Deceptive Petition: Falsely Claiming Gun Owner Support for Infringements

More like “Aim for suckering gun owners into supporting infringements…” (97Percent/Facebook)

U.S.A. – “97Percent Advocacy Launches Campaign That Gives Voice to Gun Owners in the Conversation on Gun Safety,” an email from the Astroturf gun control group posing as an honest broker on gun issues claims.

“Aim for Change is a petition for gun owners who support research-based gun safety laws that reduce gun-related homicides and suicides and keep America safe, while respecting our right to bear arms,” the email continues. “Our campaign features a digital and printable petition in the form of a shooting range target for gun owners to sign – with gun fire [sic].”

Listen to what they’re saying: They can uphold the Second Amendment and infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms at the same time. Calling that a paradox would be polite. Calling it a lie would be more on point.

And the virtual shooting range? That’s for shallow morons who think the issue is about guns. It’s not. It’s about freedom. If enjoying shooting was all it took, we’d have no better pals than Lon Horiuchi and “skeet/trap shooter” David Hogg.

But wait. There’s more:

“Aim for Change gives gun owners a tangible way to voice support,” said 97Percent Co-Founder Adam Miller. “Our research clearly shows the majority of gun owners support key gun safety reforms, but they feel left out of the conversation. Aim for Change is a way to unite gun owners, as well as demonstrate to non-gun owners, the media, and legislators that this issue is not nearly as divisive as it is made out to be.”

We’ve all seen such claims before, and the genesis for “popularizing” them goes back to a 2015 press release from the Center for American Progress claiming 83 percent of gun owners nationally support criminal background checks on all sales of firearms, while only 14 percent of gun owners oppose them. There is strong bipartisan agreement on the issue, with 90 percent of Democrat and 81 percent of Republican gun owners in support of background checks. Additionally, 72 percent of NRA members support them.”

As long as we’re talking background checks, let’s look at CAP’s. It was founded by John Podesta, Bill Clinton’s Chief of Staff and the head of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign. It gets its money from, among other well-heeled leftist sources, George Soros’ Open Society Foundations.

As for the gun owner/NRA member “statistics,” those were pattoted in a Harvard Kennedy School Institute of Politics paper that begins with the caveat:

“The article below is a product of the Harvard Political Review. Review articles and viewpoints expressed are written and edited exclusively by Review undergraduate students, not the staff of Harvard’s Institute of Politics.”

Undergrads. And no doubt still dependents on parents and grants, and able to afford “liberal” views. Cartoonist Al Capp pretty much had their politics pegged.

And the “poll” they’re relying on? The whole thing is designed to produce divide-and-conquer results and alienate gun owners from the NRA (back before Wayne LaPierre and NRA management decided to take that task on for themselves). The questions relevant to the claims distill down to:

  • Are you a gun owner?
  • Are you an NRA member?
  • How do you identify politically?
  • Do you support or oppose requiring a criminal background check on every person who wants to buy a firearm?

Understand that there’s really no way to validate the answers. If a stranger called you up and asked if you owned guns, what would you say? Also, the poll claims 24% of respondents said they were NRA members. If that were accurate, and if the poll really were random, based on the adult population of that time, the Association would have a hell of a lot more than five million members.

So, what’s going on with the numbers?

Maybe the fact that Public Policy Polling is the “it” Democrat pollster has something to do with it. That and the old saying about lies, damned lies, and statistics…

And there’s one other thing going on, something no one ever seems to want to acknowledge whenever gun-grabbers make sweeping proclamations based on something they want everybody to believe: What do the respondents actually know about the subjects they’re being questioned on, and how are the questions worded?

That’s what 97Percent is doing with its deceptive poll, or as they call it, “Targeted Petition.” What they’re targeting are your rights.

“The conversation and political discourse around gun safety has [sic] excluded the voice of gun owners for far too long,” they fake-solemnly intone. “Aim for Change is a petition in support of four research-based policies that could effectively reduce gun-related homicides and suicides. We believe in our right to bear arms but also on laws that keep America safe. It’s time to speak up.”

They then invite you (anyone, including Democrats and other gun-grab apparatchiks, but they’ll present the results as “gun owners”) to “sign the petition,” one that has four objectives:


Set violent misdemeanor crimes (including assault, battery, and stalking) as the threshold for exclusion from gun purchases and possession.

