John Richardson finds some very interesting material. Granted, I’ve known in my life people who were decent folks, but who had horrible judgement in the kind of people they surrounded themselves with. That’s the best case scenario here.

Also, this is a huge deal if it turns out to be true:

This is a good time to start developing local networks in the issue, because none of this is good for RKBA. In fact, it might be disastrous. We might have to do a lot of that self-organizing while NRA is going through all this.

What Money Can Buy

The Democratic Debates last night were basically who could out gun control the other candidate. Before Bloomberg came along, the gun control movement had virtually no organization or money. He changed all that. We can pat ourselves on the back that gun people will self-organize in the absence of leadership, but if you have the money to buy a top down organization, it doesn’t make it any less effective.

When super wealthy elites decide they want something, they will usually get their way. They might not with this issue because we have so many people who care. But it’s going to be an all-hands-on-deck fight.

Overarching, and across the world, is the fight over globalism. I’ve said in the end globalism will win, because it’s being driven by technological change at its root. The struggle isn’t whether we have transnational systems where the nation state plays a less important role: that will happen. The struggle is whether globalism will be a democratic movement that is controlled by the people for the people’s benefit, or whether it will be a aristocratic movement that benefits the transnational aristocrats. It’s been set up as the latter, and the people are, across the globe, calling foul.

The struggle over the RKBA is downstream of that fight, but what we’re seeing I think fits in the overall struggle. It’s a theme repeated throughout history that aristocrats do not like their subjects being armed. So it was practically inevitable that when the people started asserting themselves against this cultivated global order, the counter-reaction was the aristocracy returning to their traditional fears and anxieties about armed peasants. That anxiety is acting itself out among the pool of Democratic candidates.

Joel Friedman Comes out in Favor of Wayne

Article here at The Gun Writer. Much of it I don’t take issue with. Read the whole thing. I’ll quote the relevant parts and comment:

After 38 years of working hand-in-hand with the NRA, it is MY BELIEF that one of our vendors attempted to take over NRA leadership in order to preserve its own lucrative contracts. It is also MY BELIEF that this vendor had, for some time, believed that the NRA’s entire success was due to its efforts alone.

OK, I get that. I’ll take that as a given for the sake of argument. There are some who have argued the coup narrative is a smokescreen, even many here in these comments. I don’t really have an opinion on that, because I can believe either. But for the sake of argument, we’ll agree Ollie’s failed revolt was an Ack-Mac planned operation.

Show me that the people who are being retaliated against were also Ack-Mac stooges, were part of the conspiracy, and were not just Directors exercising their prerogative to have an opinion on the EVP who they hire. I don’t just mean they joined Ollie. I mean they joined Ollie at the behest of Ackerman McQueen.

For those who have had negative things to say about the law firm representing us, I ask one simple question: Name one thing the firm has done that has hurt the NRA? Thus far, no one has been able to answer that question.

Some people have legit concerns over the amount of money being spent and Brewer’s background as a Dem donor. For me the jury is still out on Brewer. I haven’t railed against his firm or his fees because he is involved in a good deal of complex litigation on NRA’s behalf at the federal level and that isn’t going to come cheap. But I would not dismiss the concerns of others so readily.

The rest of Joel Friedman’s article is defending the revelations about the clothes, travel, etc, that came out. I agree with him here. I think given the long time period, the proximity to Sandy Hook to some of the travel expenses, these issues amount to a big nothing burger. What is a bigger issue, if you ask me, is that the dissolution of the Ack-Mac relationship, and house keeping that is now needing to be done, happened on Wayne’s watch while he was actively supportive of the parasitic arrangement with the PR firm.

I’m with Michael Bane on this one: I won’t deny Wayne credit for his accomplishments over the years. I don’t begrudge him his parachute. I would hope he has an enjoyable retirement. But no one is giving me a good reason he shouldn’t be falling on his own sword like I would expect of any other Chief Executive in this kind of position.

I ask you to consider this for a moment – do you think that there’s anyone better equipped to guide the NRA during these challenging times?  The neophytes who are agitating would get their clocks cleaned in about 2 hours! 

There was, but you guys drove him the hell off. And I think anyone who can manage Trump the way Chris has can’t also manage the NYAG? I don’t take serious issue with this letter when it sticks to facts, but this one bit is the same kind of over-the-top nonsense I’ve seen from other Board Members, and smacks of a cult of personality I can’t really abide by.

I’m not a Wayne hater, and I’ve spent a lot of time here defending NRA and it’s leadership when I think they are right. I don’t think Wayne is right here. The removal of insufficiently loyal board members from key committees has to stop. If you want unity from the membership, you ought to be driving unity within.

I accept my outside status, and given the plethora of lawsuits afoot, I accept I can’t have all the information. But insiders should have a lot more, and I’m still seeing division from within. It’s not just the usual Wayne haters. The punishments that are now happening are not the actions of an EVP with strong arguments and who is in an unassailable position.

The fact that I see little internal unity tells me the EVP needs to go and be replaced by someone most everyone has confidence in. It doesn’t really matter if Wayne is a good guy and doing the right thing now. Taking one for the team, even when it’s not really your fault, is part of being a CEO. That’s why they have golden parachutes.

I’m open to the possibility that I might be wrong, but if I am wrong, I want to see better arguments being presented than mindless cheerleading.

Do I Dare Say Anything?

Millions Mourn As Rocker/Activist Ted Nugent, Age 68, Found Alive

Not that I’m complaining, but I feel like I’m not really seeing Ted Nugent’s name in the news lately. Not that I want to jinx it. Maybe it’s like Beetlejuice: don’t say his name three times.

More Preemption Fights

Philadelphia wants to be able to ban guns at city rec centers. How often have you guys had problems with people who are licensed? Which you need to be to carry a gun on the streets in Philadelphia.

Council president Darrell Clarke says after two mass shootings at city playgrounds in a month, they have to try.

LTCF holders, right? If not, you can file gun charges on top of murder already. What’s the purpose of restricting the law abiding LTC holders?

It’s almost as if this has absolutely nothing to do with combatting crime.

I Guess I’m Not the Only One


And make no mistake: there is a snitch or working enemy operative inside the NRA.  There is no way that all the records would suddenly go from the NRA HQ in Virginia, somehow bypass the Washington Post which is basically next door, and land in the desk of  Bloomberg’s The Trace/NYT.  I am almost willing to bet that two decades from now, we will see in Bloomberg’s bio that he managed to buy/insert somebody inside the NRA and create its downfall from the inside and the same time to pay or convince other organizations to badmouth the NRA to create dissension within the ranks and proving that Fifth Column works every time.  

I disagree with the last part. You don’t have to pay most of those orgs to badmouth NRA. They were willing to do that long before this shit started up. But I’m starting to seriously consider that the possibility that Bloomberg has a plant in Wayne’s inner circle. What would look different if he did?

A reader commented a few days ago, I and I think it’s very true, that when things go this sideways, the CEO has to go even if it’s just to restore confidence. This is the case here.


If you managed to travel back in time to 2015:

Time Traveler: “In just a year, Chris will announce NRA’s endorsement a well-known Manhattan socialite.”

Me: “I’m sorry sir, but do I need to have you fitted for a straight jacket? I’m happy to testify at your commitment hearing.”

Time Traveler: “It gets better.”

Me: “How can you possible top this tall tale?”

Time Traveler: “Well, Sebastian, you see, in 2019, Ack-Mac will be gone. Wayne will kick Ack-Mac to the curb after Chris Cox is accused of conspiring with Ack-Mac to oust Wayne.”

Me: “Well, now I know you’re nuts. There’s no way Wayne would ever kick Ack-Mac to the curb. And it’s no real secret that Cox isn’t a big fan of that relationship.”

Time Traveler: “The Board will back Wayne. Chris will be out, accused of being an Ack-Mac stooge.”

Me: “I think you need to take your meds.”

Time Traveler: “NRA will further consolidate their Public Relations. ILA will no longer have a separate PR outfit.”

Me: “Well, I’ve always thought they should do that, really. Once Ack-Mac is out of the picture.”

Time Traveler: “No, you won’t think it’s a good thing in 2019”

Me: “OK Buddy, I’ve had just about enough of you and your psychotic delusions.”

Time Traveler: “Whatevs, I speak the truth from 2019. You can believe me or not believe me.”

Seriously, I’m starting to wonder if I’m checking out from reality. Because this one is frankly too bizarre for me to believe.


Angus McQueen has died, Angus’s death really is the end of an era for NRA. I’ve always been of the opinion that NRA’s relationship with Ack-Mac had become an unhealthy one, but it’s hard to argue they didn’t have a huge impact on the organization and the direction. This is the end of an era, for sure. And should be a caution to Wayne’s apparent sense of indispensability: the cemeteries are filled with indispensable men, and Angus wasn’t much older than Wayne. The Board needs to be thinking about the future now. Not allowing it to be sacrificed so Wayne can bitterly cling on for a few more years.

I expected that ILA would have a brain drain when Chris was pushed out, so I wasn’t surprised to learn that Jennifer Baker has left NRA. Keeping in mind I haven’t really been talking to NRA people for several years now, so my first-hand experience is dated, but people who worked under Chris always seemed happier than people in other NRA divisions. I usually will take that to mean the boss is well-liked if I see it in an organization. No organization is perfect, but ILA always seemed to me to be pretty well run.

Gasoline and Matches

Good thing Japan has strict gun laws or someone might have gotten hurt. My chief argument against people who want to tighten up gun laws because of mass killing is: “OK, then what do we do when that doesn’t work, and we still have mass killings?” Because we will. You don’t need an AR-15 to kill a lot of people quickly. Tactics are a lot more important. Even with a bolt action rifle that only holds 5 rounds, the killer can still succeed if they adjust their tactics to match the capabilities of the weapon. So the idea that you ban this gun or that gun is not borne out by reality. Mass killings have been very successfully pulled off by trucks and explosives and even bladed weapons in countries that have strict gun laws and little cultural history of private gun ownership.

Clayton Cramer is working on a definitive work on the history of mass killing, and from what I’m hearing the history is extensive and pretty interesting. This is not a new phenomena. Mass killing is probably the number one threat to our rights, because it scares the politically powerful in ways that random crime does not. The politically powerful tend to be effectively insulated from random crime, whereas mass killings are more like lightning.

Except lightning kills about 50 people per year versus about 20 for mass shootings. People are generally pretty bad at assessing risk.