Even CNN Gets It Even If Wayne Doesn't

I know CNN is the home of "fake news" and the rest of that nonsense. Still, even a blind squirrel can sometimes find an acorn. They had a story yesterday about the struggle of the NRA to maintain the political influence it had in 2016 in the 2020 elections. The lead for the story is the personal influence that former NRA-ILA director Chris Cox had with politicians. I mentioned the same thing in my post about Jason Ouimet being appointed the interim head of ILA.

From the CNN story:

The NRA accused Chris Cox -- the man who had controlled the organization's lobbying and political activities for more than 15 years -- of trying to overthrow Chief Executive Wayne LaPierre, according to a lawsuit filed last month.

Cox denied the charge to The New York Times, but quickly resigned. His unceremonious sacking stunned NRA board members, who saw Cox as a potential successor to LaPierre, and infuriated political staffers. Some started packing up their desks, unsure of whether they would be ousted too, multiple NRA sources said.

That's when the Washington power brokers really started to worry. Cox's departure, after months of turmoil at the NRA, only amplified the sense that the gun-rights group might not be the political powerhouse in 2020 that it has been for decades, including notably in 2016.

When President Donald Trump convened a meeting with bipartisan lawmakers and signaled and openness to some gun control measures in the wake of a shooting at a high school in Parkland, Florida, that left 17 dead, it was Cox who showed up at the White House the following evening.

Afterward, Cox tweeted that Trump didn't want gun control. For his part, Trump tweeted: "Good (Great) meeting in the Oval Office tonight with the NRA!"

The reservoir of goodwill toward Cox ran deep on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.

"Every Republican senator who matters has Chris' cell phone number," one GOP operative who worked closely with Cox on the political side told CNN. "And vice versa."

The operative recounted one meeting between Cox and a senator, ostensibly about a policy issue, that instead was focused primarily on the senator's favorite hunting grounds in his home state. Cox knew them all in advance -- and had been to them himself.

Cox and his team held weekly calls with Republican committees to share tips about ongoing campaigns -- calls that increased in frequency in the lead-up to key primaries and Election Day, according to former officials. "Senators didn't call Wayne," the GOP operative said of LaPierre. "They called Chris."

That's partly because it was Cox's job to maintain those contacts, while LaPierre oversaw the organization. Cox has moved on to launch his own Washington consulting firm. But unease over his departure -- and LaPierre's efforts to consolidate power -- is fueling uncertainty about the direction of the organization overall.

 Honestly, from my conversations with others, I don't think Wayne LaPierre really understood the value of Chris to the campaign side of NRA-ILA. All he could see was a potential rival for power that had to be vanquished. As to the supposed "coup", I think it is a figment of his imagination as it has been played upon by the NRA's outside counsel William Brewer III. Witness the gratuitous mention of Chris in one paragraph of the NRA's lawsuit against Ollie North.

I am going to repeat what I wrote at the beginning of the month:  Wayne LaPierre's legacy will be as the guy who caused us to lose gun rights in order to preserve his perks if the Republicans fail to hold on to at least one House of Congress and the Presidency. His paranoia and arrogance caused him to listen to the wrong guy and we are all suffering as a result.

Adding to that statement, I would say that those NRA Board members and others who stand 100% behind Wayne will be complicit in this loss of gun rights. They will blame us, they will blame Bloomberg and Soros, they will blame anyone but themselves. The reality is that they did not want to excise what has become a cancer upon the National Rifle Association. Wayne did do good in the past but the past is past and, like with a championship football coach who no longer wins, it is time to move on.

Another Major Departure From NRA-ILA (Updated)

Jennifer Baker, the NRA-ILA Director of Political Affairs, is stepping down from her post and leaving ILA. This comes from a report posted about an hour ago in Politico. Ms. Baker was a reported to be a key aide to former NRA-ILA Director Chris Cox and was active on the campaign side of ILA.

From Politico:

Baker’s departure, which was confirmed by several people familiar with the matter, could further complicate the group’s ability to play in the 2020 election. She had been playing a key role in mapping out the NRA’s electoral strategy.

The move comes one month after Chris Cox, the NRA’s chief political architect, resigned. Cox had deep relationships with Republican political class, and with his exit many of the party’s top strategists have expressed concern that the organization will be severely hamstrung heading into the presidential election. The NRA plays a major role in turning out gun owners, and many in the party are worried that the group will be less effective in 2020.

The NRA has long been a centerpiece of the Republican Party ecosystem. But the organization has found itself in intense chaos in recent months, confronting embarrassing tales of self-dealing at its highest levels of leadership, a failed coup attempt and an investigation by the New York Attorney General into its tax-exempt status.

This comes less than three weeks since Chris Cox resigned. As I mentioned when Jason Ouimet was appointed the interim head of NRA-ILA, the loss of Chris Cox  would have its biggest impact on the campaign side of NRA-ILA. The departure of Ms. Baker will only exacerbate this loss of knowledge, relationships, and political savvy when it comes to political campaigns.

When Cox was suspended for participation in the mythical "coup", Ms. Baker was quoted in the New York Times defending Cox.

