A Survey of Pro-Second Amendment Groups

Second Amendment
A Survey of Pro-Second Amendment Groups

United States of America – -(AmmoLand.com)- One thing that often causes hot debates is the question of which pro-Second Amendment group to support. Should Second Amendment supporters go with the National Rifle Association, which has been around for nearly 150 years? How about Gun Owners of America, and its famous “No Compromise” policy? What about the Second Amendment Foundation, responsible for a number of legal victories?

Believe it or not, there are a number of pro-Second Amendment organizations out there – some devoted to state issues, others taking a national focus. Here is a rundown on the major ones.

National Rifle AssociationNational Rifle Association

Membership: Between 5 and 6 million.

Founded: 1871

Website: www.nra.org

The NRA is the largest pro-Second Amendment organization in the United States. In addition to the lobbying, the group also does firearms safety training, law enforcement training, runs competitions, and provides hunter services. While some criticize it for the high salaries executives receive and an appearance of “compromising” on Second Amendment fights, it should be noted that the NRA has been the major target of the anti-Second Amendment extremists, going back decades – even before the 1977 Revolt in Cincinnati led by Harlon B. Carter.

Gun Owners of AmericaGun Owners of America

Membership: About 1.5 million

Founded: 1976

Website: www.gunowners.org

In the wake of a handgun ban being introduced in California, then-state senator H. L. Richardson founded Gun Owners of America as a “no compromise” group. While it is pro-Second Amendment, it seems to spend as much effort damning the NRA for being insufficiently pro-gun as it does in targeting anti-Second Amendment extremists. On the other hand, it does have the effect of making the NRA’s pro-Second Amendment advances look reasonable. GOA was founded months before the Revolt in Cincinnati.

Second Amendment FoundationSecond Amendment Foundation

Membership: 650,000

Founded: 1971

Website: www.saf.org

The Second Amendment Foundation has primarily worked on legal and educational efforts. Founded in 1974, it initially was intended to be an adjunct to the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, which was formed in 1971 as a lobbying group long before the NRA’s focus shifted after the Revolt in Cincinnati. While the NRA eclipsed it in lobbying, SAF has become a major player in litigation against laws that violate the Second Amendment. The group also issues several publications. The group has also adopted a number of gun-rights groups, notably Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership and Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership.

Jews for the Preservation of Firearms OwnershipJews For The Preservation Of Firearms Ownership

Membership: 7,000

Founded: 1989

Website: www.jpfo.org

This organization provided a lot of research, mostly by pointing out a connection between the 20th century’s worst genocides and laws that disarmed the intended victims. The organization promoted Bill of Rights Day and was largely run by Aaron Zelman until his death in 2010. The group then was “adopted” by the Second Amendment Foundation, which has preserved its research.

Students for Concealed CarryStudents for Concealed Carry on Campus

Membership: 40,000

Founded: 2007

Website: www.concealedcampus.org

Founded in the wake of the Virginia Tech shooting (the college was a gun-free zone), this group has pushed for allowing students with concealed carry permits to carry on their college campuses. In addition to having a national leadership, the organization has over 350 chapters in colleges across the country, helping a new generation of pro-Second Amendment activists prepare to take over the defense of our liberties.

Firearms Policy CoalitionFirearms Policy Coalition

Membership: Unknown, but Facebook page has over 300,000 likes and they have about 23,400 Twitter followers.

Founded: 2013

Website: www.firearmspolicy.org

This group, primarily centered in California, has carried out litigation and grassroots efforts. Among its projects are litigation against the bump-stock ban, California’s latest semi-auto ban, and California’s magazine ban. The organization has also taken on Massachuetts Attorney General Martha Healey over 3D-printed guns, and is fighting Taser bans in Annapolis, Maryland and New York state.

National Association for Gun Rights

WARNING: National Association for Gun Rights

This is a group that claims to be pro-Second Amendment, but it spends almost all of its time and energy attacking other pro-Second Amendment groups and fund raising. AmmoLand News has taken them to task in the past for “despicable deception.” Calling this group a scam is an insult to Bernie Madoff.

