Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) Article on Dudley Brown/NAGR

[funkymonkey1111]

https://saf.org/?p=3617

Dudley Brown’s Despicable Deception

15 May 2014 | News & Releases
Dudley Brown and his “National Association for Gun Rights” (NAGR) have built a reputation by attacking every other major gun rights organization and even pro-gun politicians, to the detriment of the gun rights movement. His rhetoric has done more to marginalize Second Amendment activism than all of the slanders from gun prohibition lobbying groups combined.Now Dudley has spewed his venom toward Alan Gottlieb, a true champion of Second Amendment advocacy with a proven track record of accomplishment. Gottlieb is founder and executive vice president of the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), and chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA).
In his latest effort to raise money for his own self-aggrandizement, Dudley Brown has launched a vicious canard against Alan Gottlieb, accusing the veteran gun rights advocate of “Leading the fight for national gun registration.”
Alan Gottlieb has never advocated for gun registration in his life. His legislative efforts have been to prevent that, and Dudley knows it.
Sean Tonner, deputy chief of staff for former Republican Colorado Gov. Bill Owens, was quoted by The Denver Magazine, asserting, “All Dudley wanted to do was create controversy. He makes his money when there’s turmoil, real or perceived, because that’s what gets his members to write him checks.”
It is time to call Dudley what he is, a political bomb-throwing bully whose stock in trade is to incite distrust and discontent within the ranks of the gun rights movement to enhance his own fund-raising efforts and power base.
Instead of directing his energies toward fighting the real enemy, Dudley Brown has attacked other gun rights organizations in an effort to elevate his own group, but at what cost to gun rights?
Perhaps he believes the only way to raise his own status outside the borders of Colorado is to trample on people and organizations with whom he should be allied for the common cause of advancing Second Amendment rights, rather than inflating his own ego.
When anti-gunners see people in the gun rights movement attacking one another they cheer. Such vicious attacks provide aid and comfort to the enemies of the Second Amendment.
WHERE WAS DUDLEY?
The Second Amendment Foundation has championed gun rights legal actions and won in federal courts and the U.S. Supreme Court. Remember, it was SAF that took McDonald v. City of Chicago to the Supreme Court and won. Where was Dudley?
SAF and CCRKBA have conducted the annual Gun Rights Policy Conference for more than 25 years, bringing together major gun rights leaders with grassroots activists to unify and expand the gun rights movement. Where was Dudley?
When SAF and the National Rifle Association joined forces to stop the unconstitutional gun grab in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina, where was Dudley?
When SAF and NRA joined forces to defeat the San Francisco gun ban, where was Dudley?
When SAF, NRA and CCRKBA joined forces to defeat the City of Seattle’s parks gun ban – thus strengthening state preemption in Washington state and providing a lesson for anyone who might challenge other states’ preemption laws, where was Dudley?
When the International Association for the Protection of Civilian Arms Rights (IAPCAR) was created, Alan Gottlieb was there to help bring together an organization that now has member groups from every continent and several nations. Where was Dudley?
When multi-national gun rights organizations gather in Europe to resist global gun control efforts, Alan Gottlieb is there, but where is Dudley?
Where is Dudley? We’ll ask again: WHERE – IS – DUDLEY? He is AWOL!
CCRKBA is currently fighting oppressive gun control legislation in Washington State, to prevent passage of the kind of gun laws that were adopted in Colorado, right under Dudley’s nose. Instead of isolating CCRKBA – as is Dudley’s “my way or the highway” style – Alan Gottlieb has helped bring together a coalition of organizations that includes gun collectors, hunters, competitors and law enforcement professionals. Their goal is to prevent expansion of federally-mandated background checks and state handgun registration, and prohibit government gun confiscation (a’la post-Katrina New Orleans).
Where is Dudley now? Maybe he’s trying to figure out how to exploit this battle to raise funds that would never be spent in Washington State, and perhaps even to scuttle the grassroots gun rights effort there. Remember, his forte is to create turmoil, exploit it and raise money from it, not win battles.
WHERE DUDLEY WASN’T
Two years ago, Dudley tried to claim credit for a lawsuit victory that wasn’t his, in a case he didn’t pay for.
When Students for Concealed Carry won a judgment against the University of Colorado, Dudley created the impression that it was his victory, claiming in an e-mail fund-raiser that his “National Foundation for Gun Rights” and Dudley’s Colorado-based Rocky Mountain Gun Owners (RMGO) had “successfully overturned the college campus gun ban in the Colorado Supreme Court.”
SCC President Daniel Crocker sent a blistering letter to Dudley that criticized him for “misleading remarks for the pecuniary gain of your organizations…”
In that letter, Crocker stated that Dudley’s message was “not only misleading but patently false.”
What was Dudley’s contribution to that case? RMGO provided an amicus brief. Alan Gottlieb and SAF also filed an amicus brief in that case, but they never claimed credit for winning the case.
Dudley claimed to be at the United Nations for the Arms Trade Treaty conference, yet nobody saw him in the building, but they did see Alan Gottlieb there, fighting to protect Americans’ gun rights.
IS DUDLEY BROWN A CHARLATAN?
Last year, the Minnesota Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance felt it necessary to respond to one of Brown’s e-mails regarding legislation that the MGOCRA had been supporting. Without naming him, the group posted a message on its Facebook page stating, “There is an inflammatory email being sent to Minnesotans by an out-of-state individual who has never actually accomplished anything for Minnesota gun rights (or those of any other state that we can see).
“The real purpose of this email is the same as all the rest of the emails this individual sends: to solicit donations,” the message added.
Last year, when NAGR launched an attack fund raiser against Wayne LaPierre and the National Rifle Association, gun owners in North Carolina became fed up. Some members of the NC Gun Owners forum asked questions such as, “Where was Dudley Brown during the Senate hearing on AWB and Magazine limitations?” Another observed, “I never liked an organization or person trying to build themselves up by putting others down.” A third noted, “I have not supported them at all, as I feel they are opportunists that seem to be looking for donations more than actually helping the fight.”
While SAF has as its motto “Winning firearms freedom one lawsuit at a time,” and CCRKBA’s motto is “The Common Sense Gun Lobby,” Dudley may as well say that his motto is “Destroying the gun rights movement from within, one selfish attack at a time.”
We have never made it a practice to disparage other gun rights organizations. That’s not constructive, nor does it further the cause of Second Amendment freedom. We are all supposed to be in this fight together.
However, we cannot ignore this calumny, especially from someone whose rhetoric has gun owners constantly fighting one another, rather than uniting against a common enemy.
What Dudley Brown and NAGR have done with his e-mail attack on Alan Gottlieb is deliberately divisive, disturbingly deceitful and downright despicable.
And Alan Gottlieb isn’t asking for a penny from anyone with this e-mail. He’s just setting the record straight.

