More NAGR Amateur Mistakes

It looks as if NAGR were robocalling gun owners with the wrong information, and were actually telling people to ask Governor Sandoval to sign the private transfer ban that’s currently sitting on his desk. It would seem they’ve since corrected it, but it’s amateurish mistakes like this which make me not take NAGR or Dudley Brown seriously at all. This article, from someone in Colorado, was a little to “rah-rah my team” for my taste, but it has some interesting bits:

Apparently, Mr. Brown has been (for many years) using third-party “front groups” that claim to represent hot-button social issues (like abortion and gay marriage), but in reality, are little  more than direct mail operations designed to “punish” Mr. Brown’s opponents. When voters receive these last-minute attack mailers they get the impression that the candidate in question (whichever candidate Mr. Brown opposes at the time) are also opposed by a “wide spectrum” of other conservative groups. The mailers are often completely false, as with my own legislative race, where Dudley’s Beltway minions sent pieces that claimed that I was pro-gay rights and “soft” on Pro-Life issues. Anyone that knows me, knows these claims are laughable. But by then, the damage has been done.

And just recently, a reader in Virginia who knows my disdain for Brown an NAGR sent me an e-mail from a Virginia State Delegate (no link, sorry) which was sent to supporters:

You see, [NAGR] would rather line their pockets, posing as a legitimate gun organization, and attack pro-gun legislators instead of going after the liberal Democrats who boast of taking our guns.  Simply put, it is a “get-rich-quick” scheme at the expense of gun owners and their rights.

I am their latest target. My primary election is this coming Tuesday, and NAGR is engaging inone false attack after another against me.

I am known in Richmond and throughout Virginia as one of our legislature’s staunchest defenders of the Second Amendment. I have an “A+” career rating from the NRA and am endorsed in my current primary election by not only the National Rifle Association and the Virginia Shooting Sports Association, but by legitimate “no compromise” groups like the Virginia Citizens Defense League PAC and Gun Owners of America. These folks have seen my good work protecting your rights, and they know the real deal when they see it.

I’m not actually sure it’s so much a “get rich quick” scheme, as it is an attempt to use the gun vote to promote other, unrelated causes in social conservatism that have nothing to do with the Second Amendment. I continue to encourage gun owners to not have anything to do with Dudley Brown or NAGR. Don’t give them money, don’t give them support.

12 thoughts on “More NAGR Amateur Mistakes”

  1. Not having anything to do with Dudley has been my policy here in Colorado for some years.

  2. “I’m not actually sure it’s so much a “get rich quick” scheme, as it is an attempt to use the gun vote to promote other, unrelated causes in social conservatism that have nothing to do with the Second Amendment.”


    Sincerest congratulations on figuring that out!

  3. I know Dudley. Not well & we haven’t spoken in years, but I can tell you that he’s flawed. I can also tell you that I’m flawed. As are you & damn near everyone else on the planet. I don’t know that much about NAGR, except blurbs here & there. It seems like they made an error. An understandable one, but not anything to break out the pitchforks over.

    Rocky Mountain Gun Owners is the only real pro gun owner group here. They’ve been pushing for permitless carry for a mighty long time, often against opposition from other alleged pro gun owner groups. They were pushing pro gun owner bills at the beginning of the year, & they were fighting as hard as they could against the anti gun owner bills. Show me a substitute that actually supports the Right to carry, not just better tweaks for a privilege to carry, & I’d think of endorsing them instead.

    But it’s a mistake, because of personal dislike, to dissuade support from a pro gun owner group, just as it’s a mistake to support a group that’s acting contrary to your interests because of personal admiration. Issues should matter, not personalities.

  4. “Issues should matter, not personalities.”
    Here’s the issue. We don’t need lying, thieving con men on our side. His personality is questionable as well. He’s ineffective, arrogant, and has seriously misappropriated his funds.

    He’s an absolute failure at the issue he supposedly supports. He uses funds for things other than what he raises them. He lies in his fundraising letters and attempts to take credit for the work of others. Please see the below link.

    “After nearly two decades of self-proclaimed dominance of the gun rights movement here in Colorado, Dudley Brown, and the groups he founded (Rocky Mountain Gun Owners and the National Association for Gun Rights) couldn’t put a dent in the anti-gun juggernaut in his own backyard. Which begs the question; just how effective is Mr. Brown (and his two Colorado-based gun groups) at stopping any gun control measures in Colorado, or at helping to elect pro-gun candidates of either party to the Colorado legislature?”

    “…Thanks to recently released emails (uncovered during the federal lawsuit discovery process) between Brown and his third-party direct mail groups in the D.C. Beltway, we know a little more about where Brown has been directing RMGO’s money, time, and energy over the years. Here’s a hint: it hasn’t been spent defending the Second Amendment.

    Apparently, Mr. Brown has been (for many years) using third-party “front groups” that claim to represent hot-button social issues (like abortion and gay marriage), but in reality, are little more than direct mail operations designed to “punish” Mr. Brown’s opponents…”

    “…hadn’t filed their federal income tax returns for at least three years… “

  5. Jdude,
    A politician wrote a hit piece on a lobbyist he didn’t like. That’s not proof of anything other than a politician wrote a hit piece about a lobbyist he didn’t like.

    Here, in Colorado, bloomie aimed a quad mounted credit card while the biden/obama machine ran a stick & carrot gambit that successfully bought off enough dems to pass anything they really wanted. The dems had the house & the senate, & the repubs could not mount an effective filibuster.

    I don’t blame the NRA for that. Nor do I blame GOA, JPFO, NHL, ASCAP or Major League Baseball. I certainly don’t blame RMGO. I blame a bunch of dems who took their 30 pieces of silver, or an IOU for it at least.

    RMGO were the ones who brought the suit against CU when they tried to ban concealed carry on campus. RMGO won that one. That’s their biggest win. They’ve been consistently trying to eliminate prior restraint based gun owner control laws, often fighting allegedly pro gun groups in their attempts. They haven’t gotten any of those things accomplished, but they’re trying when no one else is.

    So Dudley Brown is an ass. I won’t argue the point as you may well be right. But show me another pro gun owner group that is actually pro gun owner around here, that is trying to get a Right recognized instead of a privilege tweaked.

    As for lying thieving conmen – if that were the case, & there was proof then we should abandon the political process entirely. Last I looked nearly every damn congresscritter could be described as a lying stealing conman, except for those that are lying thieving conwomen. So if we shun one we should shun them all.

    I think what the deal is here is that a lot of folks don’t like anyone who questions the NRA. Dudley’s manner is a bit abrasive at times, & he has made some errors in interpretation here & there, so folks are quick to jump on that. But he’s been fighting the good fight here at times when other pro gun groups have been actively pushing gun control. So show me actual proof – not just someone alleging something or other – that he’s dishonest or immoral in his dealings, & then show me another pro gun group around here that’s actually pro gun. Until then I think it’s a mistake to abandon RMGO no matter how much of a jerk the honcho seems to be.

    And if it turns out that he is all the evil things his opponents claim, it should be mentioned with sadness, not the glee of “I told ya so” cause RMGO has been an actual pro gun owner group. Losing that would not help me out a damn bit, and it likely wouldn’t help out anyone else either.

  6. “A politician wrote a hit piece on a lobbyist he didn’t like…”

    I’ll tell you I’m sick of seeing any discrediting information about charlatans on “our side” dismissed so glibly. Were the things stated in that column factual or not? And if they were, how do you explain them away?

    I knew about the items jDude highlighted above, long, long before that blog post and long before they came out in any public/IRS investigation. But here’s my bottom line:

    People who use gun rights issues only to promote or advance another agenda, whether it is only to make money, or to advance a Dominionist Christian agenda, or to raise money to pass off to others who are promoting a Dominionist agenda, or any agenda at all, are not being true to the cause of gun rights, no matter how many swell things they say on the floor of a legislature or in their fundraising blasts. And THAT is what we cannot tolerate.

    Do you know who any of the people behind the scenes with NAGR are? Do you know how many “liberty” organizations have their strings pulled by those same people? Do you know what their one common denominator is?

    Until you do, don’t dismiss those who give you a window to the truth so glibly.

    1. I’m sure it was only a coincidence, but did you notice the one immediate, supportive reply to Brown’s comment came from someone who uses “America and the Bible” as their avatar?

      What I said above about “other agendas.”

  7. Dudley is completely ineffective in communicating with his opponents if he is this abrasive to people who agree with him.

    1. The most important fact to cling to is that advancing gun rights IS NOT his network’s primary agenda. I’d say they aren’t AGAINST advancing them, because if they do, they can use it to increase fundraising and contact harvesting. But, whether they are effective at “communicating with their opponents” is barely on their agenda.

      They cover for that by claiming they engage in “confrontational” politics as opposed to “access” politics. The lie is given to that somewhat by, that they do have a list of politicians they will hobnob with, and who will carry their water, and vice-versa. Look into who those are, and what their “other” issues besides gun rights are, and I think you will see a pattern emerge.

Comments are closed.