About Harold HutchisonHarold Hutchison

Writer Harold Hutchison has more than a dozen years of experience covering military affairs, international events, U.S. politics and Second Amendment issues. Harold was consulting senior editor at Soldier of Fortune magazine and is the author of the novel Strike Group Reagan. He has also written for the Daily Caller, National Review, Patriot Post, Strategypage.com, and other national websites.

Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

There are 3 (three) caravans heading our way right now, according to a Breitbart article I just read. One of them has 12,000 (twelve thousand) people in it. They are coming to eat your lunch. We have TRAITORS for politicians. How many will there be next week ???


I get e-mails from NAGR telling me my subscription has expired.
what subscription??? liars get no money from me.

Will Flatt

Harold is a shill for the NRA (Not Really Activists) and it shows in his writing.
Defend your rights – join GOA!

El Mac

Uh, join both.


the SAF “adopted” the JPFO? funny, that’s not how I remember it. more like a hostile takeover.


Sorry, not true. JPFO itself proposed the merger after suffering some pretty severe organizational setbacks.


Charles Nichols

The only encouragement I ever received from any of those groups was from Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership and that was before it was taken over by that infamous opponent of Open Carry, the Second Amendment Foundation. I am in my eighth year of litigation fighting to overturn California’s Open Carry bans including the 1967 Loaded Open Carry ban which the NRA helped write and which the NRA has been arguing in support of in its Federal lawsuits since April of 2010. The Gun Owners of America filed an Amicus brief in support of California’s Open Carry bans.… Read more »

David Bradford

Harold Hutchison, I guess I will have to start looking to see who is the author of each article on Ammoland so as to NOT be insulted by having to read more of your irrational defense of the NRA. Your pathetic attempt to belittle the GOA as being anti-NRA. Saying “it (the GOA) seems to spend as much effort damning the NRA for being insufficiently pro-gun as it does in targeting anti-Second Amendment extremists” is being disingenuous and technically incorrect. Some of the current members of the NRA administration essentially are in part anti-Second Amendment extremists in a review of… Read more »


my rights, mine. i was born with them. don’t mess with my rights. polticians can and will keep lying to you. what is enumerated in constitution is a list of what shall not be infringed. no man gave me my rights. GOD gave me my rights at birth. those who think my rights need to be regulated are going to reap something …… think.

Commander bob

Owning and driving a car is a privilege, 2a is in the bill of rights

The Revelator

Actually, owning a car is in the BOR as well, amendment 4.

Putting it on a road is a privilege.


Second Amendment Foundation.
Statewide groups in many places.

Former Marine Shake and Bake dropper.

Outstanding! Marine. Perfectly said.


Oldmarine It’s about Freedom and liberty. The Constitution (all of it) is the real subject if you get down to the unity-gritty. One must take at least eight different opinions and realize that all of them have some true value in them. consider each one to see if they really get to the heart of the problem. It is impossible to make everyone happy but decisions have to be made that not everyone will agree on. I am a NRA member and try to look at the mission there of. I see that the NRA has made a major malfunction… Read more »

The Revelator

Well said

Greg K

OK, have fun with this one…Have been going to ask for some time, “What the Fudd is a FUDD?


Have you ever seen a Looney Toon / Merry Melodie?
Elmer Fudd, perennial luckless hunter, whose intelligence is continuously trumped by that of his prey.

No Filter

Ooooh, you wascawee wabbit as Bugs stick a finger down the barrel on Elmer’s gun, causing the gun to blow up in Elmer’s face. Be vehwee, vehwee quiet! Thuhffering thuckatash, l miss those cartoons! Wabbit season. DUCK season!

Dave in Fairfax

FUDDs are people who own guns but only think that hunting is what they should be used for, although they usually don’t say that. Who needs more than 5 rounds is a common statement.

Greg K

Ah, so the scumbag progressives that appreciated being defined in 1968…don’t understand folk that want to be contained by their slave masters. we can do better.


FUD (usually with one D) can also be an acronym for Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt.