Jennifer Baker, a spokeswoman for the N.R.A.’s lobbying arm, said Mr. Cox and Mr. LaPierre had “worked closely together for a quarter of a century, and any notion that Chris participated in a coup is absurd. Chris Cox is known as a calming force who always acts in the best interests of our members by effectively defending the Second Amendment, so it’s not surprising that board members would reach out to him for advice during tumultuous times.”

I have no idea on Ms. Baker's future plans. That said, I would not be surprised in the least if she ended up at Cox's new venture Capital 6 Advisors.


UPDATE: I'm not entirely sure Ms. Baker's departure was by her choice. She reportedly was escorted out of the building by an armed guard and was crying. I've gotten this from a couple of  sources.

I guess in terms of purges this is somewhat better than ending up in the basement of the Lubyanka. The actions of the Old Guard remind me more and more of the last days of the Soviet Union with the leaders and appartchiks desperately seeking to hold on to power. Ah, the curses of being a poli sci major and having lived through a good part of the Cold War.

UPDATE II: The Hill is reporting that Ms. Baker's departure is part of a "consolidation" of its communications.

“The NRA announced a reorganization of its public affairs function this week," the NRA said in a statement to The Hill. "The change consolidates and improves our communications, public affairs, and social media functions. All these operations now operate under one department, eliminating a parallel function in NRA-ILA. We are excited about the change and the benefits it brings to the organization and its members.”

It is also a consolidation of power in the executive suite of the NRA and a further diminishment of the role of the NRA-ILA. Prior to this, if I remember correctly, most communication with the press especially on things with a political overtone was done through NRA-ILA.

As to being excited about the change, I'm sure the one person who is excited about it is William Brewer III who seems to be becoming the de facto spokesman for the NRA.

Ouimet Named Interim Head Of NRA-ILA

Jason Ouimet, the NRA-ILA's Director of Federal Affairs, has been named the interim head of NRA-ILA. The news was first leaked in a story by Danny Hakim in the New York Times who seems to be the go-to guy for NRA leaks. It was later confirmed in a series of tweets by Stephen Gutowski of the Free Beacon as well as in a memo sent out to all NRA employees.

TO:                All NRA Employees
FROM:          Wayne LaPierre
                       Executive Vice President
DATE:            July 2, 2019
SUBJECT:     Appointment of Interim Executive Director of NRA-ILA

-‑‑‑‑‑-----‑‑‑‑‑‑‑------------------------------------‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑------------

I am pleased to announce Jason Ouimet’s appointment as Interim Executive Director of NRA-ILA.

As many of you know, Jason - a 14 year NRA veteran, - currently serves as our Director of Federal Affairs, a position he has held since January 2015. Jason rose through the ranks after being hired as a federal lobbyist in 2005 and then being promoted to Deputy Director at NRA-ILA Federal five years later.

Jason has a strong legislative and campaign background. On Capitol Hill, Jason was a legislative assistant for former Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-Georgia) where he was responsible for oversight of significant issues like taxes, Homeland Security appropriations, transportation, small business, Social Security, welfare, science & technology, government affairs, Commerce Justice State appropriations and pensions. He also served as Staff Director of the Life Insurance Caucus of which Senator Chambliss was a co-chair.

Prior to working on Senator Chambliss’ personal staff, Jason held the position of Senior Research Analyst at the National Republican Senatorial Committee working on projects for key Senate races. Jason began his career in 1999 as a Junior Analyst with the Republican National Committee where he conducted field research in Florida, Connecticut, Tennessee, and Pennsylvania for President George W. Bush’s 2000 presidential campaign.

Jason is a graduate of Kent State University where he received his Bachelor of Arts in Political Science degree in 1999.

Jason is an experienced government affairs professional and a skilled political strategist. He is committed to our noble cause and I know that he will do very well.

Please join me in congratulating Jason.

Wayne

From what I understand, Ouimet is both well-liked and well-respected within the NRA-ILA. It is rumored that there may be a search committee to find a permanent head of ILA but hopes are that Ouimet would be the leading candidate.

The appointment of an interim head of NRA-ILA shores things up a bit there. That said, it should not be forgotten that NRA-ILA serves two purposes:  lobbying and campaigns. The appointment of Ouimet satisfies the first criteria but fails to fill the huge hole left by the ouster of Chris Cox. Over a period of 24 years, Cox had developed a series of relationships with SuperPACs, PACs, 527s, and other campaign organization as well as a deft touch in coordinating expenditures where it would be most useful in the election of pro-gun - or at least not anti-gun - candidates.

One has to wonder if the triumvirate of Wayne, William Brewer, and the NRA officers took any of that into consideration when they forced the ouster of Cox. Brewer probably didn't give a damn, the officers were clueless, and it seems all Wayne could see was a potential competitor to his position.

Others in the political world are seeing it very clearly. An article published this morning in Politico reports that both the Trump campaign and the Republicans are worried about the NRA's "meltdown" just before 2020.

Greg Keller who is the former executive director of the American Conservative Union said:

“No organization has been more important to conservative voter education and engagement than the NRA. We all hope they’re able to mount the kind of effort in the 2020 cycle they have in the past,” said Gregg Keller, a former American Conservative Union executive director. “But in case they can’t, given their current situation, I hope they’re being forthright about that within the movement so others can pick up the slack.”

