The sellout of JPFO to SAF will be complete as of this Friday, September 12. The remnants of JPFO will be hauled away to Washington (and, I picture in my mind’s eye, be stashed away like the Lost Ark at the end of that movie).
While Gottlieb promises JPFO will continue to operate “independently,” in fact SAF is making no attempt to learn anything at all about how the organization functions. Surely they’ll keep some JPFO-ish thing going and it may even look good for a while, but it’s clear that what they’re really after is mailing lists — of members, donors, sponsors, and purchasers.
If you have or ever had any relationship with JPFO, these are your last few days to take care of yourself.
I can’t say what anybody ought to do. Some JPFO members might be perfectly happy to be handed over the SAF. So be it. Do only what’s right for you.
—–
If you’re not happy, however, you might want to join the ever-growing movement to remove your name and contact information from JPFO’s databases before the infamous and relentless Gottlieb/Merrill direct mail operation gets hold of you.
Contact info:
P.O. Box 270143
Hartford, WI 53027
Phone (262) 673-9745
Fax (262) 673-9746
jpfo@jpfo.org (webmaster — nice guy and totally not responsible for any of this mess)
jpfoscty@att.net (board member and Managing Director Doug Schuett)
—–
I also know several people who’ve asked for their money back — including one noble soul who contributed $1,000 just before the merger was forced into the light. He minced no words in saying he had donated under false pretenses.
No idea whether JPFO will return his or anybody else’s money. Frankly, I hope that problem falls to Mr. Gottlieb and his lawyers because I pity JPFO’s office staff having to deal with all this.
Nevertheless, if you recently joined or donated, asking for a return of funds may be something you want to consider.
—–
IF you are “political,” you might want to throw some support toward Gun Owners of America, the only remaining national gun-rights group that remains hardcore.
(Yes, I’m aware of accusations of a few cracks in that core, but then, that’s politics. GOA remains the best alternative for gun owners of political bent.)
If you do that, you might also want to tell both JPFO and SAF where you’re sending your money — and why.
—–
There is also ample evidence that (as one member of the JPFO rescue team put it) “JPFO’s papers are not in order.”
It’s too late to prevent JPFO’s disappearance into SAF. But potentially a JPFO member with an obsession and a lot of money could “go to the lawyers” to try to undo the deal.
It seems very, very unlikely that any one (or any group of ones) would be both furious enough and rich enough to pursue this. Also, as that same rescue-teamer put it, “… courts are very reluctant to interfere in these essentially private squabbles. The courts know damn well that ‘non-profit’ has nothing to do with compensation or personal gain. But absent evidence of overt criminality, courts are unlikely to interfere.”
Just plain inertia might have something to say, also. It’s harder to get a deal undone than prevent the doing.
Still, if you’re truly outraged and have the money to fight for what you believe is right, there are certainly chinks in the JPFO/SAF Fortress of Secrecy. (Which is, perhaps, one reason the doers of the deed were so obsessed with keeping members’ and donors’ eyes off their work.)
—–
I hear from little birds that there’s also been some minor, but creative monkeywrenching directed at the JPFO sellouts.
While I can’t say I applaud it, especially since the worst evildoers on the JPFO board aren’t the ones taking the most heat, I salute the spirit!
I don’t trust the GOA either. I won’t as long as this is on their web site: http://gunowners.org/arpaio.htm
Agreed, that’s pretty horrible, Ken. I’m personally not a member of GOA and don’t think it’s for everybody. However, for anyone who wants to support political gun-rights efforts on the federal level, they’re still the best game in town.
Political Gun Rights group? This mess only proves that no political group are any good.
Man, I’ve often wished that the NRA be split and that the educational and competition part would have no relationship at all with the “political part” at all. Not even sharing the name. If that “pie in the sky” were to ever happen, I’d be more than happy to become a life member of the educational and competition part of the organization.
????? Er…..seems to me, that since there exists politicians like Bloomberg in NY, senators and congressmen in office that advocate gun control, then having people like Arpaio are on the side of those that enjoy and appreciate the 2nd ammendment. Now, as for “politics”, that is something I will not get into here. However….since it appears that “all” politcs are bad…and if say a grpup were formed that had not politics in their make up….just how would they function? I mean, wouldn’t they have by-laws and such? And would not these by-laws have to be decided upon by the members. Further….who would enforve these by-laws and how would those that did enforce them get their “power”? Seems to me were right back to politics. As for Arpaio himself, I see no worng in his doing his job the way he is doing it. Personnaly, I would do the same if it were me.
Curt, you might consider that “politics” on the state level are a whole different thing than organization of voluntary associations. Not even close, even if they use similar words. SAF and GOA, etc. are “political” in that they attempt to interact with and even use the state apparatus to achieve their own ends.
