AHSA

[JImbothefiveth]

My friends, there is an issue that has been concerning me. Recently,there have been threads about the AHSA. This is an anti-gun organization disguised as a pro-hunting organization. Well I say it's time to get the truth out. They have supported no pro-gun legislation, but have supported and support currently, anti-gun legislation. At the present time, they support reclassifying .50 BMG rifles as NFA, and a ban on private sales. In the past, as in 2 and a half years ago, they have supported banning hollowpoints and "assault weapons". (real assault rifles are already illegal to manufacture for sale to the public.)

Paul Helmke, the President of the Brady Campaign, says of the AHSA, "I see our issues as complementary to theirs

From the Washington post




http://web.archive.org/web/20070222...com_content&task=blogcategory&id=22&Itemid=43

sportsmen overwhelmingly support reasonable gun safety proposals. Moreover, an overwhelming majority of hunters support proposals like background checks to purchase guns, keeping military style assault weapons off our streets and the elimination of cop killer bullets.

A bit of translation is in order :background checks: A NICS background check. Private citizens can't do this, so requiring that for private sales will mean you need to pay a fee ranging from $30-$50 for an FFL to preform the check, every single time you sell a gun. "Assault weapons": Semi-auto clones of some military rifles, and some non-military semi-auto rifles. Real assault rifles are already illegal to manufacture for civilian sale. "Cop killer bullets": hollowpoints. Most people here know what these are, but if you're new or don't know, these are bullets that expand after they hit the target. In calibers 9x19 and up, these provide an increase in stopping power, meaning your gun will be a lot better for self-defense, and they are more likely to stop in the target, meaning bystanders are safer as well. The police use them.


http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Fe...d.aspx?id=1702

At first glance, everything about AHSA sounds just fine. They even have one useful tool on the website, a history of wildlife conservation laws in America--strange thing is it was lifted nearly word for word from www.NRAILA.org.

Per moderator request, I'm trying to make it not too long winded, so I'm only posting portions of the article.

In their "Firearms Safety and Training" section we begin to see some curious remarks. For instance in the "Range Safety" section they never once mention that firearms should always be pointed downrange, the first rule in range safety. Another section recommends that shooters use steel wool to clean the barrels of their guns, an idea that makes most gunsmiths cringe. The rest of their safety tips appear to be written by someone who has never hunted. Never once do they mention the three basic rules of safe gun handling by which all shooters know and abide.

By now, they may have posted the rules, this article is a little old.

The most telling thing about AHSA is its leadership. A quick look at their website shows that Bob Ricker is listed as AHSA Executive Director. Readers will remember that Ricker is a former NRA employee who switched sides and has actively worked for gun control groups for many years now. A few years ago, Ricker was part of an attempt to sell out your rights by brokering a deal with the most anti-gun administration in history. He then appeared with Bill Clinton in a White House photo-op. Most recently Ricker was paid by a Virginia based anti-gun group, where he lobbied to shut down gun shows and put further restrictions on gun owners.

A little further down in the leadership section John Rosenthal is listed as President of the AHSA Foundation. Rosenthal is one of the founders of the Massachusetts based group Stop Handgun Violence, a group that has been a major force in passing some of the most Draconian state gun laws in the nation. Gun laws that Rosenthal would like to see exported to other states.

Now that says all we need to know about this group.

P.S. :If you notice any spelling errors, please point them out. My hands are cold at the time of typing this.

 

[MD_Willington]

So I guess they support banning Match King and Game King as well... some people eh...

 

[Doggy Daddy]

A wolf in sheepdog's clothing... but it's a poor fit.

 

[AllAmerican]

They are a group that has approx. 200 members. Most folks already know the drill. I dont know why on pro gun forums we give them more web time.

Pro gun folks might wanna do a little research on their own so we dont have to teach em everything. We should be starting these threads on other forums where they will have more impact.

This group is funded by other anti groups and individuals.

However, they have all the gun forums talking about them and they sure do get their message out to the public. Imagine what 200 pro gun folks could do as return fire.

Stay vigilant. Stay on your reps. The momentum is already swinging our way. Lets further our agenda.

 

[average_shooter]

Well I say it's time to get the truth out.

With all due respect, I think you're a little late to the party. The truth has been out for a while now, at least from what I've seen.

The problem is, for all the evidence there are still those that choose to ignore it and go on pretending that AHSA is a "good" organization for shooters and gunnies. All we can do is lay out the evidence, which has been done many times before.

