“A new gun advocacy group calling itself a ‘responsible’ alternative to the National Rifle Association is launching July 4 – and it hopes to attract gun owners across the political spectrum,” usnews.com reports. Who dat? “None of the members of the leadership team are representatives, agents, or employees of the firearms manufacturing industry in any way; nor do they claim to be firearms experts of any kind; nor are they law enforcement personnel, politicians, or firearms industry lobbyists,” The Texas-based American Rifle and Pistol Association website assures its readers. “Complete executive profiles on R+P’s leadership team are available to all R+P members.” Wait. You have to sign up before you know who decided that R + P = NRA? We can do better than that! Let’s start with chairman Peter Vogt . . .

According to his Facebook page, Mr. Vogt is formerly of Stamford, Connecticut, now of Austin, Texas. (Howdy neighbor!) Blame Keep it Weirdville’s tech sector for the anti-gun virus; the dog lover with a hard-on for gun control works for Austin’s BTO Group.

Nope, not Bachman Turner Overdrive, a “highly advanced Cloud Solutions Provider, providing end-to-end Web 3.0 IT transformation solutions & services to the Fortune-1000, Energy and Healthcare.” B-b-b-b-baby you ain’t seen nothin’ yet. Although I have seen that stock shot on their website about a billion times.

CEO Waylan Johnson is an oil man, also CEOing for the Texas Energy Group. American Rifle and Pistol’s President and mouthpiece is Robert Gelinas, another high-tech liberal, the CEO at the Google search-shy AppXoft. He’s also the man behind ArcheBooks Publishing, a vanity publisher with a distinct preference for its owner’s manuscripts.

Gelinas’ Linked In profile proclaims: “R+P is the Voice of mainstream gun owners. It exists to promote SANE gun ownership and firearms management. SANE = Safety, Advocacy, Networking, and Education.”

The R+P appears to have all the authenticity, promise and likely staying power of The Coffee Party. Yet none of this dubiousness has prevented the media from eating-up what they’re putting down. Which really pisses me off.

Thousands of pro-gun rights groups labor in media obscurity, working tirelessly to extend and defend Americans’ natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. And yet the media shamelessly pimps for non-groups like Moms Demand Action and this “hey guys I’ve got a web address!” gun grabbing NRA basher.

The People of the Gun aren’t so easily fooled. And they have long memories. I only wish the NRA was faster on its feet instead of living in no comment Check-with-the-Committee Land. Then again GOA, SAF, NAGR and the rest are genuine grass roots groups who aren’t afraid to denounce the false flaggers, like R+P.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

135 COMMENTS

  4. Wow, another set of lying anti-gun dweebs with the mantra “we support the 2nd amendment, BUT …”. Just like Gabby Giffords, Shotgun Joe Biden, Obama, ad nauseam.

    • Pretty much everyone on this board “supports the 2nd amendment, BUT”, it’s only a matter of degree. Of course the cognitive dissonance and ignorance of your average gun nut will never be able to acknowledge the truth of that statement.

      Come down from your high horse and tell me how much you love the purity of the 2nd when the muslim family next door to you has a nuke in their garage.

      • The childish “Everybody will have a nuke” argument against the 2a backed with good old racism against the muslims. Or would it be intolerance towards the muslims? They all are a threat in hmmmmmer’s world.

      • The 2A and “a nuke in the garage” have absolutely fvckall to do with one another, you screaming nincompoop.

        And I think you’re wrong when you say “Pretty much everyone on this board ‘supports the 2nd amendment, BUT.'” The standard line is that when you hear that, nothing in front of the “but” matters. Well, I think most people on this board are more like something I heard a politician say the other day, which reversed that statement. He said words to the effect of, “I personally don’t see the need for anyone to own an assault weapon, BUT I believe in the Second Amendment, so I would not vote to take them away from anyone.” That is the way this country is supposed to work. He represents his constituency and his Constitution, and does not give primacy to his own ideas. Most people on this board are like that. They may not agree with private ownership of machine guns, or open carry, or whatever else, but they’re not trying to get rid of it. They’re just saying, “It’s not for me.”

        • So some corrupt, partisan supreme court decided that the 2A doesn’t in fact cover all weapons, just what they arbitrarily choose, and sheep like you are happy because the line was drawn at a place YOU find to be acceptable – it was still an arbitrary line drawn though.

          I suppose the real fool is me for thinking something so incredibly obvious and simple could be understood by mouth breathing zealots.