Arpaio is perfectly happy to use the power of the state to violate the rights of any human being he decides he doesn’t like – and in fact, treat them as less than human. The fact that he and I might occasionally dislike the same person has nothing to do with it.
” “politics” on the state level”
And I misspoke badly here. I mean the “state,” the non-voluntary government, at whatever level.
My rant part 1.] Joe Arpaio is an evil person. He runs a county jail/pre-trial detention center not a prison and there is a difference between the two that he chooses to ignore. Anyone awaiting trial in a jail/detention center is legally considered innocent until proven guilty or aquitted. Just where does that walking fossil get off by PUNISHING people or forcing them to labor BEFORE they have had due process? The same goes for emasculating detainees or feeding them road kill [I have two friends I worked with who were guests of the Maricopa County Hilton [jail] both of whom told me when they were in there, for possession of a plant, they ate meat that was green with deer fur in it.] You think the TSA is bad now imagine it under good ‘ol uncle Joe. His deputies regularly assault and murder detainees so when a TSA agent under uncle Joe gets accused of sexually assaulting your grandma or one of your kids you can bet he will brush it off and his sychophants will mindlessly come to his defense. Nice huh? Part 2.] Since every gun group whether pro or con 2nd. amendment would deny me the right to self defense because I also have been convicted for possessing and smoking a plant I refuse to support any of them morally and/or especially financially.
I find it disillusioning at best to read the remarks bad-mouthing Sheriff Arpaio. I’d have to ask those of you bad-mouthing the man what YOU would do different than Arpaio ? I’m all for stopping those who appear to hail from south of FUSA’s now dissolved southern border. I’m all for pink jumpsuits and stale bread for those invaders and criminals that Arpaio locks up. Perhaps you folks swiveling about the good sherif would prefer the likes of John McCain as sherif of Maricopa County ? And when the scum known as, sadly, the Attorney General of the (Former) United States, Eric Holder, comes after Sherif Arpaio using the massive power of the federal behemoth, then I KNOW Arpaio is doing his job and doing it well.
No Dan, I actually don’t want ANYONE, ever to be in a position to use the power of the state to kill, maim or abuse human beings, wherever they came from. The “scum” are actually all of those in every level of government – and elsewhere – who think they can decide who has rights, and have the delusion that they somehow own the rest of us.
If someone attacks you, steals from you, aggresses against you with lethal force, you – along with everyone else – have the right to do whatever is necessary to defend yourself and those around you. You don’t have any right to decide to murder and harm (even by giving proxy to Arpaio and his ilk) anyone you don’t happen to approve of.
I’m late to the party and just this week found out about the merger. I know very little about the SAF but can someone tell me what the issue is? I’m not starting an argument, this is a sincere request for education. Thanks.
OK, I read the Arpaio link on GOA. It’s basically true, so what’s the deal? Are you guys trying to hijack the discussion with a tangential diversion? Seems to be working, but please stop. Apparently Sheriff Joe is doing nothing illegal, else he’d be out of office and in prison because the feds have already gone after him at least once that I know of.
If you’ve got so much sympathy for his inmates, go visit them, take them some candy and Gatorade, and be directly supportive. Stop trashing the guy who is tasked by law with maintaining them on an insufficient budget.
The issue is that the SAF is considered by many to be NRA junior, which in turn is considered to be the biggest gun control organization on the planet.
Hi jazztoo,
FWIW, here’s my rant.
My beef with the SAF is Alan Gottlieb, plain and simple.
Several months into the post-Newtown feeding frenzy, just when the Manchin-Toomey bill seemed ready to die, Gottlieb jumped in with his support to try to save it. He offered some horseshit rationalization that it was a “compromise”, that would trade a repeal of the ban on out-of-state handgun purchases in return for submission to universal background checks.
Universal background checks are one of the anti-gun crowd’s most sought-after trophies. The reason the gun-haters are so ardently pursuing this goal is simple. Universal background checks mean everyone is forced to submit 4473 paperwork for every firearms transfer. The BATFE is legally prohibited from gathering these 4473 forms for the purpose of composing a database/registry, but it is well known that they frequently descend upon FFLs, cart away their entire sets of records for a day or two with no explanation. No FFL is in any position to object, as the BATFE holds their livelihoods hostage, and their capacity for spite is legendary.
Gun-haters and the BATFE have tried all manner of schemes to work toward their goal, including the ridiculous “gunshow loophole” meme that’s been pounded across the airwaves in the past few years, as well as the BATFE’s 100% illegal demands for FFLs to report sales of multiple long-arms in southern border states (justified by the murders resulting from the BATFE’s illegal gun-smuggling to the Sinaloa Cartel, AKA Operation Fast and Furious).
