NRA Suspending All Sanctioned Matches through April 30

Due to the Wuhan Coronavirus pandemic, the NRA is unfortunately suspending all sanctioned matches through April 30th 2020. Any requests for sanctioning of new matches, beyond April 30th, are also suspended until further notice. As a result of this suspension, the NRA will no longer accept match fees or scores. The NRA will continue to monitor the situation and make additional statements as the COVID-19 pandemic unfolds. Please contact the NRA Competitive Shooting Division at comphelp@nrahq.org or follow the NRA Competitive Shooting Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/nracompetitiveshooting/​  or monitor https://competitions.nra.org

NRA Stands Strong for Law Abiding Citizens

America's Gun Owners are under attack.  NRA's Wayne LaPierre speaks about what the NRA is doing to fight back.

Mainstream Media, the Culture War, and the NRA

There are a couple of good articles on National Review Online about the NRA.  First is this one by Jim Geraghty on how the media associating the NRA's reported troubles with a greater taste among the public for gun control.  Geraghty starts off by sharing a quote from a CNN story by Jil Filipovic where, referring to the NY AG's investigation of the NRA, she says that losing the non-profit tax breaks would be bad but they should be more worried about the public's "distaste for people being murdered in houses of worship, concerts, movie theaters and kindergarten classrooms."  Geraghty notes that this "is what happens when you send a gun-control advocate to analyze a story about financial improprieties."  He points out that if the New York AG found sufficient cause and evidence that the NRA was violating rules and regulations governing nonprofits, she could attempt to dissolve the organization. That would not be easy as a court battle would ensue, and "galvanize" members to come to the organization's defense by pouring in donations and renewed memberships.  The more likely scenario is that Democrats want to tie up the attention of the NRA and reduce their effectiveness in the 2020 election.  Read Geraghty's entire article.

The second one is by Jonah Goldberg and posits the question "Will the Culture War Kill the NRA?"  He runs through what has occurred over the last two or three decades related to how special interest groups have pretty much taken over the responsibilities of branding political parties.  He also notes that gun rights used to be a bipartisan issue but is now pretty much the purview of the GOP while Democrats are for gun restrictions. With political parties no longer managing their own brands, this has caused a blurring of the things for which the NRA stands.

NRA folks today inveigh against “the socialists” with the same vehemence they used to reserve for gun-grabbers. UCLA law professor Adam Winkler, author of Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America, observes that NRATV, the online media outlet of the NRA, has strayed far from the gun lane. “Now it’s focused on immigration, race, health care,” he told The New Republic. Dana Loesch, an NRA spokeswoman, has called the mainstream news media “the rat bastards of the earth” who deserve to be “curb-stomped.”

Read Goldberg's full article.

Great National Review Article on the Common Sense of Suppressors

Josh Gerlernter has a great article at National Review Online on one piece of commonsense gun legislation President-elect Donald Trump should get behind - making it easier to purchase suppressors.  Gerlernter writes about an interview that Donald Trump Jr. gave to SilencerCo where the Jr. Trump pointed out how laws banning suppressors are a great example of laws written by people who don't know what they are talking about.  Trump said when he shoots in Europe the guns most likely include a suppressor.  That's because European countries understand the safety value of this firearm accessory.  For instance, according to Gerlernter, a Glock 17 without a suppressor registers 160 decibels, which is 10 decibels more than a jet take off at 25 yards, a sound that can rupture your ear drums.

Because gun owners stood with Donald Trump, we should make sure our rights are among the top priorities of the new administration.  Gun owners have a unique opportunity to see some of the biggest gains for our rights if the new president and congress will make these a priority over the next two years.  First on the list should be passage of the Hearing Protection Act.  If it is good enough for Europe, it's good enough for the U.S.

Fact Checking Politifact on Clinton's Statement Supporting Australian Gun Confiscation as Model for US

On Monday, Politifact published this dismissive "fact check" of the NRA's anti-Clinton mailer that charges “Clinton said gun confiscation is ‘worth considering.” 

In the final rating of "Mostly False" the author, Warren Fiske, said Clinton was simply talking about "voluntary buyback programs" and not confiscation: 

Clinton made that statement last year at a New Hampshire campaign stop, when she was asked a vague question about an Australian program that gave gun owners one year to sell certain firearms to the government before those weapons became illegal. She left the NRA some room.