“The situation,” he added, “has folks nervous.”

Steven Law, head of Mitch McConnell's SuperPAC, said this about the departure of Chris Cox.

Concerns over the NRA intensified last week after the resignation of Chris Cox, who had been the head of its lobbying arm since 2002. Cox was well-liked by NRA staff and board members and had deep relationships with major donors and many of the party’s top strategists. He recently participated in 2020 planning meetings with the pro-Trump America First Action super PAC and the anti-tax Club for Growth. The groups discussed polling and opposition research, voter registration efforts, and ensuring smooth coordination.

With Cox gone, it's an open question who will oversee the NRA’s 2020 strategy.

“Chris Cox is the guy everybody dealt with,” said Steven Law, president of the Senate Leadership Fund, a super PAC closely aligned with Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

Wayne LaPierre's legacy will be as the guy who caused us to lose gun rights in order to preserve his perks if the Republicans fail to hold on to at least one House of Congress and the Presidency. His paranoia and arrogance caused him to listen to the wrong guy and we are all suffering as a result.

Chris Cox Resigns (Updated)

An email went out this morning to all NRA employees informing them that Chris Cox has tendered his resignation. This is a sad day in the fight for gun rights on Capitol Hill. Chris Cox and the NRA-ILA have been, more or less, effective in keeping the Republicans and some Democrats on the side of gun rights.

Wayne LaPierre's email is below:

From: "LaPierre, Wayne"
Date: June 26, 2019 at 8:50:14 AM MDT
To: #All NRA Employees <#AllNRAEmployees@nrahq.org>
Subject: Important Announcement

Dear Board Members and NRA Staff,

I wanted to inform you that Chris Cox tendered his resignation as executive director of NRA-ILA. I have accepted it and want to thank Chris for his service to the NRA and for his efforts to advocate for the Second Amendment.

Chris’s action follows our filing of a lawsuit in New York on June 19. Thereafter, I announced that, pending our pursuit of the facts relating to certain allegations contained in that lawsuit, Chris was placed on administrative leave. Naturally, that pursuit will continue in the interest of the NRA and our members.

In the meantime, NRA-ILA continues to benefit from a strong team with deep political experience, valued relationships, and a passion for the Second Amendment. We will make an announcement soon about an interim director of ILA and, in the meantime, continue to position the NRA for great success in the 2020 election season and beyond.

Please join me in wishing Chris and his family the best.

Wayne

That's nice. Wish Chris and his family the best after he has been stabbed in the back.

One thing that has been mentioned to me is that there is more than a supposed "coup" attempt behind this. The NRA-ILA gave the NRA proper a substantial loan that has not yet been repaid so that they could cover their bills. The loan was made in the 2017 time frame. Now it is rumored that Wayne came back to ILA asking for a loan in the $15 million range and Chris Cox said no. The other person who had the authority to say "no" on behalf of the NRA-ILA was Scott Christman and he is on administrative leave as well.

The interim head of the NRA-ILA is expected to be the former ILA head of state affairs who has been working for the NRA proper for the last few years. The likelihood of him saying "no" to Wayne when asked for a loan is not likely.

UPDATE: If the comments on the Twitter feed of NY Times reporter are any indication, those who are anti-rights are ecstatic. You can read it here.

UPDATE II: Sebastian at Shall Not Be Questioned has his take on this whole mess. He is one of the few bloggers who goes way back with the NRA. Sebastian and Bitter have always, in my opinion, had good connections within the NRA.

The NRA, The New York Lawsuit, Ollie North, And Chris Cox

The news yesterday regarding the National Rifle Association was headlined by a story in the New York Times that said Chris Cox, head of the NRA-ILA, was suspended and put on administrative leave. This followed a late Wednesday filing in New York Supreme Court (the trial level courts in that state) in which the NRA sought a declaratory judgment that Ollie North was not entitled to his legal expenses as a director of the NRA. Also suspended was Scott Christman who served as Cox's deputy chief of staff at the NRA-ILA.

Both Cox and Christman are accused along with NRA Board member and former Congressman Dan Boren of participating in a failed "coup" attempt orchestrated by Ackerman McQueen and Ollie North. Cox vehemently denies this.

“The allegations against me are offensive and patently false,” Cox said. “For over 24 years I have been a loyal and effective leader in this organization. My efforts have always been focused on serving the members of the National Rifle Association, and I will continue to focus all of my energy on carrying out our core mission of defending the Second Amendment.”

The New York lawsuit was filed on behalf of the NRA by outside counsel William Brewer III and his firm. It seeks a declaratory judgment stating that Ollie North is not entitled to reimbursement for legal fees and expenses incurred as a result of subpoenas in the second Ackerman McQueen lawsuit and the Senate Finance Committee's request for documents. When a declaratory judgment is sought, it is making a statement that the facts are not in question and that the only thing sought is a declaration as to matters of law. That said, the complaint filed is a mish-mash of allegations that in no way could be considered a 100% recitation of facts. The full complaint is here.

