Category Archives: Gun Rights

Concealed Carry Statistics

Posted on by
2

Quote of the Day

Twenty percent of likely voters hold a concealed handgun permit (20.2%), over double the rate for adults overall (8%). Constitutional Carry states have only a slightly higher permit rate than pure Right-to-Carry states (21.38% versus 19.81%). However, our research suggests this gap will narrow over time because the share of adults with permits is declining in Constitutional Carry states while rising in pure Right-to-Carry states.

Interestingly, people in Constitutional Carry states carry handguns at much higher rates than those in pure Right-to-Carry states (34.19% versus 25.98%). In Constitutional Carry states, the share of likely voters who carry exceeds the share with permits by about 13 percentage points. In the other pure Right-to-Carry states, the share who carry exceeds the share with permits by about six percentage points. So Constitutional Carry laws result in about seven percentage points more people carrying than have a permit.

johnrlott
May 21, 2026
UPDATED: New Survey on the Rate that People Carry Concealed Handguns: Percent of Americans Carrying Increased from 24.3% in December 2024 to 29.8% in May 2026 – Crime Prevention Research Center

I was surprised at the carry rate.

There is lots of other interesting information in this post. For example, did you know that:

Very liberal and very conservative likely voters carry frequently at disproportionately high rates relative to their shares of the population. Very liberal voters account for 24.6% of frequent carriers even though they make up only 12.9% of likely voters. Similarly, very conservative voters account for 23.0% of frequent carriers while making up 18.0% of likely voters.

That high a carry rate among voters has to be making a difference in the future of gun ower rights.

See also Dave Workman’s comment on the post.

Eat the Low Hanging Fruit First

Posted on by
3

Quote of the Day

Plaintiffs request the following relief from this Honorable Court:

a. Enter a declaratory judgment stating that the Nonresident Handgun Purchase Ban set forth in 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(a)(3), 922(a)(5), 922(b)(3), and 27 C.F.R. § 478.99(a), and all other related laws, regulations, policies, and procedures, violate the right to keep and bear arms secured by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution;

b. Enter a permanent injunction enjoining Defendants’ enforcement or application of the Nonresident Handgun Purchase Ban set forth in 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(a)(3), 922(a)(5), 922(b)(3), and 27 C.F.R. § 478.99(a), and all other related laws, regulations, policies, and procedures, because it violates the right to keep and bear arms secured by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution;

c. Award Plaintiffs the costs of this action and reasonable attorneys’ fees; and

d. Award Plaintiffs such other legal and equitable relief as is just and appropriate and
as necessary to effectuate the Court’s judgment.

R. Brent Cooper
Cody J. Wisniewski
David H. Thompson
Peter A. Patterson
William V. Bergstrom
January 20, 2025
ELITE PRECISION CUSTOMS LLC; TIM HERRON; FREDDIE BLISH; and FIREARMS POLICY COALITION, INC v. The BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, FIREARMS AND EXPLOSIVES

For more information on this case see also:

I am so pleased this area of 2nd Amendment law is being pursued. It seems like it should be a real slam dunk. If someone can travel to another state and buy weed, get an abortion, or go to church, then why shouldn’t buying a self-defense tool be a no-brainer, “Hell yes, of course!” That’s just from the philosophical viewpoint.

The legal viewpoint is even stronger. The ban on purchasing handguns depending on which side of a line your feet are resting on is obviously an infringement on the plain text of the 2nd Amendment. And, as pointed in this filing:

Bruen reiterated that, “when the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct.” Bruen, 597 U.S. at 17. And a court may “[o]nly” conclude that the conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s protection if the government can “justify its regulation by demonstrating that it is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.” Id. at 24.

  1. This Court already conducted the type of historical analysis that Bruen requires in Mance. The Court observed that “the earliest known state residency restrictions on the purchase or possession of firearms” occurred in 1909. 74 F. Supp. 3d at 805 (“Defendants have not presented, and the Court cannot find, any earlier evidence of longstanding interstate, geography based, or residency-based firearms restrictions.”). Given this history, the Nonresident Handgun Purchase Ban must be enjoined again.

My view is that it is low hanging fruit that should gathered first. It creates a slippery slope that will create momentum, make it easier to win difficult cases like AR and even machine gun bans, and, figuratively, result in the anti-gun movement making a high velocity splat in the history dumpster where they belong.

