Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

June 20, 2006
By: Christina Larson

SHOOTS AND LADDERS.... The new American Hunters and Shooters Association, which aims to be a pro-gun, pro-conservation, pro-safety alternative to the NRA, is already a rumor magnet. Noting that the group's URL was first registered by an Internet consulting firm, DCS, with the address 600 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, John Lott smells conspiracy:

So ALL three groups: The Democrat leadership council (DLC) , DCS - Internet Advocacy Group and The American Hunters and Shooters Association (AHSA) Are located in the same building and all three groups are pushing to take away your rights via their made up causes for the sake of getting their faces in the news.

But wait. Other residents of 600 Pennsylvania Ave SE include the College Republicans, Republicans Abroad International, and the bistro Sizzlin' Express. Ergo, a really weird conspiracy.

(Quick intro to AHSA here.)

UPDATE: I'll cover in more detail what we can know about AHSA's political viability, leadership, and NRA contentions once I get back to the office. Frankly, more important than what I think is what's been the reaction of sportsmen and outdoor writers I've talked to here in Lake Charles.

Christina Larson 1:30 AM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (44)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

Does anyone take anything John Lotts says seriously anymore?

In an office building in my town, many years ago, side by side were the law offices of Reed and Wright, and an accountant, Justin Case.

Now that's a conspiracy!

Posted by: bad Jim on June 20, 2006 at 1:42 AM | PERMALINK

Which rights do we have left, anyway?

Posted by: craigie on June 20, 2006 at 1:48 AM | PERMALINK

You can always tell someone's wingnuttery when they refer to the Democrat Party. O'Reilly does it, Bush does it (sometimes) and Delay never lets a moment pass without slipping it in. Fortunately we have a media that is happy to play ringside judge and be as unobtrusive as possible. Gosh Bless America

Posted by: robbymack on June 20, 2006 at 2:14 AM | PERMALINK

I have it on good authority that Mary Rosh is John's inside source on all this!

Posted by: Bruce Moomaw on June 20, 2006 at 2:28 AM | PERMALINK

Which rights do we have left, anyway?

None. We've left the rights for the centre.

Posted by: floopmeister on June 20, 2006 at 2:39 AM | PERMALINK

AHA! I've always been convinced that the DLC was a front for the Republicans. Now I know it is true since they share a building with those clever College Republicans. Thanks, Lott!

Posted by: ecoboz on June 20, 2006 at 2:47 AM | PERMALINK

We all know Lott has trouble with numbers, but would it be so hard to call the rental company and ask what the average price per square foot is in that building, then call his own building's agent and ask what it is there? Golly gee whillikers, it just might be the Ass'n got a good price!

Posted by: Linkmeister on June 20, 2006 at 3:09 AM | PERMALINK

You really have to give Republicans credit for their chutzpa. Next up Newt will talk about how disgusting it is that a Democrat left his wife during cancer treatment, Cheney will talk about the horrible Democrat that shot a man in the face and Condi will bitch about the Dem that went shoe shopping when an American city drowned.

Posted by: Mike S on June 20, 2006 at 3:16 AM | PERMALINK

Note to AHSA: You can't have an effective public interest lobbying organization without a corporate puppet master. Do you ever hear about how the National Wildlife Federation killed a piece of legislation or entered into negotiations with committee chairmen? I don't think so. They have more members than the NRA but they spend most of their time and money informing members of legislative defeats.

Resort developers, Hollywood stars with vacation homes in the Rockies -- use your imagination.


Posted by: rewolfrats on June 20, 2006 at 3:28 AM | PERMALINK

John Lott? The man who shares an IP address with Mary Rosh and countless other sockpuppets? He's a one man fuckin' shell company, a man with more aliases than Sydney Bristow.

Talk about fucking irony. And yeah, chutzpah.

Posted by: ahem on June 20, 2006 at 3:28 AM | PERMALINK

Lott is a conspiracy in his own mind.

He's really an idiot!

Posted by: SteveAudio on June 20, 2006 at 3:48 AM | PERMALINK

Kevin -

NOT that I give John Lott any credence, but to counter the claims he's making about ASHA, it's important to note that he's NOT making the connection based SOLELY on the addresses for the DLC, DCS and AHSA, He is also claiming that DCS is the official PR firm for the DLC, that one of the men who heads ASHA is John Rosenthal who co-founded Stop Handgun Violence, that the press person for ASHA - Dan Drummond - is the chair of the Fairfax City Democratic Committee, and that they site's Internet Registration was then changed to show it being registered to Robert Ricker, who Lott claims has "given anti-gun testimony before legistlative committees in Anapolis."

