All posts by Claire Wolfe

Dragon Leatherworks “goes Hollywood”

Kudos to TZP’s supporter Dragon Leatherworks. Their work makes an appearance in the upcoming summer blockbuster Jurassic World. Click the above link for pix.

If you want some beautiful leatherwork of your own, click on the Dragon graphic to the right. TZP will benefit with every purchase.

Very cool, Dragonistas!

—–

I’d also like to take this opportunity to thank our early contributors, including D.C., who has set up a monthly PayPal payment for us (D.C. I’ve been trying to thank you personally, but I get error messages on my emails to you). Your votes of confidence in TZP have been wonderful and very welcome.

To this point, we haven’t been seeking donations, selling swag, or offering memberships. We’ve just been operating this blog. But I can tell you that we’re actively working on plans for the future and hope to offer more to our dedicated supporters sometime … well, before Jurassic World hits theaters.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

David Hardy on “compromise”

Gun Owners, Gun Legislation and Compromise (pdf). Why we’re right to distrust and reject “reasonable” compromise.

Abstract:

An important human aspect of firearms ownership and regulation includes the reluctance of gun owners to consent to measures that, viewed in historical isolation, appear quite limited. But this opposition is understandable if placed in historical context. During the rise of the modern gun-control movement in the early 1970s, gun-control proponents publicly proclaimed their objective was a complete or nearly complete ban on private handgun ownership. And they made it clear that lesser measures were but a means to that end. While they subsequently focused on those lesser measures, they returned to the objective of a complete handgun ban whenever that target of opportunity presented itself. When, in the 1990s, a focus on handguns became politically inexpedient, they switched the focus to semiautomatic rifles—notwithstanding their earlier avowals that rifles were not their concern.

Gun owners thus learned by experience that their opponents were not interested in genuine compromise, where each party gives up something to the other. Their opponents had no stopping point, no exit strategy, no “enough is enough.” Under these conditions, real
compromise is impossible. Any concession given would not be a stopping point, but rather a stepping stone to further restrictions.

This conclusion has been underscored by the experience of gun owners in states with restrictive gun legislation, where waiting
periods for purchase started at one day but were later increased to three, five, and then ten days. And initially limited restrictions have expanded to fill over a thousand pages of annotated text. Many of these measures serve no discernible purpose except to make legal firearm ownership as difficult, expensive, and legally risky as possible.

Intelligent actions are usually founded upon experience. Gun owners’ experiences have taught them one lesson: there is no true compromise to be had.

Et tu, background checks?

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Background checks: inside the mind of Alan Gottlieb

Washington state gun owners are being smashed between a rock and a hard place. The disaster — which is bound to be bloody — will likely shape the gun-rights fight in states across the nation.

And the outcome for people far beyond Washington state may depend on Alan Gottlieb. Which terrifies me. And should terrify you.

—–

I was talking the other day with another gun blogger who hoped that after last year’s JPFO debacle I would have insight into Gottlieb’s mind. I have none. I’ve had the same thought; I wish I knew what Gottlieb could possibly be thinking. I’ve said I wished I could be a fly on the wall of that man’s brain. OTOH, I fear that experiencing Gottlieb’s thinking from within would make me puke.

But there are so many mysteries about what that man is up to! Why would a gun-rights advocate — any gun-rights advocate, anywhere — want background checks? Why would he want the federal control, the de facto gun registration, and the risk of confiscation that inevitably follow? How could he be so clueless about rights? So clueless about the threat to gun ownership? So clueless about how gun owners think?

And beyond that … how could a man who wants background checks continue to present himself — and be widely accepted! — as a gun-rights leader?

Of course he continues to be widely accepted partially because of SAF’s several successful lawsuits and partially because too many people don’t look at what he’s really doing. Most followers are also unaware of his sordid history. But more recently (and I expect ultimately more tragically) Gottlieb’s leadership is being accepted by some primarily because he has forced Washington state gun owners to choose between that rock and that hard place — between him and activist rivals who are overtly, unabashedly radical.

—–

Gottlieb has long ruled gun-rights activism in Washington state. He not only owns several major groups himself, but he’s on the board of others and serves as virtual puppet-master of yet more. Here’s just one example of how Gottlieb’s system works.

Many years ago, in the 1990s when it looked as if the antis were going to trample us all into the mud, I sat in on a legislative coordinating meeting of supposedly independent gun-rights groups in Washington state. The meeting was (no surprise) at Gottlieb’s headquarters and it was my first glimpse of what was going on.

There was no independence. There was one overriding mindset — don’t rock the boat. The one activist (a newcomer) who offered ideas that actually could have advanced gun rights (rather than merely holding the line) was repeatedly shot down. Not only shot down, but shot down with words I found mind-boggling and unforgettable: “Oh, we can’t ask the legislature for that. They’d never give us that.”

What kind of bargaining position can that be? Where would negotiators ever get if they started out only by asking for what their opponents are already known to be willing to give? That’s surrendering before the first battle!

But that was the state of Washington gun rights groups 20 years ago, designed and dominated by Alan Gottlieb. Matters appear to be worse now. After that, I always marveled that the state managed to have fairly decent gun laws, despite such wimpy “leadership.”

Well, I marvel no more. Since November — and thanks in large part to Gottlieb’s inexplicable “divide to lose” strategy — Washington has one of the most terrible state anti-gun laws. And the Billionaire Brigade is using I-594 as a battle plan to rampage through other states.

—–

I-594 might have passed anyway since it was the product of an enormous, multi-billionaire propaganda campaign. But Gottlieb initially made matters worse by throwing all his efforts not against I-594, but into a competing initiative, I-591. That went down in flames (and $1 million+ that could have been used against I-594 went down with it). But now Gottlieb, via his many puppet organizations, is trying to set himself up as the leader of the anti-I-594 forces.

He has filed a lawsuit against the new law while explicitly stating that he’s not trying to stop background checks. Even as state Rep. Matthew Shea prepared a bill to completely repeal 594, Gottlieb ally/partner/front group WAFLAG was focusing on getting gun owners merely to ask for fixes. As activist Kit Lange observed, “[Shea’s repeal] bill has not even been submitted yet, and they have already given up.”

You can’t “fix” a law that’s evil from its inception. And you can’t win if you already side with Michael Bloomberg on the most important points.

—–

Gun owners who are really aware of the issues and who understand that you can’t have freedom without standing firm on principles want nothing to do with Gottlieb or any of his front organizations. This means that some of the most angry, adamant, in-your-face activists have stepped forward. Gavin Seim’s armed, non-permitted “I Will Not Comply” rally in December outdrew Gottlieb’s January “legislative rally” by as much as 10-to-1. But when quite a few people with the “I will not comply” mindset also showed up at Gottlieb’s event, long-guns in hand, and carried their firearms into the House visitors’ chamber, it gave Gottlieb’s allies — and many inherently moderate gun-rights people — the excuse to call them all crazies and crowd closer to the false “safety” represented by Gottlieb.

Gottlieb has set things up so it’s either “side with me or side with the crazies” when it really just ought to be about getting I-594 declared dead. And getting the horrid monster buried at the crossroads with a stake through its heart so it can never rise again.

My heart and mind are with the “crazies.” But at the same time, I see how their tactics scare some activists away — and drive some activists right into the arms of Alan Gottlieb, despite his obvious, well-publicized sellout.

But as one activist from Graham, Washington, observes, the “crazies” are using those tactics as much to defy Gottlieb as to defy I-594. They are saying, “We will never allow you to ‘lead’ this battle. We won’t be polite and deferential as you sell us out. To hell with you.”

If Gottlieb had a clue about the rights of gun owners or the mindset of gun-rights activists, he would step out of the spotlight (and not just via the pretense that one of his puppets is really in charge). Being completely discredited on anything to do with background checks, he would recognize that he has no ability to lead (even from behind) on this issue. He would let somebody more principled unite the state’s gun owners. Instead, there he is, dividing — once again — so that our enemies can conquer.

Because Gottlieb stands in the way of any calm, strong, and principled leadership on gun rights in Washington state, he is helping Bloomberg win (just as he hoped to help Manchin, Toomey, and Schumer win at the federal level a year ago). Heartened by their victory in this first state, and strengthened by the lack of effective pro-gun leadership, the Bloombergians will rampage onward to the next state, which appears to be Nevada.

Good luck, Nevada. Good luck to us all. Except Mr. Gottlieb. May he choke on his own duplicity. May the power he so craves, the power he’ll stop at nothing to get, destroy him — before it destroys the rest of us.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Refusal as a weapon

The most blunt, inspirational message you will read all year. From the great Mike Vanderboegh.

A brief sample:

Mike Bloomberg thought he was on a roll. In the wake of Sandy Hook, his money managed to buy unconstitutional legislation in Connecticut, Colorado, Maryland and New York. In the election just past, his money staved off defeat for two governors who did his bidding, although as Wellington said about Waterloo, it was “the nearest run thing you ever saw.” Most importantly — and the latest jewel in his anti-firearm crown — his money and that of Bill Gates, Paul Allen and other like-minded elitists “bought the mob” (in the parlance of the Founders) with the success of I-594 in Washington state.

Yes, Bloomberg was on a roll. The so-called “mainstream” gun rights organizations, from the NRA to Alan Gottlieb’s Second Amendment Foundation and all the smaller spin-offs in the affected states, had no answer to Bloomberg’s millions and refused to put their own rivalries and jealousies aside to find one. This is hardly a surprise, since almost all of these groups have always been more about raising money to “fight gun control” than actually FIGHTING gun control. Each has been more obsessed with their own reputation in the collectivist-dominated press and their obsession to “win friends and influence people” in the middle. So, following their long-established patterns and refusals to think and act outside the boxes they placed themselves in, they lost. They lost in Connecticut, they lost in Maryland, they lost in New York, they lost in Colorado and now they have lost in Washington state.

In each case, Bloomberg understood his enemies, their foibles and their failures far better than they understood him. So he won and they lost.

But then something happened that Bloomberg in his arrogance never expected, something that the “mainstream gun rights organizations” for their part never expected either — in every single state where Bloomberg had “won,” it turned out that the victims of his unconstitutional laws had other ideas. And they didn’t need “leaders” like Wayne LaPierre and Alan Gottlieb to lead them.

Read the rest, resist, and stand tall.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

“It stops here.”

“It stops here.”

So declared Eric Garner, vendor of “loosies” — individual cigarettes sold to evade New York state and New York City’s deliberately punitive tobacco taxes. He continued, “I’m minding my business, officer. I’m minding my business. Please just leave me alone. I told you the last time. Please, please, please don’t touch me. Do not touch me.”

Those weren’t quite his last words. As we all know by now, his last were, “I can’t breathe!” — repeated over and over again until he passed out from a chokehold and chest compression, then died as both police and EMTs stood around, indifferent to his suffering, his condition, and his eventual fate.

The EMTs were disciplined for their unprofessionalism and callousness. The man who jumped Garner and initiated his death — we also all know by now — was exonerated by a grand jury. Not even charged with manslaughter — a fact that even the most pro-police conservatives found shocking and liberals and hard-core freedomistas were outraged by.

Never mind that the man in question violently attacked Garner over nothing more than a fed-up, weary verbal protest at being constantly hassled for such a petty (and very libertarian) “crime.” Never mind that he used a chokehold forbidden to NYC police officers for the last 20 years. Never mind that he and his fellow officers held the overweight, unhealthy Garner on the ground in a way that their own police bulletins told them could be deadly. Never mind that he and his accomplices put out an initial story that Garner had died of a simple heart attack, nothing to do with their treatment of him at all, a tale quite at odds with the medical examiner’s report.

Officer Daniel Pantaleo now says he’s sorry and that he prays for Mr. Garner and his family every day.

I guess that makes it okay.

—–

Garner was killed last July. Twelve-year-old Tamir Rice was removed from life more recently. So we don’t know yet whether his killer, Officer Timothy Loehmann, is prayerfully sorry or will pretend to be. We don’t know what his “official” cover story is. We don’t know whether Officer Loehmann will get off Scot-free or receive a token wrist-slap. (If I were a betting woman, I wouldn’t put money on the there ever being a murder, or even manslaughter, indictment.)

Some things we do know: Tamir Rice was shot within two seconds of Loehmann’s police car pulling up on the scene. And Loehmann was an emotionally unstable young man, who had already been declared unfit for being a police officer.

Tamir Rice was carrying an Airsoft pistol or some other type of non-firearm. Even the citizen who’d called in the original report of “a guy” carrying a gun had said the gun was “probably fake.” Evidently he assumed that officers would check the situation out rather than instantly opening fire.

We don’t know whether that crucial detail was conveyed to Loehmann and his partner. But we do know that when Loehmann was declared unfit for police work two years earlier, it was after he had an emotional meltdown during live-fire training on a pistol range. (Yes, he was reportedly broken hearted over a relationship gone wrong, but we’ve all been through that, and most of us manage to stay sane, stable, and functional on the job no matter how dark our private moments get. His bosses clearly recognized that guns, cops, and emotional instability were an ugly combo.)

Tamir Rice learned just how ugly. Too bad he had only two seconds to absorb the lesson.

A year earlier, Sonoma County (California) cops gave 13-year-old Andy Lopez a hair more time than that before slaughtering him.

It was about the same with John Crawford III, an innocent Walmart customer murdered last August by police the second they spotted him. They were acting at the behest of a lying phony 911 caller (using a tactic recommended by the Bloomberg moms). Their instantaneous, panicked slaughter was completely unjustified. But of course, being police, they got away with it.

Seems that hoplophobia overrules common sense and judgment — and that that’s just fine when the killers are in that special, exempt class of what David Codrea dubbed “only ones.”

The only ones who consistently get away with behavior that would put you or me in prison for years, if not decades.

—–

These killings have been pinned on racism (though young Andy Lopez was, in the phrase originally coined for George Zimmerman “white-Hispanic”). No doubt fear of black men has something, maybe plenty, to do with it.

The killing of Garner is being pinned on “broken-window policing” (which assumes that those who commit even petty crimes are potential murderers). No doubt that, too, has something to do with why cops feel so entitled to use monstrous force in response to tiny deeds.

Such killings have been blamed on the militarization of police forces, with its attendant mindset that all non-cops are “the enemy.” No doubt that’s true, also. (And getting some very long overdue attention.)

Blame also falls on the concept of “officer safety” — which sounds so sensible in theory but in practice gives cops permission to see themselves as helpless victims, justified in using any amount and kind of force to “protect” themselves even when nobody is threatening them.

Clearly outright hoplophobia — a sheer terror at the very existence of firearms — has to be the major explanation for slaughtering children on sight merely for holding things that look like firearms. (For generations, American kids carried and used guns, both real and fake, without being gunned down for doing so.)

But whatever the individual causes (and I think we can safely say “all of the above”), the major underlying cause for all this is still going largely unexamined (oddly enough, the extreme-left publication The Nation comes closer than anybody else to the real issue — though it ultimately dodges it).

—–

The real problem is that governments created a special class of armed enforcers to serve the requirements of politicians and that they then turned those enforcers loose to brutalize anybody they wish without personal consequences to either the officers themselves or their direct political bosses.

That they then armed their enforcers with surplus military weapons, entitled attitudes, and a belief that the rest of us are their enemies is secondary. That these enforcers are increasingly encouraged to see all firearms and all people carrying them as a special kind of enemy, to be slaughtered on sight without any evaluation or judgment of the situation — or any mercy — is a terrible, terrible, ominous and dangerous thing. But even that is secondary to the real problem: that police serve government, not citizens, and that citizens have no way to hold brutes personally responsible for their brutality.

Bottom line: By definition, more government equals more force. And less individual accountability.

Unfortunately, the current sudden outcry against police tyranny won’t change anything. Cosmetic reforms will be passed. They will accomplish little. A few individual officers might actually face a few consequences, perhaps in highly publicized federal civil rights cases. (That happened in the Rodney King case and have you seen any improvement in policing or police officers since then?)

Nothing substantial will change because the culture of immunity and impunity that rules both politics and policing will remain intact.

In fact, for gun owners, things will get worse. Police hatred and fear of guns (that is, your guns, my guns; of course not their own guns) will increase because politicians are encouraging it and the politicians are the masters. Always have been and always will be.

Non-minorities who live in fairly civilized places will continue to luck out. For a while. As official hoplophobia builds, even that bit of luck will run out.

“It stops here” is a brave declaration. In Garner’s case, it was a foolish declaration because he had no means of upholding it against the force of both trained thugs and the government that sent them.

But if those responsible for both being brutes and sending brutes among us aren’t held firmly and consistently to account for their deeds, someday citizens as weary and fed up as Eric Garner (but more organized, more powerful, and more ready) will say, “It stops here” and make that stick.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Thanksgiving

The world is in a red-hot mess. Barbarians rampage over the Middle East (and even on the streets of London and some places in the U.S.). Thugs burn and loot in the name of “social justice.” The Cold War seems to have risen from its grave. Billionaires crow with glee because they think they’ve finally found the key to disarming the rest of us. Hatred of Jews edges ever closer to the redline.

