serve their full sentences and a lot of them are on parole or awaiting trial. The problem is enforcement, and that most gun crime in America is not only overrepresented by a small number of large cities, but also a small number of neighborhoods and even blocks in those cities. Take those out, and America is one of the safest countries on the planet. Yet instead of going after the actual problem criminals, you want to offer up more of our freedoms on the altar of good intentions.

      None of this even addresses the technological problem of creating a universal background check system that isn’t also a universal gun registry. I’m guessing you’re not a computer guy, or maybe you trusted people who were but misled you. To make a universal background check system that can show that this person bought this gun only after passing a background check, there has to be a way to tie the gun and the person together. That was is called a registry. Otherwise, what’s to stop someone from buying one gun using a UBC and then using the receipt (or whatever) to “prove” that underwent the UBC for every other gun he bought (out of the trunk of a car, for instance)? Without a registry, the UBC relies on the Honor System. And even if that’s what passes initially, the moment another shooting happens, everyone will want to “fix” the UBC so it keeps more data linking individuals to their guns. So it’s either a registry or will eventually become one. Oh, and it won’t solve or prevent any crimes. For examples of this, just look at the long gun registry in Canada.

      • I have never heard anyone argue that it was even possible this could solve or prevent any crimes, the closest I’ve heard is “We have to do SOMETHING!”, which makes no sense to me.

        Given a 100% registration magically appearing, and 10 minutes later a gun crime is committed. What does the registration do? Can it tell you who owns the gun? No. First, you’d have to have the gun! How did you get the gun without knowing who was firing it? Like shooting him, for example? If that happened, what good does the registration do? Well, then, how about the shooter left the gun behind after the shooting. Never mind “Why would he do that?” Bing, bang, we have the owner’s name and address, thanks to the now 20 minutes old magical 100% registration. Once the SWAT team has established a perimeter, set up a command post, suited up, had 3 TV interviews while being suitably threatening, 2 hours have gone by when they knock on the door. Guy answers wiping his eyes and says he’s been asleep for 3 hours. You’ve wasted your time. What did your registration accomplish?

        Try, what is it MEANT to accomplish? The only answer which makes any sense whatsoever, the only use it could ever have, is universal confiscation. It simply cannot do anything else, no matter how hard you spin. Every government, for a hundred years and more, has been attempting to get a list of who owns guns. Every one. No small number have gotten such a list, and promptly confiscated all guns, much to no one’s surprise, sometimes involving door-to-door searches complete with on-the-spot executions for unregistered weapons located. In turn sometimes followed by some manner of “ethnic cleasing” stupid excuse for murdering millions and tens of millions of the country’s own subjects.

        And yet we now hear we need this registration because “we have to do SOMETHING!” We don’t have to do that.

    • Check out Dudley’s reputation on ar-15.co, the Colorado shooters’ forums.

      Dudley is notorious in Colorado for using one of his other front organizations — Rocky Mountain Gun Owners — to whip up hysteria with claims of impending doom, citing bills that stand zero chance of passage or have long since been defeated by other pro-gun groups. All in order to raise fund from gullible gunowners who can’t be bothered to examine his claims.

      Dudley was actively — ACTIVELY — lobbying against reform of Iowa’s current ban on suppressors and SBRs, through yet another of his fronts: Iowa Gun Owners. He claimed that the folks at Iowa Firearms Coalition — the people actually trying to get suppressors legalized for ordinary Iowans — were “selling Iowa down the river” because their bill contained the standard legal boilerplate about suppressors so long as they were registered under the NFA-34. There was absolutely zero chance that a single member of the Iowa legislature would have supported Dudley’s “no compromise” solution of defying the National Firearms Act.

      IGO was also the “pro-gun” group that tried to sabotage reform of Iowa’s “shall issue” concealed weapon law, holding their breath and stamping until they turned blue in the face because there was no support in the Iowa legislature for an instant switch from “may issue” to “Constitutional carry.”

      But Dudley and his front organizations aren’t really interested in seeing their “no compromise” proposals enacted into law. That would deprive them of their real purpose: collecting money to “fight for your gun rights” year after year with never any increase in actual freedom.

  7. Didn’t know NAGR was such crap. I mean I know they like to gin up fear whether ignorantly or otherwise, but that’s just rude. Guess they are losing the benefit of the doubt from me. Sad.