But the NRA stretches her words to an almost unrecognizable form. Clinton focused her comments on voluntary buyback programs similar to those some U.S. communities have instituted for guns and the federal "cash-for-clunkers" program.

Fiske however misses some key facts, like, the Australian "buyback" wasn't voluntary, it was mandatory, as the NRA was quick to point out:

Even an ad for the supposedly voluntary "Australian example" calls it...a ban. And @HillaryClinton says it's "worth looking at"@PolitiFact pic.twitter.com/zKu0xc13lB

— NRA (@NRA) October 17, 2016

.@Politifact thinks the "Australian example," which promised "severe penalties" like a 12 month prison sentence was...voluntary? pic.twitter.com/LnDDNHrfNt

— NRA (@NRA) October 17, 2016

The Washington Examiner's Ashe Schow did the work that Fiske apparently did not have time to do:

And that "Australian example" was an example of gun confiscation. It was not a voluntary program. Historian Varad Mehta wrote about the Australian program last year for the Federalist, breaking down exactly what it entailed.

"Australia outlawed semi-automatic rifles, certain categories of shotgun, and implemented strict licensing and registration requirements," Mehta wrote. "The cornerstone of its new gun-control scheme, however, was a massive gun buyback program. The Australian government purchased 650,000 to one million guns with funds raised via a special tax."

Not withstanding the long list of sources Fiske lists that he used to reach his conclusion, it is very clear to anyone interested in knowing the facts that the NRA in no way "stretched" Clinton's words in an "unrecognizable form" and if given the chance, she would do everything she can to make it much harder for Americans to own firearms.

Ultimate Training Munitions Available to the Public

Ultimate Training Munitions (UTM) was founded in 2000 with a mission to provide a safe training ammunition that would allow military, law enforcement and professional training organizations to ‘train as they fight’ in immersive and authentic training environments and disciplines.  Through a partnership with NRA, UTM is now offering "the safest and most accurate training ammunition on the market" as an alternative to traditional live-fire ammunition. This technology has previously been available only to Military and Law Enforcement trainers but now it is available to the general public.

This past weekend at the Bristol Motor Speedway, site the Bass Pro Shops NRA Night Race, NRANews host Cam Edwards had the opportunity to speak with Tony Lambraia of UTM. For attendees of the race, UTM converted firearms with training kits to shoot non-lethal munitions. People shot Glocks and AR-15 rifles with interactive targets in a safe and comfortable environment. UTM training has been adopted by NRA training programs as a safe and reliable alternative to live ammunition. Lambraia explained how it works.

Washington Post: Tim Kaine's Zigzag Path to Gun Control

The Washington Post posted a great article on their website Monday afternoon about Tim Kaine's gun control journey.  Post reporter Laura Vozzella captured the essence of Kaine's political career as a candidate who says what he thinks will get him elected:

His current push for more regulation reflects new calculations by Democrats that after years of mass shootings, they can campaign on gun control and win.

“Back before you had these mass shootings that seem to happen every month, running on gun control did not put you in a strong position in a Southern state,” said Wayne Turnage, who served as chief of staff when Kaine was governor. “I don’t think there’s any question the national appetite has shifted.”

He first waded into the issue as Mayor of Richmond when he spent $7000 of taxpayer money to send busses of gun control supporters to the Million Mom March in 2000.  After an outcry from pro-rights advocates he finally agreed to raise the money from private sources to pay back the city treasury.  Vozzella goes on to lay out how a year later, when running for Lt. Governor, he was singing a different tune:

The next year, when Kaine was running for lieutenant governor, he needed to convince rural Virginia voters that he wasn’t too liberal. He rebranded himself as an outdoorsman who supports the Second Amendment and appreciates guns used for sport. He had camo-style bumper stickers printed. And he played up his role in helping to insert language in the state constitution that guarantees Virginians the right to hunt and fish.

Then he went clay target shooting to prove his Second Amendment bona fides as a candidate for Governor.  Now he relishes the fact that he is once again in the crosshairs of the NRA as Hillary Clinton's running mate, saying the group has opposed him every time he has run for office and he has never lost.

