Fake "Gun Rights" Group Supports Gun Control - American Rifle & Pistol Assn

I ran a check President Robert Gelinas, one of their spokesmen. In the late 1990's, he donated extensively to Joe Hoeffel's campaign. If you don't remember him, he was a Pennsylvania Representative who was very anti-NRA and anti-gun. He was very vocal about it, and he earned an F rating from the NRA.

He's also donated $500 to Bob Casey for Senate Inc. in 2012. Senator Casey jumped the fence after Newtown and started pushing for gun control. He was one of the ones spouting the guilt-and-shame rhetoric after the vote failed on S. 649.

He also donated $500 to Obama for America and another $500 to the Obama Victory Fund. Neither of those donations can really be said to help the 2nd Amendment either.

Sebastian at the PA Gun Blog did some digging into the causes Chairman Peter Vogt supports, and it's a who's-who of the new gun-control movement.

There's got to be a connection to AHSA. I just can't find it.
 
Last edited:
Yep. In case anyone's late to the party, these false-flag operations are nothing new. They've been going on since the 1990's.
Click to expand...

Sad but true. Honesty and honor have no meaning to some of these groups who are blinded by ambitions to impose their thinking on people.

I see how they would like someone like me to appear paranoid and dangerous to someone who is on the fence or barely on this side of gun control.
 
A good litmus test that I've found for new and/or lesser known 2A organizations is their attitude towards older and/or larger 2A organizations. When a group is openly critical of other organizations, usually the NRA since they are the largest, oldest, and most well-known, I become very skeptical. This is because, in my experience, groups which are openly critical of other 2A organizations are usually, at best, trying to siphon members away for their money or, at worst, false flags like AHSA or ARPA.
 
One pattern I'm noticing with ARPA (and AHSA) is that they're getting smarter about social media and craftier about hiding their tracks.
 
Just happened to run across this today....
http://oldnfo.org/2013/07/04/another-false-flag-gun-rights-organization-arpa/
and I thought to myself that the statement "SANE" is a huge hole of what the term sane means in which to flush my rights down if they get the chance to hook up the toilet! :mad:

So obvious what they mean by the term "Sane" . I remember when ASHA Started sending me emails after visiting a firearm vendor online. :mad:

That vendor discovered what they were doing and had all advertising and links removed from their site in no time flat.

Because they did the right thing quickly, I won't name them.
Anyone remember getting those?
 
With extremely wealthy people (Soros, Bloomberg) putting literally billions of dollars into the movement to ban privately owned guns, and the current administration favoring rigid gun control, we are going to see more fake "pro-gun" organizations, and other forms of propaganda supporting "reasonable" gun laws and denouncing the NRA as a tool of the gun manufacturers.

Jim
 
With extremely wealthy people (Soros, Bloomberg) putting literally billions of dollars into the movement to ban privately owned guns, and the current administration favoring rigid gun control, we are going to see more fake "pro-gun" organizations, and other forms of propaganda supporting "reasonable" gun laws and denouncing the NRA as a tool of the gun manufacturers.
Click to expand...

I agree. However, their goal is not really to attract legitimate gun owners to build any kind of organization. They fill their rosters with enough fake members so that when there is a story about 2nd Amendment or proposed gun legislation, the antis can send press releases to the media who are all too happy to present the "two sides" of the gun debate from the perspective of gun owners. On one side you have the NRA. On the other side you have groups like this one with an "alternative view". What gets conveniently left out is fact that 1) the NRA dwarfs the insignificant shill gun group and 2) there is no reporting on the fake shill being just a covert arm of the gun-banners. This is an old tactic called moral relativism where the media "innocently" gives both groups equal weight in the way report a story.

Perhaps some have noticed that when I see someone engaging in moral relativism, by saying something like "Yeah, XYZ group has some kooks, but ABC group has its share of kooks too", I tend to go on the attack. I have seen the antis and others use this tactic in a very calculated manner.
 
Last edited:
Sorry I can't cite the source, but I read recently that the NRA gets a very small portion of its money from firearms companies (the figure 1 percent comes to mind). Not arguing that they are perfect or that they have no interest in the future of the firearms industry (that would be pretty self-defeating, wouldn't it?), but they listen to their membership, allow members to vote for leadership and offer an incredibly comprehensive list of safety-related and shooting activities. Groups like this latest joke come and go, spawned by the fertile minds of anti-gunners who think we're stupid enough to fail to see through their lies.

Ahhhh Jeez .. and they're from Texas! good grief ....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top