GunSenseUs Pressures PA Sheriffs To Break the Law & Expose Gun Owners’ Personal Info

UPDATE 10/20/2019: GunSenseUs President Ann Colby-Cummings has asked AmmoLand News to remove her organization’s email from the below article over privacy concerns and her not wanting to hear from people that disagree with her efforts. See the conversation image below. We have removed her info since we as gun owners very well understand the privacy concerns. Note: if you visit their website you will also see they have no direct way to contact their organization, unlike Ammoland News. Cowards. Enjoy the irony.

Corporate Tyranny Shameful Harassment
GunSenseUs Pressures PA Sheriffs To Break the Law & Expose Gun Owners’ Personal Info

Harrisburg, Penn.-( According to firearms attorney Joshua Prince of the Prince Law Offices, GunSenseUs is trying to pressure Sheriffs into contacting references of people who apply for a license to carry in Pennsylvania.

GunSenseUs is an anti-gun group whose stated mission “is to foster community well-being by seeking common-sense solutions that recognize ALL citizens’ rights and responsibilities,” capitalization their emphasis.

Says Joshua Price :

“In violation of PA law, GunSenseUs is demanding [in a form letter embedded below] that our PA Sheriffs disclose confidential license to carry firearms applicant information or be subjected to GunSenseUs issuing a press release in local papers,” Prince said in a statement.

“PLEASE let your Sheriff know not to bow to their pressure, as it is both a criminal and civil violation of law to disclose LTCF applicant information. Further, maybe you want to send GunSenseUs – [email protected] – and GunSenseUs President Ann Colby-Cummings – [email protected] – an email with your thoughts on their soliciting and conspiring with PA Sheriffs to violate PA law.”

Pennsylvania Gun Owner Shaming & Harassment

The anti-gun group sent a threatening letter to sheriffs across the commonwealth, asking them to sign a pledge to contact at least two non-family member references for anyone applying for a license to carry. If the sheriffs were to comply with the order, they would violate 18 Pa.C.S. 6111(i) and 18 Pa.C.S. 6111(g)(3.1).

18 Pa.C.S. 6111(i) reads:

Any person … who knowingly and intentionally obtains or furnishes information collected or maintained pursuant to section 6109 for any purpose other than compliance with this chapter or who knowingly or intentionally disseminates, publishes or otherwise makes available such information to any person other than the subject of the information commits a felony of the third degree

18 Pa.C.S. 6111(g)(3.1) reads:

Confidentiality.–All information provided by the … applicant, including, but not limited to, the … applicant’s name or identity, furnished by … any applicant for a license to carry a firearm as provided by section 6109 shall be confidential and not subject to public disclosure. In addition to any other sanction or penalty imposed by this chapter, any person, … State or local governmental agency or department that violates this subsection shall be liable in civil damages in the amount of $1,000 per occurrence or three times the actual damages incurred as a result of the violation, whichever is greater, as well as reasonable attorney fees.

It is illegal for the sheriff to release any information about citizens applying for a license to carry. The demand letter from GunSenseUs is asking the sheriffs to break the law.

AmmoLand News has not been able to find any sheriffs that have complied with the demand. If they were to comply with the demand, the sheriff would put themselves in a precarious position.

The group behind GunSenseUs is threatening to send press releases to the local papers if the sheriffs do not subjugate themselves to the group demands. They have given the departments until October 23rd, 2019, to respond with a signed pledge. The group timed their effort to be around the time that the sheriffs are up for reelection. The President of GunSenseUs, Ann Colby-Cummings, signed the letter.

Jon Patton of the Gun Collective, who lives in Pennsylvania, thinks the people should vote out any sheriff that does dare to comply with the anti-gun group’s extortion demands. He hopes no law enforcement agencies give in the group’s pressure but understands that the group is using their political weight against sheriffs running for reelection.

“Any sheriff that bows down to a partisan group shouldn’t be elected anyway,” Patton told AmmoLand News. “They are meant to serve, protect, and uphold the law. They are not there to take up a political agenda. Bowing down to a group like this would show who they are and shows that they shouldn’t be in the role of sheriff.”

Patton isn’t the only one disturbed by the anti-gun group threatening sheriffs into breaking the law. Erich Pratt, Executive Vice President of Gun Owners of America, is also upset by the group’s illegal demands, but he was not surprised that gun-hating radicals at GunSenseUs would issue the letter.

