AHSA Pro-Gun Pro-Obama

[Bailey Guns]

RPCVYemen wrote:
Which does it make more sense to trust? An organization's own published statements about itself, or a competing organization's statements?

Neither. Look at what they've done, not what they've said.

Here we have a classic example of someone, who is allegedly pro-gun rights, actively promoting and supporting a known anti-gun rights organization.

And many people still scratching their heads and thinking to themselves, "What on earth happened to the 2nd Amendment?"

 

[velojym]

In 1st amendment cases where 'equal time' is demanded for pro-gun speech, I can see these guys weaseling in with a weak-sister "counterpoint" to the Brady Bunch, pushing honest gunnies out of the discussion entirely.
Once communications are completely nationalized, they could hog the entire range of dispute with their best 'against' the pro-gun AHSA weasel.

 

[Knotthead]

I have, several times, visited AHSA's website to see what they actually did to support and promote the hunting and shooting sports. I have yet to see any efforts on their part to do anything substantial beyond issuing politically oriented press releases. I haven't seen anything from them to convince me that they are anything but an organization dedicated to siphoning off support of gunowners to candidates unfriendly to the RKBA.

 

[Bailey Guns]

I swear I'm in the "Twilight Zone" lately on THR. Why, all of a sudden, do we have so many people, on a pro-gun rights website of all places, spouting support for so many obviously anti-2nd Amendment issues.

I'm gonna check the Brady site just to see if there's a lot of pro-gun discussion going on over there. I must've slipped into an alternate universe of some sort while I wasn't looking.

 

[mljdeckard]

Yemen comes in every few months to espouse and inform us about the Great Pumpkin.

 

[BHP FAN]

''The long and the short of it is that AHSA is to gun owners today what the Judenrat was to Jews in the 1940s... a way to get us onto the "boxcars" without a fight.

NO, I REFUSE ''
well said, Deanimater!

 

[SuperNaut]

I swear I'm in the "Twilight Zone" lately on THR. Why, all of a sudden, do we have so many people, on a pro-gun rights website of all places, spouting support for so many obviously anti-2nd Amendment issues.

I'm gonna check the Brady site just to see if there's a lot of pro-gun discussion going on over there. I must've slipped into an alternate universe of some sort while I wasn't looking.

I've been chalking it up to three things:

1. Lot of new shooters, as is evidenced by the insane run on everything that resembles or is associated with firearms. These new shooters have varying degrees of indoctrination to shed.

2. Lot of media hype about the latest run on guns, that in turn leads people to the gun boards. Some of them good, some not so good.

3. Since Heller the antis realize that a new tack is needed. On another board I declared the age of The Barking Moonbat over - we are now entering the age of The Forked Tongue.

 

[BHP FAN]

It's Bizarro World,isn't it?

 

[RP88]

Paul Helmke said that AHSA and the Brady Bunch both have 'complimentary views on issues'

thats more than enough for me to know better.

 

[mike101]

"Neither. Look at what they've done, not what they've said."- Bailey Guns

Wise words.

As mentiioned, the AHSA is in bed with the Brady Campaign. Paul Helmke even confirmed it, as was posted earlier.

The Brady Campaign is also always going on about how they are not out to ban guns. Funny, because they have supported every gun ban that ever existed. They filed an amicus brief supporting the DC ban with the Supreme Court, and solicited contributions to put toward fighting Heller. They are currently soliciting contributions to put toward the upcoming legal battle to uphold Chicago's gun ban. I get the emails.

"I'm gonna check the Brady site just to see if there's a lot of pro-gun discussion going on over there."- Bailey Guns

You'll have to go to Paul Helmke's blog on Huffpo. About a year and a half ago, the Brady Blog was "temporarily" closed to comments, because they were having their heads handed to them every single day, by pro-gunners. He's not doing any better on Huffpo.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-helmke

We pretty much own the place.

 

[Hawk]

I found the archived language here, and can vouch for the wording because I looked at it many times while it was up on AHSA's site (and sent them many emails about it).

If it helps, the Wayback Machine is an archive that might "sell" better to those that question any source they're not in accord with.

Jul 01, 06 / About Us will dredge up AHSA's pro-AWB language.
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.huntersandshooters.org

The current AHSA site already is aligned against the .50, the archive exposes the pro-AWB position.

 

[RPCVYemen]

Here's what the AHSA's "Who We Are" page said until relatively recently:

When I click on the link, I don't see anything like what you are quoting. It's sort of a rambling recap of the election year.

May here's another way to get at the nugget of why the theory that the AHSA has different public and private policies is so fundamentally wacky.

