U.S.A. –-(Ammoland.com)- First, let me be clear that I believe that all gun control is an infringement on our God-given rights. The only gun law I think we need is “shall not be infringed.”
Some people don’t have a line in the sand that they are not willing to cross. I am not one of those people. I have a very clear line in the sand, and I am right up against it. Not one more inch! Not one more concession! These statements are not just me spewing rhetoric. It is something I believe in with every fiber of being. For fairness to AmmoLand News’s readers, I must highlight my bias in case it bleeds through in the article below.
The gun world exploded about an article from a gun rights advocate and a former anti-gun activist. My Instagram, Twitter, and email inbox blew up with people asking me to investigate what was going on with the pair. I followed the link people sent to me to see about the fuss the article stirred up.
When I read that article on this very website by Rob Pincus and Dan Gross, I was shocked.
I was not shocked that AmmoLand News ran the article. I know where the staff of the site stands on the Second Amendment. Also, in my years of writing for AmmoLand News, I knew the philosophy of running even unpopular articles. AmmoLand News breaks the mold of an echo chamber.
What shocked me about the article was the apparent call for enhanced background checks. I expected that stance from Dan Gross since he did run the extreme anti-gun Brady Organization for many years, but not from a guy that is constantly posting about 3D printing guns.
I then read articles that claim Mr. Pincus was walking back his call for enhanced background checks. It seemed like double-speak to me. Could I have been reading it wrong? Could the meaning of the article have been lost somewhere? I saw people posting on Social Media all sorts of claims about Rob Pincus, from being a Fed to being a Mike Bloomberg plant. Others claimed that he was a grifter just looking for his next payday.
I needed to interview Pincus on the record and get that information out to the public. I figured the best way to do it was to record the interview and release the raw uncut video for the world to see and decide for themselves. I am not here to give my personal opinion on Rob Pincus. I am not here to vindicate him, and I will not demonize him either.
Too many media outlets and so-called journalists tell people what to think. Much like AmmoLand News, I am old school. I report the facts, and I ask tough questions. I will allow the informed and opinionated readers of AmmoLand News to watch the video and make up their own minds about Mr. Pincus.
Did Rob Pincus expose himself in the AmmoLand article as an anti-gun turncoat? Is he a staunch defender of the Second Amendment? Maybe the truth lies somewhere in the middle. It isn’t my place to tell you what to think of Rob Pincus. (you can read all his previous articles published on AmmoLand here) Or, watch the video (above) and come to your own conclusions.
About John Crump
John is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people of all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss, or at www.crumpy.com.
Pincus cannot walk it back. He appears to have realized his gravy train is going to dry up. With friends like Rob who needs anti-gun enemies?
A whole lot of words from Rob dancing around what he wrote without owning any of it. Calling us extremists for quoting the second amendment and saying we will not comply or having a line drawn is childish. This did nothing to change my opinion of him and in fact made it worse.
In a world of compromise some men don’t, if that makes me an extremist so be it.
If he isn’t he wouldn’t have in the first place,No discussion,Not one more inch and No Rob Pincus,got caught with his hand in the cookie jar.
There is no middle ground. Give middle ground the other side steals a few inches or feet and declares that is now middle ground. NO, there is no middle ground.
You are so right. You don’t win wars from defensive positions.
First, suicide is a permanent solution to a temporary problem. Solve the temporary problem. Mental health. Point of disclosure. I worked for a contractor putting the jumper nets on the Golden Gate Bridge. Did no good. Just as we were finishing the job a guy drove his car at full speed into our jersey barrier. He had a long record of suicide attempts. Second point. Conservatives and repubicans in particular make the mistake of thinking they can negotiate with progressives and leftists. That mistake is the foundation of New Left Progressive assumptions about how they can incrementally march through all… Read more »
John Crump, As I mentioned in the Hank Strange thread (after your interview with Pincus, but before it was posted here), you allowed Pincus to talk incessantly about things that were unrelated to the core of his rambling, incoherent article: enhanced background checks. You keep saying you ask tough questions, but you did not come across as a tough interviewer asking tough questions. You seemed uncomfortable attempting to keep him on point. There are currently federal laws requiring background checks – does Pincus want to “enhance” those laws, or not? If he does, what specific “enhancements” does he want? Many… Read more »
Did you see his posts on Facebook calling these articles “hit pieces” against him? It seems like he’s trying to crawfish using a lot of doublespeak after being called out for his background check comments.
