Top Menu

Fake Pro-Gun Groups On The Rise

I've seen a lot during my tenure as a content producer for the gun industry. A good portion of what I've seen are things that have forced me to scratch my head asking, “how does that even happen?”

For example, I've seen (and even worked for) gun websites that were owned and ran by people who were deeply anti-gun.

I've also come across people who clearly don't know the first thing about firearms and the industry at large who write reviews of guns and products, also giving advice as if they did.

And now we're learning of fake “pro-gun” groups infiltrating the industry to try and sway opinions.

via GIPHY

This particular group is called “Gun Owners for Safety” and was launched by none other than the Giffords Gun Control people.

You'll find, if you stick around long enough, that gun folks are some of the “safest” people around in terms of gun handling, but I have an inkling that's not what this is about. Instead, this is about gun control, and there's nothing commonsense about it.

Apparently one of the main goals for the group is to target a group of people in the gun industry that many of us call “Fudds.” Generally speaking, Fudds are gun owners who fit one or more categories. A lot of the time they are hunting-only people or don't know much about guns and are not interested to learn.

You often hear the following statement uttered by these folks: “I support the Second Amendment, but …”

That “but” is almost always followed by some statement like: “But I don't think people should have access to ‘assault weapons.'” Or, “But, I don't think people should be able to carry guns.”

Then there's this gem:

“I support gun ownership, but we need commonsense gun laws to keep us all safer …”

More about the word “but”:

After being an editor on this website for nearly four years, and another gun website for about two years, I can say that the word “but” usually negates everything said up until that point.

To help illustrate this, let's think back to when your high school sweetheart broke up with you. What did she say? Something like this, I'd bet: I'm having a lot of fun with you, but I think we should see other people.

Well, gee, you'd think that if you were really having fun that you'd want to keep having that fun instead of stopping it.

Unless, you know, you weren't having fun and are LYING.

Same thing with the “I support the 2A but” people. They don't really support the Second Amendment, because there is no way to support the 2A by picking and choosing what you think is okay. You are either pro gun or you're not.

As far as I'm concerned, you cannot be pro-gun if you're anti-Second Amendment.

You can't be both. There is no in between.

What does this fake pro-gun group believe?

After perusing the website, I found some things to copy and paste to share the idiocy:

Our Goals

  • Reduce gun violence through advocacy, public education, and policy change.
  • Shift the culture so Americans are informed about what makes them safer and inspired to fight for safer communities.
  • Promote responsible gun ownership through firearm safety—and holding special interests accountable.

If you care to know my opinion, it's that I'm all for gun safety. However, I think keeping your finger straight and off the trigger until you're ready to fire is NOT the “firearm safety” they're going after. How do I know? Because in the first bullet point they mention “policy change.”

Policy change is a fancy way of saying that they want to modify the 2A in some fashion. Then in the second bullet point, they want to “shift the culture” to make people more informed.

All that means is that they want to make more people OK with the fact that they want to restrict our rights.

Here is another piece from their website that caught my eye:

For years, the gun lobby has spread the myth that we face a binary choice: guns everywhere, or no guns at all. That’s not true. Patriots of every stripe can agree that the Second Amendment goes hand-in-hand with commonsense measures like universal background checks. That’s what we’re about—bringing together unlikely allies to speak out for safety and responsibility.

All I have to say about this, is that we have background checks in a system that works when it is followed. Also, the binary choice is not guns everywhere or no guns at all. The binary choice is pro-gun or anti-gun. Anyone who is for more restrictions is not pro-gun.

If the result is guns everywhere then so be it, and I think we'd be better off for it. After all, an armed society is polite.

I watched a video the group published on YouTube that states what this group believes the 2A is for: Hunters, sport shooters, and collectors. I refuse to embed such drivel here, but if you must watch it just go search for it. I'm not even going to post a link to the Gifford's website where the “gun group” is. Instead, below, I'll put a link to The Federalist story I read that gave me insight into this nonsense.

The Second Amendment:

I'm a firm believer that hunting, sporting, and collecting are nothing but a side dish of the Second Amendment. They're the side dish of a delicious, meaty main course.

The main course, the steak, is, of course, defense. Defense of what? Defense of home. Defense of self. And defense of nation. And no matter how hard they try, no matter how hard they try to push gun control on us, you cannot change the meaning of the Second Amendment.