For purposes of argument, I will assume that you and the NRA are 100% right, and the AHSA, though publicly pro-RKBA, is secretly and deeply anti-RKBA. Tell me if there is anything unfair about this assumption.

Let's look at the implications of that assumption:

1. The AHSA is secretly an anti-RKBA organization with a publicly pro-RKBA policy.
2. Let's assume that the AHSA is wildy successful - it deludes millions of people by appearing to be pro-RKBA, even though it's secretly anti-RKBA.
3. So now, it's an secretly anti-RKBA organization with millions of members who are pro-RKBA.
4. What does the AHSA do now?
5. If they advocate for anti-RKBA legislation, then they will blow their "cover" and lose their millions of pro-RKAB members, so they will have no money and no influence.
6. Their only reasonable choice is to continue taking pro-RKBA public stances in order to maintain membership and influence.
7. This hypothetical wildly successful AHSA - because its members are pro-RKBA - can never actually advocate for its secret inner sanctum deeply held anti-RKAB policy.
8. So for all time, the AHSA will have to be a secretly anti-RKBA organization that publicly advocates pro-RKBA policies.

And that makes perfect sense to you?

Doesn't it make a lot more sense to accept that the AHSA is exactly what it appears to be - a mostly Democratic pro-RKBA alternative to the mostly Republican NRA? Do the vast conspiracy theories even make any sense at all?

The fundamental flaw in all of the "secret cabal" theories about the AHSA is that it's actions will be public - if they endorse an AWB ban, it's members will know that, and will leave. I know I will.

I know that a lot of people like in tone Cold War terminology about "front organizations" and let paranoia have free play. To me those arguments miss a critical point - "front" organizations are necessary when what is being hidden is illegal or oppressed.

Communist "front" organizations never had diddly squat influence in the US precisely because we have an open political process. If you want to advocate for Communism, you can from a Communist Party and work yourself to death to advocate Joe Stalin. There is nothing illegal about it.

"Front" organizations only make sense when there is political oppression. If being a member of the Communist party means that I will go to jail, then I will form a "Cinnamon Bun Tasting Society" that is a front, and skulk around the back of bakeries pretending to taste patries when in fact I am reading Trotsky. But I can just join the Communist Part and pick up a copy of Trotsky at Barnes and Noble, why would I skulk around?

"Front" organizations don't make any sense in a free and open society. Even if you manage to get one started, the very freedom and open-ness will transform the organization so that it is exactly what it claims to be.

As an example, in the beginning of the union movement in this country, there was a lot of socialist/communist influence. That all happened when the union movement was heavily oppressed - when being a union organizer could get you killed. As soon as the unions could openly and transparently advocate and unionize, what happened? The communist/socialist influence died out. As an example, the common icon of conservative opposition to anti-war protesters was a union construction worker in a hard hat.

The ACLU has pretty much the same history - the open American political process drove the socialist/communist influence out of the ACLU a half century ago.

It made sense to form Communist "front" organizations when membership in the Communist policy was illegal, or would get you dragged in front of Joe McCarthy, or you'd lose your job for being a Communist.

Is there anyone who seriously contends that supporting an AWB is illegal, or that it will get you dragged in front of Joe McCarthy, or that you will lose your job if you advocate for an AWB?

Mike

 

[Justin]

The fundamental flaw in all of the "secret cabal" theories about the AHSA is that it's actions will be public - if they endorse an AWB ban, it's members will know that, and will leave. I know I will.

Evidently not, as you have been shown the proof of AHSA's anti-gun policies and board of directors on more than one thread, yet still cling to your membership card.

 

[SuperNaut]

I won't get into the meat of your post Mike, since I've already been down that unproductive road with you.

I will say this; donating money and support to the AHSA, whose membership and clout is on par with a neighborhood knitting circle, is simply a waste of money and time. Donate to the NRA and you join, quite literally, millions of members and an organization that doesn't just sit at the table, often they own the table.

 

[mike101]

"So now, it's an secretly anti-RKBA organization with millions of members who are pro-RKBA"

Why don't we embrace reality, in the here and now. The AHSA has 200 members, give or take. BTW, the BC won't disclose how many members they have. It's akin to an atomic secret. I seriously doubt that they have the "thousands" of supporters they claim. The NRA has about 3,000,000 members. Also, there are 80,000,000+ gun owners in this country, the majority of whom do not hunt.

I would also like to point out that the RKBA is not a Republican vs Democrat, or conservative vs liberal issue. There are plenty of liberal-leaning 2nd Amendment supporters, including myself, and I'll bet nearly half of THR members.

The 2nd Amendment is largely a matter of individual liberty. Individual liberty has always been a liberal concept.