This reporting requirement is authorized in the 1968 Gun Control Act for purchases of multiple handguns, however the language of the 1968 Gun Control Act also specifically states that the BATFE is NOT authorized to require this reporting for purchases of multiple long guns. The BATFE came up with a super-clever workaround though. They simply asserted that the 1968 GCA does in fact authorize their new requirement for long gun reporting, and guess what? They are getting away with it. They are covered no matter what they do, and they know it.
Astonishingly, their recent attempt to expand this “enhanced reporting requirement” to the rest of the country was slapped down in court. They’ll try again though. …and again and again until they get the incremental progress they are looking for.
Gottlieb offered glib assurances that the Manchin-Toomey bill would provide severe criminal penalties for use of the resulting records to construct a database. This is such a plainly idiotic argument I am simply unable to believe that it is by accident. Let’s examine just a tiny handful of the most glaringly obvious problems with his assertions of our safety.
1) Constructing a registry from 4473s is already illegal, and that hasn’t stopped the BATFE.
2) The BATFE has already shown their willingness to break countless other laws (Fast and Furious anyone?), as well as their ability to completely escape consequences. With exception of a scant few scapegoats on the fringes of the Bureau, every major figure at the core of the scandal was retained, and several were promoted.
3) How would evidence ever be obtained, considering that no sane FFL or internal whistleblower will testify against them, especially after the examples made of people like Len Savage and Special Agent Jay Dobyns.
4) Even if sufficient evidence could be assembled, what federal prosecutor is going to go after them?
5) Even if a federal prosecutor is insane enough to go after them, what will stop Holder or his successor from sending his ass straight to the soup line? Do we suppose the next Republican AG would come in, clean house and fix the whole mess? What is the GOP’s record on that thus far (and I mean results, not efforts)?
Gottlieb has also engaged in further similar such collaborationist stunts in his home state of Washington. Not being a Washingtonian I have not had time to follow the details of his state-level shenanigans, though I did note that he was again offering up universal background checks to our enemies as a sacrificial goat.
I have great respect for SAF’s Alan Gura and his accomplishments both in the Supreme Court as well as other less well-known but hugely important victories in anti-gun stronghold states such as CA and IL. If I could support Gura’s efforts without lending further credibility to that traitorous snake Gottlieb, I would do so without question.
Hope this helps, and I apologize for the lack of supporting documentation. My time is limited, but it shouldn’t be difficult to find further reading material on the issues I mentioned. Perhaps Claire will flesh out the details in an article of her own 🙂
Cheers,
#OREGON HOBO#
I get pleas for funds from SAF all the time. I’ve never contributed so it appears to be an organization that wastes money. I don’t contribute to any political organizations. Let the left pass all the laws they want. Then we real Americans can pick up our rifles and settle the question of having a republic or not.
Well said, accurately said, and passionately said, Oregon Hobo. Thank you.
Re: Ken Hagler, As someone who lives in Maricopa County, Arpaio is the archetype southern good ol’ boy sheriff who will try to crush anyone that opposes him doing whatever he wants. His years long battle with the county supervisors was nothing more than a struggle for power and control, both sides were wrong, and the taxpayers lost. People in other parts of the country that only see what his PR machine wants you to see, beware!
Re: Dan III & rev dave: You’re falling victim to his PR. “Since he’s tough on criminals he must be a good guy.” Wrong. Since he’s been in office there have been over $45 million in lawsuits paid because he can’t or won’t keep his deputies from killing Americans. As for your ‘Holder opposes him, he must be ok’ argument … the lesser of two evils is still evil.
Arpaio is an Enemy of Freedom and Liberty. Claire, sorry for the rant.
I’m a GOA member for several years, but NO ONE should be the head of DHS because it is an unconstitutional police-state agency which should be disbanded along with the BATF. Maybe we need more county sheriffs like Arpaio who act to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign AND DOMESTIC” in their own counties.
@Oregon Hobo
The ruling class does NOT want universal background checks:
http://ncc-1776.org/tle2013/tle710-20130303-07.html
Great article, thanks Paul.
Purely by coincidence I just stumbled upon another article indicating that the gun haters have officially shifted away from the “Assault Weapon Ban” meme to the “Universal Background Check” meme:
http://www.captainsjournal.com/2014/09/09/gun-control-groups-have-moved-away-from-an-assault-weapons-ban/
Gottlieb is a dangerous dangerous man, and his lust for “compromise” on this issue needs to be countered. People simply do not understand what this is about. Paul’s article make an excellent point of the “why didn’t I think of that?” variety, and should be spread far and wide.
BTW for a good chuckle, check out the numbers in that poll at the bottom of the dailykos article linked from the captainsjournal article:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/21/1172661/-How-to-Ban-Guns-A-step-by-step-long-term-process