I’ve been seeing people take notice of the American Hunter’s and Shooter’s Association’s recent letter to AG Eric Holder which purportedly opposes enacting a new and improved ban on scary looking firearms…a position which has been a major plank of the Obama administration since the beginning of the election.
Most of the comments I’ve seen have been skeptical, but I’ve seen a few recently that seem to be buying into the idea that the AHSA may have “seen the light” or is not as anti-gun as previously thought.
In the post that the last link above points to, David Hardy muses:
If anything, I’m shocked at how obvious these clowns are. A false-flag operation should be subtle. Here’s a supposedly pro-gun group that was founded by two Brady Campaign directors and well-paid expert witness for the groups suing gun manufacturers.
They seem to have gotten the message.
They are, in fact, radically altering their position statements in an effort to be less obvious that they are an anti-gun organization. Unfortunately for them, in doing so, they are directly contradicting well documented past positions and even contradicting positions still endorsed on their site.
Their intent is obvious…and dangerous. We need to be aware of it and prepared to counter them and expose their lies. This new tactic is, in fact, a tactic and nothing more. They are trying to build their “pro-gun” creds.
It’s pretty safe for them to take these positions now…while the most anti-gun administration in history is in office and they know that their pleas will fall on deaf ears. But, in a few years, they can point back at these instances and say “see, we DO support gun rights”, when trying to induce hunters and non-politically savvy gun owners to support them.
Why have they chosen this tactic? Well…they haven’t been getting any traction at all on legislation instituting their individual agenda items…but the one place they did perceive some success is in getting Obama elected. Remember that the AHSA endorsed the big O.
I have no doubt that their ego and delusions of grandeur compel them to believe that they had an impact on the election and they view this as a success. In an effort to build on that success, they have adopted this strategy. By opposing specific gun control policies (or at least denying that they support them), they hope to build their reputation as a pro-gun organization…That way, in future elections, when they endorse the most anti-gun candidates and swear that they are not REALLY anti-gun, they will at least have some semblance of credibility…the only element they lacked in the last election.
In other words, they’re abandoning their support for individual gun control proposals (actually, more accurately, they are leaving the support of individual proposals to their sister organizations, the VPC, Brady Campaign, et al…) and are focusing on endorsing and getting anti-gun candidates elected into office.
We need to be cognizant of this new tactic and prepared to defend against it. Thirdpower and others are doing a lot of the ground work in pointing out their contradictions and flip flops, we just need to be armed with those facts and aggressively use them when the time comes to undermine their inevitable efforts at deceiving the voters.