In a similar vein very strong evidence has been around for quite some time supporting evolution, yet there are still many who believe in creation.

The actual fact is that the evidence is there, it's up to the individuals to accept it or reject it.

 

[JImbothefiveth]

I asked for a thread about them permanantly displayed at the top, and the moderator told me to start one. That's why I'm risking giving them publicity.

 

[TexasRifleman]

Well, they endorsed Obama because of his "pro gun" stance and today, hours after the inauguration, this was posted on the White House website:

Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent.

 

[Art Eatman]

Know your enemy. Study his writings, learn his arguments--so you can refute them without a bunch or "Er, uh, well..." stumbling.

 

[mp510]

A bit of translation is in order :background checks: A NICS background check. Private citizens can't do this, so requiring that for private sales will mean you need to pay a fee ranging from $30-$50 for an FFL to preform the check, every single time you sell a gun.

In Connecticut, we are required to conduct the instant background check on all private party pistol sales. It is recommended for private party long gun sales, but is not required. Our NICS checks are conducted through the State Police Special Licensing and Firearms Unit who acts as the POC. Legislation requiring background checks on private sales could easily open federal NICS up the same way.

 

[mp510]

hey have supported no pro-gun legislation, but have supported and support currently, anti-gun legislation.

False again. They supported the protection of lawful commerce in arms act and also supported overturning the DC Gun Ban.

They are not hardcore pro-gun, but they are better than a lot of anti groups. If they were the biggest antis we had to worry about, we would be in heavan.

 

[rbernie]

Legislation requiring background checks on private sales could easily open federal NICS up the same way.

And in Delaware, the State Police were found to be illegally retaining and using gun purchase information (obtained via 'background check' requests) years after the purchase was made.

I don't care if it could be made no-cost to me; I am not going to volunteer to supply private gun purchasing information to any government agency if I can help it. That stance should be a bedrock principal of the RKBA community, and giving that away seems like a poor strategy to act as an advocate of the RKBA community, at least to me.

They supported the protection of lawful commerce in arms act and also supported overturning the DC Gun Ban.

That's what their web site says, but they actually submitted an amicus brief for Heller that effectively stated that the District was wrong only because the DC gun ban was unsupportably in violation of the Districts Home Rule charter. They were effectively trying to get the SCOTUS to toss the case back without taking on the constitutional issues. Their own web site offers the following:

The brief we submitted today, which was written by some of DC's most experienced Supreme Court lawyers, argues that the individual right to bear arms is essential to the collective public interest in a "well regulated militia," and that the DC Gun Law is not authorized under the DC Home Rule Act – which according to our lawyers gives the Supreme Court a non-Constitutional basis to affirm the decision of the lower court that found an individual right to keep and bear arms.

They sure tried to help out, all right, but not our side. They tried to argue that the militia, which drives their view of the RKBA, was government-controlled. More pointedly, they tried to give the SCOTUS a way to punt and not actually settle the question of whether the Second Amendment referred to an individual or collective right, thus preventing Heller from having any broad utility for the RKBA movement.

Yup - that sure sounds like a solid bit o' RKBA activism in action, eh? Right up there with supporting the reclassification of 50BMG weapons as NFA items.

<sigh>

Let's cut to the chase. Other than blogging or issuing press releases or working the Obama campaign - what has AHSA done to actually *support* hunting and shooting rights?

Do they provide hunters education seminars?
Do they sponsor safe shooting clinics?
Do they employ a team of lobbyists to assist the legislatures in crafting pro-hunting and pro-shooting bills?
Have they engaged in any actual efforts to support, foster, or initiate any land conservation activities?

AHSA pretty much rates a big NO on all that. Their presence exists to serve as a foil to the NRA, and anyone reading their web site will be overwhelmed the fact that the VAST majority of their content exists solely to disparage the NRA and that virtually none of their content addresses how they foster hunting and shooting in the US.

They are not hardcore pro-gun, but they are better than a lot of anti groups.

Dear lord, they position themselves as a SUPPORTER of hunting and shooting rights. They don't position themselves as ANTIs. If the best I can do is damn them with faint praise ("Well, they're not as bad as The Brady Bunch"), how can I possibly view them as RKBA activists and supporters?

 

[ReadyontheRight]

In Connecticut, we are required to conduct the instant background check on all private party pistol sales. It is recommended for private party long gun sales, but is not required. Our NICS checks are conducted through the State Police Special Licensing and Firearms Unit who acts as the POC. Legislation requiring background checks on private sales could easily open federal NICS up the same way.

