Category Archives: Quote of the Day

Every Civilian Owner of an AR-15 is Unhinged

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

I don’t think there are any “good guys” with AR-15s. It’s only used to massacre people. I think every civilian owner of an AR-15 is unhinged, can’t wait to use it and is a danger to everyone around them. And are almost certainly insecure in their manhood.

Cenk Uygur (@cenkuygur)
Tweeted on May 28, 2022

It’s not only another Markley’s Law Monday; it is another science denier (see also here)!

Odd. If they are only used to massacre people, I have a problem to report. I have owned one or more AR-15s for nearly 30 years now. I’ve fired thousands of rounds in them without massacring even one person. They must be malfunctioning. I wonder if they are still under warranty.

Millions of people own AR-15s. Tens of millions of these guns are in civilian hands. You would think there would be evidence of Uygur’s concern. However, in the U.S., there are only about five to six hundred rifles used in murders per year. These rifles are a superset of the AR-15s. Hence, those “unhinged” gun owners who “can’t wait to use it and are a danger to everyone around them” don’t exist outside Uygur’s imagination.

Furthermore, constitutionally protected rights are evaluated based the text of the law. They are not judged on how they are or may be misused by criminals.

Uygur view of reality is faulty. There is not a problem with the gun owners. Tell the Uygur’s of the world to seek counseling and leave the rest of us alone.

Mr. Spock, Launch a Probe

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Humanity could be sending probes toward the nearest star system with a flight time of just 40 years—seven years shorter than Voyager’s mission today. It’s not exactly the 37-hour trip that the USS Enterprise can pull off at warp eight, but it’s a start.

Darren Orf
January 18, 2025
Scientists Have a Radical Plan to Travel to the Nearest Star System Within a Human Lifetime

It could be 40 years before we get working warp drive ships. I also doubt the first warp drives will be capable of warp eight. Sending probes out ahead, even slow (relative to warp drive enabled) probes, would be useful.

I like living in the future. Just thinking about the possibilities from an engineering standpoint rather than completely imaginary propulsion schemes is a huge step forward.

Government Says Money Isn’t Property

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

As a lawyer who sues the government, you get used to the different kinds of arguments that government lawyers use to justify abuses of individual rights—sweeping claims of government power, bad-faith procedural obstacles, and more.

This was a new one: The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) argued that confiscating $50,000 from a small business did not infringe the business’ right to private property because money is not property.

Money is not necessarily ‘property’ for constitutional purposes,” the government’s brief declared—putting the very idea of property in square quotes. Reading at my desk, I practically fell out of my chair.

The DOJ gave three rationales for the argument, all packed into a doorstopper of a footnote: (1) the government creates money, so you can’t own it; (2) the government can tax your money, so you don’t own it; and (3) the Constitution allows the government to spend money for the “general welfare.”

If a libertarian was asked to write a satire of a government lawyer’s brief, this is what they might come up with. But here it was, in black and white.

Rob Johnson
January 31, 2025
The Government Says Money Isn’t Property—So It Can Take Yours

Interesting argument. So… since farmers create food does that mean farmer created food can be withheld and/or taken from government employees?

Asking for a friend.

Another Brick in the Wall

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Ultimately, the text of the Second Amendment includes eighteen-to twenty-year-old individuals among “the people” whose right to keep and bear arms is protected. The federal government has presented scant evidence that eighteen-to-twenty-year-olds’ firearm rights during the founding-era were restricted in a similar manner to the contemporary federal handgun purchase ban, and its 19th century evidence “cannot provide much insight into the meaning of the Second Amendment when it contradicts earlier evidence.” … In sum, 18 U.S.C. §§ 992(b)(1), (c)(1) and their attendant regulations are unconstitutional in light of our Nation’s historic tradition of firearm regulation.

Edith Hollan Jones
U.S. Circuit Judge
January 30, 2025
Reese v. ATF.

Still another brick in the wall regarding the right of 18- to 20-year-old people to keep and bear arms. It also helps protect the path to even more laws from GCA68 being declared unconstitutional.

California Non-resident Carry Permits

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

A district court has ruled that members of the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) nationwide can soon apply for a non-resident carry permit in California.

The United States District Court for the Central District of California issued a preliminary injunction in CRPA v. LASD, SAF’s legal challenge to the refusal of California officials to allow non-resident carry permits in the state.