The complaint alleges that North is an employee of Ackerman McQueen, that he had been asked to either resign from AckMac or the NRA board, that he has done neither, and that he orchestrated the "coup" attempt to oust Wayne LaPierre at the behest of AckMac. North is also accused of acting in bad faith and breaching his fiduciary duties to the NRA.

The complaint then includes this gratuitous mention of Chris Cox and Dan Boren. This is the only paragraph where either of these two are mentioned.

North and his co-conspirators orchestrated these threats through, among other things, a string of text messages that are filed herewith. The text messages were produced in the Virginia Litigation by Dan Boren, an NRA board member employed by one of Ackerman’s other major clients, the Chickasaw Nation. Boren relayed the contents of Ackerman’s threatened letter to North and helped to choreograph the ultimatum they presented to Mr. LaPierre. Moreover, in email correspondence transmitted over non-NRA servers, Boren admitted his knowledge that Ackerman may have been invoicing the NRA for full salaries of employees who were actually working on the Chickasaw Nation account. The same text messages and email messages demonstrate that another errant NRA fiduciary, Chris Cox —once thought by some to be a likely successor for Mr. LaPierre—participated in the Ackerman/North/Boren conspiracy.

The text message can be seen in this exhibit. It should be noted that from what I've been told that exhibits are not usually submitted when asking for a declaratory judgment. Reading the texts between Boren and Cox, I fail to see this as a "coup" attempt. Rather, in my opinion, it seems they are concerned about the war between AckMac and the NRA and its future impact on the NRA. Cox is correct when he calls what had been going on "a tragic mess".

This whole affair is so Byzantine. It reminds more of a Soviet-style purge where ministers and members of the Politburo are being purged after the head of the KGB whispers in the ear of the aging General Secretary that they are plotting against him. Insert Wayne LaPierre into the role of the aging General Secretary and William Brewer into the role of KGB head and there you have it.

SAF And NRA File Joint Suit Against Washington State Over I-1639

The Second Amendment and the National Rifle Association have joined together to challenge parts of the recently passed Washington State Initiative 1639 in a federal lawsuit. The initiative contained a laundry list of gun control measures including a definition of an assault weapon (sic) that would include Ruger 10/22s, raised the age to purchase semi-automatic rifles to 21, specified waiting periods, enacted a safe storage provision, includes a $25 tax on each semi-automatic rifle sold, requires law enforcement to verify annually that owners of handguns and semi-auto rifles are legally allowed to own them, and it includes a training requirement.

The initiative was funded in great part by billionaires such as Michael Bloomberg, Nick Hanauer, and the late Paul Allen. The goal, while not state overtly, is to kill out the gun culture in Washington State by making it so onerous and creating such a slippery slope that casual gun owners will just give up. You can hear some thoughts on this from a Washington State resident in Episode 308 of The Squirrel Report podcast.

The lawsuit, Mitchell et al v. State of Washington et al, was filed on Wednesday in US District Court for the Western District of Washington. It is a complaint for both a declaratory judgment and injunctive relief based upon a claim of violations of the Commerce Clause, and the 2nd and 14th Amendment.

The plaintiffs are firearms dealers Daniel Mitchell and Robin Ball, 19 year old competitive shooter Luke Rettmer who is a member of the US Long Range Rifle Under 21 team, 19 year old Army reservist and college student Nathaniel Casey, and recreational shooters Armen Tooloee and Matthew Wald who are 20 and 19 years old respectively. The Second Amendment Foundation and the National Rifle Association are the organizational plaintiffs in the case.

The lawsuit focuses in on four aspects of I-1639 which goes into effect, in part, on January 1, 2019 with the remainder going into effect on July 1, 2019. First, it challenges Section 12 of the Initiative's ban on the sale of semi-automatic rifles to out-of-state residents on the grounds it "impermissibly burdens interstate commerce in violation of the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution, Art. I § 8 cl. 3."

Secondly, the lawsuit challenges Section 13 of the Initiative which raises the age to purchase semi-automatic rifles to 21. It seeks a declaration that "by preventing the sale to otherwise qualified adults under age 21 of certain rifles, impermissibly burdens their exercise of rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution." They are making this claim on behalf of both the Young Adult Plaintiffs and the Organizational Plaintiffs. It is asserted that no state interest justifies this infringement and that the ban is broader than needed to serve any "possible alleged governmental interest."

Thirdly, the lawsuit contends that the Section 13 of the Initiative "impermissably burdens" the rights guaranteed to the Young Adult Plaintiffs under Article I Section 24 of the Washington Constitution.

Finally, the lawsuit says that the intention of Washington State Attorney General Robert Ferguson to enforce the provisions of I-1639 and will be acting under "color of law". Thus, Ferguson will be depriving "plaintiffs of civil rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, as applied by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution."

The plaintiffs seek to have the challenged portions of I-1639 declared unconstitutional and to enjoin enforcement of the entire I-1639 unless the challenged parts are ruled severable, and if so, then enforcement of the challenged parts.

The complaint in its entirety can be found here.

Both the Second Amendment Foundation and the National Rifle Association have issued releases regarding this lawsuit.