“What irony,” Pratt told AmmoLand News. “The gun grabbers at GunSenseUs hate the Second Amendment so much; they are trying to bully sheriffs into doing their bidding, even though it would require law enforcement to break the law. GunSenseUs would do better by actually focusing on lawbreakers and trying to reform a turnstile justice system that puts dangerous criminals back onto the street.”

“Gun owners value their privacy and oppose a registration. But, of course, anti-gun zealots could care less if the information on concealed carry holders is abused. And this just underscores why Pennsylvania must pass HB 1412, a bill to allow Constitutional Carry. Law-abiding gun owners should be free to carry firearms for self-defense without being registered like sex offenders.”

Prince is asking anyone who had their private information disclosed or had a sheriff ask for more information than required for a license to carry firearms to contact the Firearms Industry Consulting group to discuss their rights and legal options.

AmmoLand News reached out to GunSenseUs for clarification on their request by email and Facebook. Although the group saw our messages, they refused to respond.

GunSenseUs’ letter Pressures PA Sheriffs To Break the Law & Release Gun Owners’ Personal Info

GunSenseUs President Ann Colby-Cummings Privacy Request: Ironic

GunSenseUs President Ann Colby-Cummings Privacy Request
GunSenseUs President Ann Colby-Cummings Privacy Request


About John Crump

John is an NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. He is the former CEO of Veritas Firearms, LLC, and is the co-host of The Patriot-News Podcast, which can be found at John has written extensively on the patriot movement, including 3%’ers, Oath Keepers, and Militias. In addition to the Patriot movement, John has written about firearms, interviewed people from all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and is currently working on a book on leftist deplatforming methods and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss, on Facebook at realjohncrump, or

Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Ann Colby-Cummings should be charged with “Conspiracy to commit a Felony in the 3rd Degree” since she is demanding that a Sheriff commit the same crime.


It figures… liberal women who want to cause problems for men. Why are these meaningless people being taken seriously? Sheriffs, just say “No!” and stand up to these cranks.


To police officers, sheriffs, deputies and any other LEO inclined to break the law and expose the personal info of anyone remember it is you and your department who will pay the price through loss of money, your job, your reputation, and possibly your freedom…to all LEOs it is we on right (conservatives) who back the blue, it is those on the left and anti-gun groups like GunSenseUs that constantly bad mouth LEOs…LEOs please do the right thing.

Heart of Texas

I thought it was a crime to solicit someone else to commit a crime.


Good point. Will one sheriff, or more, have the stones to charge her with this? Now THAT would, in my view, be a guaranee of reelection!!


I would like to see any sheriff who violates this law procecuted and put in jail as well as all immunity of public officials stripped from them so they may be personaly sued civilly


The “president” of this anti gun outfit is just not very smart. Not only has she threatened to publicly condemn these county sheriffs but she has put her illegal threats in writing. Just another lefty completely ignoring the law and doing what ever she pleases. Lock her up!


Isn’t this a form of extortion? Would it be possible to RICO Gunsenseus?


Hmmmm Now you’re talking I like this idea a lot.

Jen jen

I disagree. We’ve abused RICO so much already. Lets not make it worse. Try to be more virtuous than your enemy.


@Jen jen – In general I agree with your statement. However were this done in a highly public manner with media coverage (in defense of liberal anti-gun group) – would it be possible we could finally generate sufficient public outcry to reform/eliminate RICO?

Get Out

IMOA, I shouldn’t have to provide 2 outside non-family member references to authorize me to CCW? It’s no one else’s business but my own that I am applying for a CCW permit. The BGC by the Sheriff will determine that I am not a prohibited person.


@Get Out

That was largely the point I was trying to make. Excellent comments, both of them. Good job.

Don’t let the vote crap fool you. I have a stalker who decided to make multiple accounts. It’s funny watching real time as they sign out of each one, and give duplicate down votes, all 1 to 3 minutes apart. 😀


of course now that I’ve publicly pointed it out, I imagine they are going to change their timing and tactics now.

Heed the Call-up

The odd part is that someone has singled you out. We all are against anyone wanting to strip us of our inalienable rights – one of the biggest reasons for the federal Constitution *guaranteeing* our rights, not granting them.


@Heed the Call-up Sorry for not being on to respond to your comment in a timely fashion. It’s not odd at all. Think about the finks we have had here over the years. Green Watch Dog, ochwill, GIL, Clark Kent(the first one who showed up)…. I call balls and strikes, that’s it. Because I was able to out argue each of them on a factual basis there was nothing they could do to even get a grip on me. I painted the target on my back myself, and it is something I am proud of! For every hypocrite and liar… Read more »

Jen jen

Lol their writing reads like a ransom note. “If you dont do this within x time, we will harm you!”.