Isn't more govenment control and new make-work jobs like the "State Police Special Licensing and Firearms Unit" a BAD thing for liberty?

 

[RPCVYemen]

My friends, there is an issue that has been concerning me. Recently,there have been threads about the AHSA. This is an anti-gun organization disguised as a pro-hunting organization. Well I say it's time to get the truth out.

As one of - if not the only - AHSA agitator on THR, I would like to express a contrary position.

How could someone who is pro-gun, a shooter and happy with Heller (though with reservations about what "reasonable regulations" means - looks to me like a hole big enough to drive a truck through) join the AHSA?

The simple answer is as an alternative to the NRA. I looked at the GOA and the JFPO (with which I have some affinity) and rejected both of those. A thread here alerted me to the Second Amendment Foundation, and I am currently investigating them. From what I have so far found, they look pretty "clean" by my standards.

Why did I seek an alternative to the NRA?

I have no objections to the NRA's positions on gun policy - as a far as gun policy goes, I like them better than the AHSA. I have agreed in a previous thread not to bring up those objections, because they are not gun-related. I will make two general comments:

1. Follow the money.
2. I swore an oath on in a dusty city half a world away a long time ago "to defend the constitution from enemies foreign and domestic." I am bound by that oath today - I was not release from that oath at the termination of my service.

If you would like to talk more about my objections to the NRA, please PM me - since the are not gun related, they are not subject matter for THR.

Four simple points:

1. I base my support for the AHSA on their public policies. I have already rebutted the "front for the HCI" nonsense in at least one other thread. You may or may not accept that rebuttal , but I see no reason to repeat it.
   
2. I disagree with the AHSA on their 50 BMG policy, and am working to change that policy. You can search threads and find that.
   
3. I am not opposed to requiring NICS checks at gun shows, flea markets, and other venues that feature commercial gun sales. The critical issue from my perspective is the burden that the NICS check imposes on legal sales. If the NICS check cost $2 and took 2 minutes, I would not be opposed. If the NICSs check cost $1000 and took a month, I would object.
   
4. I like the AHSA conservation policy.

To summarize: the AHSA's gun policies are not ideal - from my point of view. Of the alternatives to the NRA, they were the least objectionable. So I joined, and support them.

As one point that is so trivial I almost hesitate to bring it up, I would like to point out one thing about the OP's first post.

In the past, as in 2 and a half years ago, they have supported banning hollowpoints and "assault weapons".

The immediate question that suggests itself is "Why the weasel wording?" Why not report either

• The AHSA supports the AWB.

or

• The AHSA does not support the AHSA.

Why all the qualification? Why not the simple truth?

The answer is that the the OP maintained that the AHSA did support the AWB for a long thread. He dismissed by argument that the AHSA doesn't say that, and that a personal communication from Ray Schoenke opposed the AHSA.

Let's be very clear - the AHSA does not support the AWB. This has been confirmed both private communication from Ray Schoenke and by the email posted on the previous thread. The OP was on the thread where a THR member - hostile to the AHSA - posted that email. Then the OP added the weasel wording.

I would not have joined the AHSA had they supported the AWB at the time I was considering joining.

Mike

 

[Deanimator]

1. AHSA is an "alternative to the NRA" in the same sense that the Klan is an "alternative" to the Southern Poverty Law Center. Breathing methane is also an "alternative" to breathing nitrogen and oxygen.

2. Now that the Obama administration has OFFICIALLY endorsed a new "assault weapon" ban and a ban on private sales, when will AHSA condemn these statements by the Obama administration? I expect right after the Aryan Brotherhood condemns racialism.

It's not insulting that AHSA and its shills lie. It's insulting that AHSA and its shills lie with such contempt for their intended audience.

 

[TexasRifleman]

Let's be very clear - the AHSA does not support the AWB.

Doesn't matter. You supported Obama who clearly DOES support the AWB instead of the candidate that did NOT support it.

What exactly did you think was going to happen?

Even if you can convince us the AHSA is pro gun you won't convince us they are smart.

That was a flat out bonehead move, and that alone should make people write AHSA off as a waste of time and resources.

 

[Deanimator]

That was a flat out bonehead move, and that alone should make people write AHSA off as a waste of time and resources.