Alan Gottlieb of SAF had this to say:

“We are also considering additional legal challenges,” SAF Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb confirmed. “We are disappointed that too many Evergreen State voters were fooled into supporting this 30-page gun control scheme, despite overwhelming law enforcement opposition. This initiative is an affront to the constitutional rights enshrined in the Second Amendment and the Washington state constitution, especially for young adults.

“We’re determined to fight this egregious measure because constitutionally-protected rights should never be subject to a popularity vote,” he stated. “The wealthy elitists behind I-1639 want to turn a right into a regulated privilege. This measure was only designed to have a chilling effect on the exercise of a constitutional right by honest citizens while having no impact at all on criminals, and we cannot let it go unchallenged.”

Chris Cox of the NRA Institute for Legislative Action had similar comments:

"The NRA is committed to restoring the Second Amendment rights of every law-abiding Washingtonian," said Chris W. Cox, executive director of NRA¹s Institute for Legislative Action. "I-1639 violates the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens and puts people at risk. This lawsuit is the first step in the fight to ensure that Washingtonians are free to exercise their fundamental right to self-defense."...

"The NRA will fight to overturn this unconstitutional initiative. We will not sit idly by while elitist anti-gun activists attempt to deny everyday Americans their fundamental right to self-defense," concluded Cox.

I, for one, am quite pleased to see the Second Amendment Foundation and the National Rifles Association working together on this lawsuit and not competing with one another for bragging rights. This is the way it should be.

A Judge Who Believes The Rules Matter

It is refreshing to see a state judge who believes the rules matter when it comes to a voter initiative. Thurston County (Washington) Superior Court Judge James Dixon is that kind of judge.

This past Friday he threw out the 300,000 signatures collected on petitions on Initiative 1639 which would entail another round of gun control in Washington State.  Judge Dixon found that the print on the forms was too small to be read and that the petitions did not clearly state what would be the changes in the law. He ordered the Secretary of State's office to stop certification of the ballot initiative.

Among the things the initiative would do is raise the age to purchase a modern semi-auto sporting weapon including .22 rifles to age 21, require a firearm safety training course, and mandate safe storage. The petition process was started by the Alliance for Gun Responsibility and funded primarily by high tech billionaires such as Paul Allen.

As you might expect, the Alliance for Gun Responsibility is appealing this to the Washington State Supreme Court. Moreover, as their CEOs comments make clear they are not happy campers.

"The right of Washingtonians to make changes to our laws via initiative has been part of our state's history for more than 100 years and is fundamental to the Washington we know today," (Renee) Hopkins said. "Today's decision tossed out the signatures of more than 378,000 voters, and undermined the rights of the citizens of this state in favor of the interests of the gun lobby. It's not right, and we will continue to fight."

Actually, it was the Alliance for Gun Responsibility's playing fast and loose with the established rules regarding the form and style of initiative petitions that undermined the petition and not anything the judge did. I guess they thought with all the money that they had the court would just roll over for them.

As you might expect, Alan Gottlieb of the Second Amendment Foundation who sued as a private citizen was very pleased with the result.

“A few billionaires donated millions of dollars to buy the signatures to get this fraudulent initiative on the ballot,” Gottlieb observed. “But they couldn’t buy the Court.”

“The initiative process has no place for deceit and deception,” Gottlieb said. “The so-called Alliance for Gun Responsibility acted totally irresponsible in circulating this initiative to the voters and it not only cost them millions of wasted dollars but their credibility as well.”

The NRA had also sued along with Alan Gottlieb and the ruling is in response to both lawsuits. Chris Cox of the NRA-ILA had this to say:

“The National Rifle Association is glad to see the court today recognized how negligent, if not worse, gun control advocates were in their signature-gathering for this ill-advised ballot initiative,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director, NRA-ILA. “We got involved because I-1639 tramples on the rights of Washington state voters, and because the way these anti-gun activists went about pushing their agenda was egregious. We applaud this decision, and will remain vigilant in protecting the constitutional freedoms of all Americans.”

It is good for gun rights to see the NRA and the Second Amendment Foundation working together in Washington State. They are also co-plaintiffs in two more lawsuits challenging efforts by Seattle and Edmonds to circumvent the state's strong preemption laws on firearms regulations.

Is The NRA Making A Grand Trade Or Merely Punting?

Bump fire stocks have come under increased scrutiny since the mass casualty even in Las Vegas where it appears the killer used them in his violent rampage. There have been bills introduced as well as increasing calls for them to be banned. They were originally approved by BATFE during the Obama Administration when it was concluded that they did not convert a semi-auto firearm into a full-auto firearm.

This afternoon the NRA released a joint statement from Wayne LaPierre and Chris Cox which called upon BATFE to re-review bump fire stocks and to subject them to additional regulations.

(FAIRFAX, VA) - The National Rifle Association today issued the following statement:

"In the aftermath of the evil and senseless attack in Las Vegas, the American people are looking for answers as to how future tragedies can be prevented. Unfortunately, the first response from some politicians has been to call for more gun control. Banning guns from law-abiding Americans based on the criminal act of a madman will do nothing to prevent future attacks. This is a fact that has been proven time and again in countries across the world. In Las Vegas, reports indicate that certain devices were used to modify the firearms involved. Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law. The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations. In an increasingly dangerous world, the NRA remains focused on our mission: strengthening Americans' Second Amendment freedom to defend themselves, their families and their communities. To that end, on behalf of our five million members across the country, we urge Congress to pass National Right-to-Carry reciprocity, which will allow law-abiding Americans to defend themselves and their families from acts of violence."