Sure, publish private info so people can be harassed. sounds like a Brown Shirt Tactic.

Jen jen

Lol, for sure. That’s why I just used duckduckgo to search for GunSenseUS Email and found their web page listed in someone else’s article, then went to their web page, then found their email from that web page, then sent them the message. It was easy. There’s nothing private about a group publishing their info for all the world to see. If you’ve done it once, you have made that choice. It does not go backwards. Furthermore, a group seeking to push political goals should not be free from criticism nor should be considered private to protect itself from criticism.… Read more »


@Jen Jen

Thanks for your efforts. Great comment. Word of advice. There are a lot of anti gun people now beginning to come here and “Ghost vote” to try and sway public opinion on ammoland.

You already had one negative vote against you I cancelled out. Don’t let it discourage you. Keep chasing the truth. They will hate you for it, but we must not give up.


@Jen Jen – I have also subscribed to a few groups in order to listen in on their propaganda, so that I may be better prepared. However I am afraid they use subscription numbers to bolster their credibility – so no longer do so. Besides – my inbox is so spammed I don’t end up reading any of their stuff anyway.


Well, let us examine the second amendment! A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free state. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed Well regulated , meaning to run smooth, be disciplined , well supplied. Militia meaning the body of people consisting of lawful citizens in a free state of existence. Security , meaning to keep safe . Necessary meaning needed , essential Free state, meaning the collective of states, the whole nation. The right , meaning those essential liberties that all people have regardless of government. The people,… Read more »


I beg to differ Will. I do not care for the way that it is written: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” There is a glaring ambiguity in that run-on sentence. One interpretation (to a reader who can’t fathom individual gun ownership) is that the 2A exists solely to facilitate the formation of a militia. And, as they are quick to opine, there is no longer a need for the militia. The other interpretation is in line with the… Read more »


Will is right on what he said. It was written in clear, plain English. A modern day translation would follow as such.

“A people being well trained and familiar with the use of arms, being individually responsible for maintaining their own liberty and safety, the right of the people to own and make use of arms they deem necessary to their own defense shall not be restricted.”

It was clear in 1791, it is still clear today.


Perhaps Pennsylvania should pressure Ebay, Amazon and other online retailers to stop disguising the packaging of sex toys so that your neighbors and the UPS, Fedex and USPS delivery personnel don’t know your a freak.


how are they not committing extortion and coercion? they are attempting to persuade sheriff’s to do what they want by using force and/or threats, and obtaining sought after information through force and/or threats. think the leftist media will call them out on it. if President Trump actually did something like that they would be screaming (again) for impeachment.


Yes, it is extortion, but the real reason is hidden. It has to do with ERPO’s or red flag laws.

One misworded answer, one deceptively worded question, one person in a state agency looking for any reason to deny a permit or even confiscate someone’s firearms.


Since when do democraps follow the law????



uncle dudley

If there are sheriff’s in PA that allow sanctuary to illegals and don’t work with ICE I would worry about them going along with this anti-gun group.
Look out folks.


I just read this article and find it outrageous that an anti gun group would do something like this. How about The PA Attorney Generals Office or the PA State Police, investigate GunSenseUS for this? It is political pressure and extortion. The anti’s don’t care about the 2A and never have. I have yet to hear any anti gun group or politician mention the enforcing of the existing gun laws, there are more than enough of them to prosecute and put real criminals in prison for the illegal / criminal use of firearms. Furthermore the anti’s (groups and pols) never… Read more »


Domestic Enemies (to the U.S. Constitution) are those who manipulate the law or lawmakers to violate the Founder’s intent, remove their safeguards, distort, circumvent, or in any way threaten the Constitution, threaten sovereignty, infringe upon individual rights, usurp authority, advance tyranny,…


Hmmm.. too bad the law does not read “obtains or furnishes” the relevant information does not also includ “or ATTEMPTS to obtain or furnish…”.

then Little Missy Annie would already be in violation, one felomy count for each letter to each sheriff’s office she approached. If each count carried a sentence of one year, she’d be past retirement age when she got out of the joint. And it would look real good on her.


So they’ll issue a press release. What are they going to say this sheriff follows the law? Um, I don’t get it. I don’t see that big of a threat, unless they intend to lie in the press release, in which case the sheriff should file a defamation suit or something like that.


the press release would, apparently, include the personal information on those who have applied for their Mother May I Carry a Gun cards. And for every name released to this busybody twitette SHE should be charged with one felony count, and the individual who released the information to her also so charged.


