Quote of the Day
The reports from Hawaii and New Jersey underscore what could be described as the bitter resentment and resistance from gun control proponents when they lose, which has happened consistently at the Supreme Court since 2008. It signals the battle to fully restore the Second Amendment’s protection of a right that “shall not be infringed” will not end even when the high court hammers down on gun and magazine bans.
There will be other issues to address, including—but not limited to—such impairments as:
- Permits to Purchase
- Waiting Periods
- Training Mandates
- Constitutional (Permitless) Carry
- National Reciprocity
The legal roller coaster ride is definitely far from over.
Dave Workman
July 20, 2026
Wolford, Cheeseman 2A Wins Draw Anti-Gun Pushback
Workman has been involved in the gun rights movement since the mid- to late-1970s. That is about 20 years more than me. So, if he thinks we still have a long way to go before declaring victory I have to give his opinion serious consideration.
After thinking about it, assuming he means “far from over” in terms of years of court and political battles, I still think I will be closer to correct than he is. Neither of us have been in this situation before. Until just the past few years we have primarily on the defensive when blocking a law from being enacted could be considered a win. Now we complain that a court victory only applies to members of an easily joined national organization.
There is a comparison to be made with the battles other groups have been through in this country. I’m thinking of the Jim Crow laws (segregated schools and transit, poll taxes, literacy tests, bans on interracial marriage, etc.) and gay marriage. My impression of those situations is that once SCOTUS made their rulings and the executive branch started enforcing the rulings the opposition folded relatively quickly. Am I wrong? If not, then why shouldn’t this take a similar course?
I think that rather than think of this in terms of political and court battles we are entering the domain of psychological and financial battles. We certainly have the psychological edge at this point. In the 1970’s our opponents were plotting the banning of handguns (remember Handgun Control, Inc.?). They saw a national handgun ban only a decade or perhaps two away. The rifle and shotgun bans were to follow. That drive stalled and Josh Sugarmann brilliantly created the deliberate deception of the “assault weapon” to create a new front to attack us.
That attack front has been stopped. Within a year it will have been nearly completely repelled. If they only have the items on Workman’s list, I see psychological and financial collapse. Those items just will not generate the interest and donation dollars that handgun and “assault weapon” bans did. Yes, most of the dollars have been from a few big donors and government grants. But the government grants have been trimmed way back. And are big donor going to be dropping hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars on getting permits to purchase, waiting periods, and training requirements in a few more states or even to fight the repeal of those laws? What is the sales pitch to those people? If only the mass shooter of a dozen kids had better training, they would have known better than to do that?
Sebastian @SebastianSNBQ has similar thoughts after reading NJ Just Lost Its Assault Weapons Ban. Here’s Why That Matters (The Trace)
My read between the lines is they know they are losing a key fundraising issue and don’t know where to go next. If the assault weapons and mag issue go, they’re getting into increasingly esoteric fights that don’t propagandize well.
“You see, if a rifle measures 26 inches, it’s good and wholesome. But if it measures 25.9 inches, it’s a killing machine designed for war.” doesn’t hit the same. Neither does “Make Gun Owners Deaf Again”
I’m just not seeing out opposition being able to get the useful idiot enthusiasm ramped up or the people with money virtue signaling on the remaining issues.