Last weekend’s National Rifle Association convention in Louisville could easily have been mistaken for a Republican campaign rally.
“If either Senator Clinton or Senator Obama is elected president, the rights of law-abiding gun owners will be at risk my friends - and have no doubt about it,” John McCain, the presumptive GOP presidential nominee, told the crowd.
Former Republican candidates Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee also spoke, with Huckabee making - and later apologizing for - an attempt at a joke. When a chair fell over with a bang during his speech, Huckabee said it was Democratic candidate Barack Obama ducking because somebody aimed a gun at him.
Rounding out the NRA’s “American Values Leadership Forum” were Republican icons Karl Rove and Oliver North, who are now Fox News Channel commentators.
What you didn’t hear is that many gun enthusiasts balk at the NRA’s devotion to the Republican Party. They resent the NRA for appropriating their values, radicalizing their views and, perhaps, jeopardizing their ability to own guns in the future.
“In many circles, the NRA stands for the National Republican Association,” said Bob Ricker, executive director of the American Hunters & Shooters Association, which last month endorsed Obama for president.
The AHSA was started two years ago by Ricker, a former NRA assistant general counsel and longtime gun industry lobbyist, and Ray Schoenke, an avid hunter and former Washington Redskins lineman who ran unsuccessfully in 1998 for the Democratic nomination to be governor of Maryland.
“There wouldn’t be a need for the American Hunters & Shooters Association if the NRA was doing its job,” Ricker said in an interview. “We really feel like the vast majority of sportsmen are under-represented.”
The AHSA wants to preserve the right of law-abiding citizens to own guns for recreation and self-defense. But it also wants to curb gun violence and gun crime.
Ricker said the NRA’s focus on absolute gun-ownership rights has made communities less safe and led that organization to support some politicians who have bad records on environmental conservation, which is important to hunters.
The AHSA supports what Ricker called “common-sense” proposals such as the assault-weapons ban and requiring people who buy guns at gun shows to have the same criminal background checks required at gun stores.
He said the NRA’s resistance to those and other measures that would make guns safer and keep them out of the hands of criminals only further divides the nation between pro-gun and anti-gun factions. That division puts law-abiding gun owners at risk, especially when public opinion swings against guns in the wake of such tragedies as the Virginia Tech massacre.
Ricker said the AHSA endorsed Obama after reviewing all of the major candidates’ positions. Key to the decision was Obama’s vote for federal legislation that would prevent police from seizing legally held guns during emergencies, as happened in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. Hillary Clinton voted against it.
McCain has had a rocky relationship with the NRA over the years, although he’s seeking its endorsement this time. “We just think McCain is the type of guy who is going to say anything to get elected,” Ricker said.
The AHSA has signed up about 25,000 dues-paying members over two years, Ricker said. That pales in comparison to the 4 million members of the NRA, which had a 135-year head start. But Ricker notes that the NRA’s 4 million is only a fraction of the nation’s estimated 60 million gun owners.
The NRA dismisses the AHSA as a front for gun-control activists, noting that it supports some restrictions and compromises advocated by such groups as the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.
Ricker said that’s exactly the point.
The best way to protect the rights of law-abiding citizens to own and use firearms is to reduce gun violence and crime. And the best way to do that is to search for compromises that protect both constitutional rights and the public safety.
“You can’t solve it by stonewalling as the NRA has done,” Ricker said.
May 21, 2008 at 9:22 am
What about this group makes this group “pro-gun”? Appeasement and erosion of rights essentially makes them anti-gun. The article is also somewhat disingenuous in that it concentrates more on the fact that the group is against the NRA, and not what the are doing to promote gun ownership. Incidentally, there are many other gun ownership advocate groups already in existence if the NRA does not suit a certain person, all with a better track record for being true supporters of the 2nd amendment then the “American Hunters and Shooters Ass.” Gun Owners of America, the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the Second Amendment Foundation, Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, and the Second Amendment Sisters are just some of the organizations available. The NSSF produced a document specifically with the purpose of highlighting why the AMSA did not support gun owners, highlighting the affiliation of many of the AMSA members to ANTI-GUN groups. The document can be found here: http://www.nssf.org/share/pdf/AHSA_Fact_Sheet.pdf
May 21, 2008 at 4:13 pm
The AHSA has signed up about 25,000 dues-paying members over two years, Ricker said.
So … did you pull the AHSA’s form 990? The IRS will fax you a copy if you ask them to.
Now that he has to report such things, I believe the current membership consists of Ricker and his staff.
May 22, 2008 at 10:33 am
In response to Tom (above). Instead of worrying about whether a group is Pro-Gun or Anti-Gun, or what one organization says about another, why don’t you read what they actually have to say about the issue of gun ownership in America, and decide for yourself if it makes sense. I don’t see how anyone of reasonable mindset could argue against what this article says about what this group is advocating. Are you saying that being Pro-Gun is to be in favor of violent crime? Because I know you cannot reasonably make the claim that weak gun control laws (in leiu of a willing society) do not contribute to violent crime (of which America is among the world leaders). Or that because this group claims to be in favor of reducing or preventing violent crime, that makes them “Anti-Gun” and just like that, you’ve got them figured out. Forget about Pro-Gun and Anti-Gun, those terms paint a complex and nuanced subject with a very broad brush. And they fool you into believing that you know how to judge between what’s in your best interests and what is not. Perhaps it would be helpful if you would define those terms. What, to you, does it mean to be “Pro-Gun” and “Anti-Gun”?
May 22, 2008 at 8:33 pm
That “other” organization is nothing but a front group for anti-gunners. It may have about 10 members and they are also anti-gun. Ricker sold out gun owners for cash and I would not believe him if he said the sun came up in the East. McCain spoke at the NRA convention. Is Obama going to speak at the “Brady association to ban guns” convention? When is that anyway?