Again, John Lott is someone who is far more often full of shit than anything else, but if this information checks out, then it may be one of those rare times of a stopped clock not being off the mark for once.

Posted by: kriselda jarnsaxa on June 20, 2006 at 6:53 AM | PERMALINK

Here is a link to the bios of the officers and board of the organization. I have to admit any board including Jody Powell sounds like it is connected with the DLC, but the last I looked the DLC was a Republican front organization. ;) I don't know why Republicans should be concerned.

The board membership actually sounds like a pretty mixed bag.

http://www.huntersandshooters.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=32&Itemid=44

Posted by: Ron Byers on June 20, 2006 at 8:30 AM | PERMALINK

Here's another LOL member of the conspiracy

From www.USPS.gov web site:

Post Office - Southeast
600 Pennsylvania AVE SE Frnt 2
Washington, DC 20003-9997

Posted by: LottsAnIdjit on June 20, 2006 at 8:55 AM | PERMALINK

I guess you didn't know what we know out here in Texas. The cattle shot by mistake -- by beer-soaked hunters -- are the ones which supply Sizzlin' Express. The shooters are usually parents of College Republicans.

Posted by: PW on June 20, 2006 at 9:17 AM | PERMALINK

"Not to mention the fact that they want to regulate .50 caliber rifles in the same way that machine guns are regulated."

Yeah. Regulating a rifle that can put a slug clean through a police car, that that's lunacy. I mean, what would American mastodon hunters do without access to such a firearm?

I tend to take AHSA at its word: it thinks that the NRA is a sock puppet of the Republicans' Party, that it froths up the membership with lots of black-helicopter conspiracy talk (The UN(!) negotiates an agreement to cut gun supplies to Sierra Leone, then in the throes of drug-fueled civil war, and therefore its after your guns.), that where the interests of outdoorsmen conflicts with that of energy interests, the outdoorsmen lose.

Posted by: Brian C.B. on June 20, 2006 at 9:18 AM | PERMALINK

Uh...hello? The .270 in my closet can put a slug through a police car, or any other car, too.

You anti gunners, while fighting a losing battle, would still do better if you weren't so given to hysterics, nonsensical handwringing, and hyperbole.

I'd love to see a real alternative to the NRA. If there's even a grain of truth to what the NRA claims about the AHSA, this ain't it.

Posted by: Sebastian on June 20, 2006 at 9:35 AM | PERMALINK

Not to be spliting hairs, or anything, but these articles came out last year, making this seem like an extreme case of treppenwitz. I'll check beck next year, to see if there's a comment to this comment.

Posted by: Ted on June 20, 2006 at 9:40 AM | PERMALINK

John Lott and Bush's conservative lemming supporters (like Jay) again show why they can never be taken seriously - they take facts out of context, lie, make up evidence, forge documents, commit bribery, defame, redefine words with false but suitably convenient definitions, and misrepresent their opponents - anything to win, regardless how illegal, corrupt, immoral, or unethical.

Sorta like their good buddy Saddam Hussein!

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 20, 2006 at 9:42 AM | PERMALINK

I am one of those wierd Texas liberals who believes that private citizens should have the right to own any weapon available to the military short of nukes. Watering the tree with GoOPers and all that.

But the NRA is full of crap. The gun issue isn't even on the table anymore. Gone...Nada...You never even hear gun banning brought up. Democrats realized as an issue it was a Dog with fleas. Yet the NRA is playing proffesional victim anyway. Vigalance is one thing, but being an outright front for the black helicopter right wing extremists is something else.

I cancled my membership when they started sucking DeLays dick. I guess being a corrupt SOB is fine as long as you own a glock.

Posted by: SnarkyShark on June 20, 2006 at 9:46 AM | PERMALINK

Is Lott capable of walking and chewing gum at the same time?

Posted by: RP on June 20, 2006 at 9:50 AM | PERMALINK

There isn't one rock in DC that if you overturn it you won't find Sizzlin' Express underneath it. To paraphrase "All The President's Men," follow the sizzle...follow the sizzle....

Posted by: Stefan on June 20, 2006 at 9:55 AM | PERMALINK

Yes, RP - keep reading up through kriselda's and my posts.

Oh, don't worry. I already know that you can't walk and chew gum at the same time.

Posted by: RP on June 20, 2006 at 10:00 AM | PERMALINK

College Republicans? Republicans Abroad International? I never realized those right-wing punks from Dartmouth who have now settled on the Continent actually wanted to take away my guns.

Posted by: Vincent on June 20, 2006 at 10:26 AM | PERMALINK

SnarkyShark: . . . private citizens should have the right to own any weapon available to the military short of nukes.

Would that include VX, bunker busters, cruise missles (with non-nuclear payloads of course!), stealth bombers and the like?

Just askin'.

;-)

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 20, 2006 at 10:42 AM | PERMALINK

Cheney: And, I never worry.

Especially about our soldiers and their families, friends and comrades.

It's hard for you to care deeply about someone that you consider to be simply cannon fodder and there solely as a means to draw the fire away from you and your family.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 20, 2006 at 10:45 AM | PERMALINK

http://www.bernsteinmgmt.com/com_dc_penn.html

Posted by: tony spafford on June 20, 2006 at 11:10 AM | PERMALINK

I am one of those wierd Texas liberals who believes that private citizens should have the right to own any weapon available to the military short of nukes.

Texas liberals are an especially interesting study in contradictions.

Posted by: GOP on June 20, 2006 at 1:32 PM | PERMALINK

Ewwww.

Reading the AHSA webpage, it's pretty obvious that these guys aren't what they're making themselves out to be.

http://www.huntersandshooters.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=22&Itemid=43

Cop killer bullets? There's no such thing. That's one of the more tired myths in the long and storied history of gun grabbing.

And falling back on what "hunters" think about assault weapons bans and background checks sounds nice, but that's gun controller code for "we don't want anyone but white folk living in the hinterland to have guns." Reality check #1: 80% of gun owners DON'T HUNT. Reality check #2: the Second Amendment doesn't say shit about hunting. Hunting is not a specifically constitutionally protected activity (which is not to say that I think it can or should be made illegal).

The gun rights debate is only tangentally related to hunting, and the opinions of the hunting community are often at odds with the larger gun rights community for a reason.

As for whether you can own cruise missles, bunker busters, etc., those would all be regulated as explosives, not arms. I know where you're going with that, but it's a tired attempt at a slippery slope argument that doesn't hold any water.

Posted by: Sebastian on June 20, 2006 at 1:49 PM | PERMALINK

"Ergo, a really weird conspiracy."

Tasty, too.

Posted by: Vlad on June 20, 2006 at 2:03 PM | PERMALINK

SnarkyShark wrote: I am one of those wierd Texas liberals who believes that private citizens should have the right to own any weapon available to the military short of nukes.

So you are in favor of infringing the right of the people to bear arms. There's nothing in the Second Amendment that says "... except nuclear arms", just as there is nothing in the Second Amendment that says "except fully-automatic military-grade machine guns".

Clearly, the Second Amendment says that "the people" have the right to "bear" any and all weapons, and there is thus no basis for infringing the right of the people to bear nuclear arms.

The fact that the Second Amendment was written at a time when "arms" meant single-shot muzzle-loading flint-lock rifles just demonstrates the wisdom and foresight of the Founders. Clearly, they understood that human ingenuity would eventually produce weapons of tremendous power, far beyond what existed in their time, and with that in mind they specifically wrote the Second Amendment using language that guaranteed the rights of future Americans to "keep and bear" any and all weapons that future technology might produce, without "infringement", including nuclear weapons.

Posted by: SecularAnimist on June 20, 2006 at 3:30 PM | PERMALINK

This just in: John R. Lott is still nuts.

Posted by: RT on June 20, 2006 at 3:46 PM | PERMALINK

Seeing as 99.99999999999999% of the population can't even afford nuclear arms, who cares?

To keep and bear clearly describes a hand to hand weapon like a rifle, pistol, shotgun, sword, etc. in the language of the day. There's no slippery slope here.

Interestingly enough, under the Natl. Firearms Act of 1934, you can get your hands on Class III munitions (Ma Dueces, M203, 40mm grenades, tank warshots for your collectors item Sherman, etc) but the licensing, registration, and costs involved are extremely onerous and prohibitive.

Posted by: Sebastian on June 20, 2006 at 4:52 PM | PERMALINK
But wait. Other residents of 600 Pennsylvania Ave SE include the College Republicans, Republicans Abroad International, and the bistro Sizzlin' Express. Ergo, a really weird conspiracy.

Interesting, except that Lott doesn't allege that they're merely in the same building but that two of the groups (ASHA and DCS) are both located in the same office suite which suggests that they're one and the same.

Posted by: Thorley Winston on June 20, 2006 at 6:17 PM | PERMALINK

I don't care who shares a room with who; just looking at their website makes it clear that they are to gun rights what XOM's friends at the CEI are to global warming studies.

Posted by: Sebastian on June 20, 2006 at 8:47 PM | PERMALINK

"The new American Hunters and Shooters Association, which aims to be a pro-gun, pro-conservation, pro-safety alternative to the NRA, ..."