They are Compelled to Lie

Posted on by
6

Quote of the Day

California has been a long time leader in the movement to prevent gun violence. The passage of these two bills is just another way the state has stepped up to proactively prevent gun violence before it happens. Education, training, and informed research are essential in our fight to stop gun violence at its source and improve public safety in our communities.

Kris Brown
Brady United President
May 28, 2026
Brady Celebrates Initial Passage of Two Gun Violence… | Brady United

If gun control reduced violent crime, California and Washington D.C. would be some of the safest places in the U.S. But they are not::

They would also have a response to Just One Question, but they don’t. As is usual, these gun control freaks are lying. They are compelled to lie. It is part of their culture.

My Mental Marker for “Game Over, We Won”

Posted on by
10

Quote of the Day

Next up, two pieces of GOA-backed legislation on machineguns were introduced to the House.

First, Rep. Jimmy Patronis’ bill; the “Firearm Freedom Act” is the first-ever bill introduced in Congress that would totally repeal the Hughes Amendment.

For those unfamiliar, the Hughes Amendment is part of the 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act, added via voice vote, which made machineguns after 1986 illegal to sell to anyone other than the federal government.

Rep. Patronis’ bill rights the wrong that was perpetrated on gun owners 40 years ago.

And, Rep. Lauren Boebert introduced the “Freedom From Taxes Act,” which removes the taxes from machineguns and destructive devices, which are currently subject to $200 tax stamps under the National Firearms Act.

Rep. Boebert’s bill removes the remaining taxes on items regulated by the NFA after the passage of the “One Big Beautiful Bill” last summer, where taxes on short barreled firearms and suppressors were reduced to $0.

Erich Pratt
May 29, 2026
Machineguns Are In, RINOs Are Out! | GOA

My guess is that these are all posturing with zero chance of becoming law (or repealing law as the case may be). But still, it is fun to think about.

While I’m not a fan of machine guns*, I really want the restrictions on them removed. When machine guns are available without paperwork, cash and carry, family pack of four at Costco, is sort of my mental marker for “game over, we won.”

* Sure, if someone is paying for the ammo, there are ways to have fun with one. I just don’t see an occasion where I would have a real use for one. Sure, they would be useful in defending against fire breathing dragons. So, if there is some serious intel Daenerys Targaryen is on the prowl in my area of operations I will reconsider.

Do You Really Want to go There?

Posted on by
5

Quote of the Day

I think one of the things we really do need to take seriously is if these constitutional officers are not willing to enforce the law, what type of legislation can we introduce to hold them accountable for not doing their job

Del. Joshua Cole (D-Fredericksburg),
May 27, 2026
Virginia prosecutors refuse to enforce new assault weapons ban

There is also this:

I know these Republican prosecutors see this as an opportunity for tough guy posturing and amateur constitutional lawyering, but ending the sale of assault weapons in Virginia isn’t something an individual prosecutor can do anything about.

Local prosecutors don’t enforce, they prosecute – and my message to anyone thinking about breaking Virginia law is, don’t bet on Virginia law enforcement ignoring it.

Senator Saddam Azlan Salim @SalimForVA
Posted on X May 29, 2026

“Amateur constitutional lawyering”? Mark Smith, member of the United States Supreme Court bar, explains why prosecutors refusing to enforce these unconstitutional laws is entirely legal.

I would also like to remind Mr. Cole that if he wants to play that game there are already laws the DOJ could start enforcing.

I hope he gets a chance to enjoy his trial.

They Never Gave Up Their Dream

Posted on by
5

Quote of the Day

The antigunners never gave up on their dream to ban handguns, they just realized that dream was deeply unpopular and decided to focus on “assault weapons” and ancillary restrictions like fees, wait times, etc.

The Glock Switch moral panic gave Everytown and the other groups cover to demand that their allies in California and other blue states sue Glock. Now, they are getting them to ban Glock.

By banning Glock and its clones, they ban the most popular handgun platform in the country. And they won’t stop there; they will find some pretext to declare other popular handgun models “too dangerous” and ban those too. Death by a thousand cuts.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has done nothing so far to stop about a dozen states from banning the most popular rifles in the country. Bruen is working out great….if you are in a pro-gun circuit. Antigun circuits like the Ninth, Second, First, etc. are treating it like a joke and have effectively re-imposed interest balancing, and are upholding pretty much all draconian gun control.