Read the entire article.  I don't often recommend articles in the Post but this piece is spot on.

McConnell to Allow Collins "Terrorist Watch List" Bill for Senate Vote

The Hill reports that Republican Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell is expected to bring a bill by Susan Collins to a vote possibly this week.  The Collins bill would block people on two so-called "terrorist watch lists" from buying firearms.  The NRA opposes the bill but McConnell responded through a spokesman that “He will not be dictated to,” regarding lobbying efforts to prevent it from coming to a vote.

No one on our side of the issue wants terrorists to be able to buy guns but as this blog detailed yesterday, there are lot more people than just terrorists on the lists involved.  The position of the NRA and VSSA is that no one should lose civil rights simply because their names are on secret government lists.  In 2014 a federal judge ruled that the government's method for allowing the public to challenge placement on the no-fly list was "wholly ineffective" and unconstitutional.

But that hasn't stopped the gun ban crowd from using the Orlando terrorist attack to push a gun ban scheme they have been pushing since 2007.  They are likely more interested in using the issue as a campaign issue and that has led McConnell to cave according to The Hill article:

Both sides are trying to figure out how the vote might shape this fall’s elections, when Democrats could win back the Senate majority by netting just four Senate seats if they retain the White House.

Some Republicans suggested Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) aren’t interested in a deal because they want to use gun control as a wedge issue in the fall against GOP Sens. Mark Kirk (Ill.), Kelly Ayotte (N.H.), Pat Toomey (Pa.) and Rob Portman (Ohio), all of whom face challenging reelections in states won by President Obama in 2012.

“Sen. Schumer and Sen. Reid are discouraging Democrats from voting for it, trying to peel off those who have co-sponsored it because they, I don’t believe, really want to come up with a bipartisan solution. They’d just like to keep the issue alive,” Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) grumbled to reporters at one point on Tuesday.

That doesn't mean however that Reid and Schumer won't in the end see this as an opportunity to say they beat the NRA:

“I think you’re seeing in real time the vice grip of the NRA loosening in this place,” said Sen. Chris MurphyChris MurphySenate Republicans may defy NRA on gunsSenators roll out bipartisan gun proposalDems blast Republicans after failed gun votesMORE (D-Conn.). “This is a watershed moment whether this gets to the finish line or not. You have Republicans scrambling to try to find a way to remedy their no votes [Monday] night.”

The Truth About the Terrorist Watchlist

In the video below, NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris Cox challenges irresponsible politicians and media who have suggested that the NRA wants to make it easier for terrorists to obtain firearms. Cox calls such deceit wrong and “infuriating,” and makes it clear that NRA members have given their lives fighting the war on terror. He also sets the record straight on the NRA’s positions on watch lists and due process and asserts that the NRA will not let President Obama and Hillary Clinton distract attention away from their repeated failure to keep American safe: “Obama and Hillary apologize for America and our way of life. If you dare use the words ‘radical Islamic terrorism,’ they accuse you of attacking all Muslims. If you believe we should secure our borders, they call you a bigot.” 

VSSA Vice President Tom Ciarula: Adaptive Shooting - Competition for Everyone

NRA's Shooting Sports USA posted this article last week penned by VSSA's Vice President Tom Ciarula on the topic of adaptive shooting and competition.  It's a short but good read.  Tom writes:

Adaptive shooting simply means that we have to adapt the shooting style or equipment for someone with physical limitations or disabilities. If you have a competitive shooting program, and especially if you have a junior program, reach out to the disabled. It doesn’t matter if they are active duty or retired wounded warriors, or just people with physical challenges. With an easy-to-get waiver, potential shooters with physical challenges can compete in NRA matches with other competitors on an equal basis. For a disabled shooter, this might be the first time in their life they can do so; and the shooting sports may be the only avenue in which they can do so.

With the NRA waiver, junior shooters can compete in high school matches, as well as any NRA competition. Additionally, military veterans can go to the Warrior Games, National Veterans’ Wheelchair Games and the Valor Games, with competitions held all over the country. And if they are good enough they can go all the way to USA Shooting in Colorado Springs, CO, as resident athletes and represent the U.S. in the Paralympics and international competition. They can compete on an equal basis with able-bodied shooters. With such a great opportunity, there are disabled shooters at USA Shooting who vie for positions to compete in the Olympic Games on both the regular shooting team and the Paralympic team.