This statement leads to the question of the day: is the NRA trading a bump fire stock ban for national right-to-carry reciprocity or are they merely punting in the face of opposition to them from even some in the GOP who had been supportive of gun rights?

The NRA has always engaged in realpolitik in recent years. This may be a case of appearing to be willing to deal on the regulation of one gun-related item in exchange for loosening another. If so, they are trading a novelty item for something rather substantial. My only fear is that they could get out-maneuvered by trying to placate the gun prohibitionists on this one item.

I don't care about bump fire stocks. I'm never going to buy one or put one on my AR.  However, if bump fire stocks are banned now what is to say that other gun parts such as adjustable stocks or standard capacity magazines won't be banned later. If you open the door to the ban on one thing, don't you open the door to the ban of anything firearm related?

UPDATE: Chris Cox of the NRA-ILA went on Fox's Tucker Carlson Tonight to explain the NRA's position and to call for national carry reciprocity. I'll let you make the call whether it is a good idea or not.

Clowns To The Left Of Me, Jokers To The Right

The rest of that song by Stealers Wheel goes "here I am stuck in the middle with you."

That is how I'm feeling about the whole open carry fiasco in Texas. I doubt that there are many readers of this blog that don't support the extension of open carry in Texas to include handguns. Many states including my own North Carolina have unlicensed open carry.

What is incredibly frustrating is watching Shannon Watts and her fellow gun prohibitionists at Everytown Moms for Illegal Mayors making hay out of the bumbling ineptitude of groups like Open Carry Texas. Sonic, Chipotle, and god knows who's next have issued "Starbucks-style" statement asking the open carry activists to leave them out of the argument.

Sebastian at Shall Not Be Questioned has done yeoman's work in examining the folly of their actions. You can read some of those posts here, here, and here. There are more.

The attention whoring of these OC activists has caused such backlash that the NRA issued a statement last Thursday which said, in part,

Yet while unlicensed open carry of long guns is also typically legal in most places, it is a rare sight to see someone sidle up next to you in line for lunch with a 7.62 rifle slung across his chest, much less a whole gaggle of folks descending on the same public venue with similar arms.

Let's not mince words, not only is it rare, it's downright weird and certainly not a practical way to go normally about your business while being prepared to defend yourself. To those who are not acquainted with the dubious practice of using public displays of firearms as a means to draw attention to oneself or one's cause, it can be downright scary. It makes folks who might normally be perfectly open-minded about firearms feel uncomfortable and question the motives of pro-gun advocates.

As a result of these hijinx, two popular fast food outlets have recently requested patrons to keep guns off the premises (more information can be found here and here). In other words, the freedom and goodwill these businesses had previously extended to gun owners has been curtailed because of the actions of an attention-hungry few who thought only of themselves and not of those who might be affected by their behavior. To state the obvious, that's counterproductive for the gun owning community.

More to the point, it's just not neighborly, which is out of character for the big-hearted residents of Texas. Using guns merely to draw attention to yourself in public not only defies common sense, it shows a lack of consideration and manners. That's not the Texas way. And that's certainly not the NRA way.

Chris Cox of the NRA-ILA backed away from that statement yesterday saying it was the personal opinion of some unnamed staffer and not the NRA's official position. He apologized for any confusion it caused. Others such as Charles Cooke of National Review disagreed saying that it was what needed to be said. I think I and the majority of the gun blogging and gun podcast community would agree that it needed to said.

Bob Owens had an interesting observation on this at BearingArms.com. He noted that often in cases like this where a statement is retracted that it is the original statement which reflects the internal thinking of the organization. In other words, it was what we called back in my political science days "signalling".

As Michael Bane emphasized today in his Downrange Radio podcast, our goal in the gun rights community needs to be winning. We no more win hearts and minds with these open carry demonstrations in restaurants than the US Air Force did with carpet bombing in South Vietnam. I would send a copy of Dale Carnegie's How to Win Friends and Influence People to everyone in the Texas open carry leadership if I could.

I can't, so in the meantime I will implore them to cut out the narcissistic displays, clean up their websites and Facebook pages, and, as Michael suggested, think before you do stupid. Those of us stuck in the middle would appreciate it.

NRA-ILA Statement On Manchin-Toomey Defeat

Chris Cox, head of the NRA-ILA, issued the following statement following the Senate's defeat of the Manchin-Toomey amendment by 54-46 this afternoon.

Statement from Chris W. Cox on U.S. Senate Defeat of Manchin-Toomey-Schumer Amendment

Today, the misguided Manchin-Toomey-Schumer proposal failed in the U.S. Senate. This amendment would have criminalized certain private transfers of firearms between honest citizens, requiring lifelong friends, neighbors and some family members to get federal government permission to exercise a fundamental right or face prosecution. As we have noted previously, expanding background checks, at gun shows or elsewhere, will not reduce violent crime or keep our kids safe in their schools.