“The judge ruled that as a SAF member your right to carry a firearm for self-defense doesn’t stop at the California border just because you are a resident of another state,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “This is just one more benefit of being a SAF member.”

Second Amendment Foundation
January 24, 2025
SAF MEMBERS ELIGIBLE FOR CA NON-RESIDENT CARRY PERMITS – Second Amendment Foundation

This will be interesting. I expect there will be some severe requirements for the application. Such as you must be present to apply and pick up the permit and perhaps even more in-person visits required. The price will be high. There may be requirements such as owning property or working in the state. I expect them to be very creative.

As I have friends and relatives in California, I will be inclined to get a permit. But that is going to depend on how difficult and expensive they make the process.

We Live in Interesting Times

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

When I think about where I’ll raise a future family, or how much to save for retirement, I can’t help but wonder: Will humanity even make it to that point?

Steven Adler
January 27, 2025
Another OpenAI researcher quits—claims AI labs are taking a ‘very risky gamble’ with humanity amid the race toward AGI

From the same article:

Even the CEOs who are engaging in the race have stated that whoever wins has a significant probability of causing human extinction in the process, because we have no idea how to control systems more intelligent than ourselves.

Stuart Russell

We live in interesting times.

I was talking to my manager today about this. He said something to the effect that we need laws to keep AI under control. I pointed out that the military’s of the world will bypass any law. If they see an advantage of putting it in robots, drones, and other trigger pulling situations they will do it. He said he fears the next viral outbreak being something created by AI.

Barb refuses to talk about things like this.

I want an underground bunker in Idaho.

I Hope They Enjoy Their Trials

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Turning lawfare on its creators is not about revenge. It will serve as a deterrent to prevent future abuse and will restore public confidence that justice is even-handed. Individuals who have carried out lawfare have not only destroyed faith in our legal system but also may have violated the law. A federal statute, 18 U.S.C. 241, prohibits conspiring to “injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate” a person exercising constitutional rights or privileges. Clearly President Donald J. Trump had constitutional rights and privileges to run for office and govern, not to be imprisoned for contrived crimes, and not to be deprived of property based on abuse of federal and state justice systems. According to the Biden administration’s own theory, preventing a candidate from running and assuming office also deprives supporters of their rights to vote.

Victoria Toensing and John Yoo
January 27, 2025
Prosecute The Architects Of Trump Lawfare

Via email from Defens, who also said:

If the Trump administration could potentially use this, perhaps the time is actually ripe to go after folks like Ferguson, Pritsker, and other 2A infringing politicians?

It certainly seems to me they could prosecute a lot of politicians. Whether they will or not is another question. I would like to see it. And, as always, I hope they enjoy their trials.

Threatened Masculinity

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Our experiment showed that men whose masculinity had been threatened demonstrated more interest in owning various firearms compared to men whose masculinity was boosted or not altered. Women whose femininity was threatened did not differ from women whose femininity was boosted or not altered in terms of their firearm interest. These findings suggest that firearm ownership may be one way to prove or regain a sense of manhood.

Borgogna, N. C., McDermott, R. C., & Brasil, K. M.
2022
The precarious masculinity of firearm ownership.

It’s not only another Markley’s Law Monday; it is another science denier (see also here)!

They want the old insult about penis size to be true so bad they will spend money on trying to prove even a hint of “diminished masculinity” related to gun ownership.

A Right Worth Defending

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

In times of crisis, self-reliance is not just a virtue – it is a necessity. The ability to protect yourself, your family, and your community is a right worth defending.

Bradley Larson
January 24, 2025
Wildfires in California Reinforce the Importance of Gun Rights – California Globe

Politicians who ban guns get the same response from me as if they were banning fire extinguishers, seat belts, and life insurance. You never want to be in the situation where you must have a firearm to save an innocent life. And you don’t want to be in a position to use a fire extinguisher, seat belts, or life insurance. But banning them does not reduce the likelihood you will need them or the value when you do use them. It only makes the situation worse.

Hence, they must be mind-boggling stupid or incredibly evil.

Such politicians should be fired and reemployed in a field more to their mental capacity. I’m thinking coloring book tester, pharmaceutical research test subject, or organ donor.

