Rush by ‘Liberals’ to Buy Guns Refutes ‘Progressive’ Narrative and Raises Hypocrisy Questions


A “pro-gun Democrat”? This is Sen. Joe Manchin back when he had NRA’s endorsement and before he betrayed his gun owner constituents by turning his back on his oath and tryng to ram a registraiton-enabling “universal background check” bill down everybody’s throats. (Joe Manchin You Tube video screenshot)

“American gun ownership drops to lowest in nearly 40 years,” Christopher Ingraham wrote last summer in The Washington Post. He was basing that bit of wishful thinking, a.k.a. “fake news,” on a CBS News poll of “1,001 Americans in the aftermath of the Orlando nightclub shooting” to conclude “[t]he percent of American households owning guns is at a near-40 year low in the latest.”

This was pre-Trump’s November wipeout of Hillary, back when Democrats and establishment media cheerleaders were trying to convince each other that “gun control” was a winning issue. The narrative being promulgated was that while gun sales were going through the roof (ending the year with record sales numbers), they were all being bought up by a limited demographic of hard core extremists.  And all the major polls agreed.

Just like they all were astounded to see Hillary crash and burn.

The citizen disarmament lobby hasn’t had time to adjust their talking points to cover another phenomenon that directly refutes two previously accepted “truisms”: “Progressives” buying guns for purposes other than “sport shooting,” and doing so for the express purpose of defending against what they see as a potentially tyrannical government and the chance of civil unrest. Likewise, minorities are also buying guns, and for the same reason.

That’s given increased media attention to an outfit calling itself The Liberal Gun Club, a group of unknown size and backing, nonetheless reaching out to “moderates” and calling for “solidarity.”

Finding out more – like if there are hidden hands pulling strings as has been  so often the case with new “third way” gun groups – is a bit like pulling teeth. There’s not a lot of information for a group that registers its website domain through a proxy and it hasn’t been around long enough for Guidestar to report much. Likewise, most of what we learn from doing a corporate entity search through the Massachusetts Secretary of State registry is that one person holds all corporate officer positions, and the address shows up on Google maps as a residential neighborhood.

You have to wonder if the number of Google News feed hits indicates somebody wants this to be news.

“We serve as a national forum for all people, irrespective of their personal political beliefs, to discuss firearms ownership, firearms use, and the enjoyment of firearms-related activities free from the destructive elements of political extremism that dominate this subject on the national scale,” they claim. Whether they believe “shall not be infringed” is “destructive” and not settling for anything less is “political extremism” remains unsaid, but it does open the door to a fair question about priorities.

The same question came up about 10 years ago, with a group calling itself “Amendment II Democrats.”

When asked, they answered they would favor purported “pro-gun” Democrats in primaries, but when it came time for the general election:

We are Democrats, and as such we will support our party’s nominees for local, state, and federal office.

That means if it’s a choice between the Second Amendment and Hillary, guess which one loses.

It’s fair to ask one more question in regards to “pro-gun Democrats” already in office, such as NRA/NSSF darling Sen. Jon Tester of Montana.  Where the guy lives means he can’t overtly embrace gun grabs or he couldn’t get elected . The party views that as a necessary concession so he can help it achieve the rest of its agenda, such as supporting Hillary and helping with its “pathway to citizenship” agenda to transform the electorate into an unchallengeable Democrat (and anti-gun) majority.

Besides which, Tester showed his true colors when given a chance to make a difference with Post Office carry. Just like the other “pro-gun” Democrats, such as “true champion of the Second Amendment” Harry Reid, or Kirsten Gillibrand, or any of a host of Democrat politicians that have gotten gun owner support and then done an about-face.

Note the party platform and what it says about guns in particular:

With 33,000 Americans dying every year, Democrats believe that we must finally take sensible action to address gun violence. While responsible gun ownership is part of the fabric of many communities, too many families in America have suffered from gun violence. We can respect the rights of responsible gun owners while keeping our communities safe. To build on the success of the lifesaving Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, we will expand and strengthen background checks and close dangerous loopholes in our current laws; repeal the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) to revoke the dangerous legal immunity protections gun makers and sellers now enjoy; and keep weapons of war—such as assault weapons and large capacity ammunition magazines (LCAM’s)—off our streets. We will fight back against attempts to make it harder for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives to revoke federal licenses from law breaking gun dealers, and ensure guns do not fall into the hands of terrorists, intimate partner abusers, other violent criminals, and those with severe mental health issues. There is insufficient research on effective gun prevention policies, which is why the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention must have the resources it needs to study gun violence as a public health issue.