And you, my friend, are starting to sound an awful lot like a wolf in sheep's clothing.

Wait. Better make that a sheep in wolf's clothing.

 

[RPCVYemen]

Evidently not, as you have been shown the proof of AHSA's anti-gun policies and board of directors on more than one thread, yet still cling to your membership card.

OK, I will take your point. Assume that I, and every other pro-RKBA member of AHSA is deluded.

Does my delusional state change anything about the logic of my previous post?

Doesn't assuming you are correct logically lead to the conclusion that the AHSA must remain a secretly anti-RKBA organization publicly advocating pro-RKBA policies for all time?

And that makes perfect sense to you?

Mike

 

[TimRB]

"...the AHSA, though publicly pro-RKBA, is secretly and deeply anti-RKBA. Tell me if there is anything unfair about this assumption."

Unfair, no--wrong, yes. The AHSA is *plainly* anti-RKBA. It's no secret. And its members are not "pro-RKBA"--they're "clueless". I doubt that there are even a thousand of them.

Tim

 

[rbernie]

Let's look at the implications of that assumption:

The AHSA is secretly an anti-RKBA organization with a publicly pro-RKBA policy.
Let's assume that the AHSA is wildy successful - it deludes millions of people by appearing to be pro-RKBA, even though it's secretly anti-RKBA.
So now, it's an secretly anti-RKBA organization with millions of members who are pro-RKBA.
What does the AHSA do now?
If they advocate for anti-RKBA legislation, then they will blow their "cover" and lose their millions of pro-RKAB members, so they will have no money and no influence.
Their only reasonable choice is to continue taking pro-RKBA public stances in order to maintain membership and influence.
This hypothetical wildly successful AHSA - because its members are pro-RKBA - can never actually advocate for its secret inner sanctum deeply held anti-RKAB policy.
So for all time, the AHSA will have to be a secretly anti-RKBA organization that publicly advocates pro-RKBA policies

You miss the obvious.

What they are attempting to do is steer the debate towards a gradual increase in 'reasonable' restrictions. They're not trying to eat the elephant in one bite. They're trying to undermine the base of the RKBA movement, one incremental step at a time. The fact that they claim gun enthusiasts as members is what they believe will give them legitimacy and distance from The Brady Bunch, and gain them credibility with moderates and fence-sitters. Brady goes for the strongly anti-RKBA idealogues, and AHSA goes for the more middle-of-the-road folk who might be swayed into an anti-RKBA stance.

Put more succinctly - they're trying to engineer a 'good cop/bad cop' dynamics as regards the RKBA, with them trying to appear as moderate and reasonable vice the more dramatic positioning of the Brady crowd.

But by the words that their leadership shares, they have common end goals (increasing restriction upon and ultimate elimination of the right to keep and bear arms).

 

[RPCVYemen]

Why don't we embrace reality, in the here and now. The AHSA has 200 members, give or take.

Heck, I was assuming - for purposes of argument - the strongest anti-AHSA position I could assume, that they were incredibly clever, deluded millions and millions of people, and became wildly successful in their nefarious enterprise.

But let me agree with your point - the AHSA is in fact minuscule compared to the size of the NRA.

1. The AHSA - a secretly anti-RKBA organization - wants to grow to be the size of the NRA, and to wield the influence that the NRA wields.
2. The AHSA adopts a publicly pro-RKBA policy to increase membership.
3. Suppose - due to their public pro-RKBA policy, they do in fact grow.
4. What do they do now?
5. If they advocate anti-RKBA policies, they will lose the members the gained in step 2.
6. But they don't want to lose members, we established that in #1.
7. Their only choice is to continue to advocate a pro-RKAB policy.

Have I distorted your position in any way? Is there some logical chicanery here?

Mike

 

[TexasRifleman]

OK, I will take your point. Assume that I, and every other pro-RKBA member of AHSA is deluded.

Dude. There are less than 200 of you according to the Executive Director.

That's telling in and of itself.

1. The AHSA - a secretly anti-RKBA organization - wants to grow to be the size of the NRA, and to wield the influence that the NRA wields.
2. The AHSA adopts a publicly pro-RKBA policy to increase membership.
3. Suppose - due to their public pro-RKBA policy, they do in fact grow.
4. What do they do now?
5. If they advocate anti-RKBA policies, they will lose the members the gained in step 2.
6. But they don't want to lose members, we established that in #1.
7. Their only choice is to continue to advocate a pro-RKAB policy.

That is not the plan. It wasn't the plan for HCI either (same people). Americans for Gun Safety before that (same people).