Tom wrote about how his club got started and says if a club is interested in starting such a program, the most important thing is to "simply get started."  He concludes by saying helping disabled or handicapped shooters get started in the shooting sports is a rewarding experience and he is happy to help guide you if your are interested. You can email Tom for more information at at Tom-C@Cox.net.

The Hill: Gun Groups Launch Blitz to Counter Obama

Over the weekend The Hill had this story on recent steps by NRA and other pro-rights groups to counter President Obama's recent actions to restrict our rights and explain to the public what is really meant by Obama and Clinton when they talk about Australia's response to mass shootings:

The offensive includes a series of videos, newspaper ads and email alerts from the NRA, the Gun Owners of America and the National Shooting Sports Foundation in an effort to swing public opinion against the measures.

The gun lobby hopes to rebut Obama, who cast the actions as reasonable steps to prevent senseless gun violence. They also hope to make the efforts politically unpalatable for any candidate that may back them in the 2016 election.

Here is the new NRA ad:

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) full page ad referenced by The Hill ran last week in the Washington Post.  NSSF called it a "response to President Obama’s ongoing attacks on the men and women of America’s firearms and ammunition industry."

Hat tip to Sebastian and Breitbart.

Katie Pavlich: Obama, Not the NRA, Sells Guns to Terrorists

Washington is all a twitter about resurrecting a 10 year-old proposal by the gun ban lobby to prohibit people on the government's "terrorist watch list" from purchasing firearms.  The recent terror attack in Paris has stoked this renewed interest.  Never mind that it is already almost impossible for a resident of France to own firearms.  That did not seem to stop the terrorists from carrying out their attacks.  Nor did it stop a New York newspaper from claiming the NRA wants to arm terrorists because the organization opposes using a list of names, that no one can say how it is compiled and includes the names of people who are not actually terrorists, as a means of keeping people from exercising a constitutionally protected right.

On Monday, Townhall news editor Katie Pavlich wrote an OP/ED in The Hill that says it's not the NRA that arms terrorists, but it is the Obama administration that is selling guns to terrorists. She detailed how the administration allowed thousands of guns to walk across our southern border to the drug cartels in Mexico, resulting in the killing of a U.S. Border Patrol agent and hundreds of Mexican citizents.  She appeared on NRANews' Cam and Company on Tuesday to discuss the article in more detail.

The Trace, Others, Spin Narrative of Role Guns Played in 10th District Loss

Bloomberg's anti-gun mouthpiece The Trace, has picked up the narrative first offered in the Washington Post yesterday by Delegate Scott Sorovell, claiming that talk of gun control did not drive turn out up in Powhatan, costing Dan Gecker the race.  Both pieces look at how retiring State Senator John Watkins performed in his last election (2011), and then note that Sturtevant underperformed Watkins by 4% in Powhatan and underperformed Watkins in Chesterfield as well. From The Trace:

In a four-way race, Gecker lost with 47 percent to Glen Sturtevant’s 49.7 percent. In 2011, the Democratic Candidate, David Bernard, lost to then-incumbent GOP Sen. John Watkins by 13 points. (The 2011 election provides the best comparison, because there was also no governor’s race then to naturally increase turnout.)

Gecker’s share of the Powhatan vote was 22.1 percent — virtually the same as the 22.3 percent Bernard received in 2011. What’s more, despite its increased turnout, Powhatan delivered a smaller slice of the district’s overall votes than it did four years ago. In 2011, the county accounted for 22 percent of the ballots cast in the district. In 2015, that fell to 18 percent.

In the city of Richmond, turnout rose significantly from 2011 levels — but Gecker’s 67.5 percent of the vote was again virtually the same as the 67.1 notched by the Democratic candidate four years ago.

Gecker did much better in the third geographic portion of the district, suburban Chesterfield County. There he took 41.7 percent of the vote, compared to the 30 percent recorded by Bernard in 2011.