So of course antigun states are emboldened to put their toes into the handgun ban waters once again.

If the Court has any self-respect, if John Roberts cares about the legitimacy of his institution at all, they must take on a hardware case soon and make clear that bans on common firearms are unconstitutional.

And then, they must follow that up with frequent summary reversals of the inevitable antigun circuit court defiance of that ruling.

Kostas Moros @MorosKostas
Posted on X May 29, 2026

It is long past time to give the anti-gunners and the disobedient lower courts never-ending nightmares. I’d like to see it in the form of prosecutions, convictions, heavy fines, and long sentences. But that may be beyond our reach for a while. I would settle for the humiliation of being repeatedly slapped down by SCOTUS and my dream of high school machine gun sporting events.

Who are the Extremists?

Posted on by
16

Quote of the Day

I believe that being shot should be requirement for gun ownership in America. It’s very simple. You need to have gun, like taking selfies with pistols, can’t live with out it? Then take a bullet and you will be granted the right to purchase the firearm of your choice.

…

So if you love guns, if they make you feel safe, if you hold and cuddle with them at night, then you need to be shot. You need to feel a bullet rip through your flesh, and if you survive and enjoy the feeling­­––then the right to bear arms will be all yours.

D. Watkins
October 16, 2015
Want a gun? Take a bullet: Take this, gutless NRA cowards – you can have a gun, once you understand the pain of being shot – Salon.com

This is what they think of “rights.” It is something “granted” if you not only survive being shot, but if you enjoy being shot.

This is what they think of you. That you cuddle with your guns at night.

And they think we are extremists.

See also:

These people are sick.

Prepare appropriately.

It is All About Power

Posted on by
4

Quote of the Day

Never forget that the assholes who spent decades labeling all of us nazis and cancelling us for the dumbest bullshit reasons imaginable are hypocritically running this asshole who got a literal fucking SS Totenkopf tattoo on his chest for the senate.

And here is TIME magazine hypocritically making excuses for it. No matter how slimy you think liberals are, they are worse. Their moral compass is a wind sock.

If you’re other-than-democrat, they’ll destroy your life for waving wrong, smiling awkwardly at a minority, or making the okay sign. Everything we do gets called “white supremacy” even when we’re black or brown, and then they’ll clutch thier pearls and hold a fucking witch trial to burn us at the stake for crimes that only exist in their fevered retard imagination. If anyone on the right is gullible enough to apologize to these trash, that’s just throwing blood in the water, and then they’ll attack you even more.

Then these same fucking Caring White Liberals will run this posturing scumbag for office, and the second it comes out he got a shitty nazi tat on his chest they’ll cry about how it was an innocent mistake from a poor dumb Marine who didn’t know any better (lol).

Pete Hegseth has a cross on his chest and it’s the end of the fucking world, liberal freak out about racist dog whistle, and we’ve got to see a milliong tweets and ten thousand news articles and a hundred thousand hours of news coverage, and it’s even the same exact cross Jimmy Carter had at his funeral and then suddenly it’s okay and not racist.

You put Heinrich Himmler’s hat decoration over your heart as a democrat and all you have to do is go “hur dur I didn’t know no better (wink wink)” and they’ll run you for office. Elon waves funny and democats spend the next few months attacking random people’s Teslas and burning car dealerships.

They truly don’t give a shit about anything. They have no values whatsoever. Every decision is a simple stimulus/response on whether it gets them more power. That’s it. No matter how much the dumb Rs on my side may annoy me, I fucking despise democrats.

Larry Correia @monsterhunter45
Posted on X May 21, 2026

The only minor fault with Correia’s awesome* analysis is that it isn’t just about acquiring power. They get a thrill out of exercising their power. When they let their guard down, some of them freely admit it:

it is a thrill; it’s a high… I love it; I absolutely love it.

I am inclined to believe this is a sign of a mental disorder. It is also a sign that you should never give up your guns.

That thrill, that high, will not be satiated by anything. As demonstrated in the USSR, Cambodia, and numerous other times and places. When allowed access to enough government power, tens of millions will be executed. These people will only be stopped by direct physical action.

