Groups that were once “effective” in the anti-civil rights camp don’t always remain a crown jewel of the progressive glitterati. One such group that seems to continue to struggle to stay relevant is the Violence Policy Center. Josh Sugarmann, the founder and head of the group was directly responsible for the term so-called “assault weapons” becoming a mainstream pejorative. Since his semi-successful run at wreaking havoc on the Second Amendment in the 90’s, plus or minus a half-decade, Sugarmann’s group has been eclipsed by the efforts of the astroturf groups of Nanny Bloomberg, et.al. The latest e-blast sent by Sugarmann is a pathetic attempt to show…well, I don’t know what he’s trying to show, but pathetic it is nonetheless.

Sugarmann’s Campaign for Gun Industry Accountability is an initiative where his group targets the marketing of firearm and firearm-related companies. This is all the kind of drivel we’ve seen from frivolous lawsuits that are trying to do to firearms what was done to cigarettes.

“Much like the tobacco industry’s search for replacement smokers, the firearms industry is seeking replacement shooters.” Sugarmann said in a 2021 statement. “The targeting of Asian Americans is just the latest example of how gunmakers will cynically exploit any tragedy to fatten their bottom line, regardless of the lethal real-world impact of their actions.” 

In that same release, it was stated that:

Any American, regardless of race or ethnicity, bringing a gun into the home increases the risk of death or injury to the owner or a family member. If the marketing efforts targeting the AAPI community gain traction, the impact will be measured not only in dollars and cents in gunmakers’ coffers, but in increased death and injury among Asian Americans.

The problem with this marketing attack is multi-fold. First, marketing, especially when done in good faith, is a First Amendment related right issue. Second, going after marketing is their only semi-effective workaround to the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.

While it’s supposed to be verboten to sue a gun manufacturer over the acts of illegal and criminal use, that has not stopped the most brazen litigants from trying to drain the coffers of the gun companies.

There were three points that Sugarmann tried to point at in his latest update:

In this update, we look at a legal victory for Illinois' 2023 assault weapons ban, VPC comments to the Commerce Department on gun exports, and an example of gun industry disregard for the victims of gun violence.

• In a victory in the ongoing battle to restrict assault weapons, on July 2nd the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear a challenge to the recently enacted Illinois assault weapons ban. The VPC worked with advocates in Illinois to pass the ban and helped ensure the new law would be effective.
• At the end of June, the VPC filed formal comments with the Department of Commerce on a new interim final rule to enhance oversight of firearms exports. The VPC has been working with a large coalition of human rights, arms control, and gun violence prevention organizations to reverse a Trump Administration action that transferred firearm export regulation from the State Department to Commerce. The new Commerce Department rule is a significant step in the right direction, although the VPC still supports returning oversight to the State Department. Read our full comments here.
• In just one more example of the gun industry's appalling and callous attitude toward the victims of gun violence, the July cover of Firearms News promotes a new version of the MCX assault rifle from gunmaker Sig Sauer. This comes on the heels of the June 12 anniversary of the 2016 Pulse Nightclub shooting where another version of the MCX was used to kill 49 people and wound 53 more.  

The first two points are wildly laughable. VPC touting the Supreme Court’s inaction in the Illinois assault weapons ban is just smoke and mirrors. While the high court failed to act on this litigation and others like it, that’s not a sign of victory for the anti-freedom caucus.

In fact, the denial of cert in the middle of the interrogatory process is fairly par for course. If we turn back the clock, we’ve had both assault weapons ban cases and magazine capacity limitation cases granted, vacated, and remanded by SCOTUS post NYSRPA v. Bruen. That should be a clear indicator that the court finds semi-automatic rifles to be protected arms under the Second Amendment.

Inconveniently for Sugarmann, in Garland v. Cargill, Justice Sotomayor writing in dissent – with Kagan and Jackson joining –  made a big argument for the repeal of assault weapons bans. Sotomayor et.al. noted that bump stocks would be attached to  “commonly available, semiautomatic rifles,” which highlights their protection under Heller.

All VPC is celebrating is the delay of the inevitable: the overturning of these laws.

The second point, with VPC clicking their heels over the “formal comments with the Department of Commerce on a new interim final rule” they filed, is also a total eunuch in this battle of studs.

Sugarmann can celebrate “final rules” all he wants, but with the fall of Chevron deference and other recent rulings from SCOTUS, the administrative state has a much larger burden to prove – like an actual burden, when they’re tangled in litigation. The executive branch having a stronghold on rulemaking has crumbled.

VPC’s latest Campaign for Gun Industry Accountability target was a rifle featured on the cover of a magazine, which is also inconsequential.

Saying that this is an example of the “gun industry's appalling and callous attitude toward the victims of gun violence[, because] the July cover of Firearms News promotes a new version of the MCX assault rifle from gunmaker Sig Sauer,” is just trying to throw dung at the wall. “This comes on the heels of the June 12 anniversary of the 2016 Pulse Nightclub shooting where another version of the MCX was used.”

We can be all but assured that no one was trying to choreograph this and if anything, pointing this out is just pathetic. They’re grasping at straws.

Campaign for Gun Industry Accountability is trying to do the dirty work of people and entities who wish to raise frivolous lawsuits. By doing all this “work,” they’re amassing a pile of so-called “evidence” that the firearm companies are not acting in good faith in marketing. That’s all Sugarmann is trying to do…stay relevant.

If he’s not busy trying to publicly insult activists, advocates, ambassadors such as professional shooter Chris Cheng, he’s working on the next project that’s going to “wow” the world. 

“You could call Chris Cheng an ambassador at best and a salesman at worst,” Sugarmann said in a statement to CNN in 2023. This project of trying to put forward a presumed and fabricated malfeasance by gun manufacturers is not likely to be their next big “success.”

This fantastic “work” that’s going on at VPC, Sugarmann gets highly compensated for. Work celebrating two semi-moot scenarios and talking about a magazine cover gets Sugarmann $156,600.00 annually. According to the last 990 on file of the organization, Sugarmann is one of two paid employees, with their legislative director, Kristen Rand, receiving the same compensation.

The group did manage to pull in over 1.3 million dollars in donations, etc. in 2021. What those numbers look like for 2022 or 2023 is not known, as those filings are not posted with the IRS. Mind you, that’s in comparison to the over 47 million dollars in revenue from Everytown for Gun Safety Action fund, also 2021.

VPC can try as they may to stay center stage in the arena. They used to be one of the only kids on the block, vying for the attention of pinko progressives with Brady/Handgun Control Inc. being their only healthy competition. Today? They’re relegated to making sad attempts to overstate alleged “victories” and going after magazine covers.