        • The line is drawn roughly between discriminate weapons and indiscriminate weapons, and while arbitrary, yeah, I think that’s a reasonable place to put it.

          And you’re right, the real fool is you. But not for the reason you said. You’re a fool because you keep coming here trying to drag us poor stupid troglodytes out of the caves and into the sun, and dammit, we just want to stay in the dark. You’re a fool because you keep trying, when any sane, reasonable person would just give up and leave us to our ignorant ways. My estimate of your intelligence would increase considerably if you’d recognize a lost cause when you see one.

        • hmmmmer, instead of incredibly obvious and simple maybe your conclusions were arrived at by an incredibly simple person. After all your statement against muslims and your remark about mouth breathing zealots shows a pretty simplistic train of thought.

          You would probably feel right at home at a klan rally.

    • @IdahoPete –

      Aren’t those types known as “but monkeys”?

      On another site regarding this bunch, they proclaim “not to be firearms experts”…

      That’s akin to an organization of doctors proclaiming not be experts in medicine.

  6. Yet another reason why I like TTAG. Background checks on these yahoos.
    Hi Guys and Gals, back from safari in South Africa, and thankful to be home.

    • Glad you got home safely. And please please please write up a story on your trip for TTAG. Preferably with pictures?

      It was hard to fully live your life vicariously just through the comments….

    • Did you get to murder some endangered animals from a safe distance with a high powered rifle when you were there?

        • Not on the radio today, tho I listen to that station. Kinda slept thru the day after 40 hours of travel.
          I would love to write an article! I’ll get busy and do that. I actually started this trip documenting everything to write something up like ‘safari on a budget.
          I have a ton of pictures and videos, including a near death experience with a charging cape buff.
          I can also give advice freely. Like don’t EVER take a firearm thru Great Britain.

  8. So…its a 40 year old frat boy and two hookers pretending to like guns while advocating their elimination?

      • I prefer the term floosies, its derogatory but sounds classy all at the same time.

      • Guy walks into a bar and sits down next to a hot looking blonde. He asks her,”Would you have sex with me for a million dollars?”

        She gives him the once over and says.”Yes, I would.”

        He says. “Would you do it for 5 bucks?”

        She gets angry and yells at him.”What kind of woman do you think I am!”

        To which he says.”We established that with the first question. We’re just haggling over the price now.”

  10. Just looked at the website. Looks snazzy but I didn’t like what I read, like the part about the types of firearms available to the general public should be determined by recognized experts, marksmen, and law enforcement. Or the part that says states should be able to limit what type of gun you can own based on documented “proficiency”. And there’s more. Basically, they’re for the 2nd Amendment, except when they’re not. We should trust smart people like them to determine what type of gun we can own because, well, you know, they have a cool looking website with pictures of guns and stuff. And the home page even has a big picture of a modern sporting rifle. So they must be really pro gun, right?

    • I think they meant “determined by experts” to mean that if it’s available to police and similar professionals, it should be available to all citizens.

      From their website: “Basically, whatever equipment the experts deem most appropriate and effective should be available to any other citizen potentially facing the same threats.” They could have worded it better, but they seem to be saying that if police, etc., can use it to protect the citizenry, then citizens (who after all face the same threats) should be able to use it too.

      The most worrisome thing in their statement of principles is the idea that states should set their own rules — a laudable principle, but in practice it enables the political thuggery and intolerable “prove you need it” double standards of states like Illinois, New Jersey, New York, and California.

      And after the last 7 months, you can be damn sure anyone using the word “reasonable” in regards to the Second Amendment is anything but.

    • Meh, I’m not so sure about snazzy. It’s a copy of the CEO’s corporation’s site with a a couple different color blocks on the bottom two sections. And THAT site appears appears to be a knockoff of the Windows 8/Azure branding.

    • What part of “…shall not be infringed.” are these folks having the most trouble understanding?

      There is absolutely no part of the Second Amendment that says this government, our government, ANY government, has the authority to tell us, or appoint other “experts” to decide for us what arms we may or may not bear. The whole point of the amendment is to tell the government that they have no authority on this issue.

  11. “… Then again GOA, SAF, NAGR and the rest are genuine grass roots groups who aren’t afraid to denounce the false flaggers… ”
    Hey! Where’s TTAG in that list?

    • TTAG doesn’t qualify as a “gun rights group”, more of a blog/news site. There are distinct differences between the two…

  13. This is not the first time a false front organization has been started. Americans For Gun Safety and the American Hunters And Shooters Association both ended up as major failures. American Rifle And Pistol Association will be another fail.