  8. I purchased life memberships in BOTH of Mr. Gottlieb’s pro 2nd Amendment organizations before finding out he was a FELON that accepts funds from Washington Arms Collectors President and Prosecutor John “GUN SHOW BANDIT” Rodabaugh! When I asked his organizations for help getting my property back from this THIEF that’s a member of the Washington State Bar. I suggest we CLEAN HOUSE if we would like the respect of the AMERICAN PEOPLE! Read the U.S. Observer if you’d like a little TRUTH with your morning coffee.

  9. Alan Gottlieb has never advocated for gun registration in his life.

    Except that Alan has a serious hard-on for “universal background checks”, aka banning private sales. Alan also knows that this can only be enforced via registration (and creates a defacto registry in its own right). Ergo, Alan supports registration. This is why I’ve stopped donating to the SAF and will not give them another cent as long as Alan is there.

  10. Open carry vs no open carry, SAF vs NAGR….
    Tell me, do the anti gun folks have infighting like we do?

  11. Unfortunately, Dudley is all about Dudley, and pretty much only Dudley.

    Dudley also runs RMGO here in Colorado. While the laws were being passed, nobody heard so much as a fart out of RMGO until after they were signed. (Why? Dudley figured he could make more money from the panic AFTER the laws were on the books, than he could in fighting them. It was a cash proposition to him, it always, ALWAYS is.)

    Dudley then loudly condemned the Colorado recalls. Said it was the wrong thing to do. (Why? Well, because if keep gun-grabbing senators and representatives in the Colorado legislature, why, that’s more people who are nervous of what’s coming back and – HEY! That means MORE money for Dudley!)

    Then, of course, in his weekly “Please Give Me More Money So I Can Ask For More Money” mailings, he referred to the recalls as the “RMGO-supported recalls”, Or something like that. It made it sound like they were his idea.

    Then, you put all this together and realize that RMGO will eviscerate any other gun owners org that tries to get started here (Colorado 2A association notwithstanding – they pretty much just ignore the boy…) – because they’re a threat to his “market share”…

    … and you get a big package of what Dudley is about.

    I don’t even know what RMGO *does* here except talk about the money they need for vague things they’re “going to have to do” like ‘continuing to fight for your gun rights’!!! – as far as I know, they just collect donations, and say “Yay, guns!”.

    I cannot think of *one single thing* that RMGO (which is just a local rebrand of NAGR) has done, at all.

    Well, they put a list of pending gun bills up on their website.

    So I guess that’s something.

    I guess.

    • Dudley’s Iowa front — Iowa Gun Owners — did the same thing when “shall issue” reofrm of Iowa’s concealed weapon law was in the legislature back in 2010. Dudley — through IGO — demanded “Constitutional carry” and attacked anyone who supported a (quite simple and reasonable) “shall issue” concealed permit law/ It was “Constitutional carry” or nothing, even though there was absolutely no chance in hell of even a single vote for “Constitutional carry,” let alone passing in both houses and getting signed into law. And now IGO is trying to take credit for “shall issue” in Iowa, despite their hysterical opposition to it in 2010.

      Dudley’s IGO did exactly the same thing in 2014 when an attempt was made to repeal Iowa’s ban on silencers. Hysterical fund-raising appeals were spammed all over the place warning the actual pro-gun organizations like the Iowa Firearms Coalition and NRA were trying to sell Iowans down the river. Based on nothing more than the legal boilerplate in the repeal bill that would make possession of suppressors legal in Iowa, so long as they were registered under the National Firearms Act. Same as in almost all other silencer-friendly states.

      Dudley and his front group at IGO wanted a federal nullification law. One that would not get a single vote in the legislature, would be vetoed by the governor as soon as it hit his desk, and would have been thrown out by the courts.

      But they didn’t actually do any lobbying for that idea. They were too busy hitting up Iowa gun owners with sleazy “send us money now!” spam to actually talk to members of the legislature or organize voter pressure on their representatives. Repeal passed the Iowa House — no thanks to Dudley’s IGO — but was blocked in the Senate and never came to a vote. With enough pressure that bill might have made it to a vote, which it would have won, and to the Governor’s desk, where it would most likely have been signed.

      But there’s no money to be made there for Dudley Brown. No one’s going to send him money for being a small voice in support of a successful effort. His coke money comes from scared ignorant gun owners who can’t be bothered to research his claims for themselves.

  12. Who’s to say that Bloomy might find the Dudster receptive to some Bloomy-bucks…? Eh? It all spends the same to a conman.