Oh, please. You can't truly believe that can you? 15 minutes spent checking the AHSA website content and googling the names of the leadership shows the AHSA is a phony 'astroturf' type group designed to promote/protect gun-control legislation and attack the NRA. I will grant that the AHSA is less clumsy in it's attempt to deceive the American shooting public than the older astroturf group, "Americans for Gun Safety".

How weak is the gun-control crusade when they have to resort to such deception? Remember when "the Brady Campaign" group used to be named "Handgun Control, Inc."? Or the even earlier name "National Campaign to Ban Handguns'?

Posted by: Brad on June 21, 2006 at 6:20 AM | PERMALINK

And if any Democrats out there think they can use the AHSA for political cover, you best forget it. That gambit won't fool any pro-gun-rights single-issue voter.

After what the Democrats have done to gun owners over the years, and continue to do to them in Democratic strongholds like California, those voters are forever lost to the Democrats. The Democrats have less chance of picking up those votes than the Republicans have of breaking the Democratic lock on the black vote.

Posted by: Brad on June 21, 2006 at 6:31 AM | PERMALINK

Brad,
While I agree 100% with your analysis of AHSA as an astroturf group, (it's actually really obvious, and I'm hoping it's being discussed by Christina, Kevin, etc tongue in cheek), there are plenty of voters who are gun owners but don't buy into the GOP platform. The gun control movement is all but dead and is a tiny minority whose vocal and strident attitudes make them seem larger than they are. There are few votes to be gained for the Dems pushing gun control, but there are tons of social libertarians, purple state moderates, progun Dems and liberals like me, etc who are turned off by the pro-theocracy, anti-environment, anti-choice neocon cabal that's taken over the GOP. These folks will vote Dem if the Dems dump gun control.

Posted by: Sebastian on June 21, 2006 at 8:20 AM | PERMALINK
The gun control movement is all but dead and is a tiny minority whose vocal and strident attitudes make them seem larger than they are.

I wouldn't say the movement is dead; I think we've mostly reached an equilibrium where most jurisdictions laws are a fairly good match for the people in the jurisdiction, and neither those in favor of radical universal deregulation nor those in favor of radical universal regulation have a lot of opportunity for traction.

AHSA mostly seems to serve (regardless of whether its real or astroturf) to divorce a number of other liberal issues that are far more active from the political dead weight of the gun control issue, and underline that increased gun control isn't a central Democratic issue.

Posted by: cmdicely on June 21, 2006 at 7:50 PM | PERMALINK
Interesting, except that Lott doesn't allege that they're merely in the same building but that two of the groups (ASHA and DCS) are both located in the same office suite which suggests that they're one and the same.

It hardly suggests that; its quite possible for two groups to share office space in that way. Usually, what it means is that instead of renting space from the building owner, one of the groups is subletting space from the other group.

Posted by: cmdicely on June 21, 2006 at 8:04 PM | PERMALINK

"These folks will vote Dem if the Dems dump gun control. "

If - if - if, ah that's the problem. Do you really think the Dems will dump gun control? At best the only thing a few Democratic candidates seem willing to do is give lip service to not pushing any new gun-control law.

And what good are words when pro-gun single-issue voters witness Democratic actions in localities where the Democrats still dominate? The gun-control crusade is not dead wherever Democrats still call the shots. The Dem lip-service is a cheap con-job, and no one who has any memory or pays attention to current events will get taken in by it.

The problem is the Democratic party has purged itself of both conservatives and pro-gun politicians since the disaster of 1994. And the trendline for the party doesn't seem to be getting any better as the need to 'purify' the party has taken hold. I think the attempt to purge Senator Lieberman is just the beginning.

"While I agree 100% with your analysis of AHSA as an astroturf group, (it's actually really obvious, and I'm hoping it's being discussed by Christina, Kevin, etc tongue in cheek),..."

Ah, see this is the problem, while the nature of the AHSA is obvious, it isn't obvious to Christina, Kevin, etc. They aren't joking. And that obtusness, that cluelessness, perfectly sums up the problem the gun-control issue remains for the Democratic Party. Just wait, I bet some Dem politicians will claim support of the AHSA or "Americans for Gun Safety" as evidence of thier defense of 2nd Amendment rights!


Posted by: Brad on June 21, 2006 at 8:19 PM | PERMALINK

The AHSA is a year old now. We looked at them last August and found a group that staffed by ardent gun grabbers.

The question is this: If they want to be the hunting alternative to the NRA, why do the spend so much effort pushing gun control?

Check out our review.

Posted by: GLN Admin on June 22, 2006 at 6:18 PM | PERMALINK

GUNS Magazine article on AHSA

Posted by: David Codrea on June 22, 2006 at 11:13 PM | PERMALINK

Nice work GLN!

Posted by: Brad on June 22, 2006 at 11:58 PM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly