So, here I am at the annual Gun Rights Policy Conference, held behind enemy lines – “in the belly of the beast,” as one of our brothers here on the ground in San Francisco puts it – among several hundred activists for gun owners’ civil rights.  The locale is actually appropriate. The Second Amendment Foundation – co-hosting the Conference with its sister organization, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms – single-handedly defeated San Francisco’s attempt to ban private citizens’ ownership of handguns there, many years ago.

It’s the 25th such conference, and I’ve attended many of them, always feeling the recharging of the batteries that comes with being surrounded by good people from all walks of life who have responsibly applied critical thinking to a situation and come to the same logical conclusion.

At past GRPCs, we’ve been swamped with national and local media. In SF, they’re starkly absent. Almost a news blackout…so much for “fair and balanced.”

Absent too, for the first time, is any official NRA presence. Speculation is that the organization is embarrassed about a piece in one of their magazines in which NRA reportedly takes sole credit for the huge SCOTUS victory in McDonald, et. al. v. City of Chicago. It’s well known that Second Amendment Foundation initiated that lawsuit, with NRA jumping in much later. I’ve been on the road since mid-August and haven’t seen the issue in question, but if that’s true I can only wonder, “What were they thinking?” Still, SAF and NRA are natural allies, and I hope that faux pas soon recedes into history. We gun owners need both entities working hand in hand.

We got to hear details from Alan Gura, the brilliant young attorney who did that case, and is doing many more to follow up, all over the country.

The Conference continues today, with much good exchange between successful grassroots groups, from CalGuns Foundation and California Rifle & Pistol Association to the Gun Owners Action League (GOAL) in Massachusetts. Look for more in this space after things quiet down and I can get some keyboard time.

Alan Gura explains the backstory of the McDonald victory.

Alan Gura

From left: Dave Workman and Mas Ayoob from the SAF board, and Tom Gresham of the CCRKBA board, illustrate the media’s approach to the Gun Rights Policy Conference.

The Three Wise Men

1 COMMENT

  1. The sad part about it is that this is, actually, not the first time, or even the *second* time that the NRA has jumped in WAY late on a major case after SAF did all the heavy lifting, only after it looked very likely to win, and then tried to claim all the credit for itself after the fact.

    I’m afraid I have become very, very disillusioned with the NRA.

  2. While the NRA came in “late” It’s arguments were seen in a more favorable light. Other arguments made were too progessive for the court. The combination of arguments however kept things in a box that provied a rulling that helped our side.

    That does not mean that Chris Cox shouldn’t get off the couch 😉

  3. Mas, don’t drink the water (or Kool Aid) in San Francisco! It may cause you to go over to the Dark Side and become a slimy, anti-gun liberal.

  4. I also echo Phil’s words… after being a member of the NRA for a zillion years, I am also disillusioned and wonder if they lost touch with what their goals are.

  6. I for one am getting tired of the NRA pulling that s@#$. Now I’m getting more and more mailings for money, you know, too support our friends but they won’t endorse Angle ( A rating ) but gave almost $5000 to Ried who’s voted largely against gun rights. I’ve told them why Angle’s getting their donation.

  7. The NRA did indeed take sole credit for the Chicago case. I am a life member of the Second Amendment Foundation and a member of the NRA so I get both viewpoints.

    The American Rifleman magazine in particular is nothing but a bunch of press releases and a constant appeal for money. The issue in question not only claims sole responsibility for the Chicago case, it tells us that every weapon is perfect. The newest issue runs a glowing article on the new Taurus guns with a full 4 page Taurus ad spread right in the middle of the review. There is a somewhat critical review (the first in a while) for the new Beretta carbine and PX4 in .45. The magazine is one big press release unless they are discussing historical weapons.

    We all know that the NRA has all the money, but the SAF does many good things and the NRA takes the credit. Yes, the NRA is an effective lobby and a positive force. But when they extol the virtues of Senator Harry Reid because he used $600,000 of taxpayer money for a rifle range in Nevada, it makes me sick.

  8. I did a little looking around last night and found that NRA is also backing gun grabbers Ike Skelton and Betsy Markey

  9. There was no taxpayer money spent by Harry Reid on our Clark County NV Shooting Park. The funds came from money set aside by law for recreation from the sale of Nevada federal land to private developers. All of the Nevada delegation, Democrats and Republican, supported the efforts to develop the Park but Reid’s leadership was key.

    Reid’s leadership was key also in the passage of the prohibition of nuisance lawsuits against gun manufacturers and in the recent change in the collection of the excise tax.

  10. John,
    First of all, where did the money that was set aside come from if not from tax payers?

    Second, I do agree that Reid is probably the the only democrat that has shown that he is pro gun by action and, because of his status in government, he’s a good ally. It would be a lot worse if some other democrat was in his position, which is always a possibility.

  11. Thanks for the clarification, Mr. Cahill. I live far from Nevada, but you must agree that Federal land is owned by the taxpayers. If I am not mistaken, Nevada and Utah have the highest percentage of Federally owned land inside of their borders. It wasn’t as if Sen Reid donated the money himself.

    The problem with single issue lobbies is that they often need to support candidates that may be good for that one issue, but are a disaster for our nation as a whole. Everyone here is for pro-gun candidates, but we each must ask ourselves what we give up to keep some of these candidates in office. I am not ragging on the NRA, as I am going to a “Friends of the the NRA” dinner in a few days. I am just frustrated with many of their polices.

  12. “The American Rifleman magazine in particular is nothing but a bunch of press releases and a constant appeal for money.”

    Subscribe to Gun Tests magazine instead for no-bias evaluation of guns; they don’t take gun ads – so they aren’t “evaluating” a gun they depend on ad revenue from.