It's only a "bonehead" move if it's not REALLY what you wanted to happen. Believing THAT requires a life-threatening degree of credulousness. Anybody who'd believe that AHSA didn't KNOW that Obama supported and would continue to support the AWB and any OTHER repressive anti-gun-owner measure wouldn't just jump off of a bridge because "everybody is doing it", they'd do it if NOBODY was doing it.

AHSA is like the Finnish "liberation" organizations created by the NKVD to support the Soviet Union's invasion. It is the very definition of a "false flag" organization. It has about as much credibility too.

 

[Justin]

AHSA's Head Honcho, Ray Schoenke likes to push women around.

Say what you will about the GOA's belligerent attitude about the NRA, but at least Larry Pratt has enough social grace to refrain from physically intimidating someone just because they're an NRA rep.

 

[Justin]

The following points of interest would be useful in proving whether or not AHSA is actually an organization dedicated to furthering the interests of shooters.

• Show me one shooting range that AHSA has constructed or insured.
• Show me one shooting match, rifle or pistol, that AHSA has sponsored.
• Show me one basic firearms safety course they've run.
• Show me one AHSA-certified course that's geared towards certifying those who wish to carry concealed or defend themselves in their home.
• Show me one firearms instructor that's been certified by AHSA.
• Show me one anti-gun law that they've struck down, or modified in the interest of shooters.
• Show me one AHSA member who's Legged Out, been classified a High Master rifle or pistol shooter, or Grand Master IPSC shooter or placed in the top ten at a major multigun match such as Rocky Mountain 3 Gun, Superstition Mystery Mountain 3 Gun, or the annual Fort Benning 3 Gun Match.
• Show me one piece of unequivocally pro-gun legislation sponsored or drafted by AHSA.
• Show me one Republican that AHSA has given money to. (NRA has given money to both Republicans and Democrats, despite the claims of some to the contrary.)
• Show me one action undertaken by AHSA that has helped hunters to access more public land.
• Now that Obama lists re-instating the assault weapon ban on his website, show me even one press release from AHSA condemning this position.

 

[RPCVYemen]

Quote:
Let's be very clear - the AHSA does not support the AWB.

Doesn't matter. You supported Obama who clearly ...

I have to tell you that sort of cracks me up, TexasRifleman. Wether or not the AHSA supported the AWB mattered mightily to you when you were claiming the AHSA supported the AHSA. Confronted by incontrovertible evidence that the AHSA does not support the AWB, all of the sudden it "Doesn't matter"?

I think that support for Obama vs support for McCain is off topic at THR. If a moderator posts that such a discussion is permitted, I will be glad to indulge you, otherwise you can PM me.

To the more general question of my objections to the NRA, think that I have found a way express them that does not violate THR, but may whoever of you want to understand why I can take the position I take.

When I follow the NRA money, I see that the NRA is willing to trade Amendments in the Bill of Rights. "We'll trade the 2nd, for the 1st, 4th and 5th, and any other two American values you want."

That is the strategy to which I object - the strategy the causes me to seek alternatives to the NRA.

For those of you who think that we need only the 2nd, I will point out that I lived for 2 1/2 in a country with the highest per capita rate of firearms in the world and a terrible human rights record. A country where every almost adult male owned a pistol and an AK-47 that regularly tortured and killed its citizens - North Yemen in the mid 1980's. The Yemenis had virtually none of rights guaranteed in our Bill of Rights - except the 2nd, and they had that in spades. Didn't do the dissidents a whole lot of good. It turns out in reality - not in survivalist fantasy - that select fire doesn't mean a whole hell of a lot if the government comes for you.

One of the many things I learned from that experience - and another 18 months in Mogadishu after that - is that the Bill of Rights works a coherent whole. The Bill of Rights is greater than the sum of the individual rights - none can be traded away without imperiling the others.

I will not trade any amendment for any other.

Mike

 

[CoRoMo]

From what I've seen, the fascists who are bent on disarming this country always speak of hunting when they discuss the 2A.

If you listen to an anti-2A politician answer questions about RKBA, they will talk about how they go duck hunting, deer hunting, etc. and that the 2A is an individual right. What they just did is to move the 2A discussion from freedom to hunting. The 2A isn't about hunting, it is about freedom.

This is the sole premise of the AHSA.

 

[Deanimator]

I have to tell you that sort of cracks me up, TexasRifleman. Wether or not the AHSA supported the AWB mattered mightily to you when you were claiming the AHSA supported the AHSA. Confronted by incontrovertible evidence that the AHSA does not support the AWB, all of the sudden it "Doesn't matter"?

