On Rob Pincus and the 2A

[Chucktshoes]

In case any of y’all have missed the brouhaha surrounding Rob Pincus this past week, he partnered with Dan Gross (former head of the Brady Campaign) and penned an op-ed in Ammoland News calling for expanded background checks and compromise with the anti-2A crowd. 
 

https://www.ammoland.com/2021/03/guns-in-america-ending-the-culture-war-starting-a-productive-conversation/

 

Here is a good rebuttal, also published by Ammoland.

 

https://www.ammoland.com/2021/03/say-no-more-gun-owners-compromised-enough/

 

—————————-

My personal thoughts. 

I’m not a fan of “cancel culture” but Rob Pincus is a large and well known name in the gun community. He has been vocal in some very important fights in the past, including the recent work to attempt to reform the NRA. 

He is also grossly in error here. 
 

He has a history that deserves the benefit of the doubt with regards to his thinking and motives. so if he were to step back, reflect, reverse course and apologize for this, he could and should be forgiven. I don’t think that is likely for one simple reason.
 

Due to the language being used in the article being almost verbatim from Bloomberg talking points, I strongly suspect that he’s been co-opted and is on the payroll. I have no proof or evidence of that assertion, simply a gut feeling. Regardless, I must walk away and pay no heed to him and strongly be suspicious of those whom continue to work with him on a professional basis.  Retracted due to better understanding of what Pincus was attempting to accomplish with this article. 

Edited April 4, 2021 by Chucktshoes

[deerslayer]

Universal background checks are unenforceable and merely provide the logic for establishing databases.  And I doubt both sides could come together and compile a list of those “that we all agree should not have them.”  I thought Pincus was smarter than this. 

[Erik88]

Background checks are low hanging fruit. 

Nearly every single one of the mass shooters passed a background check. How do you keep these people from buying a gun if they don't have a criminal record that would prohibit them? 

[krunchnik]

He poo pooed my favorite carry pistol awhile back was put on my no fly list-he can go suck eggs-and I have felt like he was an idiot well before all this.

Part of my problem dealing with or listening to anything these so called firearm and training experts is the fact that they all think they are steps better than you or I.

I used to work at a range that also taught classes also-a few of the instructor's were pretty full of themselves-my way is the only way they think.

[FUJIMO]

I put zero stock in anyone's opinion that looks to financially gain from spewing rhetoric in their "field" of expertise. Didnt know him before you posted this and would have otherwise piled his view in with the other Aholes wanting us to join hands and sang. Now I know he's special

[felinesNfreedom]

Dear Rob,

 

Edited April 2, 2021 by felinesNfreedom

[gregintenn]

4 hours ago, Erik88 said:

Background checks are low hanging fruit. 

Nearly every single one of the mass shooters passed a background check. How do you keep these people from buying a gun if they don't have a criminal record that would prohibit them? 

You ban guns! Why you can’t see the end game here befuddles me.

[RED333]

4 hours ago, Erik88 said:

Background checks are low hanging fruit. 

Nearly every single one of the mass shooters passed a background check. How do you keep these people from buying a gun if they don't have a criminal record that would prohibit them? 

NO MORE COMPROMISES !!! We have to take back our rights, not give then away!!!

[Chucktshoes]

I’m currently watching a Instagram live he did with Maj Toure. I firmly believe in letting folks tell their side. 
 

Here’s the link. https://www.instagram.com/tv/CNKxIZhAASy/?igshid=1xmgj5gq51u6w

[Erik88]

2 hours ago, gregintenn said:

You ban guns! Why you can’t see the end game here befuddles me.

I had no idea. Thanks for letting me know.

2 hours ago, RED333 said:

NO MORE COMPROMISES !!! We have to take back our rights, not give then away!!!

Where did I suggest that?

[gregintenn]

2 minutes ago, Erik88 said:

I had no idea. Thanks for letting me know.

Where did I suggest that?

You did ask.

[Chucktshoes]

After watching the live video from Instagram, and reading an article referenced which I will provide links for, I believe that I, and others read his intentions incorrectly. I can’t break it all down at this moment, I can’t break it all down at this moment, but I will post a little later where I got it wrong, and why I did so. 
 

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/rob-pincus-answers-pointed-questions-about-his-support-for-expanded-background-checks/

 

if you have the hour to devote to it, I strongly recommend watching the discussion on Instagram that I linked before.

[RED333]

8 hours ago, Erik88 said:

Background checks are low hanging fruit.

 

You make it appear that you are OK giving away "low hanging fruit".

If I am wrong, sorry.

[Garufa]

7 minutes ago, RED333 said:

 

You make it appear that you are OK giving away "low hanging fruit".

If I am wrong, sorry.

You are wrong.  However @Erik88is correct in that universal background checks is the obvious easiest thing that can be passed right now.  Thus the term “low hanging fruit”.  You pick the apples from a tree bottom up.

[RED333]

 

11 hours ago, Garufa said:

You are wrong

Then I do apologize to Erik88 and to all involved.

I am just feed up with the commies wanting to take what is God given.

[mikegideon]

15 hours ago, Garufa said:

You are wrong.  However @Erik88is correct in that universal background checks is the obvious easiest thing that can be passed right now.  Thus the term “low hanging fruit”.  You pick the apples from a tree bottom up.

It's less "low hanging" than it was. When the average Joe gives it their usual five second glance, first impression can be that it may be reasonable. But, it has been debated for awhile. I'm betting it's less "popular" now.

Edited April 3, 2021 by mikegideon

[FUJIMO]

Its the same old theatrics.

They make it appear to be low hanging fruit by aiming for something much higher up on the tree. They've hammered on about resurrecting the Clinton ban, larger and more expansive this time and no sunset, blah blah blah. Then they start releasing these "polls" showing how (insert ridiculously high % here ) of the population would be in favor of UBGC but maybe not the bigger thing. Finally after months of froth, finger pointing and the appearance of zero compromise on the bigger thing they point back to those high polls from earlier and exclaim "well can't we at least come together on this smaller insignificant UBGC thing? " .

[mikegideon]

Right now, the current crop is selling more guns than Barack ever hoped to sell. And if they do manage to pass anything national, there will be a rebellion of biblical proportions. And, another chunk of the population will have stupid revealed. Pretty hard to excel at stupid these days, given all the competition. But my money is on them for the win. 

Edited April 3, 2021 by mikegideon

[Dirtshooter]

On 4/2/2021 at 10:06 AM, krunchnik said:

Part of my problem dealing with or listening to anything these so called firearm and training experts is the fact that they all think they are steps better than you or I.

So true, used to shoot USPSA matches and for the most part the LEO's that shot with us didn't last long. They don't like it when most everyone beats them at shooting. There are lots of very accurate shooters in the masses.

[Chucktshoes]

Ok, to revisit the topic as I said I would:

I am wholly retracting my questions on his character and intentions. I was wrong in that.

Pincus is mostly guilty of poorly defined messaging, but the 2A community wasn’t the real audience for this piece. Folks outside of it were. 
 

When Pincus and Gross (who is a former president of Brady, but left because he changed his mind on the efficacy of gun control and the honesty of those in the movement) speak of “expanded background checks” they are speaking of requiring a BGC for selling a gun to a stranger. Then they bake into it the removal of the state line prohibition and so many exceptions to what constitutes a “stranger” as to render the term almost meaningless. I think the error here was attempting to be clever for their own good and giving the other side a useful quote. “Even gun people support expanded (read as universal) background checks.”

I’m in the “not one more inch” camp. We’ve given up too much as it is. I’ll give Pincus credit for trying a different tactic, I just don’t know that it was a good one. 

[mikegideon]

5 hours ago, Chucktshoes said:

Ok, to revisit the topic as I said I would:

I am wholly retracting my questions on his character and intentions. I was wrong in that.

Pincus is mostly guilty of poorly defined messaging, but the 2A community wasn’t the real audience for this piece. Folks outside of it were. 
 

When Pincus and Gross (who is a former president of Brady, but left because he changed his mind on the efficacy of gun control and the honesty of those in the movement) speak of “expanded background checks” they are speaking of requiring a BGC for selling a gun to a stranger. Then they bake into it the removal of the state line prohibition and so many exceptions to what constitutes a “stranger” as to render the term almost meaningless. I think the error here was attempting to be clever for their own good and giving the other side a useful quote. “Even gun people support expanded (read as universal) background checks.”

I’m in the “not one more inch” camp. We’ve given up too much as it is. I’ll give Pincus credit for trying a different tactic, I just don’t know that it was a good one. 

Seems like Pincus is always misunderstood. Maybe he should leave this kinda stuff to those that aren't. We need clear lines IMO.