Here’s the question: Is it truly possible to be a “pro-gun Democrat”?

Categories: 2nd_amendment, All

About Author

David Codrea

David Codrea blogs at The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance (, and is a field editor/columnist for GUNS Magazine. Named “Journalist of the Year” in 2011 by the Second Amendment Foundation for his groundbreaking work on the “Fast and Furious” ATF “gunwalking” scandal, he is a frequent event speaker and guest on national radio and television programs.


  1. Greg K 26 December, 2016, 19:30

    Author Paulo Coelho writes, “Love everybody, but never sell your sword.”

    This was the last line in my Horoscope 2 days ago.

    Reply this comment
    • Seawolf 27 December, 2016, 17:21

      I love that line Paulo Coelho – I guess that’s why one million fire arms have been sold in California alone this year

      Reply this comment
  2. Preps 27 December, 2016, 09:55

    The liberals will sell them back as soon as Trump leaves and dems are back in power. (Let’s hope the UN ATT treaty isn’t passed ever). Let’s also hope the NWO is defeated, or we are all in very deep trouble.

    Reply this comment
    • Stewart Rhodes 27 December, 2016, 17:57

      Sadly, I fear you may be right about many of them, just as many on the right will now go to sleep again now that a Republican has won the election for President. Seems to be the cycle we are stuck in – each side of the standard left/right paradigm only cares about the Bill of Rights, including the Second Amendment, when they are out of power, and when their guy is in power, they forget all about those concerns.

      Thankfully, there is a growing third part of the population that doesn’t trust either of the two major parties or their elected politicians, and is consistent in defense of the Bill of Rights. I hope that third part of the population increases.


      Reply this comment
      • Richard Kramer 27 December, 2016, 18:34

        They won’t take your guns directly. First they’ll silence your speech, as they are now attempting to do, and when you do not have the inherent natural unalienable right to freedom of speech you will have nothing.

        Reply this comment
    • Greg K 27 December, 2016, 22:27

      Was thinking about this very aspect a week ago. Fact is, those who bought many, will relieve themselves of a few units, at a lower than new cost, thus further saturating the population with arms. That works for me!

      Reply this comment
  3. Howaboutthat 27 December, 2016, 09:59

    Beware of Democrats bearing Gifts (New Democrats owning Guns & Shooting clubs). You can paint a poisonous Snake pink BUT IT’S still a poisonous snake i.e. “Democrats”

    Reply this comment
    • Irving 143 31 August, 2017, 18:58

      Call whoever is pointing a gun at you whatever you want, the bullet from that gun won’t fly any slower due to the insult.

      Reply this comment
  4. Green Giant 27 December, 2016, 10:00

    Polls cannot be trusted any more. That is obvious after the last election. WHY? Because those hiring the polsters also specify the results they want. And the polsters know the demographics well enough that they can GIVE the results requested.
    It is a joke.

    Reply this comment
  5. Gary 27 December, 2016, 10:05

    The narrative that gun ownership is overwhelmingly conservative or Republican is false, as demonstrated by a Pew study on the topic. Gun ownership skews in that direction, but it’s hardly uniform or monolithic. That being the case, there’s hardly a reason to defend oneself from incredulous conservatives.

    Reply this comment
  6. RESolute 27 December, 2016, 10:12

    Using democrats own criteria for legal acquisition and possession, “liberalism” should fall under the purview of “severe mental health issues” as a disqualifier, just as they would like tje terms veterans, Christians, nationalists, or patriots to be.

    Reply this comment
    • Conservaderp 27 December, 2016, 15:22

      Maybe you should find out what liberals actually believe instead of what Fox News and Brettbart tell you they do. There are so many stupid comments on this page it’s hard to understand how you people manage to get out of bed in the morning let alone into a voting booth.

      Reply this comment
      • Stewart Rhodes 27 December, 2016, 15:28

        And thank you for yet another example of why the left lost the election – calling people stupid is not the best strategy for winning them over to your side, but hey, it makes you feel better, so why change now?