Will I joined GOA about 3 weeks ago…NRA appears to have some credibility and corruption issues. LaPierre and Cox appear to be the problem with the NRA. JMO


Indeed. I’ve been fighting for Constitutional Carry in my state. Will not get a “Mother may I” card.


Why not? THe state police have been keeping an illegal handgun registry for years and the courts refuse to take action. Why would they interfere with this illegal action.

Heed the Call-up

Yes, the irony that she does not want her email published, but she’s okay with firearm owners having their personal business made public. From her gun[non-]sense website, she published this email address, below, so why can’t Ammoland use it in a story about her. This email was for if you have any questions. So the question is, why is she upset that people have emailed her questioning her about her position on our inalienable rights?

[email protected]


I reading this article a second time it is interesting that Ann Colby- Cummings of Gun SenseUS contacted Ammoland and asked that the e-mail for this organization be removed, she didn’t want to hear from gun owners about this. Too bad the legal gun owners that live in PA, have that right to questions GunSesneUS and find out why this is being done. First of all, what she and this organization did is asking the Sheriff’s if they actually contacted the two non family members listed as references on the LTCF. Gun SenseUS got the information on the PA State… Read more »


Not that anyone here needs to be reminded of the hypocrisy of anti-gunners, but this is their mindset.
Law abiding gun owners and conservatives vs the lawless progressives.


To John Crump,
This is a very misleading article.
The letter asks only that the Sheriff actually contact the references.
It does not ask him to release the names.
Until a judge strikes down the law, the sheriff SHOULD contact the references.
The applicant has already given permission for the contact.
The law is certainly unconstitutional, but a judge has to rule on that.
There is no problem here.
Just fear mongering from our side


@Docduracoat “Contact non family references” – so at least two people outside of the applicant who now know you are applying. Violates the disclosure as defined by law, since those references would have to know who they are answering about. The law says Sheriff’s may not do it, not that they have to. AGAIN, They are trying to intimidate sheriffs into signing a PLEDGE, in violation of the law. The Sheriffs should not contact the references. Again, it is not law. If you want to talk about misleading, The letter sent by GunSenseUS does not say contact the references given… Read more »


Where does this letter state that they are asking for personal information from CCL permit holders?
All they are asking is for the sheriffs to pledge that they actually do their job and call the references that you are required to supply when applying for a CCL or renewing your CCL.
Is that too much to ask of a Sheriff? It is their responsibility to make sure all information is correct and not fraudulent on the application.


@Medkow74 The applicants personal information and application for a CCW. The law states that individuals and state agencies may not disclose even the application or intent of the applicant to obtain a CCW, that such information is confidential. Again, what the letter is asking is not seeking contacts the applicant lists, but going out on their own and finding other “Non family member sources”. Any act such as the pledge from GunSenseUS by state agencies to go out and ask people outside of the applicant or the form, simply because they happen to know the applicant would be a violation… Read more »


So why is an organization which wants unconstitutional Red Flag laws trying to intimidate Sheriffs into signing a pledge with a stated intent to go after them politically unless they conform, just before an election?

Especially when the sheriffs are already following the law.


Well, there are at least three cowards who didn’t want to discuss questions or evidence.

Perhaps one of them is Ann Colby-Cummings. 🙂

Dave in Fairfax

Rev, It’s very possible. I went to the website, jotted down the talking points and e-mailed both of her addys with point-by-point refutation. I was polite and quiet in my demeanor. I asked for civil discourse and have heard crickets.


@Dave in Fairfax The truth lays in simple questions and analyzing how they wrote it. And yes, you wont get honest responses back from them. For example, why would they use the word “Procure” regarding references when it is already on the application? A liar will usually tip their hand if they have an ulterior motive. I spent a lot of time during the 2012 election making some college aged kids watch video of Barack Obama on youtube when talking about the Second amendment because they wanted to tell me he wasn’t anti 2A, “He said so.” I made them… Read more »


Not exactly sure how many sheriffs follow the law. I have been using the same two references since I got my first CCL 24 years ago and neither of them have ever been called.


The applicant’s on the list are already “Non Family Member Sources” since it clearly states that you can’t use “Family Members”.
I agree with you on a lot of the statements you are making as far as this being able to be used beyond what it’s meant to be used for but I also believe you are finding statements and agenda’s that in reality are not mentioned.


