Category Archives: Gun Rights

Stay Dangerous, Stay Good

Posted on by
10

Quote of the Day

The Second Amendment is not about “gun culture.” It is not about hunting, sporting clays, or weekend range days.

It is the final, unbreakable firewall that keeps every other right from becoming a temporary privilege granted, or revoked, by those in power.

The Founders placed it second only to speech because they had just overthrown a government that tried to disarm them. They understood a brutal historical truth: an armed, trained citizenry is the one thing tyrants fear most. Without it, speech becomes punishable, assembly becomes rebellion, and due process becomes whatever the regime decides.

In 2026, some still call the 2A “outdated.” They ignore the clear, repeating pattern of history. When governments disarm their people, tragedy does not follow by accident, it follows by design. The right to keep and bear arms is the one right that ensures We the People remain the ultimate check on power, not the other way around.

Here is some examples of what happens when that line falls:

  • Ottoman Empire / Turkey – Gun registration and disarmament laws by 1911. Armenian Genocide (1915–1917): 1.5 million Armenians (plus hundreds of thousands of Assyrians and Greeks) systematically murdered in just 3 years.
  • Soviet Union – Gun control enacted 1929. Stalin’s regime (1929–1953): ~20 million dissidents, kulaks, and civilians killed through executions, engineered famines, Gulags, and deportations in 24 years.
  • Nazi Germany – Tightened gun laws and mass disarmament of Jews and political opponents (1938). Holocaust and related atrocities (1939–1945): ~13 million Jews and others exterminated in 6 years.
  • Communist China – Strict gun control inherited and enforced after 1949. Mao’s regime (1949–1976): 40–65 million dead from Great Leap Forward famine, Cultural Revolution purges, and mass executions in 27 years.
  • Cambodia (Khmer Rouge) – Full civilian disarmament upon seizing power 1975. Pol Pot’s regime (1975–1979): 1.5–2.8 million Cambodians (roughly 25% of the population) slaughtered or starved in just 4 years.

These are not isolated tragedies. They are the documented pattern: disarm the people first, then the atrocities become possible because resistance becomes impossible.

The Second Amendment was written precisely to prevent this from ever happening here. It is not a suggestion. It is not conditional. It is “shall not be infringed” for a reason that history proves in blood.

That is why we train without apology.

That is why we carry daily.

That is why we fight every single incremental step, because once the guns are gone, the graves fill quickly.

The 2A is not about guns.
It is about ensuring that liberty never becomes optional again.

We can not let that line fall.

Stay dangerous, stay good.

RedBeard @HargusJeremy
Posted on X, April 15, 2026

I wish I could write like that.

It is All Lies and Deception

Posted on by
13

Quote of the Day

A recent news headline declared, “11,500 shootings occurred within 500 yards of US schools last year.” The obvious implication is that American school children are under daily fire on school campuses nationwide. But, as with most gun control narratives in national media written by reporters who mostly don’t understand the basics of firearms or criminal gun use, that narrative collapses under the slightest scrutiny.

The first glaring red flag in this story is that Hearst Television Data Visualization Journalist Susie Webb and the WCVB Get the Facts Data Team built their agenda-driven narrative by relying on gun control advocacy site The Trace’s “School-Adjacent Shootings” dataset, which tracks Gun Violence Archive (GVA) incidents that fell within 500 yards of a K-12 school. Even that dataset warns that each row is a shooting-to-school match and must be deduplicated before anyone totals up the incidents, deaths or injuries. However, that was not done before Webb and WVTM’s story went live on several news outlets, on social media, on Hearst Television’s YouTube channel and was even—unsurprisingly—picked up by MSN.

This blatant error is not a trivial methodological footnote. It is the difference between measuring school-related crime and measuring a broad circle on a map. It’s also a trick that’s been seen time and again from the likes of Everytown’s propagandist at The Trace and GVA.

The central problem is in the dataset’s own limitations. Each row is a “shooting-to-school match,” meaning one shooting can be linked to multiple schools if several campuses fall within the 500-yard range.