Alcohol is the Third Leading Preventable Cause of Cancer

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Alcohol consumption is the third leading preventable cause of cancer in the United States, after tobacco and obesity, increasing risk for at least seven types of cancer. While scientific evidence for this connection has been growing over the past four decades, less than half of Americans recognize it as a risk factor for cancer.

…

The direct link between alcohol consumption and cancer risk is well-established for at least seven types of cancer including cancers of the breast, colorectum, esophagus, liver, mouth (oral cavity), throat (pharynx), and voice box (larynx), regardless of the type of alcohol (e.g., beer, wine, and spirits) that is consumed. For breast cancer specifically, 16.4% of total breast cancer cases are attributable to alcohol consumption.

Dr. Vivek Murthy
United States Surgeon General
January 3, 2025
U.S. Surgeon General Issues New Advisory on Link Between Alcohol and Cancer Risk | HHS.gov

See also: Alcohol and Cancer Risk.

I did not know this.

I should have put it together for at least liver cancer. An alcoholic cousin of mine died of liver cancer at about the age of 60.

Mass Shooters Have Unpunished Accomplices

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

While details are unknown, one thing is certain. Whatever the motivation of the shooter(s), he/they had accomplices who will go unpunished: the State of New York and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.

Following Bruen, New York threw a tantrum by trying to destroy the right to carry through banning carry almost everywhere relevant, even for those with a CCW permit. One of the categories of places banned is any business that serves alcohol, even if you are not drinking.

Judge Suddaby enjoined New York’s law, rightly noting that there was no historical tradition to support such a restriction. At most, history supports restricting those who are actually intoxicated, not those who are sober. But the Second Circuit reversed, citing a few outlier 19th century local ordinances that applied at only a few places (not everywhere that served alcohol).

So any New Yorkers with a CCW permit could not legally carry at the nightclub that was the site of this mass shooting tonight.

“Sensitive places” laws disarm good people and are a big help to the deranged criminals and mass murderers looking for a soft target.

New York and the Second Circuit’s hatred of the Second Amendment will have a growing bodycount. The Supreme Court needs to end its cowardice and more aggressively intervene to smack down errant circuit courts.

Kostas Moros @MorosKostas
Posted on X, January 1, 2025

This was in response to the mass shooting at the Amazura Night Club in Jamaica, Queens.

There are numerous politicians in need prosecution.

Welcome Zuckerberg to the Fight and Watch Your Back

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

In his exclusive interview with Fox News on Tuesday, Meta’s chief global affairs officer, Joel Kaplan, admitted that the Trump election changed the situation for the technology company: “We have a new administration coming in that is far from pressuring companies to censor and [is more] a huge supporter of free expression.”

It is a chilling statement if one thinks of what might have happened if Kamala Harris and Tim Walz, arguably the most anti-free speech ticket in history, had won. The suggestion is that the new spring at Meta would have turned into a frozen tundra for free speech.

Around the world, free speech is in a free fall. Speech crimes and censorship have become the norm in the West. A new industry of “disinformation” experts has commoditized censorship, making millions in the targeting and silencing of others. An anti-free speech culture has taken root in government, higher education, and the media. 

We will either hold the line now or lose this indispensable right for future generations. Zuckerberg could make this a truly transformative moment but it will take more than a passing meta-culpas.

We need Zuckerberg now more than ever. 

So, with that off my chest, I can get to what I have longed to say: Mr. Zuckerberg, welcome to the fight.

Jonathan Turley
January 7, 2025
Meta’s Zuckerberg makes a free speech move that could be truly transformational

The whole DEI industry has essentially collapsed. Gun laws changes seem painfully slow. But in reality, they are falling in numbers and speed not experienced in at least the last 100 years. Free speech may be experiencing a resurrection as well.

I welcome Zuckerberg to the fight too. But I’m also going to watch my back.

Electricity From the Air?

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

At the core of the generic Air-gen effect are nanopores, which are nanometer-sized holes that enable water and air to pass through any material, creating a surface charge as they do so. The harvesting structure would have to be constructed from a super thin layer of material filled with nanopores smaller than 100 nanometers, which is the equivalent of one-thousandth of a human hair.

Because of the tiny size of the holes, as water molecules pass through the layer of material from the top to the bottom, they will create a charge by coming into contact with the edges of the pore. This would result in a charge imbalance such as is found in clouds, as the upper part of the layer would targeted with more charge-carrying molecules than the lower section.

Essentially, a small-scale, contained “thunderstorm” is created, which is converted into electricity the same way lighting bolts are created. 

Kelly L.
January 6, 2025
Mankind has just achieved a historic milestone: Producing electricity from air

Emphasis in the original.

Very cool. Similar to the air motor in the book Atlas Shrugged. However…

Excuse me! I have some questions. And to get those questions answered I presented them to Copilot:

Joe: Is “generic Air-gen effect” real? Or is this a potential hoax or “perpetual motion” type invention?

Copilot: The “Air-gen effect” is a real scientific discovery, not a hoax or perpetual motion invention. Researchers at the University of Massachusetts Amherst developed this technology, which generates electricity from the humidity in the air using materials with nanopores smaller than 100 nanometers.

The concept is based on the ability of these nanopores to create a charge imbalance when water molecules pass through them, generating a continuous electric current. While it’s still in the early stages of development, the potential for this technology to provide a sustainable and continuous source of clean energy is promising.

Does this sound like something you’d like to learn more about?

Joe: I want to learn more. I would think the creation of the charge imbalance would require a force. The force would require slightly more energy than could be recovered from the harvesting of the charge. Is my thinking wrong?

Copilot: You’re right to think about the energy balance involved! The creation of a charge imbalance does indeed require energy, but the key here is that the energy needed to create the charge imbalance is less than the energy harvested from the resulting electric current.

The Air-gen effect leverages the natural movement of water molecules through nanopores, which generates a continuous electric current without the need for an external energy input. This means that the system can theoretically produce more energy than it consumes, making it a sustainable energy source.

It’s a fascinating concept, and researchers are still working on optimizing the efficiency and scalability of this technology. Do you think this could be a game-changer for renewable energy?

Joe: The “natural movement of water molecules” requires energy. Where does this energy come from?

Copilot: The energy that drives the natural movement of water molecules in the Air-gen effect comes from the ambient environment, specifically from the humidity in the air.

In essence, the water molecules in the air are already in motion due to thermal energy (heat) present in the environment. This thermal energy causes water molecules to evaporate and move around in the air. When these water molecules encounter the nanopores in the material used for the Air-gen effect, their movement through the nanopores generates a charge imbalance, which in turn produces an electric current.

So, the system taps into the existing thermal energy in the environment to create electricity, making it a form of energy harvesting rather than a system that requires external energy input.

It’s a clever way of turning a natural and abundant phenomenon into a useful source of renewable energy. Would you like to dive deeper into how this technology works or explore other advancements in renewable energy?

Joe: If the thermal energy of the water molecules is reduced, then why doesn’t the water condense? Can the same water molecule be used over and over to produce limitless energy?

Copilot: <60 minutes 15 hours, and counting, of crickets>*

I can envision the theoretical possibility of a device that took in humid air and output water, drier and/or cooler air, and electricity. But I have my doubts about being able to do that with nanopores in a super thin material.

I could see it being a component of a science fiction story. But it is going to take a lot more to convince me it is a real thing.

* I am envisioning Copilot rapidly using more and more memory and CPUs to try and answer the question. I will not be surprised if a Microsoft data center brings down the local grid before morning.

Spock would have been proud:

Another Brick in the Wall

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

It is undisputed that 18-to-20-year-olds are among “the people” for other constitutional rights such as the right to vote (U.S. Const. art. I, § 2; id. amend. XVII), freedom of speech, the freedom to peaceably assemble and to petition the government (id. amend. I), and the right against unreasonable searches and seizures (id. amend. IV).15 Heller cautions against the adoption of an inconsistent reading of “the people” across the Constitution. 554 U.S. at 580. Indeed, wholesale exclusion of 18-to-20-year olds from the scope of the Second Amendment would impermissibly render “the constitutional right to bear arms in public for self-defense … ‘a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.’” Bruen, 597 U.S. at 70 (quoting McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 742, 780 (2010)).

We therefore reiterate our holding that 18-to-20-year olds are, like other subsets of the American public, presumptively among “the people” to whom Second Amendment rights extend.

Circuit Judge Kent A. Jordan
January 13, 2025
Lara v. Pennsylvania State Police

See also SAF WINS CHALLENGE TO PENNSYLVANIA CARRY BAN FOR YOUNG ADULTS – Second Amendment Foundation. The Firearms Policy Coalition also worked on this case. Every month my employer and I donate money to both organizations.

After bouncing around the court system, including a visit to SCOTUS. We now have a definitive ruling that 18-to-20-year olds are considered people. The anti-gun people fought this all the way. It seems unlikely they will be able to get SCOTUS to consider the case.

We now have another brick in the wall.

Show and Tell

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

It really is crazy.

The owner of the gun is probably enjoying all the fuss, but I bet he’d rather just have a normal sized penis.

Stephen Geary @sag1015
Posted on X, January 23, 2024

It’s not only another Markley’s Law Monday; it is another science denier (see also here)!

We have a 100s of millions of guns, billions of rounds of ammunition, a specific enumerated right, and SCOTUS decisions to back it all up.

Yet, he thinks we have feelings of inadequacy. I think he is projecting and/or knows that the best he can bring to show and tell are childish insults.

They, in the Form of the State, are God.

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

The claim leftists make that their policies work for the ‘greater good’ requires a godlike perspective that views all ends and weighs all outcomes.

It’s a claim to divinity that the left are very comfortable with.

They, in the form of the State, are God.

Alice Smith (@TheAliceSmith)
Tweeted on September 23, 2022

You can see the truth of this in the actions of Stalin and other communist dictators. But you don’t need to look that deep into history or to other continents. This is Bill Clinton:

In a post-State of the Union speech in Buffalo, NY on January 20, 1999, Bill Clinton was asked why not a tax cut if we have a surplus. Clinton’s response:
“We could give it all back to you and hope you spend it right… But … if you don’t spend it right, here’s what’s going to happen. In 2013 — that’s just 14 years away — taxes people pay on their payroll for Social Security will no longer cover the monthly checks… I want every parent here to look at the young people here, and ask yourself, ‘Do you really want to run the risk of squandering this surplus?’ “
Source: Washington Times, January 21, 1999

They sincerely believe they know how to spend your money better than you do. You see it not only in the banning of the most popular type of guns in this country. You see it in the regulation of healthcare, transportation, industry, and even the toys of your children.

Also, FYI, I can find enough material in one day of Smith’s X feed to supply my QOTD posts for a week.

Liberty and Equality are Mutually Exclusive

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Liberty and equality are mutually exclusive, even hostile concepts. Liberty, by its very nature, undermines social equality, and equality suppresses liberty – for how else could it be attained?

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn @AI_Solzhenitsyn
January 8, 2025
Posted on X

Those advocating for equality of outcomes are advocating for the destruction of liberty. And as I have said before:

Full equality can only be approximated by everyone being in extreme poverty. Full equality comes with death. And it should come as no surprise the political left is well acquainted with death on a very large scale.

We Need to Raise Awareness and Respect

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

The prohibited person’s access to the firearm was obtained as a result of an unlawful entry, provided that the unauthorized access or theft of the firearm is reported to a local law enforcement agency in the jurisdiction in which the unauthorized access or theft occurred within five days of the time the victim of the unlawful entry knew or reasonably should have known that the firearm had been taken.

HOUSE BILL 1152
State of Washington 69th Legislature, 2025 Regular Session
January 2, 2025

See also: Gun owners could be charged with felonies if firearm gets stolen under new proposed bill.

These criminals* are trying to remove the above “does not apply if” clause from the safe storage law. The safe storage law is already bad enough and probably going to be struck down as being unconstitutional. But now, if a prohibited person unlawfully enters your home or vehicle, steals your firearm(s), then you become a criminal. You have committed a misdemeanor as soon as the criminal gains access. If they use them in a felon crime, you can also be changed with a felony.

If you have the firearm(s) “properly” stored in your vehicle then that does not apply. But “properly stored” means:

(a) A person shall not store or leave a pistol in any vehicle unless (i) the pistol is stored unloaded in a container that is opaque, locked, hard-sided, and affixed within the vehicle, (ii) the container is concealed from view from outside the vehicle, and (iii) the vehicle is locked.

(b) A person shall not store or leave a rifle or shotgun in any vehicle unless (i) the rifle or shotgun is stored unloaded in a container that is opaque, locked, hard-sided or soft-sided, and affixed within the vehicle, (ii) the container is concealed from view from outside the vehicle, and (iii) the vehicle is locked.

(c) A rifle or shotgun stored in a soft-sided container in a vehicle in accordance with this subsection must also have a trigger lock or similar device that is designed to prevent the unauthorized use or discharge of the firearm installed on the rifle or shotgun while the firearm is stored in a soft-sided container.

(d) For the purpose of this subsection, a hard-sided container excludes a glove compartment or center console but includes a console vault or other container specifically designed to securely store firearms.

So, they want to make is so you must have handgun and long gun cases affixed in your vehicles. Otherwise, you could not stop to pick up some ammo as you left town on a hunting trip. And unless you carry your competition gun into the store to grab a case of water on your way to a match you risk becoming a criminal.

They have zero concern for this blatant violation of the Second Amendment. We need some prosecutions to raise awareness and respect.

I look forward to their trials.

* Representatives Doglio, Walen, Ryu, Ramel, Farivar, Berry, Leavitt, Alvarado, Mena, Duerr, Reed, Parshley, Fitzgibbon, Callan, Macri, Cortes, Obras, Gregerson, Simmons, Peterson, Rule, Street, Goodman, Wylie, Pollet, Nance, Berg, Davis, Ormsby, Lekanoff, Fosse, Salahuddin, Hill, and Tharinge.

A Cure for My Nightmares

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Despite Congress not funding removal of disabilities for over three decades, ATF’s regulation (27 C.F.R. § 478.144) remains on the books with the procedure for filing and processing a petition to remove disabilities. (The regulation states that relief will not be granted if the applicant is prohibited from gun possession by the state law where he resides, but that is invalid because § 925(c) imposes no such condition for relief from the federal disability.) If the petition is denied, § 925(c) entitles the applicant to file a petition for judicial review in which new evidence may be admitted. That provides a check on abusive agency action.

The ball is in Congress’s court to restore funding. Otherwise, given the circuit split, it is likely that the Supreme Court will step in to resolve this issue soon.

Stephen Halbrook
January 13, 2025
Second Amendment Roundup: Circuit Conflict in Felon Gun Ban Cases

Having a path for convicted felons to regain their gun rights is not something I consistently advocate for. But it is important. Three Felonies a Day comes to mind.

Beyond that is the GCA 68 definition of a prohibited person includes those, “.. Under indictment for, or has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year.” This includes people were convicted as a juvenile.

One of my nightmare scenarios is that small children are convicted of a “felony.” This happens routinely. It could occur for crying in public or some such thing. Then, because everyone is a convicted felon, the Second Amendment does not have be repealed. A total ban on individual gun ownership is achieved without infringing the Second Amendment.

Yes, it is ridiculous, but nightmares are not constrained to reality. And then look at the “Red Flag” laws and domestic abuse restraining orders being used to nullify Second Amendment rights. Reality and nightmares are not that divergent.

The Range v. Attorney General case is a good first step to eliminating a large set of my bad dreams.

A Sporting Purpose Baby Step

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

U.S. Senator Jim Risch (R-Idaho) today introduced the Sporting Firearms Access Act to stop the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) from arbitrarily blocking imports of firearms and ammunition.

The Sporting Firearms Access Act clarifies the definition of “sporting purposes” used by the ATF to regulate import of firearms into the U.S. The new definition would recognize firearms and ammunitions used for activities such as hunting, target shooting, and competitions. Under the Gun Control Act of 1968, firearms and ammunition can only be imported if the ATF recognizes it as being suitable for “sporting purposes.” Ambiguity in the law has allowed the ATF to arbitrarily deny imports of firearms by U.S. customers and businesses.

James E. Risch
January 4, 2025
Risch Leads Bill to Block ATF’s Ability to Deny Firearm, Ammunition Imports – Press Releases – James E Risch, U.S. Senator for Idaho

While I think this bill does not go nearly far enough, it is an unexpected gift.

What I want to know, is where does the 2nd Amendment say only sporting firearms are protected? At a minimum, firearms used for self-defense should be protected. And the real threshold for protection should be, “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!“

Yes, the ATF have been running roughshod over imports. Their absurd definition of “sporting” means little more than hunting rifles and shotguns. So, this is an improvement. I’ll clench my teeth a little. Nonetheless, I will thank Senator Risch for a baby step in the correct direction.