Prepare appropriately.

* Please also note that Correia’s books are awesome. I highly recommend them.

Another Demonstration of Disregard for the U.S. Constitutional

Posted on by
2

Quote of the Day

Michiganders want common-sense safeguards that protect families and support law enforcement, not reckless policies that create new loopholes for illegal guns. The last thing we should be doing is making it easier for handguns to move through the mail.

Haley Stevens
Michigan U.S. Representative
May 22, 2026
House Democrat introduces bill to block Postal Service from mailing handguns

This was in response to an opinion issued by the DOJ:

A nearly 100-year-old federal ban on mailing handguns through the U.S. Postal Service is unconstitutional and cannot be enforced, according to an opinion released Thursday by the Department of Justice (DOJ).

The 15-page opinion concluded that a 1927 law, which made it illegal to use the Postal Service to mail concealable firearms, such as pistols and revolvers, infringes on the Second Amendment.

I asked for Copilot for clarification on what this bill actually does. The short version is that it is a procedural block of implementing the proposed rule to stop enforcement of the 1927 law. I don’t think it has much chance of passing, but it is still frustrating. The only silver lining is that it is another demonstration these anti-gun politicians have zero regard for the U.S. constitution.

Lessons Learned the Hard Way

Posted on by
44

Quote of the Day

A while ago, I watched the infamous 47-minute video documenting the atrocities of October 7th — the one not made publicly available, to protect the privacy of the victims.

The worst part of this video is not what it displays, but who is displaying it: the perpetrators themselves. Gleefully. Sadistically. Unabashedly. Most of the footage was filmed by Hamas terrorists on their GoPro bodycams, some also by ordinary Gazan civilians on their cellphones.

Even the Nazis tried to cover up their atrocities, but Hamas brags about theirs for the entire world to see. The killers are euphoric throughout the massacre, and their relentless, ecstatic cries of “Allahu Akbar” (punctuated by the occasional “Kill the Jew!”) are simply nauseating.

Some images are seared into my memory forever. I will never forget the two boys in their underwear — one with his eye socket hanging out of his face — asking his brother whether he thinks they’re going to die, while the Hamas monster who had just thrown a grenade in their saferoom helps himself to a drink from their fridge, taking a casual break from the slaughter.

…

It was premeditated and organized. The terrorists crossing into Israel carried printed Arabic-to-Hebrew phrasebooks with handy expressions like “take off your pants,” “lie down,” “spread your legs,” and “don’t make trouble.” I wonder why they expected to need those particular phrases?

I know one thing: no civilized country on earth would tolerate the existence of an organization like Hamas on its border after October 7th. Not one. This includes every self-righteous Westerner currently lecturing Israel from thousands of kilometres away, without an inch of skin in the game.

Maarten Boudry @mboudry
Posted on X May 12, 2026

See also: October 7 barbarism beyond all imagination: New report details how terrorists performed almost unimaginable horrors – which some on the Left STILL cast doubt on | Daily Mail Online

Hamas achieved glory and celebrated for a day. The magnitude of their error will be in history books for centuries.

They learned their lesson the hard way.

But it wasn’t just Hamas that should learn a lesson from October 7th. Learn from the mistakes of others. Everyone should have learned that disarmed civilians are vulnerable to such attacks. Never give up your guns. Keep saying, “NO!“ until you run out of ammo.

Guilty Until they Prove Themselves Innocent

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

The police can approach you and demand you ‘show your papers’ to prove you’re allowed to exercise this right, otherwise, you are committing a crime.

Some people may have an urgent need to obtain a firearm for self-defense in their home because of a threat they face, yet they absolutely cannot do that. They have to file the application, go through the process, and wait as long as the state wants to take.

At every step of the way, the burden of proof is on the citizen to be allowed to exercise their rights. You go through the first round, and if they deny you, you can do an internal appeal within the Illinois State Police, which has a review board. If you lose at all those stages, you can go to court, but even then, the burden of proof remains on you to show that you’re entitled to exercise your Second Amendment rights.

In our view, that is the exact opposite of how constitutional rights are supposed to work. A right means that you are presumed allowed to do something unless the government has a sufficiently good reason to stop you. Normally, if the government wants to disarm a particular person, they have to go to court, get a restraining order, and present evidence showing why that person shouldn’t be allowed to have a gun. But in Illinois, everybody is treated as guilty until they prove themselves innocent.

Jacob Huebert
NCLA Senior Litigation Counsel
May 19, 2026
Civil liberty advocates sue blue state over ‘show your papers’ gun law

I am inclined to believe there would be a far fewer infringement of civil rights if the constitution allowed for government officials to be presumed guilty until they prove themselves innocent.

Just a thought…

Sic Semper Tyrannis

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

After careful review of the legislation and existing Supreme Court precedent, I find the assault weapon ban signed by the Governor on May 15, 2026 unconstitutional – and as a result, unenforceable. The United States Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the Second Amendment protects firearms commonly owned by law abiding citizens.

As Commonwealth’s Attorney, I took an oath to uphold both the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of Virginia. That oath requires more than mechanical enforcement of statutes. I must exercise prosecutorial discretion, constitutional judgment, and fidelity to the rule of law. As such, my office will not support criminal charges resulting solely from technical violations of the unconstitutional assault weapon ban.

Phillip Blevins Jr.
Smyth County Commonwealth’s Attorney, Virginia
May 17, 2026
Smyth Co. Commonwealth’s Attorney says ‘assault weapons ban’ is ‘unconstitutional’ | WJHL | Tri-Cities News & Weather

See also:

It may be noteworthy that in 2019 and 2020 many of the counties and cities in Virginia declared themselves 2nd Amendment sanctuaries. For example:

It is good to know a notable number of Virginia politicians are faithful to their state motto:

Sic semper tyrannis.

Which translates from Latin to “Thus always to tyrants.”

Brady United Working with Hollywood

Posted on by

This was news to me:

Brady United – Full Story Initiative

What we do

Studies show that audiences adopt behaviors and attitudes of their favorite on-screen characters. That’s why our Show Gun Safety campaign empowers Hollywood to model gun safety on screen.

Global social reach 700k

1000+

writers, actors, producers, and studio executives trained on how they can responsibly portray guns on screen

150M

viewers have watched films and TV shows with firearms portrayals we helped shape and influence

That explains some things.

Perhaps it is time for the NRA and/or other gun owner rights groups to work with “writers, actors, producers, and studio executives.”

A Good Start

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

See you in court!

AAGHarmeetDhillon @AAGDhillon
Posted on X May 14, 2026

AAGHarmeetDhillon is the assistant attorney general in the civil rights division of the U.S. Department of Justice.

This is regarding the new Virginia governor signing an “assault weapons” ban into law.

While this is certainly a magnificent improvement over any previous administration, I would prefer it be a criminal court rather than a civil court. But I am not a lawyer so it may very well be that the current path is the best possible one for legal and/or practical reasons. Hence, I pronounce it a good start and will cheer them on.

Here is more on the lawsuit:

Also listen to this about the D.C. lawsuit:

It’s Not About the Rock

Posted on by

Via Douglas @doug86027:

Never mind the weapon Cain used is not definitively described in the Bible. The meme correctly captures the principle.

They are Now All Playing Defense on their Home Turf

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Virginia has recently been featured in a lot of headlines about gun control, for all the wrong reasons. A number of them have mentioned a federal gun control bill pending in the U.S. Senate, sponsored by Tim Kaine (D) and Mark Warner (D) of Virginia. Dubbed “The Virginia Plan to Reduce Gun Violence Act of 2026,” it tries to portray Virginia as a gun control leader whose policies could serve as a model for the rest of the nation. But, like most firearm prohibition branding, this framing is not only untrue, it is the opposite the truth. Virginia, in reality, is the victim of a national gun control agenda, not the progenitor of one.

The latest slate of gun controls laws unleashed on Virginia by its Democrat-controlled legislature and governor are not some thoughtful or tailored set of policies that organically arose from Virginia’s unique public safety picture or the particular dynamics of its crime. Instead, it is grab bag of generic policies pushed by national gun control groups, approved by their billionaire donors, and modeled on a globalist paradigm arising in nations that have no constitutional rights to arms. Virginia is simply an opportunist expansion market for these concepts, not their origin point.

…

This Virginia Plan is the California Plan, which is the Everytown Plan, which is the Bloomberg Plan, which is the Australia Plan. It has nothing to do with the citizens of Virginia or with the Old Dominion’s culture and values. What an ignominious fall from grace for a state that produced some of the most important and influential of America’s Founding Fathers. In evaluating this fall, it is important to recognize that the core elements are being driven, not by ordinary Virginians, but by globally orientated billionaires, national public interest groups, and a Democratic National Committee that would love to see Richmond morph into the San Francisco of the East Coast.

Beware the rhetorical shift and media narrative to flip the script and make an established national policy package appear more locally grounded and politically palatable, even though its underlying structure has remained unchanged for years.

Further beware that your state may be next. If it can happen in the cradle of American Constitutionalism and the home of NRA’s Headquarters, no gun owning American should believe it could never come home to him or her.

NRA-ILA
April 28, 2026
NRA-ILA | Federal Bill Passes Off National Firearm Prohibition Agenda As “Virginia Model”

Lies and deception. It is an essential part of their culture.

I had overlooked the fact NRA headquarters is in Virginia as I watched those gun control bills breeze through the legislature. I believe that was the last of the major Gun Rights organizations to have their headquarters in a free state:

Did I miss any?

It must really suck to be such a strong advocate for gun owner rights that you work for such an organization and then suffer the daily infringement of your rights. The politicians inflicting this on innocent people should go to prison.

The only good things I can see about this is that it should motivate the people who work for these organizations and make it somewhat easier to find plaintiffs and file lawsuits.

Don’t Get Cocky

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

I don’t think people understand just how much of an existential crisis Democrats are in. If they don’t gain control of the House, Senate, Presidency, pack the Supreme Court, re-mandate racial gerrymandering, and give illegals mass amnesty by 2032, they will all but die as a nationally competitive political party.

With the VRA being overturned we will net at least 15 seats and the census will give us like a dozen more, as well as forcing democrats to redraw their seats being bolstered by illegals, making them more republican. This will make the house all but impossible to win for Dems.

Then the senate will become increasingly hard for them to win as states like Nevada keep shifting red and republicans slowly keep picking better candidates.

And the nail in the coffin? The census will make it all but impossible for dems to win the presidency unless they win the popular vote by at least 6 points.

We’re witnessing the last gasps of the satanic ideology known as leftism. We will win.

Modern McCarthyist @SensibleFascist
Posted on X May 8, 2026

I think the trend is generally good for most civil and economic liberties. But I am very skeptical of the stated scope. This is especially true if a lot of people actually believe this. Overconfidence can get you killed.

Orwellian

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

The lawsuit continues recurring conflicts between local authority and Trump administration advocacy for gun rights that has played out in other cities and states.

A similar Justice Department lawsuit is pending against the District of Columbia over its restrictions on certain kinds of automatic firearms. The restrictions require registering many AR-15 and AK-47 style guns.

The District of Columbia has been joined by civil rights groups such as the Brady: United Against Gun Violence and the Giffords Law Center in asking a federal court to dismiss the lawsuit.

Tom Ramstack
May 6, 2026
Justice Dept. Sues Denver and Colorado to Block Restrictions on Gun Ownership | The Well News | Pragmatic, Governance, Fiscally Responsible, News & Analysis

Emphasis added.

“Civil rights groups“??? I am amazed at their willingness to adapt such an Orwellian mindset. I didn’t expect that until much later in their march to totalitarian socialism. My presumption is their delusions have expanded even further outside of reality.

At least they are making it exceeding clear that the book Nineteen Eighty-Four is an example of their utopia instead of a dystopian novel.

Prepare and respond appropriately.

Egg-Headed Goons Tripping Back in Time

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Times are good and possibly getting even better for those who value guns, gun rights and the Second Amendment.

The changes brought by President Donald Trump are simply stunning. In just one year we went from an ATF that targeted individual gun owners for imaginary crimes to one that’s focused on arresting real bad guys with illegal guns.

Constitutional Carry, known by the other side as permitless carry, is growing. Today, 29 states allow law-abiding adults to carry firearms without a state permit, and the number is expected to grow.

So, it’s understandable that those who want to restrict and subvert the Second Amendment are getting desperate. In fact, they’re willing to try almost anything to restrict access to firearms while President Trump is in office. It’s as if they never even heard of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.

Enter the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions.

These egg-headed goons want to roll back the clock to the late 1980s. Their just-released “Public Carry Permitting: Model Policy Guide” is pretty much what some states offered decades ago. It’s laughable—a trip back in time. Nowadays, it’s likely too restrictive for even the bluest of blue states.

Of course, the Center begins their report with lies—absolute deception—about guns, gun owners and gun rights.

Lee Williams
May 5, 2026
Fearing Expanding Gun Rights, Anti-Gun Group Creates Absurd Concealed-Carry Policy – TheGunMag

The media is not supporting the anti-gun groups like they have in the past. Hence, we see John Hopkins, Everytown, etc. as doing their usual thing and it appears to out of touch when they don’t have major media support.

Even the DOJ lawsuits against existing law do not yield a “Blood in the streets!” response. CNN is essentially just reporting the facts”. The same tone is seen with the New York Times and Washington Post articles on the same lawsuits. I would expect them to frame it as the fascist Hitler forcing freedom on innocent people or some such nonsense.

I don’t know what to make of this. Grok has this to say:

The constitutional framing of the Second Amendment as protecting an individual civil right is now unavoidable in serious legal reporting—Heller/Bruen made it binding precedent, and the current DOJ is enforcing it. This doesn’t mean these outlets have become pro-gun or neutral overall; their opinion sections and long-term editorial stance still favor stricter controls, and they highlight gun-control group perspectives in other contexts (e.g., mass shootings or state wins). But in straight-news coverage of these DOJ suits, the tone is more balanced and less advocacy-heavy than it was 15–20 years ago. Your pro-gun-rights feeds make the contrast sharper because they celebrate every development as a win while noting the relative downplaying in MSM.

If you’re seeing mostly silence or isolation of the old advocacy groups, it’s because the national legal story has moved on to court battles where the rights framework now has the upper hand federally. The groups are still fighting hard—just more at the state level and in response mode right now.

I would like to think they are becoming more accepting of gun ownership as a civil right. But they may just be grumbling to themselves about how times have changed or biding their time for a more favorable atmosphere to spread their lies.

For Entertainment Purposes Only

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

In March of 2026, Everytown, the activist organization created with the help of considerable funds by Multi – billionaire Michael Bloomberg, place a website online called EveryShot. EveryShot is an artificial intelligence tool using ChatGPT-40 mini to search for and list, according to Everytown, a collection of incidents in the 50 U.S. states where there was a shooting involving a firearm or gun or if a gun or firearm was brandished. Specifically excluded a BB guns, pellet guns, toy guns or events which are fictional. A filter is used to exclude duplicates. The tool often shows multiple sources for a single event. The tool can flag events when there is uncertainty or discrepancies the flag brings the attention of a human for review. The tool updates the database twice a week.

In the Terms of Use, Everytown states the results can be “incomplete, inaccurate, offensive, or otherwise unpredictable”. In this correspondent’s use of the tool, such a description is correct.

Dean Weingarten
May 4, 2026
GUN WATCH: Everytown’s Everyshot AI tool: Use Extreme Caution. Many Limitations and Inaccuracies

From reading the test results of Weingarten it appears he is being extremely generous to Everytown’s creation. I cannot imagine something this broken used for anything other than entertainment purposes.

You have to wonder what they expect this to be useful for. As everyone should know, you do not judge constitutional rights on the basis of how a right can be misused. The right to remain silent when questioned does not get judged on how frequently criminals avoid successful prosecution. The right of free speech does not get judged on often people say untrue things on the Internet. And the right to keep and bear arms should not be judged on how many times a firearm is used to further a crime.

But that is not how the anti-gun people work. Hence, I suspect they are still trying to influence people to do a means-end scrutiny. But in Bruen SCOTUS explicitly said constitutional rights are not subject to judicial cost‑benefit analysis. The anti-gun people are trying to fight with a weapon that was made obsolete four years ago. They are using clubs while facing an opponent using bows and arrows. I further suspect people are trying to retain their paycheck from Bloomberg and are desperate to show their worth. AI is all the rage, and this is what they came up with.

They should get a real job that produces a product more than a handful of people want to spend money on.

If you are interested, see the tool (pun intended) here: EveryShot | Everytown Research & Policy.