Reader John writes:
On the the anti’s side, we have Moms Demand Action, preceeded by various other Mike Bloomberg funded groups. And before that, The Brady Campaign. We have had a federal assault weapons ban. We have had plenty of media-glorified mass shooting incidents touted as why we need to get rid of our guns. But despite all that, more states have passed pro-Second Amendment laws than have loosened restrictions on owning guns . . .
And heck, despite the plethora of antigun groups (and I use plethora correctly here, because we only need one of those bastards, thus we have an un-needed surplus) we have pretty much had one lone group speaking out and fighting for our rights this whole time: the NRA. And they have done one hell of a job for us.
So despite all the hoopla, the media coverage, the hypocrisy of Feinstein, Bloomberg, Rosie O’Donnell, and all the claims that Americans are tired of weapons and want gun control, as a whole this country actually seems to be embracing the Second Amendment and the fact that we have the right to defend ourselves and our loved-ones.
The antis seem to change their tune, their talent, and their tactics every 18 months (aside from the rote “think of the children!”), but we keep on keeping on with what we’ve always relied on. And it keeps working almost every time. Maybe that says more about the whole “debate” than anything else.
I thought there were more pro-gun groups than just the NRA.
GOA, 2nd Amendment Foundation, JPFO, the new Armed Citizens United… most of which I like better than the NRA, but I’ll support the NRA because its an 800lb gorilla that’s (mostly) on our side.
That’s true, the NRA aint perfect, but its a hell of a powerful ally.
It seems like the NRA is the only group too that would have had any chance of stopping federal legislation in 2013.
Don’t foget that “the white house” could be included in the list of anti RKBA groups and that definitely doesn’t just include the current administration.
Spot on Lord_P.
When an NRA-ILA lobbyist walks into a congressman’s/senator’s office and says, “I represent the NRA. We have over 5 Million members.”, they listen to what he has to say. No other pro-gun organization has that much political influence, because they don’t have anywhere near those membership numbers. Numbers of Voters are everything in Washington and the state capitals too. Even when you look at organizations for all the other political issues, the NRA is still one of the most powerful.
Let me congratulate TTAG for going two whole days without a single mention of MDA. Well done!!
Now a mention does not appear to be an obsession.
You have serious problems.
And yet YOU have mentioned them both days. Interesting …
Passing strange. Nearby!
No facts or figures just attitude. Troll somewhere else, please.
If the truth is on your side, you don’t really need to change your frame every couple of years. That’s more for someone trying to fool people.
“we have pretty much had one lone group speaking out and fighting for our rights this whole time: the NRA.”
I understand the point you are trying to make, but don’t insult GOA, SAF, and the dozens of State and local orgs, et al.
the NRA cannot be everywhere. There are many other groups including state level groups like CalGuns and CCDL who are fighting at the state level everyday.
The only good thing about the NRA, is that it takes a lot of slings and arrows so that many of the other groups can do their work in the background.
The anti-gun groups only like to talk about the NRA when there are literally hundreds of groups.
The state and local groups do a great job — and the majority of those groups are NRA affiliates.
I agree here.
Also by the very definition can we call the anti groups insane? I mean they re-brand themselves to try and actually gain a following, then push the same agenda, with the same predictable outcome. While in some states the political climate can almost predict the outcome of the proposed legislation, it isn’t always the case. Last year California citizens killed over 80% of the 56+ civilian disarmament bills which were put forth. Colorado saw a single bill pass, and lost three legislators in the process. One resigned which kept the balance of power in check, but that is huge. New York and Connecticut shoved their bills onto the citizens and saw a 95% + non compliance. What does that tell you? I don’t see either of those states as a bastion of gun rights, or even gun enthusiasts, yet Albany saw 15,000 show up for a pro gun rights rally not a month or so ago.
Having said that…
Much like Pascal and others have mentioned.
NRA, GOA, SAF are the big boys. They have money, lobbyists, and the ability to get face time with politicians on a regular basis. More so than the little guys, although not unheard of.
Then we have CalGuns “lawyer conduit”, FPC, CAL-FFL, etc etc.. These folks also have money, but tend to focus at more of a local level. They are also involved in litigation, and face time in committee hearings and challenging legislation as it is created.
Finally we have groups like 1 Million Mom’s Against Gun Control, Gun Rights Across America, Local open carry, and 2nd Amendment groups. These have little to no money, and are a gathering of individuals who spend time and their own money to be involved. There are literally dozens if dare I say hundreds of these small groups across the US. We can call them the boots on the ground for the above listed groups. When calls go out to have citizens attend committee hearings, or call, fax, email, we all work together to get the word out and ask folks to spend the five minutes to do so.
So Michael Bloomberg, and Shannon Watts can try and dress up their pig anyway they want, but in reality it is still a pig, and a plastic one at that. The only reason they have any traction at all is due to media connections and money. Their big capital hill romp the other day barely garnered double digits for attendance. With turn out like that they seem to be a flash in the pan. Course they will re-brand themselves and be back at it again claiming a majority or some such nonsense. They refuse to sit and talk or debate the issue. The hallmark of their statements is to be emotional, deflect, and redirect. They are completely inept at supporting their own ideals, yet the gun owners of America are. Politicians, and business owners see this as well. This is why they got kicked out of Staples, StarBucks placated a little, yet I don’t see no guns signs in their stores, and even FacBook took umbrage with their tactics. BTW the FaceBook Gun pages are alive and well.
39 laws were passed in 2013 which were pro civilian disarmament. 70 laws passed which were pro gun rights. In fact Oklahoma just voted this morning to override their governors veto of a pro 2nd amendment bill!
Well said and quite true. I love the bit about them being like a plastic pig, it’s an interesting concept. I think the more telling part of all this though is that while those on the 2A side need only tell the truth those on the disarmament side can tell only lies. All the available evidence suggests that more guns do not equal more crime or that owning a gun makes one more prone to violence. In fact, the opposite holds in every relevant study. It’s not just that the anit’s are attempting to sell something the people don’t want, since there are people who truly do want it, its that they know they peddle a flawed product, and as if with a guilty conscience they undermine their position with falsehoods and fabrications, made up statistics and cherry picked findings from flawed studies. I think it is because they don’t dare be honest, they hate civilian armament, just hate it, and they don’t need any rational basis for this hatred. Call it holophobia (for some it surely is) call it statism (for some it surely is) call it cognitive bias (as for some it surely is) but whatever you call it don’t call it ‘common sense’ or ‘crime control’ because it’s clearly neither and the evidence bears that out. Who wants to admit that they fervently believe something either because they are neurotic, anti-liberty or just because they do with no qualification whatsoever? Deep down they know that they would be derided for their positions and rightly so. I really hate spiders (a low grade and common phobia) but I sure wouldn’t campaign to have them all eradicated because I know deep down that most are harmless and even beneficial, and because I know that once the facts were out I’d be branded as a fearful nut out to perpetrate a grand evil on the world. The anti’s surely know that most civilian gun owners are harmless and even beneficial but for their own irrational (or evil in the case of statism) reasons they want them eradicated. Of course they have to dress it up in something so that their base motives are obscured or we’d call them what they are; ignorant, dishonest or insane.
They may try to change the language they use, but they can’t keep themselves from sending mixed messages. “I support the 2nd Amendment, but confiscation could still be an option.” “We just want to keep gun out of criminals hands, but you gun owners are just criminals in waiting”. It stems from their lack of rationality and emotional control. So long as this remains the case, and it seems it will stay this way for quite a while, we have an excellent opportunity to convert fence sitters and inform and expose them to the reality of firearm owners, breaking them of their belief that what they saw on TV and movies is how shooting works.