Do you know how I know this? Because the founding fathers who penned the Second Amendment didn't write it down after a week long deer hunt … they wrote it after killing their enemies and winning their freedom (which is, maybe ironically, also our freedom).

They wrote it down so Americans for countless generations to come, would be able to enjoy the freedom our forefathers won. And then they finished that amendment off with four of the most important words ever written, outside of the Bible. Those words are “shall not be infringed.”

And just to beat any trolls to the punch, “well regulated” doesn't mean what you think it does. Today, a regulation means “rules” so it's easy to see why it is so misunderstood. Back when the 2A was written, the term “well regulated” meant “functioning well.”

And for the other trolls insisting that the “well regulated militia” is nothing more than each state's National Guard, that's not the case, either. I urge you to read 10 US Code 246 which states there is both an unorganized and an organized militia.

And just so we're clear, the term shall not be infringed has always meant what you think it does, and still holds true to this day. To paraphrase shall not be infringed while still trying to keep this blog family friendly, it means: EFF around and find out.

Ya know, just like the King George did.

So at the end of the day, I urge you to join gun rights groups, but make sure you're doing your homework on who you're joining or giving your money to. Ultimately, gun rights will be won or lost at the state level, first. As so many states have seen their Second Amendment whittled down, it continues to get worse.

All of this just to say, make sure you get out and vote. Our very freedoms rely on it.

Further reading:

Biden's gun control plan.

How to win the gun control argument.

Kamala's gun control stance.

Source.

, ,

27 Responses to Fake Pro-Gun Groups On The Rise

  1. Steve from MA October 28, 2020 at 6:22 pm #

    I’m not surprised. I was approached by a friend who was working for the Gifford’s group in Maine lobbying the legislature in support of Red Flag laws. I got the strong arm sales pitch that responsible gun owners like myself had to get involved with “common sense gun laws”.

  2. Joan Hill October 28, 2020 at 6:42 pm #

    THANX for such a well written, well articulated piece. I was made aware of this “pro-gun” wanna be group by Jared (Guns ‘n’ Gadgets) and I have to say, unfreakingbelievable! Pro 2A is Pro 2A, period. I 100% agree, when the first but comes out of anyone’s mouth, they are not Pro 2A. Have a good evening.

    • Joshua Gillem October 29, 2020 at 7:34 am #

      Yeah Jared does a great job keeping the industry informed. Good guy.

      Josh

    • Dan Noar October 29, 2020 at 5:44 pm #

      I’m always mildly amused when the anti groups start dissecting the verbiage of the 2A.
      They never talk about our forefathers actual intent.

  3. Gary Ramey October 28, 2020 at 6:47 pm #

    Great article.
    Very true about these so called”pro-gun” groups.
    Thanks Josh!

    • Joshua Gillem October 29, 2020 at 7:32 am #

      Thanks Gary!

      Josh

  4. Kenneth Lauer October 28, 2020 at 7:09 pm #

    Love the article

    • Mark Turnbull October 28, 2020 at 8:10 pm #

      Absolutely 100% correct. I have read several articles and this article has serious merit. Great job.

    • Joshua Gillem October 29, 2020 at 7:33 am #

      Thank you, Kenneth.

      Josh

  5. Archangel October 28, 2020 at 7:10 pm #

    Bravo!!

  6. Kevin Roberts October 28, 2020 at 7:25 pm #

    Excellent article and informative. Yes, there are decepticons all around, and they claim to be pro-gun, when in fact they seek the death by a thousand cuts of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

  7. Bill October 28, 2020 at 7:58 pm #

    What always gets me is how people for gun control always tell you they want to have a discussion, so I’ll say:
    ME:”What about defensive gun use?”
    THEM:”There’s no such thing”
    ME:”But there are studies …”
    THEM:”There’s no such thing”
    ME:”But professor Lott …”
    THEM:”There’s no such thing”
    ME:””And the CDC, at the request of then-Pres…”
    THEM:”There’s no such thing”
    .
    And that’s the problem – if it’s not what they believe, it doesn’t exist, no matter WHO says so.

  8. Jason Adams October 28, 2020 at 8:30 pm #

    The 2nd amendment doesn’t have any qualifying words in it. It doesn’t say “The Right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed ‘unless’, ‘except when’, ‘if’, etc”. The Right to bear Arms is not derived from the government and the government cannot legally take that Right away, but misguided or power hungry politicians and judges have reinterpreted, misinterpreted and misrepresentated the 2nd amendment since 1934 with the National Firearms Act and have continued to do so to this day. They claim that it’s in the name of safety, but it’s actually in the name of control. It’s a long shot, but now with the majority on the Supreme Court we may be able to keep the Rights we have left and, God willing, maybe get back some of the Rights we’ve lost. There’s no reason we should have to ask the government if it’s OK for us to own a firearm or have to get a permit to keep a firearm in our home or have to ask permission to carry a firearm for self defense, the defense of our family or the defense of our nation. There’s no reason for me to have to beg a government agency and have to pay $200 for a tax stamp if I want to protect my hearing with a suppressor or own an SBR or automatic weapon and it’s absurd that that same agency can just put out a memo about some arbitrary rule change and basically create a law that turns law abiding citizens into felons overnight. There’s no reason that, like my brother and a few friends, just because you committed a nonviolent felony (which is easier to be charged with than you would think) 20-30 years ago when they were basically kids that they should lose their God given Right to bear Arms for the rest of their lives.

    You’re either a supporter of the 2nd amendment or you’re not, and these people are not!

    • Dave October 29, 2020 at 1:50 pm #

      Shal no be infringed. Pretty hard to not understand that.

  9. Mike Davis October 28, 2020 at 8:47 pm #

    One of the best articles you have ever written.

    • Joshua Gillem October 29, 2020 at 7:28 am #

      Thank you, Mike. I hope you have a great day.

      Josh

  10. Mark "Boomer" Pappalardo October 29, 2020 at 12:26 am #

    Josh, First off, thank you for your service SEMPER FI! Second, you are right on the money with this article. The leftist socialist/communist gun grabber crowd, will stop at nothing to disarm us, including lying, misleading, word manipulation and deception as well as a host of other devious ways to take our weapons. As they know they can’t control us and turn us into subject/slaves until they disarm us. Hitler told his generals at the early stages of WWII “In order to control the people you must disarm them first” Well the Jews found out just how well that went for them by buying into to Goebbels propaganda and giving up their guns. We true American Patriots will stand firm against the tyrannical aspirations of the communist left and articles and blogs like yours, helps us weed through their attempted treachery.

  11. William Thomson October 29, 2020 at 12:28 am #

    Amen, brother.

    • Joshua Gillem October 29, 2020 at 7:25 am #

      I edited your comment to remove your email address.

      Thanks,

      Josh

  12. Adam-Gabriel Fernandez Rodriguez October 29, 2020 at 1:51 am #

    Yeah.

  13. Nate Anderson October 29, 2020 at 2:20 am #

    Thank you for writing this article and thank you for your service.

  14. Drew October 29, 2020 at 5:52 am #

    These people who want common sense gun laws think it’s common sense for any private individual to be forced to turn in all of his or her firearms.
    But of course they won’t tell you that.

  15. chris mccauley October 29, 2020 at 6:16 am #

    Great article, in passing, a few words of advice:
    1) Slow is smooth and smooth is fast. Accuracy is everything. Wyatt Earp
    2) A clean gun is a reliable gun, because a good bang is better than a small “click.”
    3) Keep your booger hook off the bang switch until ready to fire.
    4) Never insult 7 men when you only have a 6 shooter.

  16. Terry October 29, 2020 at 7:14 am #

    The second amendment states “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

    “free State” is what tells you it isn’t about hunting. It’s about being free from tyranny.

    This is made even clearer in the Declaration when it says:

    “… it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security…”

  17. Natalie October 29, 2020 at 12:00 pm #

    This had me laughing because I’ve heard that “but” about the second amendment many times. Great article, thanks for bringing attention to this new strategy by fake “pro gun” groups. Stay vigilant!

  18. Zigfried54 October 29, 2020 at 2:57 pm #

    Very well written, powerful and succinct. One of the best essays on this subject I have read to date! Thank you, and thank you for your service!

  19. Mark Snyder October 30, 2020 at 8:10 am #

    I do believe that to understand the intent of the Bill of Rights one must first read and understand the Declaration of Independence. There was and is a very valid reason that the Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution before the founding states would agree to ratify it.

Leave a Reply

All comments are moderated to ensure compliance with our community guidelines