The biggest problem I see is the age old fight of My Group is better than Your Group. As Firearms owners WE should be Supporting each other regardless of the Pro 2A group we are a member of. By constantly bickering amongst ourselves We all miss the point of the Fight. To preserve the Rights afforded to use in the Bill of Rights. Remember if We Don’t Stand United…We Will Surely Hand Separately. Keep Your Powder Dry…


You are right on on your point!
“We Must All Hang Together, or Most Assuredly, We Will All Hang Separately” Benjamin Franklin


AlanGottlieb has a plethora of gun rights groups under his mantle: SAF, and JPFO mentioned above… Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms ( CCRKBA) and a few others. I can see some strategy in that (appealing to distinct groups with a heading that may attract those followers) but it also presents some dilution of effort(?) One other thing: Looking at SAF’s financials it seems they are quite good at bringing in revenue. YET, at any of the legislative committee meetings on the raft of legislation before the WA legislature (In Gottlieb’s back yard) I saw NO… Read more »


Re dilution of effort: CCRKBA and SAF are analogous to NRA-ILA and NRA Foundation. One is a non-deductible lobbying arm, and the other is a tax-deductible education or litigation nonprofit. It’s all due to requirements of tax laws. It’s not as noticeable at the NRA, because all the organizations have NRA in the title.

GOA Board Member

I support the 1st Amendment every bit as much as the 2nd. Folks have the right to say anything they want, even if it is inaccurate or completely untrue. In describing GOA, the author got it wrong from the beginning. Pretty obvious he didn’t do his due diligence and research on even some of the basic facts. GOA was founded by CA State Senator H.L. Richardson (ret.) in 1975 not 1976 months before the “Cincinnati Revolt in 1977”. He founded GOA in response to the legislative introduction of a handgun ban in California. Sen. Richardson was a member of the… Read more »


Actually, GOA being critical of NRA when NRA deserves it is a good thing, and you should not apologize at all. Off the top of my head, I can remember GOA giving the NRA hell for supporting what GOA dubbed the “Veterans’ Disarmament Act,” and it was entirely right — precisely what GOA claimed would happen did happen, and the NRA ended up with egg on its facec. More recently, GOA has been calling NRA out for their shameful rolling over on the bump stock ban and keeping mum on the 21-year-old age limit for buying rifles being proposed in… Read more »


Marion Hammer bucked Rick “Skelletor” Scott in Florida regarding the 21 law. Get your facts straight.


Yes, NRA A-rated Rick Scott. And only in Florida, though several states have filed this. And only the local Florida mouthpiece. Are you seeing the problem yet? Marion Hammer also regularly shoots down gundamentalist board candidates like Adam Kraut who want to end the political and financial cronyism, insulation from the membership, and general lack of PRINCIPLED defense of the 2A on NRA’s mahogany row. (I won’t post the direct link, since it sends my comment to moderation, but you can do a web search for “NRA 2018 Board Candidate Adam Kraut to Marion Hammer: I Am Not the Enemy… Read more »


This guy writes click bait and shills for the NRA. You’ll be able to start shooting his work just by reading the Ammoland article headlines. It’s always garbage. I now scroll to the bottom of every Ammoland article I click on to see if it’s him before I start reading. Just close if it’s his. The editors need to stop publishing him.

Gas Block in WA

I am not a Fudd willing to compromise my rights away so, I donate to the GOA and not the NRA.


I do several including 2a Foundation. I am also a life member of the NRA. No internet punk will call me a FUDD to my face. I suspect 95% of people low mouthing the NRA as Bloomberg boot lickers.


Sorry. 30+ year (resigned) NRA member and instructor here, and still a proud member of AzCDL who had to go toe-to-toe with NRA HQ carpetbaggers in our state to prevent them from watering down or outright poison-pilling locally-originated, beneficial, constitutional 2A legislation from permitted concealed carry (when CC was outright illegal here) to today’s Constitutional Carry. I’m tired of the way NRA “defends” my rights by bartering them away for legislative “access.”


I just assumed that Harold was an NRA spokesperson from the articles he writes. If he is not then he is just trolling for them. With all this talk about the NRA it would make a person think they are in need of memberships and cash. Maybe the free ride days are over with and Obumer is not in power. Memberships jumped because he was a good reverse tactic salesman for the gun industry.
The GOA seems to be more serious about gun owners and their problems and the NRA will come waltzing in after the battle and claim success.