  14. Faux gun lovers, aka gun prostitutes; sorry, apologies to all prostitutes; at least prostitutes are honest in what they are selling.

  15. I think I’ll start an “anti gun” group called Guns Incite Violence & Entropy (GIVE). The message of GIVE is that guns cause violence, and gun owners (gun lusters) are evil. Thus, to help eliminate the evil of gun lusters, we must give them guns and ammo. And build shooting ranges and eliminate carry restrictions and repeal firearms/ammo taxes and the NFA. Because the sooner we get the violence causing guns into evil gun lusters hands, the sooner they will die out and “the rest of us” can live in peace without violence and war and anger.

    Seriously, I think some of these freaks would be crazy enough to fall for it.

  16. How on earth can you be an advocate for gun rights if you know nothing about guns?

    A lobby represents the interests of its constituents…yes?

    • “Shut up and enjoy the slick mobile app…that’s how.”

      I wonder if these guys would be willing to disclose their donor list, and how many anti-gun types would be on it.

  19. R+P believes that it is each state’s right to determine for benefit of its citizens any prerequisites, qualifications, documentation, training, and levels of demonstrated proficiency, if any, deemed necessary for lawful use of differing types of weapon systems. The establishment of any such requirements are not the prerogative of the federal government.

    … even if it means a complete prohibition and ban on firearms. FOAD

  20. I wonder why you never see false-flag disarmament associations? I could get behind one of those if they were for “reasonable restrictions” that included repealing all the unreasonable laws currently on the books.

  21. I’m not buying it. Sorry. I’ll stick with the NRA over these imposters any day of the week. The picture looks lame too I might add. Support the NRA and avoid the static!

  22. I really find it funny.

    Always being told by the VPC and Brady Campaign, is all of us NRA members are bunch of moderates who want assault rifles banned and confiscated, but the NRA somehow is run by these radical, but somehow on the other hand NOT radical and only care about money.

    Of course firearm industry is so profitable, most of the budget comes from evil gun manufacturers looking to put FN FiveSevens in the hands of thugs.

  23. 1: R+P believes that it is each state’s right to determine for benefit of its citizens any prerequisites, qualifications, documentation, training, and levels of demonstrated proficiency, if any, deemed necessary for lawful use of differing types of weapon systems. The establishment of any such requirements are not the prerogative of the federal government.
    So its the states job to trample the second amendment, not the feds.

    2: R+P believes that the most effective initiatives proven to reduce crime and gun-related violence are to be found in encouraging the increase in the number of well-trained Concealed Handgun License holders; better preventative treatment for the mentally ill; the reduction of gang activity and the availability of illegal street weapons; and strengthening of professional armed security in high population concentration locales such as malls and schools.
    Please define the term “illegal street weapon” and describe how a weapon becomes such a thing, then give me a way to prevent it from happening that doesnt destroy the second amendment.

    3: R+P aligns itself with neither polarized faction, believing that optimal firearms management solutions can exist where genuine gun rights are protected while public safety is assured.

    You have already stated that “more guns equal less crime” so how do “firearms management solutions”, “assure the safety of the public”?

    One more example of we support the second amendment, but. They will not be getting any of my money.

  25. Some folks on this group’s facebook page are really giving them a hard time. Looks like they will be able to fool no one. Nice try though, and the hookers(at least the one on his left) are not bad.

  26. Are we thinking about this the wrong way? If they really are (or can be forced to be) a membership driven and focused organization shouldn’t we just join en masse and shape it to our will?

    • That’s the problem, they aren’t elected and don’t follow the will of their members. The owner’s of the “for profit” only need to listen to their own goal’s, not the paying membership. This little clue is enough to highlight how the group is not a good idea, not including their stated goals/mission. Even if they had a good goal/mission list, the membership would never have a voice and it would be pointless to join.

  27. “Thousands of pro-gun rights groups labor in media obscurity..”
    You know what I know this is going to sound fruity, I personally appreciate all the people that wrote their politicians and stood really hard and defended our right. I also appreciate all the bloggers and blogs for fight and putting out fact and information. So in short you guys are awesome and I thank every single person, that I’m able to keep my right.

  28. God I love the internet. Shine that light bright on those cockroaches and watch them scatter!

  29. I don’t give a sh!t even if he was legitimately pro 2A. Just looking at his pose in the picture is enough for me to ignore this dooshbag. All he’s missing is the backwards ball cap.

    • When the Recoil meme started-up I traced the ownership to a rabidly anti-gun publishing magnate. I believe I posted much of his info here and am happy to say I had a tiny, but positive, effect.
      It’s not hard to research these PPL through industry and financial sites some even list home addresses and relatives (which I did not post)

    • Yep found the same info myself before reading this…thanks. I’ll be happily hanging onto my NRA Life card.
      Hopefully those lower in the Google-fu belt rankings will remain suspicious until they are properly educated by reliable sites like TTAG and PAGun. Their FB page is already getting hammered with the truth from this PA link and this TTAG article. What a pitiful sham….

  32. I will say this about them, their graphic design work is pretty great. Maybe a real gun rights org can hire their designers.

    • Nope. As someone else noted, it’s a Windows 8 canned ripoff. Which is what you’d expect from a buncha ripoff artists.

  33. From their website, ” to further the development of effective programs for personal and public safety.” Couched in the code words of “Gun Safety” has CUN CONTROL written all over it.

    “Unlike many other gun organizations, R+P first and foremost represents the interests and concerns of real gun owners, not the firearms manufacturing industry.”?
    Oh, many other gun organizations? This is pure Bullshxt.

    Thanks for the heads up.

    • I cant find on the website anywhere that it says that because it doesnt.

      “In the contentious firearms debate, there is often no true debate at all; rather, one faction eschewing any and all restrictions (even if sensible), and an opposing faction that strives for outright prohibition or de facto prohibition via regulation. R+P aligns itself with neither polarized faction, believing that optimal firearms management solutions can exist where genuine gun rights are protected while public safety is assured.”- ARPA WEBSITE, firearms debate

  34. “nor do they claim to be firearms experts of any kind;”

    I’m going to form a sane alternative to the AAA, led by people who never got a driver’s license.

  35. We are a member-centric, nationwide, organization that provides a digital-age voice for responsible firearms owners in America who feel their voice isn’t being adequately represented.
    Become a member and add your voice to one of the fastest growing communities of responsible gun owners in America today.
    A quote from thier web page:
    “Join Our Community
    Put the full power of Social Networking universe to work for you, to keep you well-connected, interacting, informed, and up to date on everything you need to know in the firearms world”.

    Good idea with that social networking stuff, we now know what dick heads you are!

  36. I have a lot of shortcomings but at least I only stand next to girls who are taller than me maybe once every five years or so.

      • A thick waisted super model is called “plus-size,” i.e. not as skinny as a meth enthusiast. The blonde is nice looking but certainly not model material, not even “plus size.” There are more comely women building airplanes where I work.

  37. I must say you Americans are very enterprising. You see a bandwagon, and before the wheels are moving, you jump all over it. In the 19th century it was railroads and religions. In the 20th, it was oil and gas, plastics and stocks. At the moment, it’s attracting money from anti-gun deep pockets loonies.

    And yes, a relative of mine started his own religion in the early 1800’s.

    It’s all about the bucks. This new crowd may end up disappointed. They’re not very convincing.

  38. Coincidentally, they have already been approved by the IRS as a non-profit organization. Just joking!

  41. I think I’ve seen the dark-haired woman on the right in a couple of um videos oh somewhere on the web doing err various activities with other women.

    • Hands on instructional plumbing videos? She looks like she knows her way around a P Trap.

  42. Joke
    That is all they are.

    Suckers
    Any who follow.

    So be it
    I could give a sh!t.

  43. But they are using videos by NRA badboy, colion noir and my future ex-wife, Jesse duff…
    It MUST be legit!

  45. Bill Gates and his wife, John ‘candy ash’ Kerry and his ’57 Varieties’ wife, Michle Moore, Fonda

  46. I wonder how much money the put into their treasury and if they have board elections and if so what the requirements to vote are. Since it seems tat the founders have lots of money if they put a lot of their own money into the organization, and they will be holding votes for the all the board positions we could launch our own false flag operations against them (or any similar group that may exist or will exist) have a couple of true gun rights people join the organization pretending to be their ideas of “moderates” when it comes close to their elections we get turn up in force to join the organization than vote our plants into all the positions on the board. Then rapidly spend all of he organizations money on the biggest no compromise pro gun rights activities/campaigns/politicians there are, leaving nothing but a dead husk of the groups finances (and possibly the group its self). Than to top it all off merge the organization into the NRA so the anti’s on the group our suddenly part of the “Evil NRA” just to troll them. Who know if you could keep the fact that they just became a chapter in the NRA low key enough, you might wind up with some anti’s paying renewal dues, which directly fund the NRA which would just be the icing on the cake.

    Just a thought and only really worth the effort if these founders invested a lot of money or have found some big donors for this organization, and they allow public voting on who runs it.

  47. Appreciate the heads up & have already passed it along.

    …but it got me thinking, this reminds me of that pho-sportsman group that popped up just before the 2008 election to mitigate Obama’s “sorry-assed” public stance on the 2nd Amendment, just before that election. It was marginally effective in siphoning a small portion of the “sportsmen vs gun owners” votes in that election. But, as imagined, the group disappeared right after the election.
    Anybody remember their name? This has all the same hallmarks & playing us for the rubes they think we are.

  48. So I wonder about the by-laws. Does the membership have the ability to select a new president, and the rest of the directors? Could be some interesting possibilities

  49. Inundate them with emails and questions from their own interface as well… I wrote, several days ago, this: (When it first raised its head… calling them out)

    Dear ARP,
    I note with interest your appearance on the battle grounds of 2nd Amendment rights, gun ownership and use… I sure hope folks don’t associate your initials with AARP? But that aside…

    Some issues… ” founded by a group of accomplished business executives based in Austin, TX, ” Most ‘conservatives’ view Austin as the BLUE part of Texas. And I have to say ‘accomplished’ business executives further isolates your efforts simply by the basic dollar and lifestyle

    I certainly agree with ‘education’ but education, especially as we see it over these past generations by the NEA, has been the downfall of society and not the ‘electoral’ bulwark it was intended. The classrooms have been used to undermine all that was great about America and her heritage so here’s hoping that ‘education’ to the elite means more than it has come to mean to the socialists in charge today.

    “R+P seeks to work with state and local governments to help establish effective training and licensing programs” Have you acquiesced to “any” government’s rights to “control” and, thereby, “limit” capriciously the rights of Citizens to protect themselves against those “very” state and local governments? I mean, L.A. is a local government. It is diametrically opposed to the citizens of Los Angeles being able to protect themselves as is the County of Los Angeles. Gaining parity with the favored of Hollywood, who “can” obtain (for instance) a CCW, will be a strictly UPHILL battle that many have waged for decades. Good luck with that.

    “…those that have been adjudicated mentally ill.” Hmmm, adjudicated
    indicates “authority” and, while the concept of a Constitutional Republic certainly demands ‘authority’, what happens when that ruling legislative and executive branch is corrupt itself? When the very tool of ‘adjudication’ is used as a club to curb gun ownership for the purposes of the ruling classes? Who will be ‘calling’ those mentally ill shots? Currently there is noise about “all” that have ever been on an anti-depressant? Even among the rich and famous of Austin, I would
    suspect some such use and ask you, “Are you willing to be adjudicated as
    mentally ill” due such innocent use?

    So, these are just a few thoughts on the sudden presence of a ‘new’ gun rights organization and, while we have so many, certainly another with proper financial backing AND the correct ideology driving it ‘could’ be welcome. I suspect, however, that you will find some resistance simply based on a few of the observed commentary on your site. I wish you ‘good luck’ ;^) with a ‘restrained’ expectation!

  50. Everything posted in this article is completely false or misinforming.

    This group in no way is an anti-gun organization or a bunch of liberals trying to be gun grabbers. They are trying to actually project the voice of the American gun owners, instead of strictly promoting special interests of the gun industry. When was the last time the NRA actually voiced YOUR OWN OPINION, never.

    This group has no ties with mayor Bloomberg, what so ever.

    If your mindset is so easily dupped by an uncredited blog such as this, then shame on you. How many times does misinformation spread because of blogs like this?

    These ordinary people want to stand up and fight for your voice! Not come grab your guns or enforce gun control. They want to enforce better firearms management!

    • Your very words betray intent. The NRA is the American people. Its dues and funding from its members empower it and chart the path for its actions. “R+P” is more of the same astroturf we’ve come to expect from people attempting to get themselves established ahead of important 2014 elections. Be rest assured that gun owners will do their best to expose it.

      • Lots of trolling around here. Hmmmmmmmm, Kelli, and now this fraud. We just need rtempleton, mikeybnumbers and we will have a real party.

      • PRangel, this group is non-partisian and has absolutely NO POLITICAL MOTIVATIONS for the coming elections besides promoting “S.A.N.E”.

        If they were trying to promote a liberal agenda, I WOULD HAVE NEVER JOINED.

