Bloomberg Law Looks at FPC

The Firearms Policy Coalition is a unique voice on social media for gun rights. On X, formerly Twitter, they’re…aggressive.

What I mean is that they won’t blink about telling someone to perform anatomically improbable sexual acts upon their own person because they’re pushing an anti-gun agenda. They’ll do it rather publicly and, quite often, they make it amusing.

This certainly doesn’t hurt their image among gun rights supporters who are sick and tired of being expected to play nice even as the other side accuses us of wanting dead children.

Now, this approach has garnered some attention from Bloomberg Law:

In barely a decade, a Nevada-based group has emerged as a relentless gun rights litigant, challenging laws and regulations in at least 90 cases across 20 states.

The organization, the Firearms Policy Coalition, has battled state assault-weapons bans, defended a third grader’s right to wear a hat in school adorned with the image of a semiautomatic rifle, and challenged licensing age restrictions.

It’s also boosted membership, and its coffers, with a bombastic online campaign that regularly fires four-letter vulgarities at critics and opponents regardless of their political affiliation.

Its leader, Brandon Combs, is a California millennial who calls the AR-15 “America’s rifle,” fondly recalling purchasing the semiautomatic assault weapon. These days, the coalition claims more than 310,000 social media followers and saw its annual revenue swell to $8 million in 2023, as it focuses almost exclusively on litigation.

…

Litigation is the vehicle to get things done, but social media serves as FPC’s microphone.

It’s how and where it sounds off multiple times a day. Where it trumpets victories, slams critics, galvanizes members, and even finds plaintiffs.

“Help us sue the government,” it posted in November, seeking Ohioans to challenge the state’s age restrictions for firearm licenses. The website also has a “Legal Action Hotline” for anyone who’s experienced a possible civil rights violation and looking for representation.

The organization has always emphasized social media to distribute its message, according to Combs. It’s digital first, eschewing the direct mail campaigns common among many nonprofits.

Let’s be real, a lot of people throw direct mail in the trash right from the start. They don’t like spam and direct mail is essentially spam sent via snail mail.

Yet a lot of us also use social media to some degree or another. Making a meme costs a fraction of what direct mail does and, because it amuses people, is more likely to be shared far and wide, thus creating a much broader distribution than a group might otherwise manage. They’ll blister the anti-gun side on social media, which might not win many converts, but you’re not going to in 280 characters, such as on X.

Debate on the internet isn’t likely to change hearts and minds anyway, most of the time. The people open to learning aren’t the people pontificating all over social media one way or another.

Instead, at best, you’re playing for the crowd.

But even then, there’s something to be said about just refusing to even look like you’re backing down. Attacking online, then litigating in the courtroom is a bold way to approach things.

And anti-gunners have been doing similarly for years. Sure, they tend to make their pushes legislatively instead of in court for the most part, but they’re not above attacking and being vile about it, so why not dish it back a bit.

People like that, and they’ll support people who do it. FPC has a brand now, and it’s hard not to like it.