The plan is to disrupt and confuse the argument by appearing to have some kind of pro-RKBA stance while appealing to the anti NRA people thereby weakening GOA, NRA, JPFO, SAF etc.

They don't really advocate any particular policy, they don't lobby very much either. That's not their role. They don't campaign for members heavily either, because they are funded by people that have deep pockets. They don't need a large member base to pay their bills.

Do the math (from their director again)

Membership: 200 or so
Yearly dues: $25

That's $5000 my friend. They pay their executive staff $3000 a month each (again admitted to by their director). So where's the money from ? It is from their board of directors, former members and donors of Handgun Control Inc.

Their role is to be a wedge organization, that's all. That they keep getting found out and changing names is also telling.

You have to understand that this isn't the first time this group of people has done this OK?

That you won't admit that this is the same group of people formerly known as Handgun Control Inc is also telling which is why I think you are not just some random pro gun guy that got duped but a shill for this organization.

The paper trail back to HCI is public record and widely known.

 

[benEzra]

When I click on the link, I don't see anything like what you are quoting. It's sort of a rambling recap of the election year.

That's why I posted a link to another page with the archived wording after the quote. They have deleted that wording from the page to avoid controversy, but they have not uttered an anti-AWB peep.

If they claim to represent shooters and be a pro-gun rights organization (as opposed to a pro-conservation organization, which may be laudable but has nothing to do with supporting gun rights), then they need to support gun rights and stand up against the AWB. So far, to my disappointment, they haven't.

For purposes of argument, I will assume that you and the NRA are 100% right, and the AHSA, though publicly pro-RKBA, is secretly and deeply anti-RKBA. Tell me if there is anything unfair about this assumption.

That's the thing---they aren't publicly pro-RKBA. They are publicly neutral to anti, based on their positions on new ammo bans, .50 bans, barring watchlisted individuals from owning guns, anti-CCW in restaurants, etc. The only thing remotely pro-gun they've done that I've seen is to criticize the D.C. absolute gun ban. Everything else is pro-hunting, not pro-RKBA.

And again, they have said not a word against the AWB, after publicly endorsing an AWB since their founding.

Their only choice is to continue to advocate a pro-RKAB policy.

Not if their goal was to get "reasonable gun legislation" passed, rather than simply to perpetuate themselves and brag about numbers.

But again, where are they opposing an AWB?

 

[bthest86]

"I see our issues as complementary to theirs[ASHA]," Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign said.

 

[JImbothefiveth]

The AHSA is secretly an anti-RKBA organization with a publicly pro-RKBA policy.

Oh really? HAve you read their page about the .50 caliber. here it is: http://www.huntersandshooters.org/issues/gunrights/50caliber

From another of their pages:

AHSA is committed to supporting our nation’s law enforcement officers in their fight against easy access to guns by criminals, terrorists and others.

(emphasis mine)

If they are pro-gun, why would the NRA oppose them? I've never heard the NRA attack the GOA, JPFO, etc.

 

[TimRB]

"The plan is to disrupt and confuse the argument by appearing to have some kind of pro-RKBA stance while appealing to the anti NRA people thereby weakening GOA< NRA, JPFO, SAF etc."

Exactly. They're not looking to increase membership; they're trying to get people NOT to join the NRA. Almost every page of their web site has some sort of anti-NRA message.

Tim

 

[Vern Humphrey]

1. The AHSA is secretly an anti-RKBA organization with a publicly pro-RKBA policy.

That's true.

Let's assume that the AHSA is wildy successful - it deludes millions of people by appearing to be pro-RKBA, even though it's secretly anti-RKBA.
So now, it's an secretly anti-RKBA organization with millions of members who are pro-RKBA.

They don't seek to gain many members, they seek to act as a stalking horse, offering a "reasonable alternative."

What does the AHSA do now?
If they advocate for anti-RKBA legislation, then they will blow their "cover" and lose their millions of pro-RKAB members, so they will have no money and no influence.

They have already advocated anti-RKBA legislation. And they don't need membership, they only need financing.

Ask them to publish their financial data.

Their only reasonable choice is to continue taking pro-RKBA public stances in order to maintain membership and influence.

If they did that, their sugar daddies would cut off funding.

This hypothetical wildly successful AHSA - because its members are pro-RKBA - can never actually advocate for its secret inner sanctum deeply held anti-RKAB policy.

It can and does, because it doesn't rely on mass membership for finances.

So for all time, the AHSA will have to be a secretly anti-RKBA organization that publicly advocates pro-RKBA policies.

Nope -- it's an anti-RKBA organization, financed by anti-RKBA sources, which advocated anti-RKBA policies under the guise of "reasonableness."