The NRA will continue to work with Republicans and Democrats who are committed to protecting our children in schools, prosecuting violent criminals to the fullest extent of the law, and fixing our broken mental health system. We are grateful for the hard work and leadership of those Senators who chose to pursue meaningful solutions to our nation’s most pressing problems.

Open Letter From The NRA-ILA To The US Senate

Chris Cox of the NRA's Institute for Legislative Action released an open letter to the Senate. In it he states that the NRA is "unequivocally opposed" to S. 649. He states that the NRA will oppose any and all attempts to extend background checks, to limit firearms and magazines, or to criminalize private transfers and/or sales. He specifically includes the proposals from Joe Manchin and Pat Toomey issued today.

Dear Senator,

I am writing regarding the National Rifle Association’s position on several firearms-related proposals under consideration in the Senate.

S. 649, the “Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013”, introduced on March 21, contains a number of provisions that would unfairly infringe upon the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding gun owners. This legislation would criminalize the private transfer of firearms by honest citizens, requiring friends, neighbors and many family members to get government permission to exercise a fundamental right or face prosecution. The NRA is unequivocally opposed to S. 649.

In addition, the NRA will oppose any amendments offered to S. 649 that restrict fundamental Second Amendment freedoms; including, but not limited to, proposals that would ban commonly and lawfully owned firearms and magazines or criminalize the private transfer of firearms through an expansion of background checks. This includes the misguided “compromise” proposal drafted by Senators Joe Manchin, Pat Toomey and Chuck Schumer. As we have noted previously, expanding background checks, at gun shows or elsewhere, will not reduce violent crime or keep our kids safe in their schools. Given the importance of these issues, votes on all anti-gun amendments or proposals will be considered in NRA’s future candidate evaluations.

Rather than focus its efforts on restricting the rights of America’s 100 million law-abiding gun owners, there are things Congress can do to fix our broken mental health system; increase prosecutions of violent criminals; and make our schools safer. During consideration of S. 649, should one or more amendments be offered that adequately address these important issues while protecting the fundamental rights of law-abiding gun owners, the NRA will offer our enthusiastic support and consider those votes in our future candidate evaluations as well.

We hope the Senate will replace the current provisions of S. 649 with language that is properly focused on addressing mental health inadequacies; prosecuting violent criminals; and keeping our kids safe in their schools. Should it fail to do so, the NRA will make an exception to our standard policy of not “scoring” procedural votes and strongly oppose a cloture motion to move to final passage of S. 649.

Should you have any questions on these issues, please do not hesitate to contact me at (202) 651-2560.

Sincerely,


Chris W. Cox

Reasonable Gun Control?

I think Chris Cox of the NRA-ILA hits the nail on the head in this short video. Administration documents show that an effective AWB would require mandatory gun buybacks while universal background checks would require gun registration to be effective. Thanks but no thanks!




After watching this video with Chris Cox and watching Jessie Duff on TV, I think the NRA should reconsider having Wayne LaPierre be the number one spokesman for the NRA. While Wayne has been in the fight for a long time, I think Chris and Jessie give a more up-to-date and appealing face to the gun rights battle.

Arms Trade Treaty Catches The Attention Of Fox News

The major media outlets have been rather quiet about the Arms Trade Treaty talks going on at the UN in New York. This short report from Fox News seems to be the first one that I've seen on it outside of NRA News.

As part of the the story they interview Chris Cox of the NRA-ILA. Cox pointed out that shotguns, pistols, and rifles are what's meant by "small arms".

Chris Cox On The Arms Trade Treaty

Ginny Simone of NRA News interviewed Chris Cox, head of the NRA-ILA, about the UN's Arms Trade Treaty yesterday. This interview was after Wayne LaPierre spoke to the delegates of the ATT talks and presented the NRA's position.

Chris made some good points in this interview. Perhaps the best was when he said that "our freedoms shouldn't be dumbed down to an international standard; the truth is that international standards need to be brought up to United States (levels)." Given that the ATT has countries like Iran in a leadership role I don't see this happening. That said, Chris is correct.

Another important point that Chris made was that treaties hang around forever until such time as there is a President and Senate willing to ratify it. Unlike a bill passed in one house of Congress that dies at the end of that Congressional session if the other house doesn't pass it, an international treaty hangs around like a Zombie.

NRA-ILA On Scott Walker's Win In Wisconsin

Chris Cox and the NRA-ILA are celebrating what looks to be an overwhelming victory by Gov. Scott Walker in Wisconsin recall election. They released this statement a short while ago.

Thanks to your votes and efforts, Scott Walker has won the recall election for Governor in Wisconsin defeating rabidly anti-gun Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett.

Scott Walker has proven his dedication to the Second Amendment by signing into law right-to-carry legislation, castle doctrine legislation, and the Hunting Heritage Act during his short tenure as Wisconsin’s chief executive. Scott Walker also supported statewide preemption of firearm laws and an amendment to the Wisconsin Constitution guaranteeing the individual right to keep and bear arms. In contrast, Tom Barrett has a career-long “F” rating from NRA-PVF and has supported bans on commonly owned firearms, supported exposing hunters to prosecution, and has consistently opposed common sense self-defense legislation.