It also looks like you’ll have to comment on his FB posts in order to get a response. Unfortunately, most of his responses seem to be political type non-answers.
https://www.facebook.com/115846008498234/posts/3819036721512459/
Yes – he’s loving it. Lots of attention and he can say his article means anything.
It would be helpful if this article by John Crump was moved to the same tab as the Pincus and Strange articles – the “Gun Rights” tab.
This article is currently in the “Shooting Media News” tab that doesn’t show up on the tab header (at least for me).
Rob Pincus, please answer the questions asked above. For once, keep your answers concise and to the point. Ask a friend if you need help.
Added to “Gun Rights” tab. Good catch.
Thank you – and I appreciate all you and the others at AmmoLand do to provide a forum to discuss/debate these issues. It’s a rarity.
Let’s start with checking Politician’s background, their mental condition in particular.
BIG HELL YEAH!!! Let’s start with Pigloosi, Water4Brains, Jacsome-She. Those bitches are bat shit crazy, anti-American shrews.
Of all those he could’ve reached out to, Dan Gross carefully chose to reach out to “Rob Pincus” for Gross’ “project”. Why didn’t Gross choose any other luminaries of the community such as Clint Smith, or Mike Glover, or Travis Haley, or Kyle Lamb, or Larry Vickers, or etc.? The reason is simple. All the aforementioned men, as well as many others in the community, would’ve told Gross to GFH! Gross chose Pincus because he saw Pincus for what he is, a FUDD with a social media platform willing to compromise away rights, as long as there’s “something”, $$$, in… Read more »
Exactly, Pincus just destroyed his training company. He has now been excommunicated from the community. Rob did this calculus before releasing the piece so he is most likely being paid quite well to join the anti side. Maybe Bloomberg got involved and greased Rob’s palms.
Anti-gun? Of course not. He makes his living with them. Anti-2A? If would appear so considering his statements for background checks.
Stag, you do realize that the 2A is BIG BUSINESS for both sides of the 2A issue, right??? NRA, GOA, SAF, and all other 2A protectors, individuals and organizations, are no different than the anti-2A groups/individuals. Both sides need victims/Big Bad Bullys/protectors (themselves) to make the dollars flow. When individuals stand up en masse and implement the 2A for our Founders’ intended purpose, settling this issue once and or all, then the cash flow will end. Until then, cash flow is King.
Let’s see. Pancreatic cancer is worse than colon cancer, than brain cancer, than lung cancer, et el. Still don’t want any of those. Same for any infringements on “….shall not be infringed.” Pincus cut his own throat. RIP, Rob.
I HAD planned on taking a class with Rob since he lives about 5 hrs away. Not any more.
This is not a place for “nuance”. There is no middle ground. Either you support the second amendment or you do not. There is no room for “Yeah, but” in any of this. Either you support the 2A or you are afraid of it. All gun laws infringe upon the right to keep and bear arms. Some of them are just little “yeah, buts” but all of them infringe. There is no way to make nice with the enemy of our freedom. For the founders, it was a WAR for independence, not a gentlemanly disagreement about some details of form.… Read more »
Rob, so what “enhanced” background checks do you agree with knowing that “prohibited” persons do not get background checks when they illegally obtain firearms? How will these “enhanced” checks provide any safety to any of us and/or prevent “prohibited” persons that already are illegally obtaining them? You are not employed by any anti-rights/”gun control” organizations, are you or have you ever been paid by any such organization, or organizations that seek to restrict our rights? Here are some stats on NICS background checks, do these figures show any rational or reasonable effectiveness? How would your “enhanced” background checks improve this?… Read more »
Maybe enhance the system to reduce rate of incorrect denials and number of delays? NICS should live up to its name and be instant for all.
I think Pincus is a confused man. I really believe he THINKS what he’s doing is somehow helpful instead of harmful. But he’s over-thought a bunch of semantical garbage that can’t help but be used against what he tries to say (and not very well) that he supports. I also believe that he thinks we’re not smart enough to enter into the conversation on his level—that we’re missing his point. Well, MAY-BE! Perhaps he needs to stay a little closer to his point. If what he says is a strong pro 2A narrative is so garbled as to be able… Read more »
If Pincus didn’t want any more gun control laws he could have replaced that entire rambling, ridiculous mess with:
“I don’t believe there should be any more gun control laws. I don’t believe any current laws should be “enhanced” to be more restrictive. I believe there should be less gun control laws.”
He didn’t write that.
What I’m hearing is a lot of dbbl speak, back peddling, and deflecting.
It brings to mind the old adage that if you don’t have the facts, then you dazzle them with BS.
Wow. The last time I saw something this full of crap I had to hire a whole team of plumbers with a gasoline powered rotor rooter just to unstop it. He has no unifying ideas or philosophy, just a collection of popular talking points that sound good but aren’t even consistent from one moment to the next. He claims to be a pragmatist, yet he has no pragmatic strategy. He prefers to make a problem go away today with no regard for the result tomorrow. He is living in a bubble. He needs to stop watching the empty suits on… Read more »
Anybody interested in guessing how long it takes Mr. Pincus to start making the rounds on the firearms podcasts to back-pedal?
He already got into a scrum with Florida Carry on Facebook. Then he promptly alerted Facebook Admins to suspend Florida Carry. Pincus is a POS and Ammoland is treading water by continuing to try to help him save face.
Well, it’s not like he’s the NRA calling for Red Flag laws…but give him time, he’ll cave on that too. And like the NRA, he’s not worth the effort of further comment.
Wow. That’s some incredible investigative journalism there, Crump. It took everything I had to just get past the ‘commentate’ made up word. I haven’t seen a stroke job like this since we got free passes to the AVN award show when we were at SHOT Show back in 2018. Now I know why I’ve never heard of you before. Your credibility is almost as far gone as Rob’s. It’s hard to walk back comments when you authored them! My rights are not up for compromise no matter how you want to retell the story.
It appears Ammoland is joining Pincus in trying to save their livelihoods. Once you join the enemy its difficult if not impossible to come back.
pilot25,
Once you compromise on the BoR, it’s hard to regain your credibility as a Constitutionalist. Please rethink your position.
My position is clear and it is also clear and you are in crisis mode.
pilot25,
You are correct, your position is clear.
You are incorrect, NOBODY at AmmoLand, much less me personally, is in crisis mode. I’m merely sorry that you haven’t correctly assessed the situation, and don’t favor free speech.
Another incorrect assumption and not surprisingly you are yet another person who doesn’t know what free speech means. You are using the Ammoland platform to further gun control and the gun control agenda. Have a blast and join the ranks of Bloomberg and his followers. I will no longer continue to support your site and will recommend to everyone I know they discontinue to follow this website. Cheers and spend some time reading the First Amendment so you might grasp its meaning properly.
pilot25, Oddly enough I do understand the meaning of the 1A. It limits the government, not individuals. I also understand that ALL free people have a right to say what they want. They may have to pay for what they say in various ways, but that doesn’t change their right to say it. Therein lies our difference of opinion. I don’t curtail anyone’s right to speak their mind even when if offends me. You believe that if if you don’t agree with them they have no right to voice their opinion. Your argument that they can say it elsewhere is… Read more »
I see that this is your first comment. Perhaps if you’d been here longer you’d have heard of Mr Crump, he is a frequent contributor.
Been here a long time, but thanks for assuming my number of comments has anything to do with my length of time in the know. Crump’s farce of a report combined with Pincus’s outing seemed like the perfect time to make a first comment. Not to mention watching Ammoland’s new found gun control leanings masquerading as your love of First Amendment fairness. You guys sound like Pincus with his double talk psycho babble. Just admit you did it for the ‘clicks’ and I bet most people wouldn’t care.
Magnum1701, Frequently people comment shortly after coming on board, I’m sorry that feel slighted. If you have been here as long as you suggest you have, then you have no excuse for not knowing who Mr Crump is. AmmoLand has ALWAYS stood for presenting both sides of an argument, and has ALWAYS been anti-gun control. If you actually believe that our actions are “masquerading as your love of First Amendment fairness”, or that we “did it for the ‘clicks’”, you are sadly mistaken. It also shows a lack of understanding free speech as opposed to the 1A. We don’t do… Read more »
Suicides. You would probably eliminate gun suicides by removing all guns but it would not stop suicides. Japan still has a high rate of suicides, so do many other developed nations. Should the goal be to eliminate gun suicides or suicides in general. Eliminate the guns you also eliminate the self-defense use of guns which are half a million or more times a year. Weigh 500,000 to 2 million lives saved against 10,000 people killing themselves. When big cities began dropping dropping prosecution of crime, when they began no bail releases; crime went up. Chicago is more likely to prosecute… Read more »
I also meant to say, thanks John Crump, good job!
Wait, so when he said “enhanced background checks” he actually meant “less background checks”? Somehow I doubt that’s the way Dan Gross interpreted it when he agreed to sign the letter. What I see from Rob is a guy who is playing a double game, he uses vague terms and then when you call him out he says you’re the one who just doesn’t understand.
Rob, you are a yella-belly, coward, just a back-stabbing, traitor! Go on over to CNN. I’m sure they will welcome you there, with open arms. I cant believe I actually subscribed to your PDN network. Never Again buddy. Never, ever, again.
I watched this idiot do the same thing in person at the annual NRA meeting in Tucson last year. His perspective is to oppose the NRA, his goal is to take it over by getting rid of the entire staff. His repeated attempts to try and turn the attending members, was met with less than favorable results, and resounding applause when he was apposed. He’s transparent, as soon as he opens his mouth you know exactly where he stands, on the wrong side! He and his other cronies that attended were ALL defeated, one even showed up without preregistration ,which… Read more »
I am glad to see the Ammoland was willing to publish the original article even though it seemed to be an unfavorable endorsement of expanded background checks, which I oppose. I have trained with Pincus numerous times. I found him to be a good and capable instructor, however, I remember him not caring much for verbal niceties during drills. So, I am willing to give Rob the benefit of the doubt and presume that his core idea was lost in the mass of words from the original article. Unfortunately, viewed in that light, this interview did nothing to clear up… Read more »
Well, he started a conversation all right. I just don’t think it was the one he was expecting
I don’t think any of us really know what our “line in the sand” is because we haven’t gotten to that point. The problem with the “will not comply” statement is that it doesn’t allow any room for nuance or any room for the distance between where we should be “shall not be infringed” and all of the infringements currently on the books. While I would love to go from the current state to the 2A overnight, that’s not how the real world works. Should it be faster than it has been? Of course. Changing laws requires dialog, and often… Read more »
J Gibbons, If you don’t know what your line in the sand is you need to go and search your soul. I suspect that you are wrong,and that many have made that decision. You are right, “will not comply” doesn’t allow any room for nuance. It isn’t a gray area, it is brightly delineated. The infringements are on the books but that does not mean that they must be followed. Consider the compliance rates in CT and NY. Now scale that up to the US. The problem with “Changing laws requires dialog, and often small steps toward the end goal”… Read more »
Clearly you don’t live in a gun control state. I suggest you do a little more learning and reading before commenting again.