Sorovell pretty much said the same in yesterday's Post Op/Ed.  What neither The Trace or Sorovell mention is Watkins was a 26 year incumbent in 2011 running against a relatively unknown candidate.  Watkins has deep ties in the area thanks to his family's Watkins Nurseries business.  Also not mentioned is the fact that Gecker lost his home precinct as well as his Board of Supervisors District part of the 10th.  Gecker has represented the predominately Republican district as a Democrat on the board for eight years, which likely accounts for the difference in Democrat votes cast in the Chesterifeld part of the district in 2015 vs. 2011. 

Sorovell stuck closer to the gun ban lobby's talking points in concluding his article than did The Trace.  Sorovell said Northern Virginia no longer agrees with the NRA's position and the rest of the state is not far behind.  At least The Trace admitted the focus on gun control did not appear to increase Democrat turn out in the City of Richmond, which is what has the gun ban lobby scratching its head.  The only thing the gun ban lobby has to hang its hat is they spent $1.5 million to hold a district that gave Barack Obama 62% of the vote in 2012 and was already occupied by an NRA-PVF  "D" rated Democrat.

Everyone Wants to Write the NRA Obituary

Ever since a Gallup Poll came out a couple weeks ago showing an uptick in support for gun control, opinion columnists have been eager to write the obituary of the NRA.  The latest is Bill Schneider.  He has a piece today over on the Reuters web site titled Republican primary aside, NRA may be losing its grip on the public’s imagination. He uses the Gallup Poll as proof that like same sex marriage before it, gun rights is slowly going out of style:

Over the past 10 years, the United States has seen a complete reversal of public opinion on same-sex marriage — from opposition to support. This month, a Gallup poll press release was headlined, “Americans’ Desire for Stricter Gun Laws Up Sharply.”

The turning point on guns came in 2013, when the Senate filibustered a bill that would have closed the “gun show loophole” and mandated background checks for all gun purchases. About 90 percent of Americans support universal background checks. After the Senate bill failed, public support for stricter gun laws shot up to 58 percent from 44 percent a year earlier.

In the case of same-sex marriage, the shift of opinion was driven by personal experience. More and more Americans say they know someone — a relative, a friend, a coworker — who is openly gay. The shift on guns is being driven by mounting outrage over the country’s inability to keep guns out of the hands of deranged individuals.

Schneider doesn't mention the CNN Poll that came out at the same time as the Gallup Poll had a different result, or that the Gallup result while higher than a year ago, is still slightly lower than in December 2012, immediately after the Newtown school shootings.  And, this is just on a question related to laws pertaining to the sale of firearms.  An overwhelming majority still oppose bans on handguns.

Another problem in Schneider's reasoning is there is another Gallup Poll released around the same time that indicated a majority of respondents think the Democratic Party position on gun control is out of the mainstream.  Schneider did mention the demographic shift that Professor Adam Winkler discussed in his Washington Post Op/Ed.  That narrative goes that because women, Blacks, and Latinos overwhelmingly support gun control, the NRA's, and by extension, gun owners, days are number.  Forbes contributor Frank Miniter is the latest to push back against that notion:

Even a Google search would show Winkler that the USA Today, hardly a pro-gun group, has reported that a large and growing percentage of women are now carrying handguns. The USA Today found that in Tennessee women hold “30% of almost 193,000 handgun-carry permits in effect at the end of 2013,” in Washington state, “100,000 of 451,000 concealed-carry permit holders are women” and in Florida “women were 22% of concealed weapon license holders as of May 31, up from 15% in 2004.”

After looking into these demographic changes the NSSF found that an “increase in female customers is not the only trend to which the industry is responding. Urban areas are beginning to see a significant uptick in legal gun ownership, which is slowly putting the original idea of the stereotypical gun owner to rest.”

The NRA has also begun challenging these demographics by running television ads featuring minorities and others who live in urban areas. The one that grabbed me is of a grandmotherly looking black woman who says, “I live in a government high-rise. Gang bangers and drug dealers walk down our halls everyday…. The police can’t keep us safe… But the Housing Authority told me if I bought a gun to protect myself they’d throw me to the streets. If I’m not free because of my address today what makes you think you’ll be free tomorrow. I marched for Martin Luther King at Selma. I know my rights. Now I have my gun. I am the National Rifle Association of America and I’m freedom’s safest place.”

