Gun Nuts Media

Since Brandon Webb announced his intention to run for the NRA’s board of directors, he’s been under a considerable amount of scrutiny from the gun community for statements he’s made in the media and online about willingness to “compromise” in the name of safety. To deflect some of the criticism, Mr. Webb recently posted clarifications of his opinions on several of the sites he operates, including his personal blog. Here is the link to read the full post, which of course is titled “A Navy SEAL Sniper’s perspective on firearms ownership & the NRA in America.”

We’ll skip over the body of the post, because it’s essentially just Webb talking about how he really, really does like guns, and also did you know he was a Navy SEAL sniper? In all seriousness, it would be nice if he go five minutes without reminding us of that. However, at the end of the post Mr. Webb conveniently lists bullet points that summarize his thoughts on gun rights. We’ll take a look at each one of those point by point.

The 2nd Amendment is inherent in America’s cultural DNA

Okay. I’m not really sure what that means, but I’ll allow it. I’d prefer an opening statement like “The 2nd Amendment is a Constitutional right, equal to any other right in the Bill of Rights.”

Limiting magazine capacity is impractical

Sure, I agree with that. So far we’re 2-for-2 with soft, generic pro-gun talking points!

Punishing law abiding gun owners is not the solution

I agree with this as well, and we’re now 3-for-3 on generic pro-gun talking points. Looking for a little substance here, Brandon.

I believe everyone who owns a gun should attend a basic firearms & range safety qualifications course and that these courses should be standardized

This is where Mr. Webb really begins to go off the rails. Mandatory training for gun ownership is absolutely unacceptable. Remember, we’re talking about a Constitutional right here. This is akin to forcing someone to pass a literacy test to exercise their freedom of speech, which is blatantly un-Constitutional. Mandatory training to exercise the right to keep and bear arms turns into a mess pretty rapidly, and becomes a great tool for the state to deny that right to law-abiding citizens.

The NRA should be like PADI or NAUI and encourage gun ranges to only accept NRA basic qualified shooters on the range.

If you’re wondering, PADI and NAUI are diving organizations. Again, Webb displays a lack of understanding of the real American gun culture. There are approximatly 80 million gun owners in the country, of which 5 million are NRA members. Let’s say for the sake of argument that 10 million shooters have taken an NRA basic class of some sort. Using Webb’s logic, when the other 70 million gun owners turn up at the range to practice, he wants to turn them away. Brandon Webb’s NRA would turn from an organization that tries to grow the shooting sports into an exclusive club, limiting access to training for self-defense, hunting, and sport shooting.

Few people outside of America understand how important firearms ownership is to Americans

Duh and/or hello. What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

Background checks are a good idea but should take minutes, not days

We already have this. It’s called NICS, and it works pretty well. Someone running for the NRA board should probably know that.

Often gun laws are made by people who don’t use, own, or understand firearms

Also duh. We’re now back to generic pro-gun talking points.

Mass shootings have to be dealt with head-on or America will face more gun restrictions and erosion of 2nd Amendment rights.

Also, I agree with this. But it’s easy to agree with vaguely generic pro-gun talking points that point out something everyone agrees on without suggesting a solution.

NRA training needs to be brought up to date.

If you’re still reading, you’ll probably have noticed a pattern here. Mr. Webb seems to make vague pro-gun statements that everyone can agree with, but whenever he gets closet to suggesting a solution, he goes completely off the rails. See above, and this is an example. NRA training needs to be brought up to date with what? What exactly is wrong with NRA training? Do you mean the NRA Basic courses? Or do you mean their LEO training? This is just a vague catch-all statement.

Legislation on increasing the prevention of severely mentally ill folks (e.g. paranoid schizophrenia)from gaining access to firearms seems logical. Increase the early warning signs

Of course this seems logical. It’s phrased in a way that no one would disagree with it. Of course we don’t want crazy people to have guns. The problem is how do we limit crazy people’s access to guns without further infringing the rights of law-abiding citizens. Where are you ideas for that?

Dogs/handlers at schools and colleges are better than armed guards, in my opinion. Dogs are an incredible resource to use in these situations

So when a dude rolls into Franklin D. Roosevelt High with an AK and shoots the dog, then what?

Guns aren’t the problem, mental illness is the problem. It’s like punishing responsible automobile owners (which kill more people annually) because of drunk drivers killing innocent people on the road

Back to generic pro-gun statements.

I believe we should be able to concealed-carry and open-carry where practical (e.g., not on an elementary school campus or an airplane)

Awesome! I agree. Who decides what’s practical?

Guns are guns and people should be able to own and obtain a permit to own everything, short of an anti-tank weapon or WMD, if they’re properly trained/certified

We can do that already, and we don’t have to pass literacy tests to vote arbitrary training standards to do it.