[Zundfolge]

I'm not going to defend Dudley Brown, but Alan Gottlieb's recent call for us to compromise on background checks allowing the antis to expand them further (as though they won't be back the next year to demand even more compromises) instead of fight them tooth and nail does make me look at him with the same jaunted eye that I look at Dudley.

[funkymonkey1111]

I'm not going to defend Dudley Brown, but Alan Gottlieb's recent call for us to compromise on background checks allowing the antis to expand them further (as though they won't be back the next year to demand even more compromises) instead of fight them tooth and nail does make me look at him with the same jaunted eye that I look at Dudley.

this?
http://www.examiner.com/article/fire...kground-checks

or something different?

[Zundfolge]

Yes, that.

His position seems to be that the antis are going to get universal background checks no matter what so we might as well help them write them in such a way as to do less damage.

Problem is that 1) I don't buy the idea that the anti-gun movement is winning and that UBCs are fait accompli and 2) if we help the antis write UBC laws so that they do less damage, they'll turn right around and make them worse in short order.

Either fight the antis or go home, no middle ground. We've compromised enough dammit.

[funkymonkey1111]

Gottlieb was also involved in the proposed Manchin-Toomey debacle last year, too, which I found troubling.

I agree--too much compromise

[WETWRKS]

We've compromised enough dammit.

we need to quit compromising on things...the liberals refuse to compromise on gay rights, on abortion, on healthcare, on government dole programs...but yet how dare we not compromise on a RIGHT granted by the Constitution.

[Zundfolge]

http://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/wp-...un-Control.png

(didn't actually embed image 'cause it's freakin' huge)

[hatidua]

More than too much has been compromised already, regardless of entity. No more.

[XC700116]

While generally I agree with you, it looks like "in trade for his support" on the UBC thing, he's getting a hell of a lot for gun owners in trade for it, and quite frankly if CO's UBC law was like this is looking that it will be (no BGC's - AT ALL, if you have a CHP, or other similar cert) 80% of this forum would be dancing for joy for not having to have a BGC because they have a CHP/CHL and that's just part of it. To manage to negotiate away a state handgun registry is quite possibly one of the biggest single steps forward in gun rights in a LONG time.

So I'm a bit torn, yeah I hate to see them get anything, but in this case it sounds like our side is getting significantly more and quite honestly, we're most likely not going to just be able to toss the laws out on their ears, it takes incremental change, just like how we got here, to get rid of them. Here in CO, I expect that we'll get rid of the mag ban, but the UBC law, I'm not so convinced on it. Right now, he's gotten FAR more done than Dudley ever did in his wettest dream.

But if you read the bold portion below, you see the rest of the story.

The Seattle Times article portrayed the situation thusly: “To support it now, Gottlieb is requesting several tweaks, including asking state officials to conduct the checks, not the feds.” Those “tweaks” include something monumental: Destruction of Washington state’s long-standing handgun registry, a database that has existed for years on every retail handgun purchase. For those gun owners who did not realize this, when a potential buyer fills out paperwork at a gun store, in addition to the federal Form 4473 which is done for the background check, there is a State of Washington Pistol Transfer Application.
One copy goes to local law enforcement and the other goes to the state Department of Licensing, where the record is kept. Under Gottlieb’s proposal, that would cease to exist.
Another concession would be an exemption from background checks for any state resident possessing a concealed pistol license (CPL). Also, no checks would be required for firearms transfers between family members.
In addition, according to Gottlieb, “If you are a member of an organization like the Washington Arms Collectors who does a background check for membership, you would be exempt from additional checks to buy a firearm at their gun shows.” His full statement is below.
Some political insiders have privately suggested that Gottlieb’s maneuver is nothing short of brilliant. On the outside chance this measure should become law, it would be the first time in memory that a state gun registry would be abolished. “That,” said Gottlieb, “would be huge.” Right now, he is waiting to see a substitute measure that includes all of his requirements, and a non-severability clause, meaning that if one section of the law goes down, it all goes down.


Gottlieb does not believe legislative anti-gunners will go along with his provisions, and will kill the bill. If so, the political blood will be on their hands, he says. Gun owners made a legitimate offer and anti-gunners slapped it away because they wanted something for nothing; all “take” and no “give.”

[TFOGGER]

Note to nobody in particular: No data ever commited to electronic storage can ever be reliably eradicated. There will backups for the backups of the backups. To believe the state will destroy a database of millions of handgun registrations is pure folly. Gottlieb is doing this to make the law totally unpalatable to the antis, a poison pill, if you will.