I keep doubting your statements about how you get down voted. However seeing this relatively factual comment loaded with 10 down votes provides considerable credence to your claims. Would love to see textual comments from some of those down voters explaining why they are down voting you here. Could be “gun nonsense” group has decided to follow up since they are aware of this article. I’d certainly want my friends to follow up and respond if someone was posting unflattering info about me. Would of course prefer if they provided factual arguments in my support instead of meaningless clicks –… Read more »


@Finnky You won’t hear any. Not trying to be prideful, but they know what will happen if they argue with me. I only call it out to highlight their cowardice and have a little fun with it. The more they click, the more it proves I was right about them. What I do is simple, its nothing special. Anyone can do it. If you want to win arguments, always argue the factual truth, always call out hypocrisy regardless of side, and never argue based on opinion. Of course, your final sentence and assertation here is a very accurate summation of… Read more »

Get Out

@Docduracoat, It’s no one else’s business but my own that I am applying for a CCW permit. Sherriff need only conduct a NICS BGC to determine that I am not a prohibited person.
Trash such as this only helps anti-gunners chip away at our 2nd Ammendment.


Let me show you how ghost voting works. “GunSenseUs is a loser organization filled with left leaning, anti-Constitutional losers whose lives amount to squat and so want to make sure yours does too.” Watch the vote now. Watch it.


The Trick StWayne is the question history gives us. Once you have you know what may or is happening, will it still happen once you know about it. I tried to warn Ammoland back in June/July this is how things would devolve, that it would become a tool that those seeking to destroy the constitution would make use of, that they would no longer have to expose themselves. “Ghost voting” is very similar to shadow banning, only as an inverse. Because they want to sway public opinion, but can’t prevent comments from being seen here, they silently spam negative votes… Read more »

Dave in Fairfax

Revelator, I checked into the effects of the possible trolls using their fake accts to vote multiple times and affect people doing the commenting. I DO appreciate your concern, but there are issues involved in regulation. I know THAT doesn’t come as a shock. Whether people up or down vote a specific person doesn’t affect them or their ability to comment. At most all it does is make a thread rise in popularity regardless of whether the votes are up or down. You are correct in that some people will look at the tally of up and down votes and… Read more »


@Dave in Fairfax Sorry I could not get back to you before now. “You are correct in that some people will look at the tally of up and down votes and make decisions based on irrelevancies” Yes, it is called social engineering. While it is sad to see, you are unfortunately right. I’m sorry to hear Ammoland wont be able to get rid of the idiot button, but alas, I already figured the days of accountability to be gone when things switched over. I am a firm proponent of free speech, though people too often think that that means they… Read more »


Revelator: seems you have garnished the ghost votes I was looking to fire up. Kudos to you. Dave in Fairfax offers some really good insight into the problem: it’s not the negative vote that counts, but how it was manipulated to get there. I myself ran into this, and was at first amused by it. Then I got over it when I realized what was happening. On the 10th of October 2019 I was privileged to have served on President Trump’s security detail in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Antifa was everywhere, shouting down this and that, and for reasons they couldn’t defend.… Read more »


@StWayne I remember that comment before the rally, and you stating you were volunteering. I fully supported you in that and said as much. Whether someone is a Trump supporter or someone on the right who cannot vote for him, most were going their to ask questions and support truth they needed protection. Those who want to agitate for one reason or another need to know there are guard dogs around to discourage any attempts at violence. It’s funny you mention Antifa trying to “Shout down” anyone and everyone without facts. That is the essence of what their ghost voting… Read more »


Well, seems like a lot of people here support an organization that wants Red Flag orders, but are too cowardly to speak up about it. Ammoland editors, are you watching? This new system is unfortunately going to be used by enemies of the Second Amendment.

Lee R 22

I guess I missed what all the hysteria is about. This political group is trying to get pledges from the sheriff’s department to say “yes, we actually check the references listed before we issue the permit. ” It does NOT say, “give us a list of applicants so we can call references for you. ” chill out please.

Scotty Gunn

So, they are demanding that the sheriffs sign that they are complying, or else the anti-gun group will barrage the local papers and media that the sheriff refuses to comply. (actually, they are just refusing to sign, but the Media will imply that they are doing something wrong).
That is blackmail. Are you okay with that? Is that how you operate in life? This is what people are irate about.


I agree there are to many people in here that are not reading and comprehending. There is not one spot in that letter that asks for the sherriff’s to release or disseminate the information from the applicant. The only law being broken is in reference to them trying to blackmail/extort for a signed letter saying that the sherriff will do his job when checking the background. The sherriff calling to verify the references is not in violation of the law as he is not giving out any info. Also those signing the application give consent to the reference checks otherwise… Read more »