…

The public hears “31 shootings a day near schools” and is encouraged to picture students dodging bullets at recess. But the GVA data are more often than not actually criminal and gang activity near or after school hours, accidental discharges, suicides, police interventions near a campus and/or juveniles getting caught with a firearm at school. This means the methodology sweeps in a much wider universe of incidents with duplication risk baked in.

…

The result is predictable: bad facts drive bad policy. The issue here is not whether crime near schools is serious. The issue is whether the public is being told the truth. On that question, the answer is clear. The methodology does not support the headline, and the headline does not deserve the public’s trust. We all have a right to expect more from those who hold themselves out as objective journalists.

Salam Fatohi
April 9, 2026
‘31 Shootings a Day’ Media Narrative Collapses Under Easy Scrutiny • NSSF

Emphasis added.

The autho

The anti-gun people are deliberately deceptive and liars. It is fundamental to their culture. This is just one more example.

The Stupidity of It

Posted on by
Reply

Via email from Rolf:

All gun control is stupid as a means to reduce violent crime and unconstitutional. Banning 3D printed guns is extra stupid.

Never forget:

One thing that humbles me deeply is to see that human genius has its limits while human stupidity does not.

Alexandre Dumas
Circa 1865, Grand Dictionnaire Universel du XIXe Siècle: Français, Historique, Géographique, Mythologique, Bibliographique, etcetera, Volume 2, Entry: Bêtise, Quote Page 650, Column 1, Published by Pierre Larousse, Paris. (Google Books Full View)

Second Amendment Civil Rights Division–Shall Not Be Infringed

Posted on by
7

Quote of the Day

The Second Amendment protects the rights of law-abiding citizens to own and use AR-15 style semiautomatic rifles for lawful purposes.’ Just last year, the U.S. Supreme Court made clear in a unanimous opinion that the AR-15 is “both widely legal and bought by many ordinary consumers.” Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos, 605 U.S. 280, 297 (2025). See also Garland v. Cargill, 602 U.S. 406, 429-30 (2024) (Sotomayor, J., dissenting) (AR-15s are “commonly available, semiautomatic rifles.”). Unfortunately, Virginia appears poised to infringe on the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens to enjoy and use AR-15 rifles for lawful purposes by making it a crime to purchase and sell them. This Civil Rights Division will seek to enjoin any attempt to infringe the right of law-abiding Virginians to acquire constitutionally protected arms that are possessed by literally tens of millions of Americans. See Snope v. Brown, 145 S. Ct. 1534 (2025) (Kavanaugh, J., statement respecting denial of certiorari).

In addition, laws that require constitutionally protected firearms owned by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes to be maintained in an inoperable state are unconstitutional. See D.C. v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 630 (2008) (“[T]he District’s requirement … that firearms in the home be rendered and kept inoperable at all times … [is] unconstitutional.”). We are aware that the Virginia General Assembly has forwarded to you several bills that, if enacted as currently written, would mirror the unconstitutional restrictions struck down in Heller 18 years ago. There are also other provisions contained in those bills that otherwise prevent lawful use of constitutionally protected arms for self-defense.

In all, the General Assembly has forwarded to you over 20 bills that restrict Second Amendment rights. I urge you to reconsider allowing any bill that would infringe on the lawful use of protected firearms by law-abiding citizens to become law. In an effort to avoid unnecessary litigation, the Second Amendment Section stands ready to meet and confer with attorneys in the Virginia Attorney General Office. Your counsel may contact Acting Chief Andrew Darlington at Andrew.Darlington@usdoj.gov. The Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens shall not be infringed.

Harmeet Dhillon
Assistant Attorney General of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division
Posted April 10, 2026 on X

It is thrilling to have a Second Amendment Section of the Civil Rights Division, let alone them writing, “shall not be infringed.” It is not an 18 USC 242 event, but it is still Enjoy Your Trial time.

See also the complete letter:

Constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 1715

Posted on by
4

Quote of the Day

Section 1715 of title 18, U.S. Code, is unconstitutional as applied to constitutionally protected firearms, including handguns, because it serves an illegitimate purpose and is inconsistent with the Nation’s tradition of firearm regulation. See N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, 142 S. Ct. 2111, 2129–30 (2022).