These aren’t great times to live.

But then, there have been worse. Black plague, anyone? An ice age? The aftermath of a supervolcano eruption? Hitler’s Germany? Stalin’s Ukraine?

All in all, even with perils everywhere, right now we have it pretty good — we who sit here reaching out to friends the world over via blogs and tweets and more new phone apps than a 20th-century person can keep track of.

I don’t know about you but I’m cozy and warm and looking forward to a low-key Thanksgiving. With that in mind, I’d like to mention a few things I’m thankful for and invite you, today and this weekend, to add your own in comments.

—–

I’m thankful …

For my fellow bloggers here at TZP. They are outstanding people and I have learned so much from them, reading their posts. Even though we’re still in the early stages, I think we did the right thing in creating The Zelman Partisans.

For those who’ve donated money and those who’ve cheered us on and asked, “When can I join?” or “Where can I buy TZP swag?” Thank you … and soon. Give us a few months to do all the background stuff.

For Aaron Zelman, whose legacy deserves to live on. He was a real mensch. A pain in the wahzoo sometimes, but a mensch.

For those who are rallying against the billionaires’ dream law, I-594 in Washington.

For those in the (for want of a better term) black states — Delaware, Connecticut, New Jersey, Colorado, you know who you are — who’ve defied and fought back. And for people like Mike Vanderboegh who inspire them and stand with them even when their own lives really suck. Speaking of Mike, if you want swag, go buy a hat from him.

For friends I’ve never met.

For the amazing, astonishing, wonderful people who helped keep the roof over my head this year — and then who contributed more (without even being asked) when another section of roof sagged in.

For California dried apricots! And other intriguingly apricotty things.

For Ava and Robbie, who at 9 and 13 have finally matured into being really, really good dogs (as long as you overlook Ava’s regrettable tendency to snack on Chihuahuas).

For 3D printing and the smart, bold firearm designers who are making sure that the billionaires’ dreams will never, ever come true. That so many are giving their designs freely to the world is wonderful; clearly they know what’s at stake here.

For Dutch apple pie, soft wool to knit, beautiful custom-made knives to admire, and the life-saving power of firearms in caring hands, I’m thankful.

And that so far, there’s neither plague nor supervolcanoes hereabouts.

—–

That’s just for starters. How about you?

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Of fevered dreams and helpless victims

ZelmanPartisans_Groom in the Air_1014

To my non-Jewish eyes, the event above seems like something from long ago and far away. In fact, that’s fellow blogger Y.B. ben Avraham’s newly minted son-in-law balancing precariously on a table being carried by his friends and family. The photo was taken less than a month ago at his wedding in New York City. (Well then; it may not be long ago, but it’s certainly far away, in that land so distant from gun rights.)

Y.B. sent several pictures of the joyous event. But the night they arrived I was in a pensive mood. Instead of feeling the happiness, I worried for the bride and groom and the future they face in a time when Jew-hatred (I’ll never again call it anti-Semitism, thanks to Y.B.’s semantics lesson) is spreading across the globe. In a time when, even in the U.S. “diversity” no longer implies toleration of religious beliefs that happen to deviate from the politically correct. In a time when elitist victim disarmers are feeling new power after their stunning (and stunningly ghastly and stunningly, insultingly duplicitous) election-day victory in Washington state.

—–

Of course I was also aware that even in a time that’s increasingly perilous for them, at least some of the men in that happy photo happily support their own disarmament.

I hope (and expect) that Y.B.’s new son-in-law understands better.

—–

A lot has been written about that ghastly Washington state initiative, that gun-grabbers’ duplicitous dream. Some of it has been said here by Nicki and Vladka and Ilana.

I have only personal impressions — and a dream — to add. Though those wedding celebrants are far away from I-594, my apprehension blended them together.

During my rational waking hours I know that I-594 will never stand as written. It will be challenged in court on numerous grounds. Police will never be able to enforce its completely insane provisions. (If five friends meet at a plinking quarry or go on a hunt together and each brings multiple firearms and they try out each other’s weapons, how will cops catch them, let alone count the number of innocent “felonies” committed on any sunny afternoon?) Whatever prosecutions there may be are likely to be so outrageous that they’ll wake up the v*ters who, in their ignorance, thought they were supporting “common sense gun safety.”