Boo hoo! You didn’t mention MY group with enough zeal. What a bunch of panzies. You won’t survive.


NRA founded in 1871 now having only 5 million members compared to GOA being foundeded in 1976 and having 2 million members says alot about the poor business plan & poor representation the NRA is providing today? The NRA should have 30 to 50 million members by now! Vote to improve the NRA!


The membership in both is not mutually exclusive. I myself am a member of both.

I am not saying members of the NRA should not hold them to task, but your argument is false logic.


With over 100 million gun owners today there is nothing false here! I am a Benefactor member in one and a Life member in the other & vote! It is clear the NRA should have many more members for the time they have been around!


“Nothing false here!” BS! There is certainly at least one false statement in the article. That false statement is the opening sentence of the writer’s copied description of the NRA: “The NRA is the largest pro-Second Amendment organization in the United States” Yes, the NRA is the largest organization in his list, but the NRA is not, and never has been, a “pro-Second Amendment organization.” The NRA was formed to promote competitive rifle shooting and marksmanship. It has always done that well and continues to do that well (although deliberately avoiding anything “practical” or “tactical” for “civilians”). As part of… Read more »


You failed to mention the major leadership changes in the 1970s and 1980s departing from the 1968 stuff. Case in point Charlton Heston.


I respect the 2nd amendment and the “responsible” gun owners, but it seems to be an article to promote rifles. We simply need tougher laws to insure that all guns purchased are owned by “sane” human beings. Too many people have died at the hands of “sick demented,” gun owners.

Richard L

You mean like Cops in St. Louis playing Russian gun games?


Any drunk drivers??? Should we take cars away from sober people? So a responsible person has to lose there rights because of some ?? Crazy thinking. How about going after parents or Drs for not coming forward when child or teens have a very known issue


There are a few flaws in your car/gun analogy. * Our society does limit who can own/drive cars. These limits include physical and mental impairments, age, lack of appropriate training, etc. * Our society requires registration of all working cars and licensing of all operators. Licenses for different levels of vehicles require different types of testing and restrictions. * Those who choose to drink and drive can be deprived of their licenses for varying amounts of time, sometimes permanently. * There are situations where concerns of parents and doctors about known issues in children and teens can prevent that person… Read more »

Chris Sauer

We DO NOT need tougher gun laws by any stretch of the imagination. What we DO need are our courts to enforce the gun laws on the books for those who illegally get and those who illegally use any firearm. We also need our government to STOP the illegal programs that put guns on the streets to track where they go. The cities that have the toughest gun laws now are the cities with the highest crime rates. The tougher the laws they make, the higher the crime goes. Go check it out on the FBI website. “Criminals Prefer Unarmed… Read more »


The left uses the law to force their ideas down our throats. The don’t use the legislative process because they know it won’t work in their favor. Keep that in mind. The law is supposed to disarm those who should not have guns. That would include all criminals and those who knowingly fill out the 4473 form. For simplicity sake, I will keep my argument to just those issues hoping you will get my point. In fiscal 2017, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives referred about 12,700 denied purchases to its field divisions for investigation. As of June… Read more »


There are strict laws for murder & deadly assualt with strict penalties so we need more laws that only adversly hinder those that obey laws? Some logic is flawed isn’t it? Laws only work when people obey them & criminals don’t!


Remember some of the earlier national gun restrictions? Remember a group that used to be called “Handgun Control”? What about the nasty laws against “Saturday Night Specials” that discriminated sharply against the poor, who felt they were better off with a “two dollar pistol” they could afford than the toohunnadollah COlt they could not afford? Seems the early push was to get handguns out of everyones, uhm, hands. No one was to bothered about Fudd Guns, shotties, deer rifles, or twennyritooful plinkers. That has changed in the past couple of decades, mainly because of the false meme that “black and… Read more »


11 kids die daily texting and driving.


