Alright, here’s a deep dive into the all-out messaging muddle from national gun control activists as they fumble to get their story straight ahead of the Nov. 5 election. Giffords Courage to Fight Gun Violence is just one example, yet it’s a perfect one. The level of hypocrisy and theatrics they’re cranking out through press releases and campaign emails borders on parody. But the contradiction game doesn’t stop there—it runs right through to top political figures, and it’s become impossible to ignore the glaring inconsistencies.
With the presidential election locked in a dead heat, campaigns are making their final arguments to sway the undecided. Former President Donald Trump, not one to mince words, is pulling no punches on his stance for the Second Amendment. His message to gun owners is clear as a bell: “Gun owners must register to Vote, TODAY, if you want to save your guns. Our Second Amendment is under Siege by the Democrats. They want to confiscate your guns. BE SMART. VOTE!!!”
Trump’s words are a straight pitch to Americans who care about their constitutional rights, especially their right to bear arms. It’s classic Trump—simple, direct, and designed to mobilize his supporters who view the Second Amendment as non-negotiable. To them, this election is about preventing a dismantling of their rights, plain and simple.
On the opposite end, we have Vice President Kamala Harris. Her stance on firearms? Well, it’s what we might call “flexible.” Harris has played both sides of the gun control argument so many times that her current stance is anyone’s guess. Back when she was San Francisco’s District Attorney, she supported handgun bans and other strict measures. Then, in her Senate days and during her presidential run, she flirted with the idea of using executive power to enact gun bans, especially targeting Modern Sporting Rifles (MSRs). But somewhere along the line, she walked that back—or at least quieted down about it.
Yet here’s where it gets interesting: Harris recently admitted she owns a handgun. Now, let’s be clear. For most Californians, owning the kind of handgun she does is no walk in the park, thanks to the state’s notoriously strict gun laws. So while Harris calls for increased control on one hand, she wields her own personal firearm on the other. And that, my friends, is the very definition of “Gun control for thee, not for me.”
Then, of course, we have Giffords Courage to Fight Gun Violence, jumping into the fray to support candidates with anti-gun stances while also running around trying to figure out whether crime is up or down. Last month, they eagerly amplified President Joe Biden’s claim that his gun control measures have led to a substantial drop in violent crime. They quoted him proudly: “If you’re trying to talk about reducing crime and violence in America, you need to talk about guns in America.” They credited his “historic action” with keeping guns out of the wrong hands and reducing crime.
But here’s the rub: turns out this “crime reduction” story was built on seriously shaky ground. Just last week, a RealClear Investigations report revealed that the FBI had “stealth edited” crime data back in 2021 and 2022. The revisions led to the narrative that violent crime had dropped by 2.1%, when in reality, crime had actually increased by 4.5%. It’s a pretty colossal discrepancy. Yet, as you’d expect, neither the White House nor Giffords seems eager to walk back their previous statements or apologize for spreading what was essentially misinformation. They’re sticking to the old saying, “garbage in, garbage out.”
But that’s not even the end of it. Giffords’ crime messaging took yet another turn recently when they attacked U.S. Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.). Just a month after singing the praises of President Biden’s supposedly crime-reducing gun control, Giffords called out Rep. Lawler for accepting support from the firearm industry while “gun violence remains a threat to families in the Lower Hudson Valley.” They attacked him for allegedly turning a blind eye to the safety of New Yorkers by accepting donations from the firearm industry.
But let’s pause here for a second. If gun violence is supposedly down thanks to Biden’s policies (as Giffords previously claimed), then why turn around and use the threat of crime as a bludgeon against Lawler? It’s a classic case of wanting to have it both ways. In Giffords’ world, gun control measures are simultaneously responsible for reducing crime and failing to keep people safe in areas where they need it most. It’s like their message is custom-fitted to each audience, regardless of whether it contradicts what they said a few days ago.
And then we get into the real kicker: the money trail. Giffords went after Rep. Lawler in the same press release, claiming he’s “bought” by the firearm industry because he accepted a $1,000 contribution from the National Shooting Sports Foundation’s PAC. Yes, $1,000. Meanwhile, the Giffords PAC? They’ve pumped a staggering $1 million into supporting Lawler’s opponent, former U.S. Rep. Mondaire Jones, who they’re banking on as a “gun safety champion.” But wait, there’s more! They also recently announced another $1.8 million to mobilize Latino voters in support of Harris in Michigan and Nevada. Altogether, Giffords has committed $15 million to promoting anti-gun candidates this election cycle.
It’s almost laughable. Giffords is accusing Lawler of being “bought” by the gun industry for a $1,000 donation, while they themselves are throwing around millions to push their own agenda. They even used the term “unearthed” in reference to Lawler’s contribution, as if they’d uncovered some great scandal. In reality, all they did was check the publicly available campaign finance documents—documents that Giffords and every other PAC also have to disclose. But hey, if they can make it sound like they’ve blown open a Watergate-level conspiracy, why not?
Of course, Giffords and their allies aren’t alone in this double-standard game. Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety has poured billions into promoting gun control while essentially ignoring the inconvenient reality that many of their proposals don’t necessarily make people safer. But groups like Giffords, Everytown, and their allies are banking on the public not digging too deeply. They’d rather the average voter doesn’t look too hard at the inconsistencies or the fact that millions of dollars are flowing into races across the country to promote strict gun control laws that they themselves might not even abide by.
And here’s why this matters. Voters across the country need to be informed. With just under two weeks until the election, millions of dollars are being poured into races by anti-gun groups hoping to sway public opinion and push for stricter gun laws. But do these same groups hold themselves accountable to the same standards? Hardly. That’s why the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) has released a 2024 Congressional Report Card, showing exactly where current U.S. Representatives and Senators stand on issues affecting the firearms and ammunition industries. This report card is aimed at educating voters so they know exactly what to expect from the candidates on the ballot.
In the end, it’s up to Americans to look past the messaging haze, see through the double-speak, and make informed decisions come election day.