Saying you support Obama but NOT an AWB, bans on concealed carry, etc., etc., etc. is like saying, "I support George Wallace but not segregation."

NOBODY believes you. You don't even believe yourself.

 

[Deanimator]

The Bill of Rights is greater than the sum of the individual rights - none can be traded away without imperiling the others.

And YET that's PRECISELY the game plan of AHSA.

Nobody can make AHSA stop lying.
AHSA can't make gunowners believe those lies.

AHSA is nothing more than a clone of the Institute for Historical Review aimed at gunowners.

 

[RPCVYemen]

Saying you support Obama, ...

The reason that I supported Obama as opposed to John McCain are unrelated to the relative merits of their gun policies.

I will give you a hint - I started the last election as a McCain supporter, and gave him enough money to get a couple of autographed pictures of he and Cindy. I gave no money to Obama.

If you want to PM me for the reasons I changed my mind, feel free.

s like saying, "I support George Wallace but not segregation."

1. If the only difference between the two candidates was their gun control policy I would have voted for McCain.
   
2. If Obama had been a single issue candidate (as George Wallace was), and that issue was gun control, I would (probably) have voted for McCain.
   
3. If Obama were willing and able to impose pro gun control polices on the American people, I would (probably) have vote for McCain.

None of those three are true.

That's all I am going to say about Obama vs. McCain. Anything else is verboten at THR.


Mike

 

[TexasRifleman]

Confronted by incontrovertible evidence that the AHSA does not support the AWB, all of the sudden it "Doesn't matter"?

It "doesn't matter" if you take the assumption that AHSA is pro gun, which I do not. And I'm still waiting for this "evidence".

The AHSA website, as you know, called for the assault weapon ban to be reinstated during a good portion of the Presidential campaign.

Obama never made a secret that he wanted the AWB back in place.

So, your group and Obama fundamentally agreed during most of the campaign and, as many have pointed out, it's not what AHSA says
that matters.

You seem hung up on what they SAY, and that changes from time to time depending on the wind direction.

What MATTERS is what they DO.

And what they DID was to endorse a Presidential candidate who made no secret of his desire to reinstate the AWB. It is therefore reasonable to assume that AHSA also wants the AWB reinstated, regardless of what they SAY they want, especially since they DID in fact say it for a very long time.

If I SAY that I like trees but I set them on fire every time I see one, is it really sane to believe that I do in fact like trees?

This really isn't as complicated as you keep trying to make it.

I have yet to see any evidence that AHSA does not support an AWB, since their candidate certainly does, and their website did.

For the moment you have shown no "evidence" that AHSA does not support a ban, you just have talk.

Action matters, and when there was action to be taken, your group supported Obama and his desire for a ban.

Which, of course, is why what you SAY doesn't matter as much as what you DO.

 

[Deanimator]

The reason that I supported Obama as opposed to John McCain are unrelated to the relative merits of their gun policies.

I will give you a hint - I started the last election as a McCain supporter, and gave him enough money to get a couple of autographed pictures of he and Cindy. I gave no money to Obama.

If you want to PM me for the reasons I changed my mind, feel free.

I don't care why you supported Obama any more than I'd care why somebody supported David Duke. It's enough that you did.

Your support for someone who's a direct threat to my 2nd Amendment rights is what matters. Your hairsplitting about matters unrelated to that is as completely irrelevant as the hand waving of neo-Confederates who try to justify secession and slavery to me. Your reasons for wanting to make me a disarmed victim are as of little interest to me as somebody else's reasons for wanting me to be 3/5 of a person.

s like saying, "I support George Wallace but not segregation."

If the only difference between the two candidates was their gun control policy I would have voted for McCain.

If Obama had been a single issue candidate (as George Wallace was), and that issue was gun control, I would (probably) have voted for McCain.

You're either very young or not being honest.

Wallace was NOT a "single issue candidate". He had a variety of positions on a variety of issues, some of which I agreed with. His desire to deprive me of basic human dignity by force of law is what matters, just as Obama's desire to make me a helpless victim of whatever predator happens along is what matters now.

If Obama were willing and able to impose pro gun control polices on the American people, I would (probably) have vote for McCain.

None of those three are true.

Obama ALONE can impose little. Obama and a House and Senate controlled by fanatical anti-gun people can impose a LOT. Just admit that that's what you WANT.