It also, per Gun Owners of America’s “Lautenberg  Horror Stories,” could include A LIFETIME BAN for tearing a pocket or throwing a set of keys. It could even include someone who lawfully defended himself but, because threatened with a felony by a prosecutor determined to make a charge stick, pled down to a misdemeanor because he couldn’t afford to fight and/or feared what a conviction would do to his life.  Are the respondents aware of that?

(As a tangentially related aside, NRA “leadership” has once more stepped in it by changing the rules and electing Lautenberg Amendment fanboy Bob Barr as First Vice President.)


States would require a permit in order to purchase and possess a gun. Two permits would be issued at the same time, a general one and one for concealed carry.

Just like the Founders intended? These are people who begin their petition with “I believe in the right to bear arms” and then show everyone what huge “buts” they have by diminishing them to revokable permitted privileges…? Didn’t our friends over at Grassroots North Carolina just get the anti-gun governor’s veto and that state’s Jim Crow purchase permit law overturned? And aren’t the majority of states (27 at this writing with Nebraska joining the ranks) now permitless carry states (with GRNC pushing to make it happen there before the legislative session ends)?

What kind of idiot gun owner oblivious to this would support taking two steps backward and mandating new edicts grown from racist roots? The kind that thinks the 97Percent scam is a good idea?


Required simplified federal, and state background check as part of the gun permitting process.

In other words, criminalize heretofore legal private sales and impose a prior restraint and government permission to claim a right. They’re relying on poll respondents not knowing that no less an “authority” than the National Institute of Justice has admitted “Universal background checks … [e]ffectiveness depends on the ability to reduce straw purchasing, requiring gun registration…”

They’re also hoping no one will ask how come such infringements never seem to stop the scofflaws who are committing all the killings in Democrat/Bloomberg Mayor cities like Chicago and Baltimore, and why the real homicide problem doesn’t come from peaceable gun owners, but overwhelmingly occurs in known specific geographic areas.

(As another tangentially related aside, if they were truly interested in background checks without the possibility of a system that could be amped up to include registration, the grabbers would be pushing something like BIDS, the Blind Identification Data System. It’s still a prior restraint, and absolutists like me would still be opposed to it, but it’s useful to bring up because it shows what the antis are really after is a camel’s nose under the tent.)


State-level laws would allow law enforcement or family members to petition a court to remove firearms from a person who is a threat to themselves and others. This would include due process protections for the gun owner.

And what would those be? This already presumes the accused is a threat and rights have been taken away based on the say-so of a not entirely disinterested party, maybe even a vengeful ex seeking divorce settlement advantages, with other prohibitionist factions demanding “red flags” to close “boyfriend” or “terror” loopholes, all without being charged, let alone convicted of a crime.  Since when is “guilty until proven innocent” the Constitutional standard? It’s reminiscent of a passage from Alice in Wonderland, where the Queen of Hearts declares “Sentence first. Verdict afterwards.” There was a time even a child could see the tyrannical absurdity and injustice of that.

The inescapable truth is anyone who can’t be trusted with a gun can’t be trusted without a custodian. If a person is really a threat, take him in, prove it, and then segregate him from those he could harm. The legal system provides a way to do that. It’s just that it’s harder because it requires REAL due process. It’s supposed to. That’s the way the Founders thought best to protect individual liberty, which after all, is what the system they bequeathed to Posterity is supposed to be about, instead of these cheap “legal” shortcuts designed to railroad Americans based on accusations. And, of course, it also presumes that “gun control” works.

Going over and trying to take the poll, you’ll find even if you select “Skip” to not click on the targets, it still presents a “Submit your petition” link at the end. I declined, because of the way these ideological snake oilers have treated site visitors thus far. Forgive me for suspecting that they’d count any petition submitted as a way to boost their numbers.

It will be interesting to see what results they ultimately publish and how many responses they say they get. Especially since, despite obvious financing and tons of free national publicity for years, they’ve only managed to attract 10,000 Facebook and less than that many Twitter “followers.” If that doesn’t say “Pure Astroturf,” nothing does.

I’ve written about these false fronts before, first on assignment for Firearms News and then several pieces to apprise AmmoLand readers about the divide-and-conquer strategy being used to make it look like gun owners support even more infringements on their rights. What they’re for the most part doing is exploiting the uninformed and/or those for whom RKBA is of secondary interest, new gun owners (the so-called “GunCulture 2.0”), Fudds, and Democrats.

For any gullible gun owner lured in through 97Percent’s slick presentation, ask some questions and you’ll see how hollow their assertions are. Because if you buy into their rights swindle, you’re really just being bare naked in the town square conned by apparatchiks, useful idiots, and Judas goats:

For further background see:

About David Codrea:

David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating/defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament. He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” is a regularly featured contributor to Firearms News, and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.