The Department of Justice may not, consistent with the Constitution, enforce section 1715 with respect to constitutionally protected firearms. The Postal Service should modify its regulations to conform with this opinion.

T. ELLIOT GAISER
Assistant Attorney General
Office of Legal Counsel
January 15, 2026
Constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 1715

I wonder why the legacy media has not been talking about this. Are they drowning their sorrows in cheap boxed wine? Have they finally decided gun laws are now a lost cause?

But as Copilot told me:

The OLC opinion is a quiet admission that the 1927 handgun‑mailing ban was never compatible with the Second Amendment — it simply took a century for the government to say it out loud.

Media Influence on Frames of Reference

Posted on by
11

Quote of the Day

If a man wants to cum on his girlfriend’s face because he saw it in porn, and she doesn’t feel like getting her face cummed on, we cheer go-girl and frown at the man for even watching porn at all. But if a woman wants her boyfriend to buy her flowers because she grew up being fed this action in movies, and her boyfriend doesn’t feel like it, we have no sympathy for him. We are horrified even at comparing the two things. It’s obvious to us that porn should not influence what happens in sex, but we have been so immersed in romance-porn that the idea of buying flowers for a woman is seen as what romance ought to be. The romance narrative has become romance, and rejecting the narrative becomes rejecting romance itself. We have lost the ability to distinguish!

Aella
April 9, 2026
The Other Porn Land – by Aella – Knowingless

I love how Aella can see alternate realities and express them in ways that make me laugh and almost whoop for joy at the twisting of everyone’s view of the world.

The same sort of things applies to gun ownership. “Guns are icky and only criminals have them” versus “Everyone should have guns and know how to use them because they are tools for self-defense against criminals and tyrants.”

Framing matters. Media and your peer groups dominate the positioning of the framing. Try to see through framing and get a grasp on the true reality. Seeing things other people cannot see gives you a huge advantage. We cannot all be Aella or Elon Musk, but we can do better than what we currently do. Realty is tough, really, really, tough.

Greener Pastures

Posted on by
6

Quote of the Day

On Dec. 1, 2025, Washington reported 706,046 active CPLs. On April 1, that number had plummeted to 696,015. The alarming decline has been explained by many gun owners, saying they’ve either left Washington for more Second Amendment-friendly environs in Idaho, Texas, Oklahoma and elsewhere, while others have decided to carry without a CPL because they refuse to pay the state to exercise their right to bear arms, which is specifically protected by both the state and federal constitutions.

Dave Workman
April 3, 2026
Wash. CPL Numbers Decline; Gun Owners Flee, Others Refuse to Renew – TheGunMag

I think the Washington state gun laws will be straightened out by the Federal courts in less than five years. But the taxes and crime situation will probably continue to deteriorate. So, with that in mind I am working on an escape plan. I can’t leave right now because I need to save up money for retirement. Underground bunkers in Idaho are expensive.

The underground bunker be completed soon (only a few more days of work). I will then start counting the days until I can retire and have the option to leave Washington state as well.

Are you thinking of fleeing the tyranny of your state too? I’m giving free tours of my underground bunk to people attending Boomershoot this year (the first weekend of May). It would give you something to think about…

Free Speech and Guns

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Brits surrendered their firearms in 1997.

Less than 30 years later, they’re being arrested for Facebook posts.

That’s not “safety.” That’s the speed of tyranny once a government knows its citizens can’t push back.

When people are disarmed, the state no longer fears the people. And when governments have zero fear of the people, they do whatever the hell they want.

Stacy is Right @PoliticalStacy
Posted on X, April 4, 2026

From later in the same thread:

Possession and Carry on Military Bases

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

SAF fully supports Secretary Hegseth’s decision to enable our service members to be able to carry personal firearms on military bases, with any denials requiring a written explanation. SAF believes any “gun-free zones” are constitutionally questionable, and also create soft targets that are enticing to criminals and others bent on violence.

The fact that military bases, of all places, have been under such restrictions has long been perplexing to us. Serving your country should not require the wholesale abandonment of the Second Amendment right of armed self-defense. It’s excellent to hear that this dangerous policy is finally changing.

SAF @2AFDN
Posted on X, April 2, 2026

Listen to it straight from the “horse’s mouth”:

My inclination is that service members should not have to ask permission to bring personal firearms on base and carry when off duty, but I would be willing to listen to an argument in opposition to that assertion. Perhaps some military bases have reasonable justifications for such a policy.

Cry Harder

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Your “horrifying if you believe in the First Amendment” drivel is the exact cognitive blind spot these cells exploit…weaponizing free speech as a get-out-of-consequences card for those who piss on it with bullets and bombs.

Brandenburg v. Ohio carved it out decades ago:

protected speech stops cold at incitement to imminent lawless action that actually happens. They didn’t just talk; they executed.

The Constitution doesn’t shield arsonists, shooters, or terror enablers any more than it shields Al-Qaeda sympathizers handing out bomb manuals.

This verdict isn’t chilling dissent; it’s lethal accountability, the kind that deters the next cell of ideologically poisoned fuckwits from turning public facilities into kill zones.

So spare me your performative horror, you fucking idiot.

The jury saw the pathology for what it was. The FBI built the case on it. And the law cut them down.

Cry harder, sweetheart.

LHGrey™️ @grey4626
Posted on X, March 14, 2026

This was in response to:

It is interesting this person believes the First Amendment protects the destruction of government property and shooting a police officer with an AR-15. They must have crap for brains. With that broad of scope for the First Amendment, just imagine what the Second Amendment must protect. Why, it must protect the use of artillery dropping HE on the U.S. Capital or some such thing.

They Went too Far

Posted on by

It is surprising how fast things turned around:

At work, in January 2025, the DEI thing went away as if someone had flipped a switch.

The “progressives” went too far and they are paying a huge price.

I just hope the gun rights groups do not go too far. We still have a way to go before we get to a neutral position. I think the way to determine that is if the force of government is being used against individuals. For example:

  • You must get firearms training whether you plan to own or gun or not.
  • You must purchase a gun.
  • You must carry a gun.

Even subsidies for gun ownership or training may be too far.

I can see a case being made for all of the above with the framing of a well-regulated militia. But I caution going that far until there is a super majority of gun owners in the country.

Lead Ammunition Concerns

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Pacelle posits that lead was banned from products, including paint and gasoline, because of its toxicity.

He adds, “It’s time to restrict hunters from dispersing this toxic metal across millions of acres of New York’s landscapes, poisoning wildlife and putting themselves and their families at risk from ingesting of lead-infused wild-game meat.”

But this is all a lie. What he’s not saying is that he’s talking about entirely different kinds and uses of lead. Traditional ammunition uses non-soluble lead. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) does not consider expended ammunition, even at shooting ranges, to be a problem of “dispersing toxic metal.”

Nephi Cole
March 24, 2026
Latest Anti-Lead Ammo Attack Isn’t About Ammo at All • NSSF

That is good to know. I sometimes worry about all the lead we put into the ground at Boomershoot. It is right next to cropland. We sometimes put lime in boxes behind the targets to reduce the soil acidity. This will prevent the lead from leaching into the ground and the water. But still, without expensive testing how do we know if we have done enough or we are overdoing it?

Your Membership Isn’t Just a Card

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

In September 2025, Judge Reed O’Connor declared the federal post office carry ban unconstitutional. The government failed to persuade the court that a historical tradition of such bans existed, because there wasn’t one in over 200 years. The ban didn’t even exist until 1972.

The DOJ responded by asking the court to narrow the injunction to limit protection to specific named individuals and anyone who was a SAF member at the time the lawsuit was first filed, leaving everyone who joined after that date unprotected. Their position: yes, the law is unconstitutional, but we still want to enforce it against as many people as possible.

The court rejected that argument. The injunction stands for all SAF members, present and future.

…

Your membership isn’t just a card. It’s a federal court order standing between you and an unconstitutional law.

Dana Wilson
Director of Development / Major Gifts Officer
Second Amendment Foundation
Via email March 24, 2026

I believe SAF does really good work. I became a life member many years ago and have been donating over $1,000/year for at least a decade. If you are not already a member and want to join you can do that here. It is more than just a legal pass to carry in the U.S. Post Office, it is funding the slap down of anti-gunners all over the country.

Another Data Point Against Socialists

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

We have a great place for agriculture. We have the right climate and soils, but our cost of doing business is so much higher. The problem is Olympia. They just don’t understand agriculture — how we have to compete against other states and other countries.

Vander Kooy
March 17, 2026
What’s the matter with Washington? | Capital Press

I can not tell you how many people in the last couple of months have told me they have to leave Washington State. Today someone told me he and his wife were looking for a new place to live. The currently living in Lewiston Idaho. His wife found a nice home in Clarkston, Washington just across the river from Idaho where he has his own business. He pointed out to his wife what the business tax rate in Washington and that was enough to kill the Clarkston house without going into all the gun issues.

Washington State Democrats are full blown socialists, and some even wear that badge with pride. Socialism always kills businesses, they take your guns, and sometimes then murder their citizens, too. Don’t give socialists your support or your tax dollars. Move out of socialist states.

6G Mobile Communication Systems

Posted on by

5G phones have settled into common use and now 6G is on the drawing boards. So, what will be in the 6G feature set?

Read about it here: The 6G vision: Fewer dead zones, smarter networks, and built-in ‘radar’.

This looks to a scary feature:

One of the planned new features in 6G is called Integrated Sensing and Communication, or ISAC.

“It’s the big talking point that’s getting the most attention right now. ISAC means that we will no longer see the mobile network as just a way to transport data. Instead, radio waves will be transformed into a sensor, a kind of radar. The network can ‘see’ and measure distance, speed, and movement with centimeter precision without the devices needing GPS or cameras. This opens doors for everything from traffic monitoring to fall detection in healthcare,” says Mikael Gidlund, professor at Mid Sweden University.

The idea that all mobile phone masts could be able to sense their physical surroundings and detect presence or movement may sound like science fiction — and also like a nightmare from a privacy perspective. This is something Mikael Gidlund is well aware of.

“This is one of the most important technical challenges that must be solved for the technology to gain acceptance. The goal is to design the system according to the principle of ‘privacy by design.’ ISAC works like a radar, not a camera. It works with anonymous point clouds rather than biometric data. We can see that someone has fallen and needs help, but not who it is. By allowing data processing to take place locally in the mast and building technical barriers to identification directly into the standard, we can actually increase privacy by replacing cameras in sensitive environments. Anonymization is not an option — it is a technical prerequisite for trust.

They are saying some of the right words and phrases. But if they have centimeter resolution, it probably means this tech will enable the detection of people who carry guns. If they can tell if someone has fallen, they can tell if two or a group of people are having sex.

I find it telling they enumerate some potential benefits, but then lump all the downside into “privacy.” And just because they don’t know who someone is, if they can detect a person who as fallen, then I’m almost certain they can track an individual person. And if they can be tracked, privacy just disappeared.

As a first step, what needs to be done is to enumerate all the ways this technology could be abused and apply “privacy by design” to those use cases. My intuition tells me there will not be much left in the benefits category once they have eliminated the potential for abuse.

Alternate Motive for Gun Grabbing?

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

According to Daniel Fritter of the Canadian firearm magazine Calibre, as of early 2026 the amount spent on the gun grab program is CAD$779.8 million, an amount that exceeds the original estimated cost by more than 300 percent.

Fritter refers to government sources showing that “the current known, documented cost to the taxpayer” per gun surrendered or confiscated is approximately CAD$25,000, with the “undocumented cost being even higher” because the “costs accrued by more than a dozen partner agencies” involved haven’t been included.

To place that per-gun price tag into context, Public Safety Canada has advised that it intends to pay out an average of CAD$1,800 per gun, making the gun grab’s administrative cost per firearm significantly over CAD$20,000…and likely more.

However, the few people who participated in the federal government’s initial rollout of the program for individual gun owners in November were reportedly paid far less, around CAD$700 per gun, increasing the already astonishing imbalance between the cost of administration and compensation. Nothing has been publicly released about the make, model and compensation paid for each confiscated gun collected then and whether these were truly the “weapons of war” that the Liberals used to justify the gun grab. The government “released records that were almost entirely blacked out” in response to a freedom of information request.

Canada’s gun owners have overwhelmingly rejected the gun grab: “somewhere between just 1.6 and 6 percent of newly prohibited firearms in circulation have been declared,” states Fritter. An increasing number of jurisdictions have taken the “ten-foot barge pole” approach to participation, too.

NRA ILA
March 16, 2026
Canada’s Spending More Than $20,000 in Administrative Costs Per Confiscated Gun in Its Bloated ‘Compensation’ Scheme – Shooting News Weekly

With such an incredibly high “administrative cost” per gun confiscated you have to wonder if the primary purpose is to fill the pockets of the criminal politicians.

In any case, with less than 6% of the guns being turned over you have to give Canadian gun owners some credit for the risks they are taking. I wish them luck.

Mistakes we Both Make

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

The mistake pro-2A people make is that we assume that if only we could explain how none of their proposed “solutions” would prevent crime they would stop trying to ban guns.

They fucking HATE you. They want you disarmed so that you can’t tell them “No.”

They must be defeated

Sean D Sorrentino @SorrentinoSean
Posted on X, March 16, 2026

This was in response to:

I have nothing to add.

Is Your Opinion Irrelevant?

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

If you don’t own a rifle, your opinion is mostly irrelevant.

Devon Eriksen @Devon_Eriksen_
Posted on X, August 14, 2024

There is a surprising amount of truth in this. This is particularly true in the political arena.

Think About this Another Way

Posted on by

The U.S. and Israel have decapitated Iran and probably are working on the neck and shoulders of the religious leadership. The apparent thinking is that Iran will soon run out of people volunteering to be leaders or change their evil ways.

That makes sense. At least at first thought it does. Let’s run through a little thought experiment I have had a few times with some close friends a decade or two ago.

Imagine an alternate timeline where SCOTUS came up with different result in the Heller decision and things went downhill from there. Today, in this alternate timeline, U.S. gun owners realize all they have left is the 100 million guns and a few billion rounds of ammo they had hidden before everything else was confiscated. They still have the firepower and now the motivation to remove the tyrants and restore liberty and the true meaning of the U.S. constitution.

In a coordinated attack, with the help of insiders during the state of the Union address, they take out POTUS, all his cabinet, the VP, and the Speaker of the House. They then make it known that everyone who voted for the unconstitutional (in the eyes of the gun owners) laws must be removed from office and replaced with constitutionally friendly politicians. If not, minds will continue to see the light in the most literal sense.

What would the response be? Would the remaining anti-gun politicians go into hiding or give up power? Or would they double (and/or triple) down?

I believe that the smart money, in the best-case scenario, says, “That’s an interesting question.” The more likely result is a police state and mass killings of innocent people.

What are your thoughts on what to expect in this alternate U.S. timeline and what that might tell us about what the Iran response will be?

Run Away! Run Away!

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

I was invited to do a panel at La Verne University on Bruen.

State Senator Portantino, who pushed a ton of CA gun control bills, was also set to appear. I told them I was happy to do it, but didn’t want my presence to cause their higher profile invitees to drop out and ruin their event. They were confident they wouldn’t, so I agreed.

Portantino dropped out last minute, appearing only for a few minutes on Zoom and taking no questions. Another gun control professor also dropped out. So it was just me, a pro gun prof, and a middle of the road guy.

I torched Portantino as a coward and rebutted every point he asserted.

Antigunners are, generally, cowards.

Kostas Moros @MorosKostas
Posted on X, March 6, 2026

I’m not certain I call it cowardice if you know you will get slaughtered and cause damage to your cause in the process.

There is a lot of evidence to support the claim this behavior is common. They know they cannot win on legal, principle, or practical grounds. They can only win on lies, deception, and emotional manipulation. They are evil.