“…We simply need tougher laws to insure that all guns purchased are owned by “sane” human beings. Too many people have died at the hands of “sick demented,” gun owners….” Ya mean, all those dope-heads buying ‘legal’ dope? Or the druggies selling on street corners? Those kind of ‘sane’ human beings? We need tougher laws than, “If you kill someone, you don’t get off with ten years after good behavior” type laws? Or, if you rob someone at gunpoint and get shot, you can’t sue the one you attacked? Righhhttt– all we need is more laws that only harm the… Read more »

Greg K

You don’t think there were; Drunken, Crazed, Wife Beating, Violent, Rabble Rousing, Traffickers, When the 2nd Amendment was written? There are very few Qualifiers in the 2nd Amendment, and our founders were brilliant enough to understand that the largest mass murders are always committed by Governments towards Unarmed Populaces. They factored in the crud, for the greater good, which is the exact hypocritical argument you are trying to forward.


In a free country, the law leaves you alone to mind your own business until such time as you break it. Freedom entails some risk, but many people have died to protect that freedom and I am nowhere near ready to hassle law abiding gun owners for the sins of a few.


No, we damnably-well do NOT “need tougher laws” regarding firearms. More than 23,000 firearm-related laws already exist in the US. American firearms are THE single most-heavily-regulated industry in the entire world! Liberals insist that simply adding more duplicative and ineffective gun-control legislation to the dungheap… somehow, magically, just might work to stop the nonexistent loopholes next time – which is Einstein’s definition of insanity. Actual enforcement of existing laws – which already plainly address the subject of individual suitability for gun ownership! – is all that is necessary. Nothing more, nothing less, nothing else. [By the way, those “sick demented”… Read more »

Charles Moore

Leonor, actually NOT very many have died at the hands of gun owners, but many at the hands of gun POSSESSORS; these would be those who do not OWN them – never bought them from a prior legal owner, therefore are illegal possessors, not owners. Most of these are heavily involved in other criminal activities. The ones that you speak of also typically support leftists, socialists, Democrats and the diminishing of the rights of the good people in this country and elsewhere. And, yes, MANY of them ARE “sick” and “demented.” The “sick” ones, I have come to conclude suffer… Read more »

Austin Miller

Leonor: I have been reading the comments on this site for YEARS and I don’t remember one time when someone suggested “Sick demented” people should have guns. I am not being sarcastic when I ask this; how do you suggest that individuals who clearly can not differentiate between acceptable moral imperatives be restricted from owning guns without infringing upon the vast majority of citizens that are able to do so? I am truly interested in why well intended folk like yourself don’t seem to understand that the very people you are worried about are the ones who will not abide… Read more »

Jim Macklin

The Second Amendment was written and submitted to the States in 1789 as the fourth amendment. It was ratified as the Second Amendment. It was adopted with only one comma. The Senate had rejected adding the words “for the common defense” as a limitation. The limit was just some way to clarify that the right was not limited to actual service as a state militia man. The whole reason for the Second Amendment was that the Constitution of 1788 only provided for firearm possession for the common defense. Further the Congress retained the power of organize and arm the militia… Read more »

William McAtee

On even cursory examination, one should notice that in the 2nd Amendment wording, only the militia is subject to being well regulated, not the common people. This was to ensure that a state sponsored militia would have checks and balances to discourage it from being used to oppress its citizens.


not quite. That term “well regulated” meant simply functioning the way it needed to function. A clock or watch that keeps accurate time is “well regulated”. It does its job. In the context of “militia”, which were simply the people of some area or town or district, was that the men involved would arm and train together, practice, drill, become a well functioning group equipped and prepared to deal with anything relating to “the security of a free state”. that meant being prepared to fend against indian or drunken pirate attacks, highwaymen lurking in the area, and any form of… Read more »

Charles Moore

Well stated. In this venue, “well regulated” would refer to the adjustment of sights on a firearm as it is being finished in its’ manufacture so that the alignment of the sights agrees with (are regulated to) the point of impact of the bullet (ball) at the determined distance, usually 75 or 100 yards.


“Well regulated” means properly functioning. Think of a well regulated clock. This phrase has nothing to do with government control!

