Category Archives: Gun Rights

Quirky Gun Laws

Posted on by

Via Copilot:

🔍 Quirky Gun Laws Across the U.S.

  • BB Guns Treated Like Real Firearms (New Jersey) In New Jersey, BB guns are regulated as strictly as actual firearms. You need a Firearms ID card to own one, a permit to carry it, and another permit to transport it in your car. Some models are even banned outright.
  • Microstamping Mandates (California & New York) These states require new handguns to imprint microscopic identifiers on spent casings. Sounds futuristic, but criminals can easily game the system by planting spent brass from other guns at crime scenes.
  • Hollow Point Bullet Restrictions (New Jersey) Hollow points are banned except in very specific circumstances—like at home or on the way to a shooting range. Even possessing one loose round outside those conditions can land you in legal trouble.
  • Shooting Range Bans (Chicago & Blairstown, NJ) Some cities have banned commercial shooting ranges, making it difficult for residents to practice firearm safety and proficiency—especially in urban areas with no private land.
  • Ammunition Licensing (Washington D.C.) You can’t possess ammo unless you’re licensed for a firearm of that specific caliber. One man was convicted for having muzzleloader bullets in his home after a SWAT raid.
  • Tube-Fed .22s as “Assault Weapons” (New Jersey) Certain older .22 rifles like the Marlin Model 60 are considered assault weapons if they hold more than 15 rounds. Unless registered before 1991, they’re illegal to possess—even though they’re common plinking rifles.

These laws often reflect attempts to address public safety concerns, but they sometimes veer into the realm of the absurd.

I was doing some research for tomorrow’s QOTD and part of one of Copilot’s responses was:

It’s always a pleasure digging through the details with you—sharp eyes like yours keep things honest. Let me know if you want to dig into other historical quirks or gun law oddities. There’s no shortage of them!

I responded with, “Sure, share a few quirks and oddities with me!” And the above was its response.

There is very little I didn’t already know, but having it put succinctly and formatted nicely in just a few seconds made it much more accessible.

I like living in the future.

Oh, the Thought!

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Leave it to gun control groups to suggest that half of the law-abiding population of the United States shouldn’t be considered for gun ownership. And it’s the half of the population that owning a firearm for self-defense benefits the most in time of need.

Sure, in the past, women were not the segment of the population that immediately popped in to mind as being firearm owners. But now in 2025, shouldn’t that be different? Women already have the same rights as men – including the right to keep and bear arms. Firearms are a part of the American culture, enjoyed by everyone of any color, race and nationality. And over the past five years, industry data has shown women are the fastest-growing demographic of gun buyer. It makes sense that firearm industry businesses would pay attention to their customers and cater to their needs.

But that’s not how many gun control activists and gun control groups see it and they are now aghast that lawful firearm manufacturers would cater their advertising and marketing efforts to appeal to women.

Oh, the thought!

Paige Pearson
July 22, 2025
Gun Control Groups Can’t Stomach Women Gun Owners • NSSF

If even half as many women as men start voting pro-gun, the anti-gun people will be seriously in trouble in upcoming elections. Violent crime against women will decrease. Fewer women will regard victimhood as a virtue.

Oh, the thought, indeed!

Half-Truths, Straw Man Arguments, and Lies, No Data

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Some people feel more secure just knowing a gun is within reach. But having a weapon nearby doesn’t guarantee protection – in fact, it often increases the chances of injury or death. Research shows that homes with guns have higher rates of accidental shootings and suicides. Even trained gun owners can make split-second mistakes in high-stress situations.

Brody McCormick
July 2025
17 Gun Myths People Still Believe – Even Though They’re Completely Wrong

Do you know anyone who claims, “having a weapon nearby guarantees protection?” The “17 Gun Myths” are filled with crap like this. It is anti-gun ownership clickbait.

I find simple minded half-truths, straw man arguments, and lies to be extremely irritating. I don’t think they are this stupid. I think they are deliberately crafting a narrative to influence people into accepting their lies.

Public Policy Major Does Not Understand Specific Enumerated Rights

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

In 2019, a gunman shot and killed 12 people in a Virginia Beach municipal building. His semiautomatic weapon was fitted with a silencer, making the gunshots sound, to one survivor, “like a nail gun.”

If the shots had been louder — if the people inside had been given even 30 more seconds of warning — lives could have perhaps been saved. But muffled sounds from the silencer created confusion and, ultimately, death. 

Silencers are dangerous. Now, they’re more accessible than ever. 

Sally Young
Senior at Dartmouth College studying English and Public Policy
July 26, 2025
Opinion: Silence kills: Now is the time to speak up against deadly gun silencers

It is very telling that Ms. Young can only cite one instance of a suppressor being used in a crime. Even though there are millions of them in the possession of U.S. citizens suppressors are almost never used it a crime. Even more telling is that even though she is studying “public policy” it apparently does not occur to her that specific enumerated rights are not evaluated on the basis of how they are abused. They are protected and the people who abuse them are punished.

After reading a little bit about what a “public policy” major is, I see the problem. Public policy majors are taught to see the world through the lens of what government can do to improve society. I cannot say for certain, but it looks to me like a “public policy” of limited government powers is not in their playbook. The solution to all problems is always more government control. In other words, socialism and tyranny.

No, thank you. Ms. Young, you may not have my guns or suppressors. Your move Ms. Young. Please choose wisely.

California Background Check for Ammo Sales is Unconstitutional

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

A federal appeals court this week struck down California’s landmark law requiring background checks and in-person transactions for ammunition purchases, the latest in a string of judicial wins that have gun rights advocates celebrating.

… the opinion by a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals follows closely on a separate panel’s ruling against a California law aimed at regulating the marketing of firearms to minors earlier this month, and on a federal court ruling Wednesday allowing gun rights advocates to continue a lawsuit against concealed carry rules in Los Angeles County.

“We’re on a roll,” said Southern California attorney and gun rights advocate Chuck Michel, who was involved in all three cases.

In its 2-1 ruling against the ammunition background checks, the appellate panel said Thursday that by limiting purchases, California’s law effectively limited the rights of gun owners to have functioning firearms.

Sharon Bernstein
July 25, 2025
California cannot require background checks to buy ammunition, US appeals court rules

From the same article, “The state has two weeks to request a review by the full Court of Appeals.”

This ruling also rids Californians of the ban on buying ammo out of state, either in person or mail order.

Read more here:

A Great Day for Freedom

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Today is a great day for freedom and the American people. The dismissal of this appeal should be the final nail in the coffin of this unconstitutional Biden ATF assault on gun owners. As we explained in the case filings, braced pistols are not ‘short-barreled rifles’. But either way, they are unquestionably arms protected under the Second Amendment. We are thrilled to have secured this important win for liberty and excited to take on even more unconstitutional laws so you can exercise your rights when, where, and how you choose.

Brandon Combs
Firearms Policy Coalition President
July 17, 2025
FPC WIN: Order Vacating Biden “Pistol Brace” Rule Stands, Government Dismisses Appeal – Firearms Policy Coalition

See also: DOJ Delivers Final Blow to Biden-Era Gun Regulation.

A year ago, I could not have imagined seeing this sort of thing happen. I sometimes think I must be dreaming about how well things are going in the fight for the rights of gun owners. We lived the nightmare for so many decades it is nice to have things turn our way.

The really big thorns in our paws are now:

  • Restrictions on semi-automatic rifles.
  • Restrictions on standard capacity magazines.
  • Permitting of all types.
  • Waiting periods.

I think these are all relatively easy wins if we can just get them before SCOTUS.

Another Brick in the Wall

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

For too long, countless Americans with criminal histories have been permanently disenfranchised from exercising the right to keep and bear arms—a right every bit as constitutionally enshrined as the right to vote, the right to free speech, and the right to free exercise of religion—irrespective of whether they actually pose a threat. No longer.

Pam Bondi
U.S. Attorney General
July 18, 2025
Office of Public Affairs | Justice Department Publishes Proposed Rule to Grant Relief to Certain Individuals Precluded from Possessing Firearms | United States Department of Justice

See also Trump admin proposes major change to gun laws.

This has been a sore point for a lot of people. Technically, there was a process for doing this (18 U.S.C. 925(c)) but congress defunded it in the 1990s. It was challenged in court, and we lost.

The worst story I have heard about this is an elderly black guy who had a felony conviction from many decades ago for having a deck of cards with semi-nude pictures of white women on them. No other brushes with the law, and he was denied the right of effective self-defense.

There are probably thousands of other stories with non-violent convictions of people who led a good and productive life for decades and were never able to own or handle a gun.

It is a bit ironic, and I’m not going to say who it is, but there is a very well-known gun rights professional who had a felony conviction for income tax evasion. They were able to get their gun rights restored before the process was defunded. Very few people were as fortunate as this person was.

It is just another small brick in the wall, but this probable change is very pleasing to me.

Wanted: Sympathetic Plaintiffs

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Unsympathetic defendants make for bad precedents. This is what happened in the Rahimi case, where the Supreme Court opened the door a crack, allowing judges to believe they can create more exceptions to Second Amendment rights.  Rahimi is cited as the reason for the upholding of the Gun Free School Zone Act in the Fifth Circuit.

Dean Weingarten
July 17, 2025
GUN WATCH: Fifth Circuit Holds Gun Free School Zone law to be Constitutional

This is why we have to be as aggressive as we can in the courts. We need to flood the courts with sympathetic plaintiffs in infringing areas that are relatively obvious wins. Please consider donating to the gun rights organization who are active in the courts.

I donate money to FPC and SAF.

Aggressive Court Action

Posted on by

A challenge to using the prohibition against using the U.S. Mail to ship handguns:

Excellent!

It is What They Do

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

I’m not anti-gun at all. I’m just for some gun safe common sense. I’m challenged by large-capacity clips in urban centers, weapons of war sometimes outgunning the police. But otherwise, man, people have the right to bear arms. I got no ideological opposition to that at all.

Gavin Newsom
Governor of California
July 11, 2025

Actions speak louder than words. What about his attempt to change the constitution and neuter the Second Amendment:

The 28th Amendment will permanently enshrine four broadly supported gun safety principles into the U.S. Constitution:

  • Raising the federal minimum age to purchase a firearm from 18 to 21;
  • Mandating universal background checks to prevent truly dangerous people from purchasing a gun that could be used in a crime;
  • Instituting a reasonable waiting period for all gun purchases; and
  • Barring civilian purchase of assault weapons that serve no other purpose than to kill as many people as possible in a short amount of time – weapons of war our nation’s founders never foresaw.

Additionally, the 28th Amendment will affirm Congress, states, and local governments can enact additional common-sense gun safety regulations that save lives.

Emphasis added.

Or the multitude of oppressive gun laws he has signed into law?

He lies with ease and a smile. He has had lots of practice. It is what anti-gun people do.

See also Newsom has ‘no ideological opposition’ to 2A rights? Let’s test that | Buckeye Firearms Association.

Seize the Means of Production

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Zohran Mamdani’s run for mayor of New York City is a clear and present danger to the stability, economic health, and democratic foundation of both the city and the nation.

His platform is rooted in a radical socialist ideology that has, time and time again, led to failure, repression, and suffering wherever it has been tried.

And thanks to a clip surfacing on social media today, we see that Mamdani is not hiding this. In fact, he has been strikingly open about what he believes and what he plans to do. You can listen to his comments for yourself here.

Speaking in 2021 at the Young Democratic Socialists of America Organizing Conference, Mamdani said his goal is to “continue to elect more socialists” and to be “unapologetic about our socialism.”

He followed that with two key objectives: boycotting Israel and “seizing the means of production.”

The phrase “seizing the means of production” is not some vague slogan—it is the core tenet of Marxist revolutionary ideology. It means that private property, businesses, and industries are taken from their owners and turned over to collective or state control.

Quoth the Raven
June 30, 2025
“Seize The Means Of Production”: Mamdani Lays Bare His Agenda

This is consistent with yesterday’s QOTD.

Watch and listen to the video:

You can vote your way into socialism. You have to shoot your way out.

Prepare appropriately.

Prevent Future Oppression

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

In addition, the bill contains funding for a “buyback program”—which, of course, is a euphemism for the government using the American people’s money to disarm them. To anyone paying attention, this ought not to be a surprise, for, despite its fluffy name and aw-shucks marketing campaign, the GOSAFE Act represents just another attempt at the mass-disarmament of the American people—and an exceedingly brazen one at that.

That these anti-gun members of Congress likely don’t have the votes to get this done now is heartening, but it is also a warning, as they are telling us precisely what they’d like to do if they regain power.

Charles C. W. Cooke
July 2, 2025
Anti-Gunners Want to Change the Past to Take Away Today’s Freedom

I have no doubt that if they get the votes and control of the Presidency they will pass and sign the bill into law. Constitutional issue protests will be ignored. It would only be via the courts we could get legal relief. And that could take years.

The only way I see this cycle being broken is to create a strong disincentive for these obvious rights violations. The best way I see to accomplish this is to start prosecutions of the politicians presently violating our rights. To let bygones be bygones now is to invite oppression in the future.

Final Judgement on Non-resident California Carry Permits

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

This important judgment means that people must maintain their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms when they cross California’s border. Just as people are free to speak or worship in states they don’t reside in, this win makes clear they are likewise free to bear arms for lawful purposes throughout the United States. Unlike Louisiana, which recently repealed their unconstitutional residency requirement following an FPC legal challenge, California’s commitment to tyranny forced us to take this case to a final judgment. FPC will continue to eliminate unconstitutional residency requirements and other bans so that people can exercise their rights when, where, and how they choose.

Brandon Combs
President Firearms Policy Coalition
July 1, 2025
FPC WIN: Federal Judge Rules California’s Non-Resident Carry Ban Unconstitutional in Summary Judgment Order – Firearms Policy Coalition

See also Obama-Appointed Judge Delivers Second Amendment Win.

At the end of April, I posted about the preliminary injunction in the case. This is the final judgement. Of course, the state may appeal it. Historically, the odds of the 9th circuit siding with the 2nd Amendment are almost exactly zero.

California has 14 days to file a notice of appeal in the case. Today is the 14th day. Check here to see what they decide.

More Thoughts on ATF/DEA Merger

Posted on by

I posted about this a few days ago. And I have had some more time to think about it and read what other people have said.

I am still undecided, but I am leaning towards abolishing them one at a time rather than combining them then trying to abolish the conglomerate. The reason being that while there are votes to be had from across the aisle for the abolishment of the DEA, I think there are more votes to be lost by people strongly opposed to legalized recreational drugs. Abolish what we can, when we can, then look for an opportunity to get rid of other agencies when the time is right.

ATF/DEA merger: a good idea? – American Thinker

Gun Owners of America is alarmed, warning such a merger would enable even greater anti-liberty/gun mischief, such as: 

*The combined agency would have three times the ATF budget
*Four times current ATF tactical (SWAT-like) units
*More than 10,000 new employees
*Reduced oversight and accountability

The Firearms Policy Coalition is equally unimpressed:  

The DOJ’s dangerous proposal would consolidate the ATF and DEA into an authoritarian “super-agency” with the combined powers to wage the failed war on drugs and enforce unconstitutional federal gun control laws against all Americans, not just violent criminals and drug cartels. By merging the ATF’s firearms enforcement authority into the DEA, the DOJ is effectively equating peaceable American gun owners with drug cartels, turning millions of law-abiding citizens—as well as their constitutionally protected weapons—into co-equal targets of a militarized federal enforcement regime.

It’s hard to know who is right in this case. There’s no question the ATF has all too often abused its power, serving as an anti-gun enforcer for anti-liberty/gunners rather than a professional, non-partisan law enforcement agency. Too often their enforcement targets have been gun dealers who made innocent paperwork errors, or Americans with no criminal intent charged with made-up crimes. Some in Congress continue to want to entirely abolish the ATF, an idea that could arguably strengthen individual liberty.

It’s also hard to imagine how the legally mandated tasks of both agencies might be combined in a way that would make either more efficient or less costly.

Government “Solutions” to Government Created Problems

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Guns being stolen from cars is a problem…one created by failed government policies and anti-gun corporate rules that coerce responsible gun owners into leaving firearms in vehicles.

The government creates the problem, complains about it, then demands more control.

Black Guns Matter @blkgunsmattr
Posted on X, July 12, 2025

Yup.

The framed picture below was given to me a long time ago. I don’t even remember who gave it to me. It probably was one of my children. The packaging has suffered some damage, but the idea is still valid:

Cope, Seethe, Repeat

Posted on by

If you like the disrespect of anti-gun people and rough language follow the FPC on X and donate money. They do good work even if their public presence does not have the politeness and polish of the older pro-gun organizations. Or… perhaps because of it.

Legislative Versus Judicial Victories

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Congress should never have shifted responsibility to the courts to strike down the archaic National Firearms Act of 1934. Now GOA will do what Republicans would not: continue the fight to repeal the NFA.

Aidan Johnston
Federal Affairs Director
Gun Owners of America
July 8, 2025
Gun Rights Groups Sue to Block National Firearms Act Enforcement

I understand the sentiment. I don’t even disagree. But a court victory is more permanent than a legislative victory. It is more costly in both time and money. But it does have advantages.

Combine Them for Abolishment

Posted on by

There has been talk of combining the ATF into the DEA. Gun rights groups are opposed to this (see also here). I’m not entirely convinced it is a bad idea. But that could be a bias of mine.

You see, I am of the opinion that the DEA should be abolished. Where in the constitution does it say the Feds have the authority to regulate recreational drugs? How many billions have they spend on the failed war on drugs? And if you don’t think it has actually failed, here are some things to consider:

The DEA was established in 1973, and tracking heroin street prices over the decades reveals some fascinating—and troubling—trends. Here’s a summary of the data I found:

📈 Heroin Street Price Trends (1973–2011)

The DEA’s Heroin Domestic Monitor Program began collecting consistent data in 1979, focusing on price per milligram of pure heroin. Here’s a snapshot of key years:

YearAvg. Price per mg Pure HeroinNotes
1982~$3.90Very low purity (~7%)
1992~$1.50Purity increased to ~28%
2007~$0.81Mexican heroin purity ~33%
2011~$1.35Mexican heroin purity dropped to ~17%

These prices reflect retail-level purchases made by DEA agents in major U.S. cities.

🧪 Purity vs. Price

  • As purity increased, price per mg of pure heroin dropped—making heroin more potent and affordable.
  • By the 2000s, heroin from Mexico and South America dominated the U.S. market, with regional differences in purity and price.

📉 Long-Term Trend

From the early 1980s to the early 2000s:

  • Price per pure mg dropped significantly
  • Purity rose, peaking in some cities at over 60%
  • This made heroin more dangerous and accessible, contributing to rising overdose rates

Since its founding in 1973, the DEA’s budget has grown dramatically—from $75 million in its first year to over $3.4 billion in recent years2.

💰 Estimated Total DEA Spending (1973–2023)

Using historical budget data from DEA.gov, here’s a rough cumulative estimate:

  • 1973–1980: ~$1.4 billion
  • 1981–1990: ~$2.7 billion
  • 1991–2000: ~$13.2 billion
  • 2001–2010: ~$22.6 billion
  • 2011–2020: ~$28.6 billion
  • 2021–2023: ~$9.5 billion

🧮 Grand Total Estimate: ~$78 billion

These figures are approximations based on annual appropriations and may not include all supplemental or off-budget expenditures.

📊 Spending Highlights

  • The DEA’s budget has consistently increased, especially during periods of heightened drug enforcement focus (e.g., crack epidemic, opioid crisis).
  • In 2023, the DEA requested $3.1 billion, a 6.3% increase over the previous year.
  • The agency now operates in 93 foreign offices across 69 countries, reflecting its global reach.

So… if the war on drugs was effective you would think the price would go up and the purity would go down. That is pretty much a well-known economic law, right? But that is not what happened. It seems to me that either the war on drugs was ineffective and the price and purity changes were unrelated, or the DEA somehow contributed to the lower prices and increased purity.

Either way we are faced with the fact that the war on drugs has either failed or it is not about making it more difficult for people to obtain recreational drugs. Perhaps it is more about acquiring power as in the famous Ayn Rand quote from Atlas Shrugged.

In my mind, combing the ATF and DEA sort of makes sense because we might be able to get more support from those opposed to the war on drugs who might be opposed to reducing gun regulations.

Changes at the ATF

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

NSSF®, The Firearm Industry Trade Association, has confirmed with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) that the Demand 2 Program is ending. That program, begun in February of 2000 during the antigun Clinton administration, required federal firearms licensees (FFLs) that have 25 or more firearms traced back to them subsequent to the recovery at a crime scene and the time from retail sale to trace is three years or less (what ATF calls “time-to-crime”). NSSF has been critical of the misuse of this protected firearm trace data to attempt to “name-and-shame” firearm retailers for crimes in which they had no involvement.

NSSF
June 13, 2025
NSSF Confirms ATF Demand 2 Program is Ending • NSSF

If you spend about three seconds thinking about this program, you realize that large retailers could have a very low rate of guns showing up at a crime scenes but frequently trip the threshold for getting a less than friendly visit from the ATF. And at the same time someone who sells eight guns a year and they all end up at crime scenes would not get “the visit.”

As is almost always the case with anti-gun advocates and politicians, it is never about crime reduction. It is about raising the cost, in money and time, of gun sales and ownership.

This infringement program has been in place for more than 25 years. It is long past the time the criminals involved should have been prosecuted. That probably will never happen in this case, but at least the program is winding down.

See also ATF Begins Overhauls Directed by President’s 2A Executive Order • NSSF.

In the Belly of the Beast

Posted on by

I’m surprised, but pleased:

Second Amendment Advocates Score Victory In New Jersey

An initiative spearheaded by the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA) and the New Jersey Firearms Owners Syndicate (NJFOS), with the robust backing of the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA), has seen Englishtown, New Jersey, pass a resolution to refund the municipal portion of permit to carry fees to applicants.

This success marks the beginning of a concerted effort by the three organizations to replicate the refund resolution across the entire Garden State.

At the heart of this movement are New Jersey’s current permit-to-carry fees, which stand at $200. A significant $150 of this fee goes directly to the local municipality.

Critics argue that a negligible amount of these funds actually covers the administrative costs of issuing permits, strongly suggesting the fee is “strictly punitive in nature” and designed to discourage citizens from exercising their Second Amendment rights.

This is in New Jersey!