Your NRA was fully vested in this race with a comprehensive campaign that included tens of millions of online ads and hundreds of thousands of television, radio and print ads before today’s recall election. The media campaign was also supplemented by a concentrated advocacy and get-out-the-vote phone and mail program. All-in-all, almost two million pieces of advocacy mail were sent and phone calls made in this remarkable victory for freedom.

The NRA’s media campaign was complemented with a strong grassroots effort, utilizing field coordinators to conduct literature drops, canvassing and volunteer efforts across the state in the months before the election.

Together we made a difference in this race. But, as always, what mattered most in this race was your vote. Thanks to gun owners in Wisconsin, one of the strongest pro-gun Governors in the country will continue working to support our fundamental, individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

I bet the managers of those two Gander Mountain stores which refused to let the NRA-ILA hold their previously scheduled grassroots training sessions are feeling a little stupid right now. I still plan to shop elsewhere given Gander Mountain's actions.

Chris Cox On Arms Trade Treaty

Chris Cox, Director of the NRA-ILA, was interviewed by Ginny Simone of NRA News on the UN's Arms Trade Treaty. One very important point that he made was that a treaty doesn't go away at the end of a session of Congress if it isn't ratified. It stays out there forever and a succeeding Senate could ratify it years after it was first submitted. That is what makes the Arms Trade Treaty so dangerous to our gun rights and freedoms.

Chris Cox Versus Dennis Hennigan On CNN

Dennis Henigan, Acting President of the Brady Campaign, and Chris Cox, head of the NRA-ILA, appeared on CNN's American Morning to discuss and debate the new reporting requirements issued yesterday by the Department of Justice. Kiran Chetry, host of the show, pushed Hennigan on why another law was needed when straw purchases are already illegal. His answer would have you believe that the notification of multiple sales are made in real time and that ATF agents will be at the door to arrest the buyers as they exit the store.

Thirdpower has more on Hennigan's lies and slanders at Days of our Trailers.

NRA Response To Multi-Rifle Reporting Requirement

The NRA-ILA issued this response to the DOJ's new reporting requirement.

NRA Statement on Obama Administration Decision to Require Rifle Sales Reporting

$40 billion transnational criminal enterprises don't fill out paperwork and are not deterred by paperwork violations. This is a blatant effort by the Obama administration and ATF to divert focus of Congress and the general public from their gross incompetence in the Fast and Furious scandal. This scheme will unjustly burden law-abiding retailers in border states. It will not affect drug cartels and and it won't prevent violence along our borders. ATF and the Administration lacks the statutory authority to do this and the NRA will file suit as soon as ATF sends the first demand letters.



-Chris W. Cox, executive director, NRA-ILA

NRA-ILA Statement On Court's Decision On Attorneys' Fees

Chris Cox, head of the NRA-ILA, released this statement this afternoon regarding the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals decision regarding the awarding of attorneys' fees in NRA et al v. City of Chicago et al and McDonald et al v. Chicago et al.

Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Holds NRA Entitled to Attorneys’ Fees in Lawsuits Against Chicago and Oak Park, Illinois

Thursday, June 02, 2011

Fairfax, VA—Today, the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals conclusively and forcefully held, without need for oral argument, that the National Rifle Association has the right to recover attorneys’ fees in its lawsuits against the city of Chicago's and the village of Oak Park’s unconstitutional gun bans. The court held that the NRA was a prevailing party in the case of National Rifle Association v. City of Chicago and Village of Oak Park.

“This is a Second Amendment victory and a civil rights victory. The National Rifle Association and the Second Amendment prevailed against those who sought to deny the right to keep and bear arms in Chicago and Oak Park,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director of NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action. “The attempt to avoid paying the NRA’s attorneys’ fees was rightly found to be unjust by the Court."

After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment guarantees a fundamental right to keep and bear arms for all Americans in the historic McDonald v. Chicago and NRA v. Chicago and Oak Park cases, it remanded them for the purpose of issuing an injunction against Chicago and Oak Park's unconstitutional gun ordinances. Before that injunction was issued, however, those ordinances were repealed. The City and the Village then argued that the NRA was not a prevailing party and should not be allowed to recover attorneys’ fees. The District Court, which originally ruled against the NRA, agreed and denied the fee award.

Today’s Seventh Circuit decision overturns that ruling, holding instead that the NRA is indeed a prevailing party and is entitled to receive reimbursement for attorneys’ fees. The amount to be recovered will be established by the District Court.

“This is a major victory for the NRA. While we are grateful to recover our attorneys’ fees, however, we remain steadfast in our belief that Chicago and Oak Park continue to circumvent the law of the land and deny their law-abiding residents the Second Amendment freedoms protected by the Constitution. We will continue to fight those efforts until the Second Amendment is fully respected," concluded Cox.

I see Mr. Cox still has a problem saying the name of the attorney who won the case actually heard in the Supreme Court as well as the Heller case. Let me say it for him - AH-lin Grrr-AH.

Chris Cox On Cam & Company

Chris Cox, head of the NRA-ILA, was on Cam Edward's show Friday night. Among the things he discusses with Cam are the NRA's response to Obama's "stakeholder meeting", Operation Gunwalker, and the media among other things.