The Arizona Rifleman

Over the years, I’ve noticed that many media outlets (newspapers, TV/radio stations, etc.) have made several factual errors when reporting on firearms.

While some of these errors are fairly minor and hardly worth mentioning, several have been incorrect in critical ways.

For example, many news outlets reported that the sunset of the 1994-2004 federal “assault weapons ban” (”AWB”) would result in new machine guns being legal for private citizens to purchase. This is not true; the AWB did not apply to machine guns (which are regulated under a separate law created in 1934 and which remains in effect), but many of the guns that were restricted under the AWB have a similar appearance to machine guns, hence the confusion.

Incorrect reporting of such facts can result in uninformed and/or misinformed decisions by the citizenry and legislatures, which can seriously affect millions of American citizens and businesses.

Thus, in the interest of providing accurate, non-biased information to the public, I make the following offer to any and all media organizations, large or small, wherever they exist in the world*:

At no financial cost, I will…

• Provide verifiable facts relating to the technical aspects of firearms, ammunition, and related topics.
• Provide verifiable facts relating to existing or certain pending acts of legislation relating to firearms in the United States.
• Provide referrals to experts and/or other verifiable sources on firearm-related topics that I am unable to accurately comment about.
• Review pre- and post-published articles, scripts, reports, and other similar things for accuracy as it relates to firearm-related topics.
• Provide on-air commentary or interviews (via telephone) on firearm-related topics, so long as I am given a list of questions/topics ahead of time so I can prepare a suitable response. (This specific point may be limited by my availability, so please contact me ahead to schedule such a time.)

To take advantage of this offer, simply contact me within a reasonable period (I recommend at least a day or two at the bare minimum) before your deadline with any questions you might have. If, during the course of discussion, more questions or issues arise, I will be glad to assist you with those as well.

* While I welcome inquiries from around the world, I regret that I can only communicate in the English language.

Brendan O’Neill writes in the Guardian:

“From great actor and progressive campaigner to reactionary old fart who loved guns: everyone agrees it was a tragic fall from grace. But did Heston really make a dramatic political u-turn? Actually, no. From the 1950s to the 1990s, he remained rather consistent in his commitment to upholding America’s freedoms. It was his liberal critics in the gun control lobby on the east coast and in trendy parts of LA who changed their tune, and made a mad swing from liberalism to authoritarianism.

How gun control came to be seen as a liberal cause is one of life’s great mysteries. In both the US and across Europe, fully paid-up lefties and progressives will tell you with pride, even pomposity, that the American authorities ought to disarm their populace and ban guns.

What a turnaround. Demanding gun control has traditionally been the preserve of reactionary, even racist elements in American society. Up until the 1980s, gun control was mostly a conservative campaign, driven by a conviction amongst right-leaning activists, politicians and lawmakers that ordinary people, especially those of the non-white variety, could not possibly be trusted with guns. Only the state, they believed, should have the right to use fatal physical force.”

Hat tip to David Hardy.