Already Washington state gun owners are planning a mass public non-compliance. Thousands plan to commit harmless felonies outside the state capitol building.

To whatever extent I hold to reason, I do not believe that I-594 will stand — or that the Billionaire Brigade will succeed in passing such a monstrosity on many other states.

—–

But in vulnerable moments — like right before falling asleep or upon waking in the middle of the night — I-594 chills me.

The night I got the happy photos from Y.B., the moment my head hit the pillow I was assailed by dread. I had visions of thousands of unknowing innocents being dragged away from their pleasant days, dragged to jail, dragged before by-the-book judges, dragged into the financial ruin of legal defense, losing their jobs — merely because they handed a gun to a friend or handled a friend’s firearm. I had to sit back up and turn the light on to get past the images.

I slept well — until about 3:45, when I awoke from a dream. All I remember of the dream was its last moments. A train passed by pulling endless numbers of cattle cars. The cars weren’t made of old-fashioned wood and metal, but of some new, high-tech material that was slightly translucent. Every cattle car that ground past was full of people. I couldn’t see the ones deep inside and couldn’t see much detail. But I could see those who were pressed against the outer wall. I saw their mouths, opened in agonized screams. I saw their hands, splayed against the walls of the cattle cars, pushing and clawing to get out.

I understood (don’t ask me how) that these endless carloads were the mildest “offenders.” They were the children or spouses of gun owners. Or they were people who’d broken the law unknowingly. They were also all the vulnerable disarmed, including the happy Jews at Y.B.’s daughter’s wedding.

Eventually, more cars rumbled by and these contained gun owners who had protested the law or boldly violated it. These cars also contained special victims of hatred — people who weren’t PC, who didn’t conform, who were “different.” They couldn’t scream or claw at the walls because they were being tortured — bound into contorted positions, blindfolded, and gagged.

I woke up before seeing what worse things might be near the end of that train.

—–

Yes, it was just a dream. And before that just the terrors of a half-conscious brain. Nothing. Just impressions, phantasms. Meaningless. After all, even the most awful gun controllers wouldn’t seek out and target the innocent. And surely, after the horrors of history, Jews wouldn’t do anything to enable their own destruction?

But the combination of those happy wedding photos, the vulnerability of the people in them, the fact that so many conniving power-trippers want innocents to be more vulnerable, and the fact that there are so many useful idiots who’ll v*te to make it so … all that still chills me days later.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

TZP gets its first media coverage — and it’s great!

Read it and smile.

Reporter Lee Williams, aka The Gun Writer, has a regular column in the Sarasota, FL, Herald Tribune. He knew Aaron and was aware that JPFO had been handed off to the Second Amendment Foundation. So when he saw via Twitter that there was a new gun group in town following in Aaron’s footsteps, he jumped right in.

He opens:

Aaron Zelman was a titan within the gun-rights community.

The group he founded in 1989 — Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership — mimicked his bold, uncompromising personality and his truth-telling style.

Zelman and the JPFO called out anti-gun politicians, many of whom represented districts in the Northeast. He had a loud, powerful voice lawmakers learned to respect if not fear.

Some of Zelman’s tactics, though effective, could appear controversial to the uninitiated.

He once paired a picture of a saluting Adolf Hitler with the caption: “All those in favor of gun control raise your right hand.”

A classic, that.

Zelman never compromised in his support of the Second Amendment, or any other amendment, and his members loved him for it.

And it just gets better from there.

—–

As TZP’s own Sheila Stokes-Begley noted in her interview with Williams, people have given us a tremendous response. People have been asking how they can join and have told us they want TZP logo tee-shirts, fridge magnets, and other swag. We’re workin’ on it, guys. With your help and support, a lot will soon be happening.

Williams got just one small detail wrong in his report (which is really pretty good these days). He’s right that we don’t yet have a button to allow people to join. But we do have a button for donations. Check it out: top right of the page. AND we already have our first two generous donors.

That’s pretty good for a site that been online only a few weeks. We’ll be putting those donations and our behind-the-scenes energies into building an organization that you can join and can be proud of — an organization that will carry out Aaron’s mission. And even if nobody left on earth can conduct Aaron’s mission in Aaron’s unique style, we’ll give you our best.

