Why Would A Gun-Ban Group Change Its Name?

by
posted on October 19, 2017
** When you buy products through the links on our site, we may earn a commission that supports NRA's mission to protect, preserve and defend the Second Amendment. **
a1f-mark-feature-10-19-header-image.jpg

What do you do when your gun-ban group becomes so persistent in pushing restrictive laws for law-abiding gun owners that more and more people begin to realize where you really stand on gun ownership?

For Gabby Giffords’ group, so-called Americans For Responsible Solutions, the answer is to change your name to further hide your goals.

On Tuesday, the gun control group’s name was officially changed to "Giffords." “It is about the courage of single individuals, but also the courage of members of Congress and state legislators to stand up to the gun lobby and focus on this like they never have before,” Giffords’ husband, Mark Kelly, told The Washington Post about the name change.

If the goal is to put the focus on the former congresswoman, what might Kelly and other leaders of the group be trying to draw our attention away from?If the goal is to put the focus on the former congresswoman, what might Kelly and other leaders of the group be trying to draw our attention away from? That’s easy—the continual slide toward support of more, and more restrictive, gun laws that would only affect law-abiding Americans, leaving criminals to ply their trade unfettered by armed citizens.

Just look at the organization’s website, and you’ll see there are few anti-gun proposal that the group doesn’t embrace. In the site’s list of main issues, it states the group opposes guns in public places. That’s another way to say it is against concealed carry for law-abiding Americans, including vehemently opposing concealed-carry reciprocity legislation currently under consideration in Congress.

The group also targets gun owners by trying to pretend criminal violence is a public health epidemic like polio or smallpox; wants to ban semi-automatic firearms used by millions of Americans for sport and self-defense; and wants to limit the number of rounds a magazine can hold, despite the fact criminals would ignore such a law. Kelly even tried to capitalize on the tragic Las Vegas shooting by spouting a lie that Hillary Clinton also used to try to halt movement of the Hearing Protection Act in Congress: “Imagine how much worse last night’s shooting could have been if the gunman had a silencer.”

Additionally, the organization puts much of its efforts into trying to pass so-called “universal” background checks. We’ve told you before how such a scheme only imposes such “universal” checks on the law-abiding and not criminals, and how such a plan would require gun registration for enforcement to even be feasible. And just this week we reported how a brand new study showed that such laws have been ineffective in three states where they have been tried.

One must wonder just what part of “infringe” the organization doesn’t understand!

Recall that Giffords’ organization isn’t the first gun-ban group to rename itself in order to hide its true agenda. The Brady Campaign was once named Handgun Control Inc., before leaders there realized that a majority of Americans didn’t want to see handguns “controlled.” But that organization’s name change did nothing to temper its rabidly anti-gun policies, which have become even more strident in recent years.

Regardless of what Giffords’ group calls itself, it will continue to push for supposed “solutions” to violent crime that would do nothing to curb crime, while infringing on the rights of law-abiding gun owners. Whether called Americans for Responsible Solutions or simply Giffords, the gun-ban group is an enemy of freedom—and will continue to be.

Mark Chesnut has been the editor of America’s 1st Freedom magazine for 17 years and is an avid hunter, shooter and political observer.

Latest

PLCAA in marble
PLCAA in marble

Cynical Strategies To Subvert The Protection Of Lawful Commerce In Arms Act

Since President George W. Bush signed the bipartisan Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) into law on Oct. 26, 2005, those bent on civilian disarmament have sought to bypass the legislation’s clear commands. In fact, 20 years later, gunmakers were fending off a frivolous nuisance suit from the city of Gary, Ind., filed in 1999, despite the PLCAA and state-analogue legislation.

The New York Times Tries to Explain the Drop in Crime

The New York Times is attempting to explain away the Trump administration's success at lowering crime rates with these explanations.

Winner-Take-All Elections Mark A New Chapter In The Second Amendment

Will a meaningful Second Amendment survive in Virginia? That this is even an open question shows how dramatically one election can reshape a state when it comes to the right to keep and bear arms.

Part 1: How the Mainstream Media Lost Touch With America—The Takeover by the Elites

Why is so much of the mainstream, legacy or corporate media opposed to our right to keep and bear arms? This three-part series attempts to answer these critical questions—understanding, after all, leads to solutions.

President’s Column | NRA Focus On The Vision

I can’t believe it’s been seven months since I was elected NRA president, and I’m already composing my eighth President’s Column. The officers never fully anticipated or appreciated the immense challenges we faced when elected.

Standing Guard | The NRA is Strong

The strength of the NRA is, and has always been, our membership. Without our millions of members, we would not be able to effectively rally behind elections for pro-freedom politicians; just as importantly, if not for our large membership, our representatives in office would not feel the same urgency to listen to us in this constitutional republic.

Interests



Get the best of America's 1st Freedom delivered to your inbox.