The NRA should take a strong leadership position when it comes to legislation affecting ownership pro and con, not just a “supporter” of legislation. The perception from the left is that the NRA is an uncompromising organization

…it does that. You do realize that’s basically what the entire NRA-ILA does? Seriously, if you’re running for the NRA board, you should probably know what the NRA does.

The NRA should take a strong leadership position when it comes to legislation affecting ownership pro and con, not just a “supporter” of legislation. The perception from the left is that the NRA is an uncompromising organization

You say that the left perceives the NRA as uncompromising like it’s a bad thing. It’s really not. Also, I’d like to note that from when I read Webb’s post yesterday and today, he edited this line item. It was previously “I wouldn’t let Wayne LaPierre lead my kids on a camping trip”, and was a paragraph that did nothing but disparage Mr. LaPierre’s leadership of NRA. Interesting that Webb softened his tone overnight.

If elected to the board I would be one of 76, but I would do my best to make sure we hold the elected leaders accountable, and work on ways to promote and engage the responsible youth in this country. They are the future, and you cannot ignore the decline in youth firearms participation and membership.

I swear, if he makes one more generically vague statement with no substance…

I believe the 2nd Amendment is a right we should keep and hold dear

And there it is.

So what are we to make of all of this? Webb’s pro-gun statements are so generic and soft that they’re essentially meaningless. His statements on mental illness are equally pointless because they’re worded in such a way that no one would disagree with them. Of course we don’t want crazy people getting guns.

The far more troublesome areas of Webb’s position on the gun rights issue are his ideas about training. The NRA’s training arm exists to grow the shooting sports, not limit access. Suggesting that we should have mandatory training for gun ownership is unacceptable; and when compounded with his desire to have ranges limit access to only shooters who have passed a training course Mr. Webb becomes a closer ally to the Brady Campaign than the 2nd Amendment. The final nail in his coffin is his staggering ignorance of the current role of the NRA in American politics and the influence it has over legislation at the state and federal level.

Brandon Webb served his country with distinction as a Navy SEAL, and we owe him a debt of gratitude for that service. That debt should not give us blinders about his political positions, and his clearly stated desire to place limits and compromises on the right to keep and bear arms. His statements read less like someone trying to get on the NRA board, and more like a person who’s trying to set himself up to get talking head gigs on CNN as “The Navy SEAL who is a moderate voice on gun rights.” We wish him all the best luck with that, and will continue to oppose his election to the NRA’s board.

Editor’s Note: Because Mr. Webb has already edited his posts in the past to redact potentially damaging information, we have reprinted his bullet points in their entirety here.

Many of our readers are familiar with Brandon Webb, the former Navy SEAL who is the proprietor of the popular website SOFRep. Unfortunately, many of those readers are not aware of Mr. Webb’s stance on gun control. After the Newtown shootings, Webb issued the following statements:

I don’t have all the solutions on this issue but I do know that I’m personally ready to compromise to limit mass shootings, and I’m ready to have an intelligent conversation on this issue. If leading gun organizations like the NRA don’t take a leadership role in proposing realistic solutions, then they will have failed to truly represent gun owners.

On December 2nd, Brandon Webb announced that he wanted to run for the NRA’s board of directors, displaying at the same time a startling tone-deafness and an utter lack of understand on what the NRA’s board of directors actually does:

Well folks, it’s time for some new blood at the NRA. We can’t bury our heads in the sand when it comes to firearms legislation. The NRA needs to actively participate in the legislative process not dodge it. (emphasis added) I’ve decided to run for an NRA Board seat and hope I can count on existing members within my network to help me get on the ballot and breathe some new life and young blood into this organization.
-Brandon

The part we bolded is the most ridiculous part of the entire post, and the most tone-deaf thing we’ve read in some time. For Webb to state that the NRA is “dodging” the legislative process displays a tremendous amount of ignorance about what the NRA has done before and after Newtown to preserve our right to keep and bear arms. If ignorance was his only sin, it would be enough for us to note vote for him. However, ignorance of the NRA’s role in defending our rights isn’t his only sin.

His other sin is one I personally share, and it’s hubris. Mr. Webb seems to think that his service to his country as a SEAL shields him from criticism, or from having to answer tough questions about what exactly he means by “compromise.” When asked repeatedly by readers on Facebook and other platforms, Webb has essentially said “I’m a former SEAL sniper, that should be qualification enough.” We all know how well a similar attitude worked for George Kollitides during his unsuccessful bid for an NRA board seat.

Make no mistake: Brandon Webb is a hero who served his country with distinction for years as a SEAL. In no way are we impugning his military credentials or his expertise on military and tactical issues. However, none of that expertise qualifies a person for a seat on the board of the National Rifle Association. Until Brandon Webb is willing to answer the tough questions about what he’s willing to compromise, and educate himself on the role of the NRA in continuing to defend our rights, the team here at Gun Nuts will do everything in our meager power to oppose his election to the NRA’s board of directors.