You don't have to take the decidedly pro-rights Miniter's word for it though.  Look at this Today Show segment by Ronan Farrow to see that the old white guy narrative is changing.  That's not to say everything is roses.  Gun owners need to continue reaching out to minorities and women to bring them into the community of gun owners so the next generation is just as protective of our rights as we are.

State Targets Gun Blogs and Forums, Justice Targets Anonymous Blog Commenters

Paul Bedard of The Washington Examiner reports the NRA believes a new proposed rule by the State Department could have a chilling affect on the online discussion of firearms:

In updating regulations governing international arms sales, State is demanding that anyone who puts technical details about arms and ammo on the web first get the OK from the federal government — or face a fine of up to $1 million and 20 years in jail.

"Gunsmiths, manufacturers, reloaders, and do-it-yourselfers could all find themselves muzzled under the rule and unable to distribute or obtain the information they rely on to conduct these activities," said the NRA in a blog posting.

"This latest regulatory assault, published in the June 3 issue of the Federal Register, is as much an affront to the First Amendment as it is to the Second," warned the NRA's lobbying shop. "Your action is urgently needed to ensure that online blogs, videos, and web forums devoted to the technical aspects of firearms and ammunition do not become subject to prior review by State Department bureaucrats before they can be published," it added.

This isn't the only example of the federal government targeting online discussion.  Claiming that anonymous commenters on Reason.com's web site may have made actual threats against a judge, the Justice Department wants to know the identity of those commenters.  This from the Volokh Conspiracy:

The commenters were opining on a post by Reason editor-in-chief Nick Gillespie, expressing their ire at the federal district judge who sentenced Silk Road founder Ross Ulbricht. The rationale for the subpoena is that the commenters may have been transmitting “true threats” in “interstate or foreign commerce” in violation of this federal statute.

For reasons White explains, the comments almost certainly do not qualify as “true threats” against the judge. They are, rather, the kind of nasty and stupid vitriol that is all too common in anonymous comments on the internet. For example, one of the commenters wrote that “judges like these… should be taken out back and shot,” another opined that “I hope there is a special place in hell reserved for that horrible woman,” and a third replied that “I’d prefer a hellish place on Earth be reserved for her as well.”

Nasty stuff, indeed. To put it mildly, comments such as these are hardly valuable contributions to public discourse. But if federal prosecutors investigated every similar anonymous comment on the internet, we could probably devote the entire federal budget to hunting down these types of blogosphere trolls, and still not find them all.

The government just keeps finding new ways to be more intrusive in our daily lives.

NRAPVF, VSSA, Endorse Janis for 12th Senate District GOP Nomination

Earlier today, the NRA Poltical Victory Fund (NRA-PVF) and VSSA announced the endorsement of former Delegate Bill Janis in the GOP primary for the 12th Senate District seat being vacated by retiring State Senator Walter Stosch.  Both the NRA and VSSA cited Janis' long record of not only voting for pro-rights legislation, but spearheading efforts to regain rights lost in earlier years.  For instance, in 2004, Janis was the first member of the legislature to successfully begin the rollback of Virginia's gun rationing scheme known as "one gun-a-month."  In 2005, VSSA requested then Delegate Janis to carry legislation (HB2282) that would protect Virginia's shooting ranges from localities changing noise requirements that could result in putting the ranges out of business.

Janis is currently in a four person race for the nomination.  He is the only candidate with a voting record on the issue important to gun owners in the 12th District.  VSSA urges gun owners and sportsmen in the 12th State Senate District to get involved and help Bill between now and June 9th.  Most importantly, please go to the polls on June 9th and vote for Bill Janis.

Bloomberg's Gun Safety Fail

Michael Bloomberg's Moms Demand Action gun ban group, which likes to think of itself as a "gun safety" group, has come up with a new project that appears to borrow from two well known programs, NRA's Eddie Eagle and NSSF"s Project Childsafe, as well as the Brady Campaign's Ask campaign, but in the end misses the target. 

Known as the Be Smart campaign, it brings former child star Melissa Joan Hart out of mothballs to appear in a new video as the spokesperson for the program.  Hart, who was associated with conservative messages during the 2012 presidential campaign has taken small steps into the gun ban movement. She appears to have jumped head first into the movement with this project. Bob Owens of BearingArms.com gave his thoughts on the video yesterday.

You may have noticed that the video title, "a conversation about kids, guns and safety" is similar to this one:

But that is where the similarities end.  Bob mentioned via Miguel at the Gun Free Zone blog, some of the technical issues with the Be Smart video, like, what's up with the NYPD police officer locking away the ammunition in the safe but leaving the handgun out, even if it is secured by a cable lock?  Most importantly though, unlike the NSSF video above, the Be Smart video includes no discussion with kids about gun safety.  The NSSF approach of fully engaging your children in the process is what really works.  And, having someone who actually knows something about firearms and gun safety like NRA Mom and World Champion shooter Julie Golob doesn't hurt either.

In the end, the Be Smart campaign isn't really about gun safety, it's about telling people if they have kids, they should not have guns.  With the public's attitude toward firearms shifting dramatically toward the pro-rights side, Moms Demands' new campaign is likely to fall as flat as their annual protests of the NRA Annual Meetings and Exhibits.

New York Times: Has the NRA Won?

That's the question New York Times' far left op/ed writer Charles M. Blow asks in response to the new Pew Research survey released last Friday that pointed out  "for the first time, more Americans say that protecting gun rights is more important than controlling gun ownership, 52 percent to 46 percent.”

It is now fair to ask whether the National Rifle Association is winning — or has in fact won — this era of the gun debate in this country. 

Gun control advocates have tried to use the horror that exists in the wake of mass shootings to catalyze the public into action around sensible gun restrictions. But rather than these tragedies being a cause for pause in ownership of guns, gun ownership has spiked in the wake of these shootings.

Blow goes on to lay out the information Pew's survey shows about how the public's attitude has changed over time then concludes:

One may begrudge and bemoan the fact, but it is hard to deny it: the N.R.A. appears to be winning this round.

I'm sure Blow was moaning the entire time he wrote his column.

Jim Shepherd: Hillary Gives NRA Last Word

The Shooting Wire's Jim Shepherd ended today's edition with a wrap-up of the NRA Annual Meeting and started with a pronouncement that something that happened hundreds of miles away from Nashville may do more to unite the NRA's membership than the upbeat positive event that just ended:

As the one hundred and forty-fourth annual meeting of the National Rifle Association wrapped up in Nashville, Tennessee's Music City Center yesterday, one of the most galvanizing actions for the NRA's membership took place hundreds of miles away.

With Hillary Clinton's virtual announcement of her formal candidacy for president, the NRA and the many Second Amendment groups in attendance finally have the face of the anti-gun movement firmly fixed in their political sights. As the parade of potential Republican presidential candidates rolled (slowly) across the stage on Friday, many of them took pointed shots at President Obama's record, but others took advantage of the opportunity to let the NRA faithful in attendance know they were ready for "Madame Clinton" when her apparently inevitable other shoe was once again digitally tossed into the ring with considerably less invective than a rumored ashtray was passed to her husband in the White House.

We've been down this road before where we focus on defeating Hillary Clinton and ended up with someone as bad if not worse.  In 2008 most anyone would have said that Clinton was going to be the Democrat nominee. She had the early start, the popular (among Democrats at least) former president husband, and it looked like she could not be beat.  Sound familiar?  So you can excuse me when I heard a focus on Hillary at Friday's NRA-ILA Leadership Conference as maybe just a little bit of déjà vu.


With no other announced candidate on the Democratic side of the race, it makes sense to focus on the known.  There is talk however that former Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley may jump in an that he would possibly run to Hillary's left (as if that is possible).  His record on Second Amendment issues are just as bad.  Let's hope this year, if there ends up being a competitive Democratic primary race, we will get the word out on how each of the candidates stand on our issue.  Because, as more than one person has noted, the more people who see Hillary, the less they like her.

Wayne LaPierre at CPAC (Live Stream 1:20 PM EST)

VSSA will be live-streaming Wayne LaPierre's speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) today at 1:20 PM EST.


This will play the speech live when it happens and then play as a recording after the event.  Click on the graphic to play video.
UPDATE: From the CPAC Facebook page: **IMPORTANT SCHEDULING NOTE** The CPAC schedule is running 30 minutes late. Stay tuned for more updates.