    • If I want to support gun control I can go with the Brady Bunch or VPC. What do I need these clowns for?

      • These people are in no way for gun control! You have been seriously mislead.

        “In the contentious firearms debate, there is often no true debate at all; rather, one faction eschewing any and all restrictions (even if sensible), and an opposing faction that strives for outright prohibition or de facto prohibition via regulation. R+P aligns itself with neither polarized faction, believing that optimal firearms management solutions can exist where genuine gun rights are protected while public safety is assured.”- ARPA website

      • Well, I have to respect everyone’s opinions. I also understand everyones skepticsm. I got sold on the member centric…if this group truly wants to be member centric or even a relevant pro gun group in general…what are somethings you want to hear or see from them? Or things they should do different?

    • R + P Member: I’m willing to keep an open mind. Can you expand on a couple concepts for me?

      “…project the voice of the American gun owners, instead of strictly promoting special interests of the gun industry.”

      Clearly you misunderstand the NRA. The NRA’s power is its membership. They are not a lobbying organization for the gun industry, save that the people in the gun industry are very often NRA members.

      “When was the last time the NRA actually voiced YOUR OWN OPINION, never.”

      Well, I’ll admit the whole “blame Newtown on video games” thing was pretty goddamn stupid, but beyond that, yeah, they generally depict my point of view pretty accurately.

      “They want to enforce better firearms management!”

      Please explain exactly what that means, in actual English. What do they consider “better firearms management” and how to they propose to enforce it?

      “…one faction eschewing any and all restrictions (even if sensible)…”

      Please define what R + P considers sensible restrictions. You may find that some of us agree with them, once we know what they are.

      “…believing that optimal firearms management solutions can exist where genuine gun rights are protected while public safety is assured.”

      Corporate speak, ho! I like how I can make that sentence about information security just by changing a couple words, and it will still be just as meaningless. Watch: “…believing that optimal information management solutions can exist where consumer access is protected while data safety is assured.” Neat, huh?

      But that’s fine, we’ll take it as written. What are “firearms management solutions” and how can they be “optimized?” What specific “firearms management solutions” does R + P support? What are “genuine gun rights” and what makes them “genuine?” Conversely, what gun rights does R + P consider to be not genuine, or illegitimate?

      I look forward to your answers to any or all of these questions. Try to keep your answers as free from corporate-speak as possible.

      • Pretty good reply Matt. I thought about going into that detail but really, all one needs do is read the posted links here and on their FB page to see the wolf lurking beneath the wool.

        As for “They want to enforce better firearms management!”, I can manage my firearms just fine thanks…so long as no one jiggles my elbow on the firing line.

    • Your organization’s big mistake is to take up a party line of the gun control crowed, that the NRA is a lobby group for the gun makers. The truth is that the NSSF is the lobby group for the gun makers, the NRA is for the people, but actually fights for all gun rights across the board.

      You also kinda killed yourself by identifying your group as an outsider to the shooting community by typing ths: “If your mindset is so easily dupped by an uncredited blog such as this,”…dude, seriously, this one of the top blogs in the gun community. Even if your not a fan of Fargo’s junk….he still runs an epic blog, and every one knows it. This blog is often the very face of the gun community. Ignorance killed ya on this one.

    • So far, the NRA has echoed my thoughts and wishes. I know plenty of others that agree with that assessment. If anything, I think in the past, they haven’t been vociferous enough in implementing things like removing NFA items or abolishing NFA completely. If anything, I wish the NRA would take a tougher stance on these issues, like SAF and GOA does.

  51. They’re getting better…huge step up from “The Gun Guys” days-just enough coats of paint so the Low Information Voters can’t see the rotten wood, but never passing even cursory scrutiny.

  52. JD has a point. These frauds are getting better at deception. I am grateful sites like this exist to help get the word out.

  53. Honestly, reading a progun website should not give me the creeps….and this R+P does just that. This should not happen to a helpless gun fanatic who will read anything about guns like me. Seriously, I get the feeling that I’m reading MAIG’s web site. It just doesn’t feel right.

  54. So I suppose that the extensive revealing info posted over on PAGuns that was discussed here earlier just proves that they too are another “stupid website”?

  55. NRA is a non profit. The R+P is a business…..and you say “take money out of the equation”….seriously.

    • Her alma mater is listed as: San Francisco State University. Oops. I’ve known quite a few people from there. Exactly one of them is NOT a barking moonbat.

Comments are closed.