        Reply this comment
        • Stewart Rhodes 27 December, 2016, 15:35

          By the way, here is a nice example of what many liberals believe:

          And please don’t try to tell me he is some anomaly on the left. I spent four years in college, and three more in law school, and that is the kind of nonsense I heard all the time from “progressive” (aka communist) professors. Again, when your side consistently spews hatred, don’t be surprised if you start to lose elections.

          Thankfully, 25% of the Hispanic vote went to Trump. So, the leftist attempt to divide and conquer the American people along racial lines is failing, at least in that demographic. That is some good news.

          Reply this comment
  7. Moman 27 December, 2016, 10:24

    yeah.. they are STANDARD CAPACITY magazines, thanks, and both sides are full of morons.

    they say they will not remove the rights of responsible gun owners, but in the next breathe, demonize everything, and essentially flat out say they want just about everything illegal.

    and if they are really going after devices that kill, why nto ban cars with their damned high capacity fuel tanks, think of the families and the children, whiel we’re at it ban alcohol because it is the purveyor of vehicular homicide, ban hammers too because they kill more then the scary black rifles, and fists…. and ect., ect., ect.

    the ploy to sue manufactures is to drive up cost so as to be prohibitive to all persons, if they can’t outright ban it, then make it cost too much to buy for the average hard working Joe. this in turn eventually kills the buyer base and then the company.

    of course there is the ghost gun desktop CNC machine….

    Reply this comment
    • Stewart Rhodes 27 December, 2016, 18:22

      “the ploy to sue manufactures is to drive up cost so as to be prohibitive to all persons, if they can’t outright ban it, then make it cost too much to buy for the average hard working Joe. this in turn eventually kills the buyer base and then the company. ”

      Or it results in only the very wealthy and their hired armed security being able to purchase new firearms. That only benefits the 1% super-wealthy the left says they oppose, and also, ironically, the police the left also says they distrust.


      Reply this comment
  8. ErikO 27 December, 2016, 10:54

    So, the LGC has not been a 501 (c)3 educational nonprofit for six years, was not incorporated in South Carolina and does not have over 1500 paid members?

    Oh yeah, nice hit piece, Codera. Pretend the Left is totally disarmed so your cop masters can sleep easy while they disarm those who would protect the people of Ferguson.

    Reply this comment
    • Stewart Rhodes 27 December, 2016, 15:46

      You really have reading comprehension problems. He did not say your group was started in reaction to Trump. He merely said the reaction to Trump – the increased fear on the left – has brought your group some more media attention. And “cop masters”? David? You really don’t know much about him if that is what you think.

      And when the people of Ferguson were threatened by murderous arsonists, where were you? We were on the roof-tops actually protecting them. Why weren’t you there too?


      Reply this comment
  9. ThorVidar 27 December, 2016, 11:03

    Just waiting for the day they go after pressure cookers, cars, and fertilizer. In this way, in order to get any of those items you need to pass a comprehensive background check. Remember its all to protect the children….

    Rolls eyes…

    Reply this comment
  10. CeramicMonster 27 December, 2016, 11:10

    You should look at the group’s response and make far fewer assumptions regarding the left’s policies and attitudes toward gun ownership, instead of taking it all from fox news.

    Reply this comment
    • Stewart Rhodes 27 December, 2016, 16:02

      I read their responses, and what I saw are the same silly declarations about Oath Keepers we see on all leftists sites – that we are racists, wack jobs, “brown shirts” etc. Funny how you guys complain that David is unfairly describing your group but you do the same to us. Ah well, I suppose it is just the way it is.

      Reply this comment
      • Stewart Rhodes 27 December, 2016, 17:59

        And, when it comes to the left’s views on guns, here is what you all had to say on your own Facebook page:

        “The Liberal Gun Club
        7 hrs ·

        For years (6 ish), we have been trying to changes hearts and minds. It’s slow, it’s a slog, and many of our liberal peers couldn’t or wouldn’t get beyond democratic talking points. Bringing new people to second amendment rights is a good thing. Perhaps we can take it off the table for 2020 and talk root cause for the first time in forever.”

        Clearly, the “it” you want to take off the table is the leftist drive for “gun-control” regulations rather than dealing with the socio-economic causes of crime and violence.

        That is an honest, and accurate, assessment of the reality on the left, and especially when it comes to leftist politicians. Why are you so defensive when we simply point out the same thing your own group is saying – that pro-gun people on the left are in the distinct minority, that your political parties are dominated by anti-gunners, and the liberal talking points are decidedly anti-gun?


        Reply this comment
      • Greg K 27 December, 2016, 22:40

        Racists–>BLM, Wack Jobs–>Cop Killers, or people who demonstrate rather than engage to change the law legally, or those that refuse to accept the results of our Beloved Republic. Brown Shirts—> Weren’t they shipped around Germany to rabble rouse and beat down anyone who opposed their point of view? Much like the Progressives in this country now?

        Ever wonder why progressive populous is swayed on the gun control argument? Because they are afraid of what they would do if armed. I call it “Projection and Transference.”

        Reply this comment
  11. JJM 27 December, 2016, 11:12

    “33,000 Americans dying every year” Have to put that into perspective. Many are committing criminal acts, killed by LEO or potential victims. But political correctness and agenda message is that every gun death is a horror.
    “all being bought up by a limited demographic of hard core extremists”. So are the Liberals buying guns, those with some common sense or potential mass murderers?

    Reply this comment
    • Cowboy Dan 27 December, 2016, 12:57

      JLM, they also leave out the fact that 60+% of firearm deaths are self inflicted. Sounds a lot more horrific when the number is larger, doesn’t it?

      Then let’s open the real can of worms. In MOST of the 10,000 or so murders in the U.S., both the actor and the victims are or have been engaged in a criminal act just prior to the fatal incident. Most often, they are people who would not be legally allowed to own guns and the guns involved are either stolen or trafficked through straw purchases.

      The Democrats don’t want to tell you this, and they get really goofy when you try to confuse them with the facts.

      Reply this comment
  12. Rabid vDog 27 December, 2016, 11:19

    Only a fool places a “No Weapons” or “Gun Free Zone” on their business and worse….in front of their house.

    And…living in Chicago, a “Gun Free City” is like living in Aleppo or Baghdad without a weapon.

    The absurdity and stupidity of fearing guns is because of laziness and lack of training. The icing on-the-cake….if the Communist Left ever succeed in 2020, will be to make it illegal to shoot and kill an intruder.

    Reply this comment
    • Frank 28 December, 2016, 10:50

      You mean like a good chunk of Europe? I recall a recent event where a woman defended herself from a (Muslim) rapist with pepper spray. The rapist was let go, she’s being prosecuted for the pepper spray.

      Reply this comment
  13. Badger 27 December, 2016, 11:49

    The answer to the last line is yes.

    Since 1968 the Democrat party has been under siege by Marxists posing as liberals. Historic Democrat’s were systematically displaced with infiltrated radicals. The ego, impatience and arrogance of the ‘chosen one’, in conjunction with his unbridled anti-American policy, striped the mask away revealing a grotesque, demented carcass that in reality is not the Democrat party, but the Radical Marxist Party.

    Bill, Hillary, and, I’ve noticed, Jerry Brown are furious and have become unhinged since November 8, 2016. Historic Democrats knew they were included in the basket of ‘deplorables’ and did not take kindly to the label either.

    Reply this comment
    • Stewart Rhodes 27 December, 2016, 18:14

      There is a great deal of truth in what you are saying. The Democratic Party is now dominated by Marxists (they call themselves “progressives” but let’s call the what they really are). Bernie Sanders is openly socialist (from a clear Marxist background), and if not for the corrupt manipulations of Hillary and her allies in the DNC, he would have been their nominee. Yes, on some things he is in agreement with those of us who are opposed to globalist banker domination of our political system, but he is a socialist through and through, and his proposed solutions are themselves destructive to our Constitution.

      Democrats who are not Marxists need to purge them out of their party. Let the Marxists go form their own party.

      Reply this comment
  14. Mark 27 December, 2016, 14:28

    Liberal gun club formed six years ago with 1,500 members and you paint it as a response to trump, such a joke… I wonder who is pulling your strings, typical convenient lack of facts. Ever heard any press is good press? Thanks for adding a few more members to the liberal gun club, don’t be scared homie.

    Reply this comment
    • Stewart Rhodes 27 December, 2016, 14:54

      Actually, David did not say that the Liberal Gun Club was formed in response to Trump. He said that more liberals are buying guns now, and some of that is a reaction to Trump, and that uptick in liberal gun purchases has caused more media attention to the group. Here, again, is what he said:

      The citizen disarmament lobby hasn’t had time to adjust their talking points to cover another phenomenon that directly refutes two previously accepted “truisms”: “Progressives” buying guns for purposes other than “sport shooting,” and doing so for the express purpose of defending against what they see as a potentially tyrannical government and the chance of civil unrest. Likewise, minorities are also buying guns, and for the same reason.

      That’s given increased media attention to an outfit calling itself The Liberal Gun Club, a group of unknown size and backing, nonetheless reaching out to “moderates” and calling for “solidarity.”

      See? He is not painting the Liberal Gun Club as a response to Trump. He’s just pointing out that the response to Trump benefits that group by way of more media attention.

      And frankly, I am glad more Americans are becoming gun owners, whatever their motivation. However, it is an indication of the sad truth that people tend to care most about the Bill of Rights when they are out of power, while they tend to ignore those provisions when “their guy” is in office. Both sides do it.

      Reply this comment
  15. FlaJarHead 27 December, 2016, 20:19

    It amazes me how Americans who consider themselves Oath Keepers defend today’s Democrat Party. It’s a sad day when someone thinks they have a (D) stamped on their forehead instead of American.

    Reply this comment
  16. Unknown Ranger 27 December, 2016, 23:54

    Liberal’s buying guns ; Sounds trendy too me !!!

    Reply this comment
  17. Brian 28 December, 2016, 13:04

    “The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference – they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good.” George Washington

    December 4, 2015 Mark as favorite Chart of the day: More guns, less gun violence between 1993 and 2013 Carpe Diem!

    Bottom Line: Even if you’re not convinced that increased gun ownership reduces violent crime and gun homicides, you should be totally convinced of this indisputable fact: Gun violence has been decreasing significantly over time, not increasing as you’ll frequently hear from anti-gun politicians and progressives.

    Reply this comment
  18. Reallly 28 December, 2016, 16:00

    If the 2nd amendment is essentially a protection from tyranny, then people should consider having weapons equivalent to any force capable of tyranny.

    No one’s big Chevy 4×4 is going to fare to well against combat. A skid loader, maybe, with some mods.

    Directed energy weapons make circuit boards unhappy. Digital HAM radio…fuel injection, range finders, night vision, laser/infared sightings, etc., will be useless against a “tyrant” in possession of a weapon capable of electromagnetic interference.

    It’s no conspiracy theory that these kinds of directed energy weapons exist. Raytheon? For goodness sake.

    I am all for Americans owning guns, or any arms for that matter. I would even be cool with my neighbor having a tank….long as I got to drive it at least once.

    I think that as a form of public service the Oathkeepers should at least give some basic information on what weapons could come into play should a bad situation arise.

    While a firearm is still a viable, dependable, and useful tool in nearly all combat situations, the most powerful weapon is knowledge.

    A bit off topic from the article, perhaps, and please excuse that. I just feel that there are tools other than firearms that should be on the radar, under the 2nd amendment umbrella, and in the reportois of patriots.

    At the end of the day, a firearm in the hands of an American is nearly always a good thing. Blowing the crap out of an empty tidy-cats container is good for the spirits.

    Reply this comment
  19. Smitty 29 December, 2016, 09:33

    The Marxist are not against guns they are against us having guns. Like the book animal farm states “SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL”. They understand a Marxist utopia is impossible with a functioning 2nd Amendment so it must be destroyed.

    Reply this comment
  20. Stavros 19 January, 2017, 15:31

    “Likewise, most of what we learn from doing a corporate entity search through the Massachusetts Secretary of State registry is that one person holds all corporate officer positions, and the address shows up on Google maps as a residential neighborhood.”

    Maybe you could let us know the name, so some of the local boys could determine if it is one of the Usual Suspects in the Massachusetts Deep State.

    Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Your e-mail address will not be published.
Required fields are marked*