Former Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-Ariz.) and her husband, Mark Kelly, are leading a group that is working to rebrand its gun control effort. | AP Photo Dems urged to retool their guns message

Democrats itching to slug it out with the National Rifle Association this fall need to stop attacking the gun-rights group and start sounding a little more like it, particularly when it comes to respecting freedom and safety, according to new message testing from a group founded to enact tighter gun laws.

While Democrats think they have a winning election-year issue, a group led by former Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-Ariz.) and her husband, Mark Kelly, is pushing to rebrand their effort — based on poll and focus-group data — in the hope that it will take root in an American culture that has long accepted gun ownership, if not revered it in parts of the country. It's a cultural linkage that's likely to be highlighted Tuesday at the Republican National Convention, as the top lobbyist for the NRA plans to take the stage, as will Donald Trump Jr., who has touted his affinity for hunting.


With that in mind, representatives from a broad mix of progressive groups sat around a table last week at the Washington offices of Global Strategy Group, where they received a tutorial on how — and how not — to talk about guns. Leading the lesson were top officials from Americans for Responsible Solutions PAC, the campaign wing of the group Giffords and Kelly founded after the Sandy Hook massacre.

For example, groups seeking tighter gun laws have been trying to get away from the “gun control” label since well before ARS started testing for a new messaging strategy last year. Better options, they say, are “gun violence prevention” and “preventing gun tragedies.”

"We've stepped away from a debate about guns that was sort of postured pro-gun or against-gun,” said Peter Ambler, the PAC’s executive director, “into one that’s centered around data-tested ideas like the background checks that we know increased public safety and save lives, but don't sort of disapprove of the individual gun owner and don't disapprove of the responsible use of firearms in society.”

And while Hillary Clinton promised to “keep taking on the NRA” in October, she should maybe stop, according to ARS’ findings, and instead take on the “gun lobby.”

“The NRA has great favorabilities in a lot of places,” said Global Strategy Group Jeff Pollock, pointing to the 144-year-old organization’s popular — and apolitical — hunting and safety training programs.

Stick to stressing “the gun lobby” as a special interest out to “protect the profits” of manufacturers, Pollock told the assembled representatives of Priorities USA, NARAL, AFSCME and the Senate and House Majority PACs. A strategist from the Democratic side of Google’s political consulting operation was also there.

Americans for Responsible Solutions PAC spokesman Mark Prentice said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has also been briefed on the new strategy, as has the House's Democratic Policy and Communications Committee. Rep. Mike Thompson (D-Calif.) distributed ARS’ glossy new strategy booklet to every House Democrat last week, according to Prentice, and they’re planning briefings for the Congressional Black and Hispanic Caucuses, as well as the LGBT Caucus.

Gone, evidently, are the days when Democrats “made a deliberate and conscious decision to walk away from this issue” after Al Gore lost West Virginia in 2000, said Dave Walker, a pollster with Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, at the briefing. Now, Democrats are trying to take advantage of what they see as a polling advantage for incremental new gun laws. Expanding background checks, for example, consistently wins support from eight in 10 Americans in polls — but it’s just one in the “pantheon of defining issues,” Walker said.

But Republicans are also looking to make guns part of their election-year strategy, using the issue to unite their party and drive base turnout. The NRA endorsed Donald Trump earlier than any GOP nominee in history, citing fear of Clinton as much as enthusiasm for the presumptive nominee.

In New Hampshire, ARS sees the race against Sen. Kelly Ayotte as a test case for whether voters will punish an incumbent who opposes new restrictions. Ayotte voted with most other Republicans to block expanding background checks in the months after the shooting in Newtown, Connecticut.

Expanding background checks has been a tough sell in New Hampshire. While advocates can point to polls showing 90 percent of voters back the proposal, a similar measure failed in the state House in 2014, even though Democrats controlled the chamber.

ARS strategists noticed that Ayotte's polling had taken a nosedive in the aftermath of the vote but had recovered by the time she started running for reelection in 2015. So they went on air to remind the public about that background check vote, calling called her “out of step” and “beholden to special interests.”

Ayotte responded by touting her vote for an alternative Republican measure that would not have expanded background checks but would, as she put it, have had the effect of “fixing our background check system.” It would have devoted more funds for prosecuting gun law violations. It also had some measures to make it easier to purchase and transport guns across state lines.

Last week, ARS responded with a six-figure purchase for a new spot, accusing her of misleading voters about her position in order to win reelection.

Ayotte’s campaign threw the accusation right back at the gun control advocates, and her Democratic challenger.

"Gov. [Maggie] Hassan's third-party special interest allies have spent millions of dollars on misleading attacks against Kelly in the past three years, proving that they’re more interested in scoring political points than in finding solutions to these issues,” said campaign spokeswoman Liz Johnson. “Kelly’s record is clear — she has voted to strengthen the current background check system and encourage states to submit relevant mental health records, increase prosecutions for those who try to buy guns illegally, and prevent terrorists from buying firearms while protecting the rights of law-abiding American citizens.”

ARS invested heavily in developing the new message, hiring Greenberg Quinlan Rosner to run several polls, Global Strategy Group to host online discussion boards and Anzalone Liszt Grove to hold five focus groups around the country with gun-owning women, millennials and minority voters.

The strongest message in favor of stronger gun laws, Walker said, is “with freedom comes responsibility.”

That language mirrors that of gun rights groups, by design. The NRA calls itself “freedom’s safest place,” for example.

“Essentially, we co-opted their language,” Walker said. Similarly, another point stresses that “as adults, we have a responsibility to make our country a safer place to live.”

ARS’ strategy also subtly suggests that its allies are overplaying some strategies. “Relying on victims’ and survivors’ stories alone can amplify feelings of hopelessness,” its strategy booklet cautions.

“Mothers have also been powerful advocates for stronger gun laws, but we need to show through our messengers that they are not the only ones who want to reduce gun violence,” it advises, before suggesting bringing in more men, gun owners, hunters and experts like ER doctors and police.

The group also suggested phasing out efforts that highlight the total donations lawmakers receive from “the gun lobby” and the NRA.

“Their money isn’t that big,” Pollock said. “It’s not what they do. Their power rests in their stupid postcards and their ability to terrorize members on the Hill and have them panicked about their rating.”

What he didn’t say: ARS, and other groups like the Mike Bloomberg-backed Everytown for Gun Safety, have increasingly deep pockets. They outspent the NRA on lobbying after Sandy Hook, and they may have their own potential to terrorize members in the future.

One of Washington's leading gun lobbyists said he didn’t sense much of a new threat, however, saying people have been going after the “corporate gun lobby” for decades.

“The '60s called, they want their clichés back,” said Larry Keane, senior vice president at the National Shooting Sports Foundation. Based on a description of the new strategy, Keane called it "very pretty looking camo."

He added, in an email, "Saying it isn't gun control doesn't mean it isn't gun control. Their agenda remains the same."

ARS also developed specific messages to turn out parts of the original Obama coalition of blacks, Hispanics, women and millennials. The latter might actually be the most difficult to persuade. ARS’ pollsters found that millennials' views on guns track more with the party ID than their age, and other studies have found that younger voters are especially open to gun rights, seeing them in the same vein of personal liberty as gay rights.

There’s also something of a deadline when it comes to a generation that was in school when two teenagers killed 13 of their peers at Columbine High School in 1999. One of the top new talking points is attacking the “new normal” of gun violence. But, as Global Strategy’s Angie Kuefler noted, for millennials who haven’t known a time when mass shootings didn't happen regularly, it’s not so much new as just normal.