  13. “It is time to call Dudley what he is, a political bomb-throwing bully whose stock in trade is to incite distrust and discontent within the ranks of the gun rights movement to enhance his own fund-raising efforts and power base.”

    Yup, this.

  14. Dudley is clearly correct in all of this. SAF is a front for the Brady Bunch. If I were a multi-millionaire, I’d give NAGR at least a million of it.
    You defenders of Gottlieb better hope we never meet on a dark street.

  15. Until “People of the Gun” make it very clear, very loudly, that they regard the “Chipoltle Ninjas” to be irresponsible and foolish, not at all representative of the vast majority of gun owner’s, it will be easy for MDA and other anti-2A group to paint us all with a broad brush as being a bunch of nut jobs.

    I’ve heard people saying, “Oh, they were just exercising their rights.”

    That argument is as stupid as saying a person who runs into a crowded movie theater and screams, “There’s a fire!” is just exercising his First Amendment rights.

    • “I’ve heard people saying, “Oh, they were just exercising their rights.”

      That argument is as stupid as saying a person who runs into a crowded movie theater and screams, “There’s a fire!” is just exercising his First Amendment rights.”

      Sorry, chief, but that was a stupid argument. Peacefully carrying an inanimate object is in no way comparable to shouting that there’s a fire / a bomb / other life threatening emergency.

      • Aggressively brandishing apparently loaded semiauto rifles in a restaurant is not the exercise of a right.

        It’s the pathetic posturing of a fat loser and his pint-sized wimp pal.

      • if i’m right.. the fire in the movie theater example is .. irrelevant because it creates ” a clear and present danger.” from my understanding of stuff i read in my cousin’s law school textbook that’s prohibited due to the “clear and present danger” restriction :

    • They were exercising a Constitutional Right in public. Please state, clearly and precisely, at what point that becomes “irresponsible and foolish”. Draw the line for us, and explain why you draw it there.

      (For the record, I don’t agree with HOW they did it, but fully support the RIGHT and CHOICE to do it. And I’ll explain my line when you’ve done yours.)

      • Pusher, try reading what I just wrote. Just because you “can” do something, does not make it wise, appropriate or even right.

        But you go right ahead and parade into Chipotle with your Ninja OC friends and see how far that gets you.

        • That’s right Paul, keep doing the anti’s work for them. Why pass laws banning open carry when gun owners can just spew hatred at any gun owner that open carries?

        • Publius, thanks for helping MDA advance their agenda. It’s guys like you that defend the stoopid that do more harm to the cause than good. And it is cool how guys like you that talk a big game always post anonymously.

  16. The lobbyist for the Texas State Rifle Association has said that NAGR has tried to take credit for pro-gun legislation that she got passed.

    • Same thing Dudley did in Colorado with campus carry, and in Iowa with reform of Iowa’s “may issue” law.

      Dudley is a lying sack of shit who is only interested in putting money in Dudley’s pocket.

  17. Dudley Brown is a complete and total idiot. He is “pro gun right” but his tactics and methods are completely self-defeating.

    All he does is throw raw meat to the rabid-right wingers out there, the poster children for the anti-gunners to use to portray us all as complete nut jobs.

    Dudley routinely takes credit for various activities, lies about his activities, but in fact is AWOL at every key event and point.

    He is a con artist.

    He flat out lied about going to New York and the United Nations.

  18. Alan Gottlieb may not be perfect in every way, but he has done more for gun owners in any given year than ol’ Dudley has ever done in his lifetime. I was a member of SAF and the CCFRKBA back in the 1980’s and 1990’s during the dark days of the Clinton admin. Money got real tight, or I’d still be a member of both organizations today.

  19. Alan Gottlieb has been way out in front in the war to secure/restore our gun rights. He’s lapped us so often we can’t tell if he’ s comin’ or goin’. Gottlieb is very strategic. Couple of examples in addition to others mentioned in earlier posts: 1) He and his wife, Julianne, have worked for over a decade to get her certified as an NGO delegate to the UN for all the small arms treaty BS that those civilian disarmament elitists have aimed straight at ordinary Americans, not at third world terrorists. 2) Alan started funding law review writers (academics and grad students) in the 1970s! to build a legal foundation through for the 2A that has proved critical for most the favorable judicial decisions we have obtained. I think he is a national treasure who is almost always several steps ahead of everybody, including many of us POTG. Despite Alan’s legislative dumbassery with Manchin and that traitor, Toomey, I thank God for the Gottliebs.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *