Previous Post
Next Post

Dan Coonan’s emailed a statement to us this evening regarding their new relationship with Evolve (and posted it to their web site). I also had a long conversation this afternoon with Rebecca Bond, one of the founders of Evolve. She’s going to follow up with a post here, too, that’s intended to do a better job of explaining what Evolve is all about than their, um, rudimentary web site. Here’s Coonan’s statement:

Most important, I am a firm supporter of our Second Amendment rights – all of them!

My goal, and the proposed goal of the relationship with EVOLVE, is to shift the single-pointed focus of gun related violence and the social/economic/political aspects that are promoting a culture of violence in this country . . .

Evolve is intending to bridge the gap between the extremely large number of people that are caught in the middle of this debate and shift the focus of the debate to the root causes of violence, as well as promote firearm safety and responsible ownership.

The first step is to start a common dialogue between gun owners and non-gun owners. We at Coonan, Inc. support that dialogue and want to help nurture that growth in the proper direction.

We understand the enormity and sensitivity of a project like this, and ask that you please be patient with the development of this effort.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. “Most important, I am a firm supporter of our Second Amendment rights – all of them!”

    Wait, there’s more than one?!

        • As for the militia thing:

          “10 USC § 311 – Militia: composition and classes

          (a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States

          and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

          (b) The classes of the militia are—
          (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and

          (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia. “

    • Well I instinctively thought that “rights” meant rights to handgun, standard cap mags, select fire, silencers, large bores, etc., all of them.

      Of course, there’s a good chance he doesn’t mean that. I don’t know.

  2. Here’s hoping that Coonan/EVOLVE can do a better job with that conversation than I have had. I start a conversation and then they start screeching at me from an emotional position that ignores logic.

    • Dont use logic against them (that is like using a SuperSoaker against a tsunami), ask them to come to the range with you one day (dont start of with that, steer the conversation to that direction).

      • Logic does NOT work against phobiacs. They KNOW that their fear is irrational, but the fear remains anyway. Try the methods described by Farago in yesterday’s piece, “Random Thoughts About Hoplophobia in San Antonio”. These sleepers need to be deprogrammed, and logic doesn’t help. It only makes them angrier. I intend to try his idea about iviting them out shooting, thus inducing extreme fear, and at least note the results…

  3. I look forward to hearing more. There are those that will say it’s too late, that they’ve already shown their colors, etc., and that’s fine. Everyone’s entitled to their opinion.

    When you get right down and think about it, if what they say is true about their goals, the knee-jerk folks who called for Coonan’s head (and Dietz’s, and the intern’s, and your brother-in-law’s) aren’t really the people they’re targeting to reach anyway. They’re aiming for the people who are willing to take a breath before they breathe fire. We have folks from all along the spectrum reading here, some who fit that description, and some who don’t.

    • Matt – you liberal troll. If you understood ENGLISH and had been reading the threads related to this article you would clearly understand (r)evolve(r) is a FALSE FLAG operation run by screeching hard core leftists who rant at gun owners and are fans of Piers Morgan etc… You need to take a closer look at the threads, and I’m sure, if you are being fair, you’ll see what has people riled up. Having a gun manufacturer work with people who call gun owners “Dumb Asses” is nothing but a fools mission, maladaptive, and self destructive to the 2nd ammendment. Please do your homework
      Thanks, BigUnit

    • Any time someone uses the phrase “culture of violence” I can’t help but dismiss them. Is there a “culture of violence” in Switzerland or Mexico? How about Japan where if a man murders his family it doesn’t count as long as he also kills himself? Regardless of international comparisons, how do Piers, coonan, and their fellow travelers at evolve square the fact that violence in the USA is at historical lows while gun laws are as liberal as they have been since 1968?

      Leaded gasoline contributed way more to a so-called “culture of violence” than gun ownership rates (a negative correlation anyway) or GTA-V or movies ever could.

    • Matt,
      It sounds to me that Coonan is defending this relationship. Unless I am mistaken, Evolve appears to be a modern take on the American Hunters and Shooters Association. Their only goals are to jedi-mind trick gun owners into supporting gun control and to fund said gun control. It’s a thoroughly manipulative and duplicitous organization that no manufacturer or shooter should have any dealings with.

      I’d never even heard of Coonan prior to this. My first instinct yesterday(other than to write a condemnation of Evolve) was that Coonan probably didn’t know who they were mixing it up with. This letter, however, seems to show that I was wrong and it is the kiss of death for me. If they want to reach out to non gun owners for dialogue, they shouldn’t have chosen evolve as a vehicle for that process. Coonan’s language also leaves a lot to be desired. Somehow, it seems that every time I hear something like this:

      “The first step is to start a common dialogue between gun owners and non-gun owners.”

      …It is followed by a line that includes the word “compromise” and then a push for “common sense” gun contyol. Eerily familiar, isn’t it? Well we’ve compromised the RKBA too much already and I am not buying what evolve is selling.

      He should have immediately reversed his decision to associate with Evolve, much less defend it. If gun safety is the goal, there are better organizations out there to support that actually do more than just play lip service to it.

      If I ever found myself wanting a 1911 in 357 (a solution in search of a problem) Coonan is off the list. I’ll be sure to let my friends know about their disreputable associations as well.

    • My desire for negotiation and “exciting new dialog” about infringing my inalienable right to keep and bear arms starts with the 2nd Amendment, and ends at the muzzle of my rifle.

      Now, who would like to start a dialog?

  4. After going down the rabbit howl that evolves myfacespacebook is, it it my humble opinion that evolve is clearly anti gun. Maybe not full on retard anti, but certainly anti. But that’s just my opinion, and I could be wrong.
    And thanks for the follow up Dan.

    • Same conclusion I came too after viewing their site and digging into their FB page. Evolve is another anti gun organization which is probably just above MAIG and Moms Demand Action.

  5. Despite what I said above, I do still have serious reservations, considering the heavy regurgitation (and retweeting) of Civilian Disarmament talking points from Pierced Organ and MAIG.

    • That’s where I’m stuck, too.

      If they’re going to occupy a true middle ground, they have to know and talk to both sides. Where are the retweets from places like TTAG or links to places like or Guns Save Life? And if you’re going to advocate for something, you need to be specific about what it is — promoting a “reasonable conversation” isn’t going to cut it, not when that’s been a code word for “do what we tell you” for so long.

      I’d like to believe there could be such a thing as a non-polarizing group that could bring in a lot of the fence-sitting non-gun-owners without selling the Second Amendment down the river, but I’m not holding my breath waiting for it. And given the lessons of history, I’m not extending the benefit of the doubt, either.

      I’ll give Coonan the benefit of the doubt, but not Evolve. Aside from damaging Coonan’s reputation, what have they done to really engage with gun owners? Nothing.

      • I won’t give Coonan the benefit of the doubt anymore. He has had the opportunity to read everything that we have and has decided to still support an obviously anti-gun group. I stand by my change of heart about buying one of his firearms. I have been saving for a long time to buy one, but will look for something else unusual to fill that spot in the collection.

        • Even if a gun manufacturer agrees with a group like evolve, I can’t see how it’s in their interest to be public about it. It is, however, very easy to see how such public support can be detrimental to sales.

          This will cost Coonan a lot more in sales from people of the gun than it will generate in sales from the much smaller group of rich liberals who want a fancy gun for their own self defense but also want to limit access to firearms the “wrong kind of people.”

          And who’s going to give money to evolve? Full throated gun control folks will not be attracted to their “soft” message, and people of the gun are for an unambiguous support of the Second Amendment. This untapped “silent majority” that evolve claims to represent are silent because they chose not to engage. One must be willing to engage before one is willing to donate to a cause. I think this market segmentation and marketing appeal is too clever by half.

        • “And who’s going to give money to evolve? Full throated gun control folks will not be attracted to their “soft” message…”
          “Evolve’s” founders are shoulders deep with Bloomberg and soros groups.

        • How about what I think was simply known as the “COP”? I cant remember the name for sure, but it was a .357 mag, four shot, with four barrels, and a rotating firing pin that would fire the barrels one at a time, in sequence. It was very small, like .32 auto small. I remember they quit long ago, so might be tough to find, but that also means better holding of its value, as the supply is fixed.

      • There is no middle ground where rights are concerned. You either support them or not. Those who talk of middle ground do not support them.

    • Which is exactly why I can’t give evolve any chance. Those talking points and catch phrases are part and parcel with those openly trying to ban guns, which tells me they take their marching orders from the same general.

  6. “We understand the enormity and sensitivity of a project like this, and ask that you please be patient with the development of this effort.”

    Trans.: “We’ll be back with you as soon as we can think of some way out of the disarmament corner we’ve managed to back ourselves into. Hopefully we’ll think of something.”

      • sharia law? genius. if criminals dont have arms, it will be that much harder for them to commit gun crimes. if we castrated more sex offenders im sure those numbers would drop too

    • While there may not be a middle ground, there are lots of voters in the middle of the issue. They are not antis, not gun owners, just people who never thought much about the issue. We absolutely need to win them as a matter of practical politics.

      • While I agree winning the fence-sitters support is paramount to the cause, winning them by giving up our rights is not worth it.

  7. Perhaps it’s just me, and feel free to put me in my place if it really IS just me: Coonan makes one modified 1911 model and a FAL receiver, correct? That’s it? So why are we all panties-in-a-twist about this? I’m no gun guru, but I can name oodles of firearms companies and will never ever get to flippin’ “Coonan”. Are they worth all the electrons we’re spending on them?

    Evolve? OK, yet another “can’t we all get along?” political gun group. I’ll be interested to see how it plays out once people start digging deep into their history, but I skeptically reserve judgement.

    • I get where you’re coming from. I’m pretty sure I’d never heard of Coonan before this story popped. If I had, it didn’t make much of an impression because 1911s aren’t really my thing.

      • Pretty nice pistols. Grip is a bit big, but so are my hands, so it fit. Never got a chance to shoot one. I looked at them like an AMT. Why get a copy when you can get an original.

    • Flubnut, don’t forget that Smith and Wesson grabbed a cigar and crawled under President Clinton’s desk. They learned their lesson and no gun manufacturer or S&W’s new owners will ever do that again.

      Sometimes you have to sacrifice the liberal thinkers on the alter of FOAD.

      Coonan needs to be this next example. Better them than a company I might buy something from. 🙂

      • AMEN. That says it all. I’ve nothing to add. For everybody NOT aware, just go back and look up(or just remember, if you’re my age) what happened to S&W after they jumped on Clinton’s bandwagon of “sensible gun control”! Learn how that ended up for them(I’ll give a hint, it involved a bankruptcy court…)
        It seems some big companies just cannot stop themselves from cutting their own throat, just to see how red the blood is I guess…. But it also seems the bigger they get, the worse their self destructive tendencies become.

    • The left only wants to ban the AR-15 and “high capacity” magazines. What’s the big deal? It’s only two categories. There are still thousands of arms to choose from.

      • Those two categories are “semi automatic rifles” and their “standard capacity magazines.”
        The big deal is if they can ban a weak little pea shooter like the ar, they will most assuredly come for everything else eventually.
        “everyone, even gun owners agreed that the ar15 was too dangerous for civilians to own, so why do we allow ownership of these firearms that are SO MUCH DEADLIER? Piers Morgan reports…”

      • We only want to unban the manufacture of full auto weapons. That is only one category so no big deal by your definition.

  8. What we have here is, “I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I’m not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.” You can be completely sure of one thing, this is revise and extend. Deploy a drogue chute to stabilize the descent and scrub-off a few ft p/sec p/sec from you gravitational velocity. As everyone knows, you can’t deploy your main rebuttal chute when you’re still falling at a rate just below mach.

  9. The responses and feedback we have received through Coonan and this site have been very infomative. Evolve is not seeking to create a polarizing dialogue around the issues of firearms safety and violence. In fact, those are the very concerns that have come up in the majority of our conversations with gun owners and the gun community. We believe the productive dialogue begins with gun owners across the country. We are firmly pro Second Amendment. We would not be able to say that, and talk to this community, if we weren’t sincere in our efforts. That doesn’t mean there isn’t plenty of room for misunderstandings and we have to constantly keep learning through the people we talk to. When Coonan says the ‘enormity and sensitivity’ of this, we take that very seriously. We promise to do all we can through this dialogue to not create those misunderstandings. In the meantime, we respectfully ask that you give us the opportunity to begin to take the baby steps in forming this fragile, but important dialogue. We have been told by the gun community: it’s a great idea, but don’t mess it up. We would ask that if you have suggestions for how we can have better conversations around these topics, please let us know. I would ask if you could please have some patience with us to give us the opportunity to show our sincere intentions. You can always disagree with us, but we hope that we can meet your expectations. Thank you.

    Rebecca Bond

    • No “dialog” is necessary with my rights. You either get it or you don’t. That’s why it’s called the Bill of Rights and not the Bill of Evolving Conversations. I don’t have time to educate those that refuse to educate themselves first. I’m already too busy paying taxes for those that refuse to work.

      • Don’t bother. Rebecca Bond is more commonly known as “Becky Bond” go look at her posts on Huffington, her tweets or the “working assets” company of which she is “political director.”

        She is hardcore Anti gun rights. Her company works closely with Bloomberg.

        Look at her use of the term “gun rights community”.

        That is already a perverse position. Are your first or fourth amendment rights “community” based?

        • Ms. Bond:
          Your company is providing funding to the organization calling itself “Mayors Against Illegal Guns”. To show your commitment to dialog and discussion, please post on your website that your company will donate an equal amount to the National Rifle Association. Do that, and you will have credibility.

    • Please give some more details regarding “the 2nd Amendment guarantees the right to bear arms- just not ALL arms”, which was taken down from your website.

    • There is nothing to discuss though, there are plenty of laws already in place as there is and the need for further “discussion” is unnecessary. I am extremely tired of hearing “we need to do something” when murders and violent crime in general are the lowest in this country in years. The fact that we continue to talk about this issue as if it is an epidemic is absurd, and when firearm manufactures add to the fire by collaborating with these anti-gun organizations only makes it worse for us. The fact that the intern of Evolve expresses anti-gun talk is enough evidence as it is that the organization is another false flag organization that thinks it needs to correct a problem that is not even a problem in the first place. One only needs to investigate their FB page and their website to see what is extremely blatantly written on the wall.

      For one thing, I am tired of constantly comprising. I am tired of comprising my rights in order to satisfy someones delusion to feeling “safer”. Coonan will not be seeing a cent from me in the future.

    • Ms Bond,
      Your facebook stuff told me all I needed to know.
      Here’s a bit o Ben Franklin for you…
      “They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty or safety”.

      I, for one, respectfully decline to have anything to do with your organization, as I believe you are an anti gun, and therefore anti-liberty organization.


    • If this is really Rebecca and not a troll, props for willing to engage. Your brass wrecks anything Shannon Watts and her ilk can present.

      My 2 cents, Coonan, for whatever reason, went from niche manufacturer to pariah in record time.

    • After having seen the kind of crap your organization’s twitter account likes to reblog, I don’t believe a word you say.

    • If you don’t want to “mess it up” then denounce any future pushes for more gun control and call for the repeal of gun laws currently on the books. Once you’ve done that, back up your stance with actions: Codify it in Evolve’s official mission statement and put that mission statement on the front page of your website.

      Until then, your FB page exposes you as an anti-RKBA organization and all of the “hey we’re just like youse guys” nonsense is just cheap talk. The ACTUAL shooting community is not interested in “compromise” or “common sense” solutions. That progressive doublespeak for “infringement” is a tactic we are all too familiar with and we’re not buying it.

      As things currently stand your organization is courting destruction. We (shooters) won’t support you because your organization supports middle-ground solutions to our liberties. Middle-ground solutions are not an option where my constitutional rights are concerned. On top of that, we get the distinct impression that your organization exists to manipulate gun owners into supporting gun control. That type of sneaky, dishonest behavior is EXACTLY what destroyed the American Hunters and Shooters Association. Remember them? I hope so, because your organization is about to share its fate.

      • Also Mrs. Bond, reader ING pointed out something else worth mentioning in his/her comment above:

        You’ll post quotes on your Facebook page from vehemently anti-RKBA entities like Piers Morgan and MAIG. Where are the quotes from OUR side of this “discussion?” Where are the links to SAF, GSL, CCRKBA, JPFO, etc? Where are the Robert Farago, Adam Kokesh, Colion Noir, Cody Wilson, Cam Edwards or Ben Shapiro quotes?

        I seem to be missing all of the evolve range-day videos where you and your employees receive/practice gunfighting training on your AR-15s? I am sure they are forthcoming, what with you being a pro-second amendment organization and all.

        Furthermore one of your stated goals is firearms safety, is it not? Then where are the all links to instructional videos and materials related to gun safety? When is revolver going to produce their own videos about gun safety? The enemies of the RKBA often use the term “gun safety” interchangeably when they need to refer to gun control in an attempt to be misleading. I suspect that is how you’re using it, too.

        It all just makes you look like a bunch of liars, ma’am. Liars who look upon us as if we are simpletons to be molded for your purposes. Liars who only lip service to the RKBA and gun safety. If you style yourselves amongst the progressive elites, the time has come to reevaluate your talents. You are mistaken. Your arrogance is your undoing. Evolve is coming to an end and righteth soon.

    • “Evolve is not seeking to create a polarizing dialogue around the issues of firearms safety and violence.”

      Then why are you forwarding Piers Morgan’s vitriol?

    • Rebecca, by you rlogic we need a “dialogue” about the first, fourth, fifth sixth and eight amendments. They create 10x the violence the second amendment does.

      How about a “reasonable compromise” like no due process after your first offense?

      And you used about 8 second amendment code phrases like “gun violence” which is a stalking hours to include suicide, even though of the 20,000 suicide by guns, longitudinal studies indicate only about 200 would not occur absent a gun.

    • Dear Ma’am or Ms.

      I applaud your expressed desire to take steps toward creating a more firearms friendly national environment. The first of those “baby steps” must be this: Utterly repudiating Piers Morgan, Micheal Bloomberg, MAIG, HuffPo, et al. Make it clear that you understand that they are deceptive, manipulative elitists who wish to curtail the rights of those they view as “beneath them”. Make that part of both your and your organization’s public internet record, and cut all ties with them. Because if you believe that any of those people or organizations have ANYTHING positive to add to the discussion, then you have zero credibility with us, and we will continue to regard you as a false flag organization.

      Respectfully Yours;

    • Becky your words are a big pile of steaming BS. The replies above point out your substantial lies and obfuscations that are clearly revealed by your posts as well as Evolve.

      Let.s cut to the chase…..FOAD.

    • Thousands of people are injured or killed in this country every day due to swimming pools, extension cords, ladders, cars and guns. In terms of numbers guns fall pretty far down the list of causes.

      Most all of these deaths are equally preventable.

      What differentiates guns from these other causes? Society accepts the social costs in death and injury associated with each of these causes because of each cause’s benefits. The leisure value of pools are worth the drownings. The transportation value of cars are worth the accidents. And many believe the deaths resulting from guns are worth the value of self defense.

    • Hello Rebecca;

      I applaud your posting on a real second amendment web site that actually posts articles about successful self-defense situations by using a gun as well as posting articles and YouTube postings from anti-gun proponents like Piers Morgan and various anti-freedom activists like most academics.

      I went to your web site curious to see what your message was and if it would have a balanced presentation such as this web site. Imagine my shock and dismay to find plenty of postings from the likes of Piers Morgan and Oprah Winfrey and the death statistics of young children by gun fire; but no counter postings of the many documented successful use of a gun for self-defense.

      I must speculate as to the veracity of your statement that you support the second amendment.

      This lack of balance in your web site I find greatly troubling and leads me to speculate as to the true purposes of said web site.

      I would suggest that you step out of the “bubble” that Prof. Thomas Sowell speaks of in his excellent history of the many failings of the the “intellectuals” in the western world in his book, “Intellectuals and Society” and actually go out and shoot a gun, get a concealed carry permit and carry a weapon for self-defense and then, maybe, you might be believed you actually support the second amendment and are not actually attempting to subvert it through “re-educating” those you obviously hold in utter contempt.

      • Sowell is a genius. When you listen to him it’s pretty awe inspiring. The left HATES him because they have no good answers to his assertions and therefore they just try to dismiss him by saying that “he is a traitor to his race!!”.

        As Prager says…..the left is only good of accusing the right of being SIXHIRB.

        That’s how the Left engages in “a national conversation”.

    • If you want to have a productive violence discussion, then you need to show you are reality-oriented enough to be worth anything in that regard.

      If that was the case you’d not be talking about guns, you’d be initiating a dialog about the
      INCENTIVES and MOTIVATIONS for violence with the people who PROVIDE those incentives and motivations and with the people RESPONDING to these incentives and motivations.

      Why is this notion reality-oriented while your premise is not? Look at any reputable study of crime. Study economics (not just of money, but of power). Look at the same incentives and motivations resulting in violence everywhere in the world regardless of the tools available to apply to it.

      There is an economics to violence, if you want to stop it then you need to disrupt that economics. The fact is the very premise of your organization is incapable of being descriptive of this notion. It betrays a lack of understanding, the same logical trap that anti-gun anti-violence groups fall into over and over (and over).


      • Hey, also, if you want to start a productive discussion, start with anyone in your organization that buys drugs or in some other way directly subsidizes black markets. That person without realizing it is benefiting from and perpetuating what is essentially an enslaved population of oppressed workers, whose station is kept so bad it makes it a rational choice for them to take on great personal risk to deliver the self-righteous masses the illegal goods they demand at a low price.

        At the same time the same self-righteous society forbids these people the modern sophisticated tools of commerce and business. This would include the enforceability of legal contracts, the security of bank accounts and warehousing, and the non-violent tools for business conflict resolution. You leave them ONLY with the simple age-old methods of business conflict resolution. Violence and the ability to make credible threats of it. And whatever tool they pick up will be used to implement this strategy so long as the rest of self-righteous society fuels the need to do so with their patronage.

        Then when these business conflict resolution mechanisms become the culturally intuitive methods for success in these populations, they bleed over to their non-business lives. When kids see HOW the most successful and powerful members of their society operate they will emulate. When adults learn what works for them at work, it will be what they think of first when they come home. Then you see kids and adults using these mechanisms to resolve personal disputes, and you are surprised.


    • Are you this Rebecca Bond from this CREDO email I had received a while ago:

      The petition reads:
      “Immediately pass a ban on military-style semiautomatic assault weapons, and high-capacity ammunition magazines.”
      Automatically add your name:
      Sign the petition ►

      Dear Don,

      One month ago today, we watched in horror as the news came out of Newtown that another gun massacre had occurred. And it is impossible to put into words the pain still being felt by families and friends of the victims.

      Now is the time to demand action from legislators in Congress. In the wake of the massacre of 20 first graders and six educators, there is clear momentum for passing common sense gun control regulations to ban the Sandy Hook mass murderer’s weapon of choice.

      Tell your senator: Support a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines. Click here to sign automatically.

      Two bills to be introduced in the Senate could ban assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) plans to introduce a new assault weapons bill,1 while Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) has pledged to re-introduce his bill to ban high-capacity ammunition magazines.2

      Since the massacre at the Sandy Hook Elementary School, even legislators who received “A” ratings by the National Rifle Association have shown interest in supporting restrictions on the military-style weapons and high-capacity ammo magazines like the ones used in the Newtown massacre.3

      The gestures from these legislators are welcome signs, but we need more than sympathetic words. We need real leadership to overcome the death-grip the NRA has on Congress and begin the vital work of addressing the senseless gun violence that threatens our communities.

      The federal assault weapons ban, which expired in 2004, banned the sale of guns like the AR-15 that was used in many high-profile mass killings including the Aurora, Colorado movie theater shooting.4 And Lautenberg’s bill banning high-capacity ammunition magazines would have made it illegal for anyone to buy or own the type of ammunition magazine Adam Lanza used in the attack Newtown attack.5

      Tell your senator: Support a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines. Click here to sign automatically.

      CREDO members worked to pass the federal assault weapons ban in 1994. And we fought to stop its expiration in 2004. We continue to advocate for passing and enforcing sensible federal gun laws restricting ready access for civilians to assault weapons. Massacres on the scale of the tragedy in Newtown happen in part because our federal gun laws make it easy for civilians to obtain military-style firepower.

      We’re not so naïve as to think that sensible gun laws are all that’s needed to stop the killings. There are many things that need to change in American culture to stop the next Newtown-like massacre. But we do know one thing we should put at the top of the list: keeping military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines out of the hands of civilians.

      It’s long past time to reinstate the federal ban on assault weapons, and institute a new ban on high-capacity magazines.

      Tell your senator: Support a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines. Click the link below to sign automatically.

      Thank you for speaking out against gun violence.

      Becky Bond, Political Director
      CREDO Action from Working Assets

      1.Sean Sullivan, “Feinstein will introduce assault weapons ban in Senate.” The Washington Post, 12/16/12.
      2. Steve Strunsky, “Lautenberg renews bid to ban high-capacity ammunition.” The Star-Ledger, 12/17/12.
      3. Josh Israel, “Meet The 10 Gun-Touting Lawmakers Willing To Consider Gun Control In Aftermath Of Shooting.” ThinkProgress, 12/18/12.
      4. Zack Beauchamp, “Expired Assault Weapons Ban Would Have Covered Rifle Used In Colorado Shooting.” ThinkProgress, 07/20/12.
      5. Steve Strunsky, “Lautenberg renews bid to ban high-capacity ammunition.” The Star-Ledger, 12/17/12.

    • I have to say I find it rather odd that all of sudden Rebecca Bond’s twitter feed has gone ‘private’ when just a few days ago I saw numerous tweets from that account in the Evolve feed. What is being hidden?

      As are the tweets of the other “Evolve Founder” (might even be the same person):

      The twits, er I mean tweets, in both were rabidly anti-gun before they were put under ‘protection’. If you (Rebecca) and the rest of Evolve want us to believe the baloney hiding your twitter feed is NOT the way to do it.

    • Rebecca,

      As you may have noticed from the replies here, this blog is probably not the right place to come to if you’re looking for a dialog on compromises and such: the average stance here is rather hardline, people feel like they are already compromising too much under the existing arrangements (with NFA etc), and any calls for further compromise will not be well received.

      Speaking for myself only, I am a liberal who happens to be moderately pro-gun (e.g. contrary to the groupthink here, I’m in favor of background checks). But even so, given your background on working with known lobbies with a declared goal of complete disarmament of civilians in this country (MAIG etc), as well as your unequivocal support for AWB and high-capacity magazine ban, I find your invitation to discuss compromise rather strange. Both AWB and hi-cap mag ban are seen as rather extreme “anti” positions on which no reasonable compromise can be achieved. There are other areas where discussion is possible, such as background checks, but as soon as you so much as mention AWB, all credibility that’s necessary to have such a discussion in the first place goes out of the window.

      • Funny you should mention background checks. Now, I’m a believer that background checks shouldn’t be necessary because anyone too dangerous to own a firearm is also too dangerous to be allowed to walk around free. But since that isn’t the world we live in and we apparently have to have background checks I’m all for them, as long as that is what they are. For that reason, I support the Coburn background check amendment, rather than the M-T background check amendment. Since Coburn would basically open the background check system to private citizens, and allow sellers to verify that buyers had passed the background check it satisfies the ‘need’ for the background check. It does so without the paperwork requirements of M-T, and without forcing all sales to go thru FFL dealers.

        As such, I always find it a litmus test for whether or not a person supports “common sense” laws. I ask if a person supports the Coburn amendment and, if not, why not. The ‘why not’ answer is usually VERY informative.

    • Please read the Second amendment and all of the original debates on it. It does include any military defense or offence weapons available to the military in general…ALL weapons !

  10. Whatever. I wasn’t going to buy from them before this, and I won’t after. May they rot in bankruptcy.

  11. For a long time I’ve said we need to refocus the argument. We don’t have a gun (knife, chain saw, hammer, toaster etc) problem, we have a violence problem. So their statement appeals a little to me. But their choice of words really sounds amateurish, like they’re jumping into the fret with no prior experience in any way, shape or form.

    • “We don’t have a gun (knife, chain saw, hammer, toaster etc.) problem, we have a violence problem.”

      There is no point in “dialogue”. The only reason any of these groups want a dialogue is to see what crack in our resolve the can slip a little wedge into. So called moderate and reasonable groups like this, still anti-gun in their philosophy, are interested in getting that wedge in and then tapping it gently until the 2A cracks, rather than go at it with a sledge hammer. The results are the same.

      As for a violence problem, the point of the Second Amendment is to resolve that exact problem. If sufficient good guys have guns and are not prevented by over-zealous prosecutors or ridiculous civil trial jury awards then the violence perpetrated by criminals and other social misfits will be resolved.

      You want to solve the violence problem? #1 Tort reform! Immunity from civil suit if it is determined that your use of the firearm was justified self-defense. #2 Universal “Stand you ground” laws expanding the right of self defense. Given these two things good guys can protect themselves and others without fear of lawyers ruining their life or draining their bank accounts, and bad guys will either die, go to prison, or find other sources of income.

      ANY dialogue that includes the concept: “maybe you can give up just a little of your second amendment rights to make everyone feel safer.” is a non-starter. We’ve already given up too much when we didn’t protest the very first attempt to infringe on the Second Amendment.

    • Do we even actually have a violence problem that rises to the level where we must do something now, for the children? Five times as many people die from diabetes than are murdered each year. 16,000 homicides in a country of 315 million people seems like a very low rate. Ideally, it would be zero, but humans are not ideal creatures, and even the most passive, pacifistic population will still have a few murderers in the mix. The homicide rate has been dropping steadily for two decades, so is all this chatter and “dialogue” really even necessary?

      The only reason people think we have to “do something” is because the scare-tactic media milks every violent incident for all it’s worth to make a quick buck. Where’s the breathless news stories about the half-million heart disease deaths each year? Not scary or flashy enough. So let’s concentrate on the statistically insignificant homicides instead…

  12. Again, gun owners and gun culture are not the problem. Gang bangers and their derivatives are the problem. People can dialog all they want with me about gun violence until they are blue in the face and I will not give away one bit of my rights. Why? Again, I am not the problem. My friends and family are not the problem. I have many many friends and family who own guns who have never committed a crime with a gun. How are their non-violent use of firearms contributing to any violence?

    Until these groups specifically target the problem I really don’t want to have any sort of dialogue. Create a plan to attack inner city poverty that is not just meaningless empty handouts. Then I will start listening.

  13. I would love to believe them, but you only need about 5 seconds on their web site to see the articles they are sourcing (right hand column) to know exactly what they stand for. They bare a false flag worse than any other, they are here to teach us that its ok to own some guns,. but not others and to tell us that its ok to think like them. A “nudge” squad if you will.

  14. Yep. Thats my take too and Ms Bonds e133t marketing speak sounds like the same kind of mumbo jumbo you get from any progressive nonprofit with obligatory NPR like plummy tone of faux compassion that says ” dont worry we know whats best for you”.

  15. I ran into a guy with a pistol from this manufacturer a few years ago. I held it. Tolerances were tight and it felt like a sold piece of boat anchor. I considered buying one because I don’t like the Deagle action too well. However, the proud owner claimed that the mags were over $200 and I refuse to buy a gun that needs that much for standard cap mags I could make myself if I decided I wanted 10 and had the time to learn and buy machinery to press my own spring fed ammunition devices.

    The company struck me as boutique, like getting OFWGs to buy a gun worth bragging about after you have a stable of 1911s from every manufacturer. I see a point in the niche market. May Capitalism make simple decisions to the fate of the manufacturer.

    The amount of double speak, delete key and explanations provided are only making murky what is a pretty clear point. As a result, the PR game being played here is good because the nature o of it makes intent far clearer. They want to tell us what we need to think about their message. If what we would come to isn’t good enough don’t beg for a redo or judging concessions; change the damn message.

    If Rebecca is worried about polarizing any group when this manufacturer is not even as well known as fly-by-night companies selling guns in Shotgun News…it is like asking a 3 year old to contribute to a grown-up discussion. It’s cute, sounds nice but is wholly impractical given the size of the world compared to a toddler’s worldview. I could care less about Coonan before. Buying his stuff now seems sillier than ever but that wasn’t a hard idea to bring to mind.

  16. It’s BS, as disengenuine as the Kelly’s claiming to be Po-2ndA
    If Coonan had a wake-up and walked away from the Lefists it would be one thing, but he is now insisting that Gunnies follow him down the same path.
    Coonan just bought himself a Heaping Helping of Bad Press and he deserves to Reap what he sowed

  17. Having a conversation, discussion, and/or dialog about rights is infringement. There is NO “middle ground” within “rights”. You either have them or they are gone.

    nous defions

  18. If they wanted to reduce gun violence, they should’ve created a program with the NRA or the GOA. And if they’re trying to convert fence-sitters, their entire PR program is so off its disgusting. You’re not going to convert some pudgy quasi-liberal soccer mom with phrases like “don’t be a dumbass” and “this isn’t your first gun.”

    Screw the bastards and let them pay for their collaborating.

  19. Rebecca – Will you be posting up pictures and video of your and Jon’s range time with a pair of Coonan 357s? If you really want to understand us then you have to be like us.
    As others have said, I’ve seen enough in your social media already to know that I dont want my “common sense” voice represented by you.

    Safe travels to you but I hope the fishing sucks.

  20. The message I get from both Coonan and Evolve makes about as much sense as a 1911 chambered in .357 magnum. I like my 1911s in .45 ACP and gun grabbing organizations to be straight forward in what they claim to support (civilian disarmament).

    • Heh. Great comment. Started wondering myself what claim Coonan had “to being a legendary gun-maker”… still just not getting why you’d want to shoot .357 from a 1911 frame. Then I read this was done back in the 70s, and the company went in and out of BK. And all the video and posts on the company blog died out last year…

      So now I am not surprised Coonan was taken in by these too-clever-for-their-own-good sockpuppets at Evolve. Must be desperate for some attention.

      Mr Coonan: Lie down with dogs, get up with fleas…

      Ms Bond: On the internet everyone knows you are a dog…

  21. Patsy. Or quisling. Either way, I hope his business fails fast and his employees can find another source of income quickly.

  22. Evolve website its older version etc show it is sinmply a pawn of the anti gun groups.

    They link the following:
    “NRA built massive database of gun owners while opposing national gun registry.”

    That article is a BOGUS article no different than saying the B’nai B’rith if it opposed a national registry of Jews would be hypocritical because it sought to build a private one to oppose threats.

    Newsflash:, an advocacy organization building a database of owners in order to protect them is NOT the same thing as government database.

    The efforts by Evolve are more PERVERSE than outright opposition to the second amendment because they are dishonest.

    Evolve’s mission is to distract from the causes of violence (failure to convict from crimes, failure to keep felons in jail,etc) — and in doing so it INCREASES danger of gun violence.

    I saw one of the founders speak and deny the numbers on defensive gun use. This despite the fact that Mr. Obama’s own CDC study says 500,000 to 3 million.

  23. Regardless if evolve is truly well intentioned, they are assuming the wrong place to operate on a violence solution. It’s the same stupid fixation on tools and methods, not motives and incentives. stupid stupid stupid.

  24. The only way that violence issues are going to be solved long term is to address the culture of unwed births and baby mommas. The studies have proven that children born in homes without both parents have a much higher rate of substance abuse, criminal activity and of course joining gangs. Having children without both parents should not be glorified, it should be discouraged. I would go far as to say that government support for such behavior should be ended. Keep paying for those already in the system, but not further subsidize future irresponsible behavior after a set date. Over the long haul, you will see a huge impact on gun crime and violence in general. Sadly my ideas could never be proposed by any elected official because the left would be up in arms with the usual “starving children and women” rhetoric.

    • Your solution seems a bit radical. There have always been out of wedlock births and there always will be. Those women and children will need support and they don’t ALL get hooked on drugs and join gangs, that is a stereotype.

      Otherwise, I agree that single parenthood should not be encouraged. You are correct in that much of what we are seeing in terms of violence and drug addiction can be traced back to broken homes, but that is only one piece of the puzzle. There are violent junkies who have two parents that are still together, plenty of them.

  25. In the earlier threads I think I called it by saying…………

    I guess that means that old man Coonan is fine and dandy with the message conveyed.

    I’m betting that old man Coonan has gone senile and stupid and the marketing folks can’t move him off his position.

    The result is the mush mouthed PR statement they released. The only thing not mentioned from their fantasy world were some rainbow colored unicorns.

  26. Didn’t folks confirm the Evolve head honchos were re-tweeting Piers Morgan? This is a black propaganda front as I said before, they will say anything to preserve it and continue the charade. Clearly Money Bags Coonan doesn’t care and will believe their schtick in exchange for whatever they have promised him.

    Now, regarding the main causes of violence in this country: They are poverty, addiction and mental illness. These are the issues that need to be addressed, not property rights AKA gun ownership.

    To this end the government should work to increase genuine employment opportunities, decriminalize cannabis and certain other drugs, take addiction/mental health treatment seriously with better funding and higher standards for employment in state and private agencies that deal with those issues.

    I have worked at both addiction centers and care facilities for the mentally ill/mentally retarded. The quality of staff at the places I worked was not up to par, not at all. I was shocked. Firearms are not the problem, they are just being foisted to prominence by an opportunist media as society literally decays around us. It is frightening and more frightening still are groups like “Evolve” which bear all the hallmarks of a conspiracy to manipulate public opinion.

  27. Is it just me or what because as of 9:24 EST I see nothing new or added at Coonan’s home page and blog page? Nothing but the original Oct.15 postings calling gun owners dumb-asses.

    What a bunch of fumble fcks.

  28. i always have an open mind, but they’ll need to prove it by calling b.s. on gun bans, may-issue carry, and other laws unsupported by evidence. I am sure there is a middle ground, i just don’t think its where they think it is, but they can always prove me wrong.

  29. Here’s my “conversation” about gun violence that never seems to come up on the MFM….

    I make the supposition that the core leftist ideologies that are drummed into our kids heads from kindergarten through graduate school create a narcissistic, God-hating, America-hating, abortion-loving culture with little respect for fellow human beings.

    Ok, let the discussion begin…..

    …and BTW, MFM isn’t a misspelling, it’s Mo Fo Media

  30. This is just desperate spin from man whose ox is in a ditch. Is Coonan an anti-Constitutional Quisling caught in the act? Probably not. Was he duped by a slick front group? More likely. Does either matter? Nope. Lines are being drawn and there’s no place for mealy-mouthed silly-speak. His company is one of “them” now.

  31. The first step is to start a common dialogue between gun owners and non-gun owners.

    I love to dialog with non-gun owners about which gun they should buy, what training they should receive and what ammo they should use for target practice and self-defense.

    But any non-gun owners who would like to dialog about which of my rights I should surrender can ES&D.

  32. The friend of my enemy is my…?
    Seems to be a company that is already positioned to cater to the elitist crowd anyway.

  33. I always knew there was a good reason why I wasn’t much interested in a multi-thousand dollar .357 semi-auto that can’t make it through a mag w/o a stoppage. Besides the obvious, I mean…

  34. The CounterIntell part of me is hollering that rEVOLVEr has duped Mr. Coonan & company both well and truly. And I suspect that TheGunMaiden may be Ms. Bond’s alter ego, so that she can play “good cop, bad cop” from the comfort of “the big chair.” Ms. Bond’s post above, in the final analysis, provides no concrete action to be taken by either side except for us to stand down. In other words, nothing.

    I have to ask myself – Why would (s)he repudiate her well-documented Internet past to embark on this totally alien, foreign encounter?

    I must stand by my earlier assessment that rEVOLVEr is a loose confederation of con artists who realized that they can play both sides of the 2A issue against each other while amassing undocumented cash (i.e., Donations) from both sides. After all, our cash is just as green as Bloomberg’s.

    So someone please pass the popcorn. This is gonna be a good show to watch. I’ll crack a cold one and shut up now.

    • This is the only explanation that makes sense to me, too. Wannabe “nudge” squad.
      Coonan gains nothing from hitching his successful (?) niche business to a new “alliance”.

      That weird 357 -in- 1911 frame for $2000+ is a clearly a word-of-mouth product –

      as he says, “its not your first gun”, so who in the broader imaginary world of “Dan Baum reasonable lefties who might be a gun owner” if only they were educated by the likes of Evolve, to “not to be a dumb-ass”, is he thinking to sell it too?

      Evolve on the other hand, has nothing to lose, and if the dialogue fails to “nudge” anyone, at least they can snicker behind their hands at the next Greenpeace event and say they took down a doddering old gun-maker.

    • I am fairly certain that “TheGunMaiden” is Rebecca Bond. Both of their twitter feeds appear to have gone ‘private’ at the same time. I don’t think she did it to play ‘good cop/bad cop’ tho, as the tweets that were on TheGunMaiden were no less anti-2nd than the ones on Rebecca Bond’s feed, there were just less ‘other tweets’ there. She apparently set-up “TheGunMaiden” in an attempt to make it seem as if a ‘gun owner’ was for Evolve and all they stand for, including supporting Bloomberg and Mayors Against Guns.

  35. Haha, they liked Fox News on their facebook page. That must have tough for them to do…but hey anything for the cause right?

  36. For all those counseling patience and forbearance with Coonan on this issue –

    My Daddy used to say, “You’ll be known by who your friends are.” Evolve seems quite proud of being in tight with Pears Morgan. Why didn’t Coonan just skip the middleman and align his company directly with that famous protector of the Second Amendment, Pears? Would those of you willing to give him a pass on associating with Evolve be just as tolerant if he were to endorse the PM patented approach to “a common sense dialog”?

    Your efforts to be calm and evenhanded scare the sh1t out of me. It is pacifistic, don’t-rock-the-boat gun owners like yourselves that are responsible for the constant threats to our rights that we now face. If every gun owner became a dedicated, active single issue voter for just one election cycle we would run the anti-gun law makers out of Washington on a rail and leave an object lesson writ large in the memory of ANYONE running for public office in the foreseeable future.

    Instead we have self proclaimed “people of the gun” who think we need a little more patience and understanding for people doing their utmost to deny your rights. People who would be fine with concentration camps for those with the audacity to oppose them if it “saves one child.” Think that is extreme, just read the violent, hateful language they so often use. Don’t have the quote at hand, but just a few days ago remember the anti who hoped that gun supporters children would be shot in the next outbreak of “gun violence”?

    You can’t compromise with these people. And you can’t have a “meaningful dialogue”. with them either. They are our bitter enemies. If you fail to recognize that inconvenient truth, you have a very unpleasant awakening looming in the near future.

  37. Just now found this link doing a “Google” for Conan:

    This is what it leads to – It seems Dan Coonan is the “new national spokesman for evolve!

    Coonan Inc.
    Discussion – Oct 15, 2013

    Coonan Inc. is excited to announce that the legendary gun designer, Dan Coonan, has been asked to be the national spokesperson for Evolve. EVOLVE a not for profit organization promoting gun ownership responsibility. We would love to hear your concerns and questions about firearms, gun ownership, and gun safety. Please send them to: [email protected]. This is your opportunity to have your voice heard in this new and exciting nationwide dialog.

  38. To those who still wish to “give Coonan the benefit of doubt”, read this review from
    Ofc, they give Coonan all of those doubt benefits, as well, but the story speaks for itself. Coonan lied to him, REPEATEDLY.
    “I got on the Coonan site and browsed through the limited but sensible options available there. I landed on fixed serrated night sights and extra magazines for my choice. On December 21st, 2010, I called David and placed the order for one in this configuration. We were quoted six to nine weeks turn around…Week nine arrives and David is making the phone calls, and being told “a few more days” time after time. Over a period of a few more weeks, they stop returning his calls.”
    The story ends with excuses about it being the night sights that coonan had to wait for… bla bla bla. If true why did they give his dealer weeks of the run around? Why not just tell the buyer that up front? Why did it require the buyer find a factory “in” before the delivery was made? Why did the “in” say that he would take it to Dan Coonan directly? Is that the only to get a true word? Is that a proper business model? Can one believe the words of a company that has lied repeatedly?
    I think not. I know nothing about Dan Coonan personally, but if this story is any indication, he is dishonest at the core, and that makes GREAT bedfellows with RevolveR, cause it fits in with their “marketing model” perfectly!

  39. In American murders about 80% of the perpetrators have long criminal records and 80% of the decadents also have long criminal records. They don’t need “gun safety education,” they need to be IN jail on their earlier offenses.

    Dan has been played for a fool by Eastern anti-gun money. I’ll bet $1 that if we dig deep enough we’ll find Michael Bloomberg’s money or someone bought by it.

Comments are closed.