—–

A personal note: Kudos to my fellow TZP founders — Jo Ann for hosting and site building, Sheila for dynamic public relations, Nicki for more things than I can name but especially social media skills (JPFO lost a dynamo when it lost Nicki), and Brad for good humored moral support. Kudos to all the TZP bloggers, especially our two newest, the famous Ilana Mercer and the more-humble-than-he-needs to be newcomer, Y.B. ben Avraham. What a privilege and a delight it is to be in your company.

And BIG kudos and thanks to Lee Williams for giving us such a superb and honest media launch.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Beatifying Aaron — while ‘disappearing’ him

Yes, David old friend. “Some will no doubt object to this.”

Word came out earlier this week (to those not previously in the know) that JPFO founder Aaron Zelman received a postumous “Bill of Rights Award” at Alan Gottlieb’s 2014 Gun Rights Policy Conference.

Now, the GRPC is a big deal and surely few people on this planet deserve a Bill of Rights award more than Aaron (my friend, co-author, and tireless crusader for ALL the Bill of Rights).

But as fellow TZP blogger Sheila Stokes-Begley wrote in an email: “Coming from SAF, is this a little like Obama congratulating someone for being an excellent constitutional scholar? They may well be an excellent constitutional scholar, the problem lies in knowing the compliment came from a man who wouldn’t know a constitutional scholar from a cartoonist.”

As you may know, TZP was created in response (and in protest) to the Gottlieb/SAF buyout of JPFO. Short version of the story: Aaron Zelman was a man who never compromised on any issue of principle and Gottlieb never met a compromise he didn’t like.

—–

In the post linked above, David Codrea notes that he was “… invited to an evening working meeting/closed-door advisory session supplemental to the GRPC, and heard no evidence that there were plans to bastardize the mission, and plenty of plans to make the organization viable without involving compromises.”

Though I surely wish I could have been a fly on the wall at that meeting, I don’t doubt David’s description at all. David is a hero of gun rights and a man of great integrity. When he and the very sweet Kurt Hofmann decided to stay on with the new JPFO when Nicki, Sheila, Brad, Ilana, and I left, I wished them well.

But I admit I laughed when I read David’s description of that meeting. Because of course Gottlieb and Co. are not going to have a meeting in which they rub their hands together like cartoon villains and cackle “Bwaahahaaaa!” while they eeeeevilly plot to turn JPFO from a no-compromise outfit into some watered-down imitation of itself.

That’s not the way it works. In the world of corporations and politics, inconvenient predecessors are gotten rid of and policies and views are mutated … politely. Just as SAF is doing.

First they pull the cagey (though rather painfully obvious) PR stunt of “honoring” Aaron to show that they’re really not such bad guys after all. But that’s a cheap, meaningless gesture. It fools only those who haven’t been watching closely. Then they’re going to make some improvements to sadly neglected portions of JPFO’s infrastructure (oh, that creaky old website!). They may come out with a few new projects. They’ll almost certainly use Gottlieb/Merrill’s huge fundraising operation to bring in a lot more money. At first things will look GOOD! GOOD! GOOD! By golly, look what wonders SAF is doing to save the legacy of Aaron Zelman and preserve gun rights!

Then slowly, over a period of years, they’ll turn JPFO into …

… into what, it’s hard to say. Will it just be some bland, almost-forgotten thing? That’s what KeepAndBearArms.com became after Gottlieb bought it. One of the most lively, popular gunsites on the ‘Net is now a backwater.

Or will JPFO live and appear to thrive while subtly toning down its positions?

At this point, nobody can say. I can only say that it’s simply not within Gottlieb’s character to perpetuate Aaron’s character.

Very likely the first real test will be how the new JPFO responds the next time Gottlieb pushes for universal background checks. Don’t ever forget that Gottlieb called Manchin-Toomey a “win” and a “godsend.” Although he eventually removed his support from that particular bill, he still advocates universal background checks. He was still pumping hard for them at this year’s GRPC.

And this was after buying JPFO, folks. This was during the same weekend as that meeting to pretend that JPFO will be allowed to live “without compromises.”

So tell me this: Next time Gottlieb pushes his UBC agenda, what will JPFO’s staff and writers do? Go along quietly? Keep their mouths shut? Actually agree with Gottlieb?