Amanda Lee Jobin

You do realize you can support ALL the groups, right?
It’s not an exclusive club…. you can belong to them all…. It’s totally not a choice.

Bad writer is bad

Robert Messmer

Other than warning about the National Association for Gun Rights nowhere in the article does the writer encourage or discourage anyone from being a member of one or more of the groups. Good writer, he kept any bias out of the article and allows the reader to decide.


Unbiased except perhaps the part about the GOA positions making the NRA positions seem reasonable?

Read cynically, it sounds like the NRA supports “common sense gun control,” overlooking entirely the part of the 2nd Amendment that reads “shall not be infringed.” That’s not a small thing, IMO.


I think he meant it makes the NRA positions seem reasonable to the opposition and to the unwashed, which may make achieving them more probable, but in no way means they are actually good for US.


There is a problem with your notion of supporting “ALL the groups” — why would you support groups with opposing agendas? Would you support both an animal rescue organization AND an organization working to eradicate several breeds of dogs? Would you support both a pro-2A organization AND an anti-2A organization?? THAT is exactly what you are suggesting. Contrary to its advertising and fund raising campaigns, the NRA has a verifiable record of being consistently opposed to the Right to Keep and Bear Arms since at least 1934 and continuing through at least 2018. It is time for gun owners in… Read more »


Sure. If you have all the money in the world, you can support all the groups equally, even the ones that are largely ineffective and a waste of your money, and of course even the ones that are astroturf gun-grabber groups masquerading as “responsible gun owners,” and who actively use your money to destroy your rights.
But you’d have to be both rich and stupid. Fortunately, outside of lottery winners, dementia sufferers, professional athletes, and show-business icons, that demographic isn’t too prevalent.


right boys bitch at eatch outher . you need to go after the fucken us gov demacrats and leftys


Heck, what a bunch of pompous whinny cry baby’s.
The more groups the merrier.
No place like a forum. Huh?

Tim L

It’s all about CHOICE. Or loyalty to one or all groups. You will notice that when people bash one group or other groups, its just saying (we need more members to join) Remember that it’s the fight for freedom against tyranny. If you don’t want to have a firearm? Well you can stand in front of me as a shield while I’m reloading. It’s better to die on your feet than live on your knees! For the ones that want to live on your knees, you can just suck it.

Joseph P Martin

The article seems to be a bit one-sided. A little too pro-NRA and denigrate everyone else to be credible.

Roy F. Wilt

This writer is so full of Crap!


Let me guess, you’re a supporter of the National Association for Gun Rights? Lol


Shut up Fudd, author is a “national review” author which says everything anyone needs to know.


Although i respect the constitution and our bill of rights, i dont need them to tell me i have the right to take up arms in defense of my own life. I was BORN with that right, and i have it, just like we all do, with or without the constitution.


Jesus couldn’t write an article without bias in it could you?
You’d do well in a place like CNN

HMLA-167 Warrior

Well, I was about to say pretty much the same thing about the blatant bias. Since you have already stated it, I will just add a +1 to your comment. Glad to see I wasn’t the only one seeing his bias so clearly.

1776 Patriot

Bias? OK, mind sharing your facts witb the rest of us so we can make up our own minds? Not saying you’re wrong but I don’t see what you’re referring to in the article nor the rationale for blatant bias accusations. As a relative newby to the Second Amendment fight for our God-given, Constitutionaly-codified Civil Rights, I appreciate anyone who actually sheds ight on a subject; shade, not so much. Thanks.


HMLA and 1776 must be members of NAGR – which also stands for No Actions for Gun Rights.

Patrick L Jones

Yea I helped NAGR at a few gun shows but was not impressed by them. I support NRA and GOA.


If you’re familiar with how to sway an audience by subtleties and leaving out certain key facts then you see it immediately. For example, in mentioning GOA, the writer says “….it seems to spend as much time damning the NRA as…”. Now, that’s a negative, did he immediately follow with “but, in fairness, unlike the NRA, they were the first to file a law suit against ATF…”. No, he didn’t, he let that single negative statement hang. Nor did he offer any balancing criticism in his discussion on NRA. If you notice, NRA was the very first group mentioned, given… Read more »



Anyone that can’t see the bias, is because they are bias.

Robert Messmer

Quote: “If you notice, NRA was the very first group mentioned…” Noticed that all right. I also noticed that no other group was formed as early and still exists.

Dave in Fairfax

OK, here’s some light, but you’ll have to do the legwork.
Go on-line and do searches on The Federalist Paper, The Anti-Federalist Papers, A view of the Constitution by Wm Rawles.
The 1st two will give you the arguments that the Framers had on what the BoRs(Bill of Rights) should cover. The 3rd serves as a commentary on the Constitution. There’s a lot more, the Heritage Foundation has free classes to teach you on-line. If you want more after you think about that just ask lots of people here can help you learn.

The Revelator

Harold, “There you go again” ~ Ronald Reagan We told you what needs to happen with the NRA before those of us criticizing it will rejoin. No article you write here on ammoland is ever going to change that, just as we have come to expect that you will more than likely never willingly remove your head from your sphincter. People like Vanns40 and Clint covered the rest of the evidence against you since I came late to the party, but seeing as how your articles follow a form letter presentation if you’ve read one you’ve read them all. Nothing… Read more »

The Green Watch Dog

Do you find it entertaining to insult and demean anyone who disagrees with you? Try and be more polite, and refrain from commenting in an ugly and mean manner!

The Revelator

No, I just find it hilarious and entertaining to aggravate those intent on helping pass gun control that violates our rights like yourself, while destroying their arguments through careful application of evidence, history, and common sense. By the way, You are a hypocrite. Ugly and mean manner? This coming from the guy who has been intentionally mis-spelling my name for over a month in an attempt to get a rise out of me, and who tried to mock me telling me I should change that name to one of a Claymation villain from 40 year old SNL skits. So here… Read more »

The Green Watch Dog

Your’e mad. Revelatar, or Revelator? That was not intentional. And to refer to you as Slugo from Mr. Bill comedy on SNL? Yes, I am guilty of that.You seem to fit his character perfectly. Please notify the authorities that so I can be pistol whipped.

The Revelator

Not Mad. Just find it hilarious that someone who is so concerned about being so “nice and respectful towards other people” is trying to talk out of both sides of his backside. Now, “Not Intentional” would be perhaps two or three times. You have been doing this for almost two months. Very subtle, but it might be easier to deny if the correct spelling was not right at the top of my comments by which you are admitting to reading by your reply. So that is two months you have had to get it right, that is not a mistake.… Read more »

The Green Watch Dog

I wand to apologize for misspelling your name. It was not my intention, and was an oversight on my part. Somehow the name “Revelatar” was correct. So my bad. For certainly much more important matters, we all need to be active in our support for Students For Concealed Carry.
This needs our focused attention on every campus. It would be great if the NRA, GOA offered more of their support from their own team? Do you or others know if that is being offered? Will be glad to assist.

The Revelator

@Green Watch Dog That’s the first honest question I have seen you ask since you have been here. Everything else has been an attempt to push your opinions and ideology on others at the expense of their rights. If you are truly being honest about your concern for campus carry, then the best advice I can give is contact your state/local rights organizations. They will be in a better position to direct you where you need to go and who is working to fix things. Myself and others can tell you from Experience that the NRA drags its feet and… Read more »


The greenratfink’s licking itself again. Slurp, slurp, gurgle, gurgle, gurgle… gulp! See we think it’s mean that we must keep reading your communist bullsh!t.
Go write, lick and swallow Gorby or maybe a AOC somewhere else, anywhere else but here. They’ll give you all the green and pink juices that you deserve to swallow.

El Mac

Hillary, is that you?

The Revelator

No, Canklesaurous-rex had her internet permissions restricted after her private server got dusted.

Of course, if you like how Harold has attempted to whitewash any wrong doing by the NRA, please let us know in clear and concise language. We’d like to know where you stand.

If you are referring to Green Watch Dog, no that is not Hillary. That is Michael Bloomberg’s private fifteen year old Peruvian “office assistant.” He has to come here and fill his daily quota of comments or else Bloomberg punishes him severely. You know, lotion and all.