AGS is heavily funded by Hungarian billionaire (and hardcore gun prohibitionist) George Soros,
You are mixing up your anti-gun billionaires. AGS is founded by Monster.com founder and former Board of Director for Handgun Control Inc., Andrew McKelvey.
Here is an article I wrote for publication awhile back. It never saw the light of day, so I'll publish it here for those who are interested (article is circa 2000 and is much kinder than my actual opinion of them at the time):
"Last year, a new group, Americans for Gun Safety (AGS), entered the gun debate. Claiming to represent a "third-wayâ€, they acknowledged a fundamental right to own guns while at the same time insisting that tougher laws were necessary to keep firearms out the hands of criminals and children. The National Rifle Association denounced the new group as the same old wolf in a new sheepskin. By the time this article goes to press, AGS will be pushing for a new bill mandating background checks at gun shows (McCain-Lieberman S.890) and hoping to duplicate their local success in Colorado and Oregon on a national level. Commercials paid for by AGS will be running in movie theaters across the nation. This story examines AGS: who they are, what they say and how their actions speak louder than words.
To understand Americans for Gun Safety, you must first understand a little bit about Andrew McKelvey. A successful dot-com billionaire, Andrew McKelvey has built a business empire around TMP Worldwide – a conglomerate that runs from the Monster.com to yacht building companies. In 1999, McKelvey plunged into politics headfirst. The catalyst for McKelvey's change was the tragic incident at Columbine High School in Littleton, CO.
Convinced that more gun control was the solution, McKelvey opened his wallet and began donating to anti-Second Amendment groups and politicians. McKelvey began personally donating the maximum amount to pro-gun control politicians (such as $2,000 to New York Sen. Carolyn McCarthy, a strong supporter of Handgun Control Inc). He supported the Million Mom March to the tune of $1 million. McKelvey also donated $2 million to Handgun Control Inc and received a chair on their board of directors. In the year since Columbine, McKelvey had spent over $3 million of his own personal fortune supporting gun control and yet gun control legislation had not advanced at all.
Convinced that “the best way to help resolve issues relating to guns is to join the huge majority of Americans in the center of the debate and seek compromise through moderationâ€, McKelvey reached deeper into his pockets and founded Americans for Gun Safety with an astonishing $12 million of his own personal fortune. The money would establish the group as a national presence and provide $60,000 one-year grants to 28 different state chapters. Despite the moderate message, all 28 chapters that eventually received grants were existing gun control groups with close ties to Handgun Control Inc and other national gun control lobbies. For example, Texans for Gun Safety supports regulating firearms as consumer safety products, banning certain guns and ammunition, registration of all firearms at time of purchase and of resale, licensing of all firearm owners, forfeiture of license for violations of firearm safety rules, mandatory insurance of all firearms, with all covered users listed in the policy, differentiation of insurance rates for users with certified training. They also explicitly deny AGS stated position that there is an individual right to own firearms. Many other AGS chapters deviate from the national policy of supporting the right to own guns to some degree as well.
When asked whether these groups would receive continued funding, AGS president, Jonathan Cowan responded: "When we review grant requests for next year, we will be weighing how each of the groups has been working with AGS to see if a continued relationship makes sense. As to gun rights and firearms clubs, we certainly would consider making similar grants, but we would hold them to the same standard - any grantee group would have to be working in good faith toward goals that we share. These include tougher laws and tougher enforcement of existing laws to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and children."
When asked, Cowan declined to specify what laws he would like to see implemented that would keep reduce unauthorized use of guns by children. Cowan has considerable experience in both the government and gun debate as Andrew Cuomo's right-hand man at the Department of Housing and Urban Development. In a December 20, 2000 article of the New Democrat, written by Cowan and Cuomo, they take credit for using HUD money allocated to drug prevention programs to sponsor gun buyback plans in 100 cities as well as pursuing the lawsuits against gun manufacturers that led to the Smith & Wesson settlement.
“I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." – James Madison
AGS is trying to duplicate its success in passing gun show regulations in Colorado and Oregon at the national level. Teaming-up with Sen. John McCain (AZ), the group wrote the McCain-Lieberman Gun Show Loophole Closing and Gun Law Enforcement Act of 2001 (S.890).
It is certainly a laudable goal to ensure guns are not sold to criminals, however as well-intentioned as this bill may be, as written, it could be used to shut down most gun show operators. All vendors, whether they are selling firearms, lemonade or beef jerky, must be reported to the Secretary of Treasury. The Treasury also has the right to request additional information about every vendor. AGS originally denied that the bill did this, but when shown the bill's text, said it was simply a drafting error that should be corrected by the time it's submitted to the House.
Much worse is the provision for civil penalties. If an illegal sale takes place in the parking lot of the gun show, unbeknownst to the gun show promoter, the promoter is not subject to criminal prosecution, due to a gross negligence threshold, but the promoter can be assessed a civil fine up to $10,000 as well as revocation of the "special firearms event license" that permits the promoter to hold gun shows.
The bill does not require the Treasury to demonstrate gross negligence when assessing civil penalties. There is no civil-court trial - the promoter is limited to an administrative hearing held by the same department that levied the penalty originally. This is a lot of discretionary power to place in the hands of the executive branch, that a few short years ago, was threatening to sue legal manufacturers for selling a product regulated by the federal government.
“If . . . the powers of the General Government be carried to unconstitutional lengths, it will be the result of a majority of the States and of the people, actuated by some impetuous feeling, or some real or supposed interest, overruling the minority, and not of successful attempts by the General Government to overpower both.†– James Madison
In one respect, AGS is similar to those who say, "I don't want to take your guns away, keep them, but I think they should be registered and licensed." The problem with this line of argument is that AGS cannot guarantee your gun rights. Polls consistently show 40% of respondents favoring ban on handguns. The Congressional Record quotes numerous politicians declaring that reasonable gun control is a handgun ban. Firearms cannot be regulated like other products because nobody usually wants to outlaw or discourage the use of those other products.
As fewer people make the choice to own guns due to red tape or expense, as more vendors and business are discouraged from selling guns, gun rights proponents lose more and more political clout. Of course it then becomes easier to pass further restrictions. AGS feels that "slippery slope" arguments are an excuse by both sides for not getting anything done. Of course this neglects a very real process that happened in
England and Australia.
The trouble with most gun control proposals is that they are anything but a genuine compromise. They usually entail the surrendering of existing rights by gun owners, or as the above gun-show bill illustrates, the only loopholes in a bill often work against the gun owner or seller.
Without constitutional guarantees and their enforcement by the courts (which hasn't happened), most gun law proposals result in a further reduction down of our rights or worse, our gun rights are at the mercy of the majority. This is why, unless a law has solid guarantees against abuses, it should be vigorously opposed by gun rights proponents.
Whether Andrew McKelvey and AGS are sincere in their mission statement is something I can't tell you. An organization that seeks to attract moderates will often keep its statements deliberately vague to remain palatable to the largest number of people. Even if AGS is sincere in its desires to both support gun rights and enact tougher laws, will they still be there to support gun rights when their tougher laws have been enacted? What an organization does is often more telling than any policy statement they can make. You now know what AGS actions have been in the first year of its existence. Only with the consent of gun owners can AGS achieve its goals. Whether they achieve those goals will depend on gun owners' judgment of those actions and their willingness to support or oppose AGS in the future."
