LETTER FROM
THE EDITOR
ons ban that expired in 2004. But
while a growing majority of Americans clamors for stricter and safer
gun laws, a few powerful holdouts
have an alternate take on what
made possible the rampages in
Newtown, in Aurora, at Virginia
Tech, etc. etc. etc.
That dissenting view is abundantly clear in Howard Fineman’s
interview with NRA president David Keene. Keene’s matter-of-fact
statement is that, after the outcry
that followed Newtown, “we had
to change the subject.” To do that,
the NRA rolled out a PR blitz that
included calling for armed guards
in schools, blasting President
Obama as an “elitist hypocrite” for
employing armed Secret Service
agents, and blanketing Connecticut with robocalls to push its progun message. As Howard writes,
“Keene told me that the NRA had
no regrets or second thoughts and
that gun control advocates had
seized on the Newtown tragedy to
pursue their own unconstitutional
political agenda.”
Elsewhere in the issue, Christina Wilkie looks at the Second
Amendment Foundation, a nonprofit that has backed a flurry of
HUFFINGTON
04.07.13
lawsuits designed to expand gun
rights. It’s a story that delves
deeply into one of the less-discussed facts of guns in America
— that gun advocates are far from
being a single, monolithic group.
The NRA generally takes a gradual
approach to expanding gun rights
While a growing majority
of Americans clamors for
stricter and safer gun laws,
a few powerful holdouts have
an alternate take.”
— one professor calls its leaders “extraordinary minds for the
long ball and the big picture” —
while other groups, like the SAF,
are bolder and more aggressive.
As Christina puts it, “Depending
upon whom you ask, the SAF is
either a brave defender of the
Second Amendment or a sketchy
upstart with the potential to significantly damage gun
rights in the long term.”
ARIANNA