Privacy Policy

This is the blog of the book, “Selling the Second Amendment” by Gregory Smith, and my Pinterest Gun Ads page.

As one of the few advertising copywriters that supports the Second Amendment, the goal was writing a book that would present pro-gun arguments from a marketing perspective.

The blog itself features a collection of pro-gun stories, opinion, ads, and sometimes issues unrelated to the 2nd Amendment.

My political philosophy is right-libertarian with a touch of Objectivism (Ayn Rand), and I’m often attacking the left but rarely the right.

I’m also a member of the NRA. The way I see it, you can say you support the Second Amendment, or you can support the Second Amendment. There’s no other way.

So, welcome to the blog. Explore the directory. Have fun.

Gregory Smith.

P.S. I do not sell guns, I don’t have an FFL (Federal Firearms License). If you need a gun, go to your local gun store. 


10 Responses to About

  1. Here is a long but complete email I sent to the Chattanooga Times Free Press:
    To: Chattanooga Times Free Press

    Dear Editors,

    Monday, December 30th, I violated my personal rules and purchased another copy of your radically left wing newspaper. UNBELIEVABLE! The first thing I noticed was you published a very socialist spin item on your front page and on the majority of page A6. It may come as a surprise to you but competent journalism requires the front page be devoted to actual news and not political propaganda for any specific political party! That’s “101 Journalism” if any of your editors should ever decide to study journalism in college. Your main coverage was pure propaganda about republican Congressman Scott DesJarlais consisting of idle gossip of his divorce that occurred more than a decade ago. You also devoted a lot of coverage condemning his conservative ideology that a vast number of republican constituents actually support and consider the major issues facing our nation today. You have obviously lost touch with the real world!

    I would not have given your front page item a second thought if you had published it on your editorial pages where it belonged. Many people tell me they consider your paper to operate as though you were part of the Democrat party and responsible for publishing their radical left wing spin. I have to agree. Your article heaped praise on several democrat candidates while ridiculing the GOP congressman.

    To quote just a few of your derogatory statements of the GOP candidate you state “DesJarlais is on a wild ride” “All of it has led to bipartisan predictions that DesJarlais’ campaign is doomed as well as unflattering comparisons to some of Washington’s most notorious scandals.” “There are questions that go to his character.”

    “DesJarlais is going to lose and lose badly.” (All of these wild accusations with front page coverage as though they were factual news!)

    In your ridicule for his position on Obamacare, you state “The candidate entertained the notion that the Affordable Care Act may have been a plot to destabilize the health care industry and bring about socialized medicine.’ Evidently, you consider anyone with this view as being ignorant and opinionated. But any person of average to superior intelligence most certainly understands this is a definite fact. What have your editors been smoking?

    Many republicans complain your editors are so radically liberal you are actually unaware that even on the one page you assign to conservative comments your editorials make statements that are clearly coming from the far left. Yet, with your biased minds you do not even detect these comments are not conservative since you are very comfortable with their stated views.

    ONCE AGAIN! PLEASE BE ADVISED YOUR NEWSPAPER’S POLITICAL SPIN BELONGS ON THE EDITORIAL PAGES AND NOT ON THE FRONT PAGE THAT SHOULD BE DEDICATED TO FAIR AND BALANCED FACTUAL NEWS! One good benefit of your radically bias newspaper policies, your paper should help unify and bring out large support for the GOP as of future elections. You like to publish Marxist Bennett’s political cartoons. So, once again, I am attaching a better one I created.

    Bud Gray

    Dayton, TN

  2. I am a fan of firearms advertising as well, and greatly appreciate the work you do here posting these advertisements and opinions. I will most certainly be checking back on a frequent basis.

  3. Years ago, we did a thorough study of the 2nd Amendment in college. Needless to say….the professor was not happy.

    Below is the analysis:
    There is something called a “Preamble” that is written as the “first” rule of order regarding the Constitution. A Preamble is always first, in front and is the introduction to what you are about to read.

    The Constitution Preamble is as follows:
    “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish
    Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

    As noted above in the Preamble, most important is that the “ultimate” authority is the people and that it is the people with this authority that “ordain and establish” the
    Constitution. It is not the President, Congressional House, the Senate or any other elected politician.

    Furthermore, there is “only” one possible way for anyone to work in “any” political office.

    It is not their education or experience in any field. They “must” swear an oath to obey the U.S. Constitution. If they do not take the oath then they do not get into office. So, the first step in any political career is the sworn oath and testimony that the American citizen is the final and ultimate authority.

    The word “amendment” is defined as an alteration or correction to the previous text – in
    this case the Constitution. This is what defines what the “Bill of Rights” are – also known as the first 10 Amendments.

    [Remember – the Amendments are Rights guaranteed to American citizens, who are
    the ultimate authority and acknowledged under oath by all public servants.]

    2nd Amendment:
    “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

    1. “A well regulated Militia,” = the subject.
    2. The comma leads to a modifier/qualifier for previous subject “or” adds another subject.
    3. “being necessary to the security of a free State,” = the modifier or qualifier.
    4. The comma leads to a modifier/qualifier for previous subject “or” adds another subject.
    5. “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms,” = the subject.
    6. The comma leads to a modifier/qualifier for previous subject “or” adds another subject.
    7. “shall not be infringed.” = the modifier or qualifier.
    8. Period = end of statement.

    Additional research into the original Constitutional ‘wording’ with a 1778 dictionary
    comparatively to a modern Merriam Webster dictionary reveal the definitions have not changed.

    1. The American people have the right for a Militia (army) to protect them – Federal or State.

    2. The American people have the right to “own and carry” firearms.

    Any law that contradicts the Constitution automatically loses and is illegal.

    *The Founding Fathers, having created the Constitution with the Bill of Rights, officially stated in government documentation, that these “Rights” are given to American citizens from God; they can not take these “Rights” from Americans. All Public Servants are required to acknowledge this truth when taking their oaths.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.