David Codrea

Notify of
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

As an American, the pistol, rifle, sword, knife, tomahawk, and all the other horrible implements of the soldier are my birthright, and that of every American, to defend life, liberty and property… and decimate tyranny. We do not ask permission to acquire or carry weapons, as there is no authority to ask. The government, in fact, is specifically prohibited from having a say or infringing on our right to keep and bear arms, in plain English, in the 2nd amendment. Courts and politicians respected that contract and foundational document for a century, and will be made to respect it again.

Last edited 1 month ago by Arizona

you do mean tomahawk missile, I think laws rockets are more practical but to each their own


“Those would give up essential Liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither Liberty nor safety!” Benjamin Franklin


Yeah, but I truly believe that ole’ Ben was speaking in terms of mentally straight and well adjusted humans that didn’t go door-to-door raping and murdering people..


Those who engage in such behavior need to be met by others who are armed. Then the evil doers need to be put in the ground, whether shot first or not…


As always, David, you have delivered extremely powerful content and in-depth exposure to the Trojan Horse methods of the scum that fears and destroys reality, freedom and true liberty. Scum that have no the backbone to defend and nurture our freedom, liberty and sovereignty, or to teach it to their family, friends and neighbors as well as to prepare it, (The Constitution and all founding documents, their importance and meaning) to pass it along into the hands of what is an extremely lost generation. We here only have THIS TIME in life to do whatever we can to amend our… Read more »

Knute Knute

Forget about that “restful peace”. That’s just more ‘liberal’ bullshit stories that the lying media has thrust on people. Life is always a struggle, whether one is a tree, an ameoba, an ant, or a mammal. Life IS struggle. Peace is death. This is why we tend to write it on graves. Peace is death, and so it’s not a thing that I’m for. “It is good that warriors such as we can meet together in the struggle of life… and death. It shall be life.” -Ten Bears Remember the little lesson in there. THAT time, the choice was life.… Read more »


I believe schools should teach safe handling by 3rd grade , and unless you have been jailed you have all your rights


Ever since the 70’s it has been a catch and release game of law enforcement to arrest, book and print each and every citizen the best they can, “under color of law” to be able to create their database to link nationwide. There are going to be a LOT of gun owners that have been arrested and booked, charged with crimes, but later charges dropped and cases either dismissed, expunged or acquittal occurs. Regardless, that still puts an ‘arrest’ on your “FILE”. Doesn’t remove your rights in any manner.


and unless you have been jailed are in jail, you have all your rights” FIFY Once you have paid your debt to society ALL rights should be restored.


Agreed, wholeheartedly.


Says the 3x’s-8x’s murderer, rapist, child molester.

Last edited 30 days ago by USMC0351Grunt

@Bigfootbob and @Hazcat wrote about people released from custody and returned to polite society. Those you describe should not be returned to society, so whether they may bear-arms is moot.


taken to a wast treatment facility and drowned in an appropriate substance, many demoncrats too

Knute Knute

I’d put that down to a decades-old socialist plan to purposely release the worst predators back into society, and then when that policy slowly creates a giant bubble of thievery, rapes, and murders, they just use their giant media megaphone to convince the sleeping sheeple that it was the laws and/or the guns that created the problem in the first place, rather than their secret agenda getting the blame that it richly deserves. All that’s left now is to watch as the sleeping sheeple wake up and get angry… or just die in their sleep. I think they will wake… Read more »

Knute Knute

If one thinks about the issue for a bit, how could it be otherwise? If a one is judged sufficiently “rehabilitated”(in whatever manner…) to be turned loose back into a polite society, then that one must be able to be trusted with the trapping(s) of that society, otherwise he should not be released back into it, but rather be kept in State custody, yes? How could it be otherwise?


Well but of course you’re right… But that just goes to show the scam of it all… “They” know that no rehabilitation comes from any of that… It’s just that we’re not advanced enough of a society to know what to do with these offenders, nor the habitual offenders… We pretend that we are, but we’re not. We can’t even fix the pseudo-intellectuals.


EXCACTLY! THAT is the reason they call it REHABILITATED! But, like all else in today’s society, with the drug induced 80’s and the, “Oh well, it is what it is?” and destruction of Quality Control and Customer Service.

Knute Knute

But remember that just because someone turned loose a terrible predator on purpose(whether a Nikolas Cruz in Florida, or a big batch of Neo-nazis in Ukraine is really irrelevant), it doesn’t necessarily follow that that is the fault of a given system. Perhaps evil took over the system and no longer follows the rules. Will it truly be NATO’s fault if they look the other way, and ignore the rule about never even considering a country for NATO membership if they’re already at war? If NATO ignores that rule and lets Ukraine join anyway, then the NATO counries will be… Read more »

Knute Knute

I’d be interested to find out which word(s) caused the censors to hold up my last post. I wonder if it was:
“otherwise he should not be released back into it, but rather be kept in State custody, yes?”

Knute Knute

“If a one is judged sufficiently “rehabilitated”(in whatever manner…) to be turned loose back into a polite society, then that one must be able to be trusted with the trapping(s) of that society…” ??

Knute Knute

Rehabilitated, appears to be the word-non-grata of the day…

Knute Knute

Now we can all wonder why wordpress dislikes the word: “rehabilitated” enough to censor it away. Or attempt to anyway.
To ammoland’s credit, they always approve my comments, eventually. Not because of the wordpress censors, but in spite of them! 🙂


have been jailed is not released , the game of parole either should not exist ,or be the trial out of cell but technically under control , that over without problem coming out party

Patriot Solutions

No. You have it entirly incorrect.

For example, in Colorado there is only 60 crimes considered crimes against humanity which when convicted of per SB 271 result in the loss of firearms rights for 10 years unless the possesion is for the constitutionally protected right of self defense and defense of ones property which is settled case law in Colorado.


Whoa? So, you’re saying rapists, murderers, pedophiles can ALL (Within these 60 crimes against humanity list) carry guns as soon as they are released from prison for the purpose of self-defense? If THIS is the protocol and they go out and commit ANY of the 60 crimes against humanity, then those that authorized the release of these predators should be held accountable. WHY is the citizenry NOT doing this?


I do agree that if they are “safe to be released” person stating so should bear all consequences if they are wrong.


Once again you pen a valuable article, thank you.

Polling has become a convenient, lazy way to do anything. It’s also unreliable and more people everyday are learning not to pay any attention to them.

Polls told us Hillary had 97% approval and would definitely win the 2016 election. Now they using that famous number as a name for an anti-gun group, shows how little they respect the intelligence and integrity of a 2A supporter. More reason to abandon voter skepticism.

The more real journalists like Mr. Codrea tell the truth the more these attempts at gaslighting us will fail.

Last edited 1 month ago by Bigfootbob

Or could they be using 97% as those spineless chickenshits that never had the backbone to join in the 3% that engaged in The Revolution against greater odds than they could fathom to break free from the pending threats that ended in giving them the rights and freedoms to, well, continue acting like a bunch of spineless chickenshits?

Last edited 1 month ago by USMC0351Grunt

But but but David (in my most whiney gun controller voice) ALL of these ‘proposals’ are just so ‘reasonable’ and based on ‘common sense’ – or are they? Intentionally manipulating the questions to achieve the desired results is the forte of the gun grabbers. Unfortunately far too many gullible people (even LOTS supposedly on ‘our side’) WILL buy into their nonsense and give them even more traction to base their false claims on. How can they realistically claim a 26% reduction, they can’t – but that figure shows just how disingenuous (deceitful?) they are.


It’s just like the “Man On The Street” type episode that Jesse Watters did on the Oceanside, California pier with his petition to; “Take away EVERYBODYS’ guns where only the police and the criminals will have them!” And those stupid bastards out in the sunny California coastal town of Oceanside were signing away their entire risk of their lives AGREEING WITH THIS BS!

Last edited 30 days ago by USMC0351Grunt

Ban Iiberals.


Article 4 Section 4 of the Constitution guarantees a REPUBLICAN type of government. A Republic is a government where ALL Laws under our Constitution are supposed to protect THE INDIVIDUAL’S Inalienable Natural Rights. Mob rule can’t deny individual rights. Polls are irrelevant.


I can always peg your writing as being yours, without reading the credit….funny….I can always peg Harold’s as his own, too.

For two different reasons, obviously.

Last edited 1 month ago by Boom

What would a poll taken in the Deep South in 1963 reveal about Integration? For, or against? Gee! I wonder!


What do you think the results of the same poll on a national level be?


Scumbag traitors are among. For the life of me we need to stop talking and take the strongest possible response to silence these traitors.


That would make a great target for us!


When is too much enough?


I guess whenever we have finally been interned.