Or will they — as they would do if JPFO remained its real self — shout to the rooftops that UBCs are wrong, dangerous, anti-rights, a front door to registration, and a backdoor to confiscation? Will JPFO’s spokespeople bravely inform the world that Gottlieb is selling us all out?

And if JPFO writers and staff actually did have the courage and fortitude to speak up and oppose their boss, what will SAF and Gottlieb do then? Will Gottlieb applaud and say, “Isn’t it great? See, I really meant it when I said I wanted JPFO to remain hardcore and uncompromising?”

Or will he purge the purists (or let them quit in protest and replace them with more compliant types) and continue what was always inevitable — making JPFO over in his own image?

Time will decide. Maybe — could be — Gottlieb will give up his advocacy of universal government control of firearm sales and avoid that potential conflict. But he and some of his shadier minions can wave awards over Aaron’s grave every day of the week and it wouldn’t change a thing. “Honoring” dead people is one of the tidier ways of turning them into powerless pictures on a wall, names on a plaque, hallowed (and ignored) institutions — and therefore shoving their real, inconvenient views out of the conversation.

—–

* Shady minions do not include David, Kurt, or webmaster Chris, who are all great people worthy of high regard.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Gottlieb: The man who owns JPFO

From the great Herschel Smith:

As for Gottlieb, I always knew that the “stupid” act he played after support of Manchin-Toomey was a ruse. He has a deep character flaw that enables him to support totalitarian measures. We all have our flaws, but this one runs deep and dangerous. In fact, read again his excuse for supporting universal background checks. Basically it boils down to this: if you don’t voluntarily agree to it, they will do it anyway. Or by way of analogy, if you don’t give a pick pocket you money, he’s just going to take it anyway.

Someone please try to convince me that isn’t what he is saying, because it looks to me like it is. And that’s puerile and childish reasoning, and in this case I think he advances it not because he really believes that it is logically compelling, but because he is frightened, or a publicity hound, or something dark. As I said, I don’t know exactly what, but the character flaw runs deep in Alan.

Gottlieb appears to want universal background checks, despite his Washington state initiative that, on the surface, opposes them. The very short text (pdf) of his I-591 manages to include language completely unnecessary for the stated purpose of the measure — and it’s language that virtually invites the federal government to try again to impose the very UBCs he supported last year.

Gottlieb just wants background checks and the inevitable firearms registration on on terms that he considers favorable — even as everybody else in the gun-rights movement (even the normally limp and compromising NRA) draws their line in the sand in front of UBCs. And “favorable” means favorable to Gottlieb in some way.

What Gottlieb is up to, nobody really knows. The only thing anyone can be sure of is that whatever he’s up to will benefit Gottlieb. That’s been his way of business for a very long time.

One Jewish gun-rights activist I know calls Gottlieb a Kapo. The Kapos were prisoners, sometimes Jews, that the Nazis used to help them rule others in the concentration camps. The Nazis couldn’t do it alone, so they enlisted sellouts — men interested in saving their own skin and working to their own advantage — to help them rule and destroy their fellows.

Per Wikipedia:

The system was also designed to turn victim against victim, as the prisoner functionaries were pitted against their fellow prisoners in order to maintain the favor of their SS guards. If they were derelict, they would be returned to the status of ordinary prisoners and be subject to other kapos. Many prisoner functionaries were recruited from the ranks of violent criminal gangs rather than from the more numerous political, religious and racial prisoners; those were known for their brutality toward other prisoners. This brutality was tolerated by the SS and was an integral part of the camp system.

Prisoner functionaries were spared physical abuse and hard labor, provided they performed their duties to the satisfaction of the SS guards. They also had access to certain privileges, such as civilian clothes and a private room.

Yep, that shoe fits. When Gottlieb supported (and even claimed to have helped write) last year’s Manchin-Toomey-SCHUMER bill, he repeatedly cited petty privileges that the bill supposedly granted, ignoring the principles and rights it would have slaughtered and the millions of gun owners it would have put at risk.

And this is the man to whom JPFO’s weak, tired, willful, and (in one case) quite possibly senile board members sold Aaron Zelman’s legacy. That they sold it “on the cheap” and without even considering better options makes matters worse. But a Gottlieb-owned JPFO, cheap or dear, is a travesty and an abomination.

Poor Aaron. He must be so weary from rolling and rolling in his grave.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail