Quote of the Day

It’s easy to talk about “sensible gun control” when you don’t actually lay out what that means.

spf4000
August 31, 2025
What “Meaningful Gun Control” is this author talking about? : r/liberalgunowners

You see this all the time in various forms. People will make some statement or series of statements that sound good, but do not include details. It might be better roads and bridges but no details about how it will be paid for. It might be affordable housing but do not mention they intend to take money from other people to pay for the housing.

Politicians are great on broad stroke statements. But they either don’t understand details are important, or they are deliberately hiding the devil in the details of what they intend to do.

Quote of the Day

While we acknowledge more guns pose a greater threat to our communities, CPL holders tend to be responsible gun owners.

Renée Hopkins
CEO of the Washington-based Alliance for Gun Responsibility
July 21, 2025
More Washingtonians than ever have a concealed carry license

In response, Dave Workman said: Somebody Finally Admits It!

At the highest levels the anti-gun people know CPL gun owners are not a threat to society. But they want us disarmed anyway.

Respond appropriately.

Quote of the Day

Today, March for Our Lives is in disarray. Funding shortfalls and a rift between its board and younger staffers… have strained the organization. And a recently filed federal lawsuit accuses the board of racism and retaliation.

On March 20 of this year, just before the seven-year anniversary of its celebrated rallies, MFOL terminated 13 of its 16 full-time employees.

Firearms Policy Coalition @gunpolicy
Posted on X, August 20, 2025

See also: Inside the Chaos at March for Our Lives.

As I said the other day, our recent progress has to be putting pressure on donations.

At this point MFOLs has to be rendered powerless to cause us any damage. I think it is extremely unlikely they will recover. They are just dust in the dustbin of history.

Quote of the Day

Today’s mandate issued by the Ninth Circuit marks the first time the court has issued a final decision striking down a law for infringing on the Second Amendment. Between Heller and Bruen, every case heard by a panel which concluded the law was contrary to the Second Amendment was reheard en banc by the court and ultimately upheld. This is a historic victory for Second Amendment rights in the Ninth Circuit and marks a measurable defeat for Governor Newsom and the legislature’s attempts to curtail the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms in California.

Adam Kraut
SAF Executive Director
August 14, 2025
SAF, PARTNERS SECURE HISTORIC VICTORY IN NINTH CIRCUIT – Second Amendment Foundation

The defendants chose not to request an en banc hearing, so we don’t need to worry about that anymore. This is the final decision.

Quote of the Day

In the movie Tremors Burt Gummer was originally supposed to have an NRA sticker on his truck however his actor Michael Gross objected not because he refused to play an NRA member but because he said Burt was WAY too pro gun to be in the NRA

Dr Death @DrDeath1776
Posted on X, August 11, 2025

I don’t know about the truth of Gross saying that. My AI sources can’t give explicit reference but they agree the sentiment is correct.

Grok reflects my best take on it:

Yes, the claim appears to be true based on available information. Michael Gross, the actor who played Burt Gummer in Tremors, reportedly objected to an NRA sticker on Burt’s truck during the film’s production. His reasoning was that Burt Gummer’s extreme pro-gun stance and extensive arsenal went beyond what the NRA would typically endorse, especially in the context of the 1990s. Gross believed Burt’s character was too radical in his gun enthusiasm to align with the NRA, which might have been seen as more mainstream or cautious in comparison. This sentiment is reflected in posts found on X discussing the matter.

However, without direct confirmation from Michael Gross or primary production sources, this should be considered plausible but not definitively verified.

Back twenty years ago the quiet conversation at the gun range or late in the evening after the “women folk” had gone to bed it was commonly said, “If the politicians think dealing with the NRA is bad, they really aren’t going to like who they will have to deal with if the NRA fails.”

Quote of the Day

I’ve had enough of FUDDS on the bench.

Put Colion Noir in the next seat.

I want to see supreme court orders mandating machine gun and RPG ownership for everyone over 8 under penalty of summary execution.

_anoneng @_anoneng
Posted on X, August 9, 2025

I think that is an appropriate initial negotiation position. I could see allowing for a small amount of compromise if there push back to the point of not being able to get a majority vote.

Quote of the Day

The most fundamental requirement for a legitimate legal regime is that a person must be able to know what the law requires before being held accountable to it. As a recent case out of New Jersey shows, however, the state’s oppressive laws for gun businesses no longer meet even this minimal threshold.

New Jersey arguably has the nation’s strictest gun control laws; it is difficult even for well-meaning people and businesses to thread their way through them to exercise their Second Amendment rights. On top of those laws, in 2022, the state enacted new requirements for each “gun industry member” to “establish, implement, and enforce reasonable controls regarding its manufacture, sale, distribution, importing, and marketing of gun-related products.” These “reasonable controls” are supposed to be geared toward preventing bad outcomes from the diversion and misuse of the industry member’s products by criminals.

Yet just what is expected, on top of the mountain of explicit requirements these businesses already face, is not explained. Gun industry members are supposed to figure that out for themselves. The price for guessing wrong, moreover, could be ruinous litigation from the state’s anti-gun office of the attorney general (AG).

…

In resolving the case, in fact, the superior court washed its hands of trying to untangle what reasonable controls the law actually required of Butch’s Gun World in making the sales in question. Instead, it simply held that because the shop hadn’t imposed any additional measures (beyond following explicit statutory laws) in making the sales, the reasonable controls statute must have been violated in some fashion.

NRA-ILA
August 4, 2025
NRA-ILA | New Jersey Attorney General Platkin: Making Up Gun Control Laws as He Goes Along

You might ask, “Isn’t this unconstitutionally vague?” From the same article:

The court similarly washed its hands of the shop’s contention that the reasonable controls statute violated due process by not explaining its requirements: “This Court is not positioned to determine whether the statute is unconstitutionally vague and will not do so.”

There are some people that need to be prosecuted. This prosecutor and judge are on that list of people.

As I have said before, I won’t be going to New Jersey until they fix their laws, or I can get hunting tags.