I think you are on to something there. The anti’s have to start off a half-step behind by stating, as they always do, that they do support the 2nd A. Of course that’s false, but (1) it is an implicit if not explicit acknowledgement of the strength of 2A support in this country, and of the authority of the 2nd A itself, and (2) it leaves them open to be called out on the inherent contradiction of their stated positions: You say you support a citizen’s right to have guns as per the 2A, but you call all state-licensed gun owners “gun offenders”? You say you support the right of citizens to own guns, but you also say that only the police and military should have guns? And so on…
The NRA has caved on more illegal gun laws than I can mention !!! I’ll go with Gun Owners of America !!!
Hey, as long as you go with SOME GROUP on our side…
This is America, we all have the right to speak our mind (1st amendment) Also if we don’t like something
or someone we have the right to try and have it banned or MOVE. If they don’t like the current laws then
they can MOVE to the UK and live where gun’s are currently banned. Time will teach the fools who think
the state will protect them…
Do you think Shannon Watts has nice legs?
I don’t think she has a leg to stand on!
BaDoomBoom! (drum sound, not gun sound)
Comment Ownage of the day right there!!! hahaha
She’s got legs, she knows how to use them.
She never begs, she knows how to choose them.
She’s got a dime all of the time,
Stays out at night movin’ through time.
Oh, I want her, said, I got to have her,
The girl is alright, she’s alright.
Now I know what’s going to be running thru my head all day… LOL!
Does it matter? Clearly she thinks she does otherwise she’d wear something a little more modest/business-like and suiting her age.
By the way, what in the world is she looking at in that picture?
Where her money and “power” come from?
Another one of those “mixed messages” I think. She can’t decide whether she wants to be the Everytown Soccer Mom leaving her cookies to burn in the oven to go advocate for The Children or be the innocent schoolgirl who needs to be protected from the Gun Bullies. So she winds up looking like the corporate shill in costume for her prep school reunion.
and despite her cold sore issue, that is what drives me wild. . . . . 🙂
Tooo funny–reminds me of the comment my cousin made about one of the girls at our church back when we were all teenagers; “And despite the fact that she has pyorrhea, I do think she has a cute little mouth…”
Looks like at Bloomie’s crotch to me. Judge for yourself.
I think it’s irrelevant. She could be built like Kaley Cuoco, but with that sick twisted mind of hers, I wouldn’t f— her with your d—.
This article is true as long as you exclude, NYC, CA, and Chicago from the “But despite all that, more states have passed pro-Second Amendment laws than have loosened restrictions on owning guns . . .”
You missed Maryland and New Jersey. Their becoming worse than the “big apple” and “hollywierd”.
Don’t forget the big suck which is CT
Can’t include Chicago on that list anymore. Right to carry is finally moving forward in Illinois.
Perhaps a real debate, toe to TOW might just end this jaw jackin and keyboard pecking once and for all.
With all due respect, Heller was the brainchild of Cato. The NRA for many years was willing to compromise on cases etc. and was not as absolutist on the 2nd A as it should have been. They actively discouraged cases because they did not believe that these cases could be won in large part because of their failure to do in depth work on the Constitutional issues.
I am a long term NRA member but they did not shine in the battle that led up to Heller, constantly wanting to compromise.
Robert A. Levy of the Cato Institute organized and financed the Heller case. The NRA would not support the case because their lawyers thought that they could lose, which would have set back 2A a hundred years.
The NRA was right — nobody could have predicted Kennedy’s vote. But Cato rolled the dice, and we won.
Levy is one smart guy.
I don’t know all the insider facts, but that sounds like a really astute analysis. Especially the part about Kennedy, I know that’s right.
“…this country actually seems to be embracing the Second Amendment and the fact that we have the right to defend ourselves and our loved-ones.”
That sea-change in public attitude owes a lot to the millions of members of the NRA who supported Neal Knox in shifting the NRA from a target shooting group to a 2nd Amend. advocacy group with the 1971 “Cincinnati Revolution NRA members meeting, and supported Marion Hammer (1st woman president of the NRA). As the NRA state rep for Florida, she worked tirelessly to pass the first “shall issue” concealed carry permit law in 1987. When it passed, the anti-gun media (redundancy alert) went bonkers: “The Gunshine State!! It’ll be Dodge City in Florida!” yadda yadda, all of the lies we have heard every time another state added shall-issue laws to their codes. And, surprise, surprise, law-abiding citizens who go to the trouble of getting a carry permit turn out to have a lower crime rate than the the general public and the police. As more and more states passed those laws, more and more Americans saw that being able to defend yourself against a criminal attack was a good thing. It took us 40+ years to get here, but I have watched a definite shift in public attitudes towards guns over those 40 years.
And don’t forget for one moment the millions of NRA members who write their congressional reps on 2nd Amendment issues – we are a true grass-roots group, and the members of Congress know that. (Ask House Speaker Tom Foley [1989 to 1995] about the NRA – he was kicked out of “his” seat in the Spokane area of Washington state over his support for the Clinton “assault weapon” ban. The first House Speaker to lose re-election since Galusha Grow in 1862.
We will pass another significant milestone this year: 100 MILLION FBI/NICS background checks for gun purchases during the Obama administration. Thus showing that the American people really do understand exactly where the “progressive” left wants to go with civilian firearms ownership.
“As the NRA state rep for Florida, she worked tirelessly to pass the first ‘shall issue’ concealed carry permit law in 1987.”
I believe Georgia, Indiana, Maine, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and Washington all had “shall-issue” concealed-carry laws prior to 1987. Florida’s 1987 law served as a framework for other states’ CC laws that came later, but Florida was far from the first state to pass/implement shall-issue concealed carry.
I remember reading about that law, but only peripherally – the article was about the surge in muggings of European and Asian tourists who were unarmed, while the rate of muggings of citizens plummeted. You had to kind of dig it out, but they did begrudgingly admit that the concealed carry law had worked. (the foreign tourists were known by the thugs to be unarmed.)
I am a member of the NRA but they’re far from alone. I also contribute to GOA SAF NAGR CRPA CGF FPC and CAL-FFL. Each is doing its own part to defend our civil rights.
Ugh. Don’t get me wrong, I’m working on a life membership to the NRA, but they have not always been stalwarts, there are other national orgs fighting these battles, and at least in my state, the state orgs fight the state law battles more than the NRA does. Yes, please support the 800 pound gorilla, but do not minimize the efforts and victories of other groups while whitewashing NRA’s former appeasment.
“… but we keep on keeping on with what we’ve always relied on. And it keeps working almost every time.”
I disagree. I believe there has been way more true grass-roots activism on our side in the last few years. And that grass-roots activism has translated to crushing action on politicians.
Remember when the Illinois legislature introduced a bill to ban most firearms roughly a year ago? And do you remember how People of the Gun flooded their legislators with phone calls and e-mails to the point that their legislators quite literally could not conduct business? That was not the NRA.
Remember when Colorado enacted their new law restricting magazine capacities and repealing concealed carry on universities? And do you remember how People of the Gun successfully recalled two Colorado Senators and were on their way to recalling a third Senator who resigned in response? That was not the NRA.
Don’t get me wrong. I am NOT knocking the NRA which I believe is vitally important. What I am saying is that firearm rights organizations like the NRA, SAF, GOA, etc. in conjunction with crushing, relentless, true grass-roots activism is why we are winning.
Do you really want to know what has changed and why we are winning? The Internet. We have a huge grass-roots base of support for firearm rights. But what good is that support base if we have no idea what is going on, no way to organize, and no way to coordinate our efforts? The painful truth is that monthly magazines or annual newsletters are inadequate to inform, organize, and coordinate activism. That is what limited the synergy between firearm rights organizations and the support base. Thanks to the Internet now, we are able to inform, organize, and coordinate activism — almost in real time. Now the support base and firearm rights organizations can act with synergy and effectiveness as never before. That is why we are winning. And that is why gun grabbers are frothing at the mouth and have gone “all in”.
Though I will point out a minor factual error (which doesn’t alter the validity of your conclusions in the slightest). Colorado did not pass a bill regarding CC on campus. Colorado DID pass a >15 round mag transfer ban and universal background checks.
Hudak (the senator who resigned rather than face a recall vote) treated a rape victim testifying on the *proposed* campus CC ban like dirt, and that video sunk her career (and there is much rejoicing on that score). The testimony killed the bill.
Excellent post. I think the coordination via the internet/social media has raised the hysteria on the other side. They have no grassroots 24/7/365 community to draw on, so they are desperately trying to fund one.
An irony that they are clueless to is that their actions are inherently racist. They don’t trust black people with guns. With freedom comes responsibility, and they don’t trust them with this freedom. So while they may argue that they want to make inner cities safer (or spin it as a desire to protect their school age children – updated bs as very few measures are implemented through legislation to truly make schools safer), Bloomberg thinks that he is protecting people from themselves. Inherent to this moral superiority is a racist and patronizing undertone.
Shouldn’t “loosened” in the post be tightened?
I was going to make the same comment. As it is, the sentence doesn’t make much sense.
Also, the bit about “because we only need one of those bastards” is incorrect, because we don’t actually need any anti-freedom groups trying to roll back the Constitution. Sure, we have them, but not a one of them is necessary.
I agree with all the above post that the NRA is no saint. They are the 800lbs gorilla in the room and need to be taken Seriously. They may have sold is out in the past, but did right by us this time. To all those that are toting the “Greatness” of 2nd Ammendment Foundation, don’t forget they sold us out on the Toomney bill and are willing to do it again. http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/05/robert-farago/safs-alan-gottleib-on-background-checks-lets-make-a-deal/
Im amazed that people think the saf is a gun rights group, considering that they support gun registration and expanded background checks
Gottlieb is buddies with a lot of FFLs who are licking their chops at all those transfer fees…
Interesting photo, she’s lookin’ at Bloomberg like she want to jump his bone(s) right then and there…of course being the queer little bastard he is, he wouldn’t know what to do with it…
LOL that’s what I was thinking… Is she checking out Bloomberg’s package there or what??
I firmly believe that Shannon Watts is Michael Bloomberg’s concubine…
She’s definitely staring at the junk.
By the looks of the picture, it seems that Bloomberg has developed some sort of whiz-bang wireless control technology for his ventriloquist dummy. Quite astonishing.
If the other side is having a debate they seem to be having it amongst themselves.
In spite of 90% support for their position…
The internet saved the Second Amendment.
Just out of camera view, four armed guards enjoy a smoke!
Very true that there are more pro-2nd amendment groups than the NRA… I s’pose my point is that in over a century, the NRA has been there, slogging in the trenches to defend our right to defend ourselves. In all that time, antis have come and gone, and NRA has soldiered on. This is meant in no way to lessen or dismiss the fine work done for us by many other groups…
is SW looking at MB’s crotch ?
A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.
The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to complacency; From complacency to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.
[ The choices are now seemingly quite clear indeed.
Mothered over as children of the New Nanny Nation or lorded over by billionaire Tyrants and their ilk.
Either way, they decide, you abide. ]
Seeing a 45 year old wearing an outfit that is evocative of the “school girl” look just doesn’t work…
The image she’s trying to project is just as artificial and false as the rest of her persona.
in support of this article I’d just like to point out that the commentary the MDA crowd hates them most is when we point out how utterly irrelevant they are.
That really gets ’em going. So you know it’s true.
Just be careful… it’s not going to be through legislation that they pull off gun control. It’s going to be through health care. Given a combination of psychological and health safety manipulations, the anti’s will be in a position to ban guns without banning them. Remember that the last attempt for Surgeon General was an extreme anti-gun advocate.
I wonder if Watts dresses old Bloomy so they are more simpatico?