Archive for the 'Gun Control' Category

Gun, hunter and liberty control by any other name is still communism.

But of course. Rights are not for little people.

What a terrible woman. I’d glad I’m not a part of her life. She sounds like a witch, doesn’t she?

Remember boys and girls. These things must have a special power for them to be so afraid of them.

Ammoland.

“At first, all they wanted to do was repeal the $200 tax on the suppressors, but they still wanted to leave it in the NFA, which means the registration and all that goes along with that; the waiting periods, etc.” Pratt explained. “We said, ‘No, no, no.’ We just melted their phone lines. I mean, so much so we had reports they were turning off the phones in the House of Representatives.”

Well, that’s not the way I remember it. I remember you talking about this being a “win” for future suppressor owners. Either way, you didn’t succeed. You should have told Cornyn that you would lobby against his reelection to the senate if he went down this path.

Speaking of Cornyn, how come the fine folks in Texas haven’t run him out of office yet? After all, he appears to care more about the Muslims than anyone else in his supposed constituency. Let’s see if there are enough Muslims in Texas to elect him.

🚨BETRAYAL🚨Texas Senator John Cornyn has praised Islam and said “Ramadan Mubarak.” Cornyn last year said “Inshallah” at the TX GOP Convention, meaning “If Allah Wills.” Is this why Cornyn has NOT Condemned the Texas SHARIA LAW City that's being built?!

Follow: @Carlos__Turcios pic.twitter.com/8SryANYtx2

— Carlos Turcios (@Carlos__Turcios) April 13, 2025

I’ve conveyed my puzzlement at folks who would sit on the couch rather than go vote, and then worry over whether what they have in their homes is illegal.

Anyway, I like his style. I just can’t stand the overly-emotion presentations elsewhere, but here he gives you the scoop without the drama.

This is for my Virginia readers.

Source.

A U.S. appeals court on Friday ruled that California’s ban on openly carrying firearms in most parts of the state was unconstitutional.

A panel of the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided 2-1 with a gun owner in ruling that the state’s prohibition against open carry in counties with more than 200,000 people violated U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

About 95% of the population in California, which has had some of the nation’s strictest gun-control laws, live in counties of that size.

U.S. Circuit Judge Lawrence VanDyke, who was appointed by Republican President Donald Trump, said the Democratic-led state’s law could not stand under the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 landmark gun rights ruling.

That decision, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, was issued by the court’s 6-3 conservative super-majority and established a new legal test for firearms restrictions. The test said they must be “consistent with this nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”

VanDyke, whose opinion on Friday was joined by another Trump appointee, said the latest case “unquestionably involves a historical practice — open carry — that predates ratification of the Bill of Rights in 1791.”

He noted that more than 30 states generally allow open carry. California itself allowed citizens to carry handguns openly and holstered for self-defense without penalty until 2012, he said.

“The historical record makes unmistakably plain that open carry is part of this Nation’s history and tradition,” VanDyke said.

There is also coverage here.

My position on open carry has never changed. I really don’t care what you think about it. For the state to dictate the manner in which a man must carry his weapons is tyranny.

I predict: (1) the state will appeal it to be heard en banc, or (2) Newsome’s LE and the California legislation will simply ignore the ruling, and because “conservatives” must obey the courts and tyrants never do and always get away with it, nothing will change.

Here I posed a question for Geissele Automatics: Will you do business with law enforcement in California now that they have passed a law that forbids the ownership of the subject weapons by all other citizens?

The comments are so laborious that I almost couldn’t make my way through them. I didn’t ask how best to deal with the new law, whether to rely on FFLs or try to navigate these waters alone? Or whether to stop supporting existing gun owners with parts? Or anything else of the sort. I asked a simple, easy to understand and easy to answer question.

The answer I got from Geissele answered every but the one I asked. They can continue to sell to law enforcement, or they can take Ronnie Barrett’s position. The choice seems simple enough to me.

Thank you for your reply. Of course, that’s one way to handle the issue. The other way is to follow in the footsteps of Ronnie Barrett.

Thank you for your reply. Of course, that's one way to handle the issue. The other way is to follow in the footsteps of Ronnie Barrett.https://t.co/5NzoJKMg3v

— CaptainsJournal (@BrutusMaximus50) December 30, 2025

Mark’s theory: the DOJ is surreptitiously taking the unconstitutional side in order to drive this case to SCOTUS and get a ruling favorable to the second amendment.

My message to Mark. Stop it. Just stop it. Stop claiming that the DOJ is playing 4D chess. They are not. Pam Bondi has some lawyers running loose doing the bidding of the gun controllers because she (and Trump) is at heart a gun controller.

Besides, what about the possibility that the SCOTUS doesn’t grant certiorari and the district or appeals court agrees with the DOJ arguments? In that case, it becomes a case that can be referenced by other district and appeals courts, even if not binding.

This whole thing is stupid – that is, assuming that the DOJ is on our side. They have defended the NFA, and now federal knife bans. They are not on our side.

David Codrea writing at Ammoland.

“No response is required…  Plaintiff is not entitled to compel the production of any record… This Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction… Plaintiff is neither eligible for nor entitled to attorney’s fees [and] Plaintiff’s request is improper to the extent is it unduly burdensome…”

How dare you peasants demand to know how we determine whether we will grant you the opportunity to bow on your knees to us – “Kneel before Zod,” but only if we deign to give permission first.

It is a privilege, not a right, for us to condescend to your level.

Anyone from Geissele can drop by and correct this post if it is mistaken. In fact, if mistaken, I’ll correct the record with another post and laud their commitment to the second amendment.

But what this press release doesn’t say is that if Geissele can’t do business with everyone in California, they won’t do business with law enforcement either.

One day firearms manufacturers are going to have to buckle down and begin making moral decisions concerning their commitment to the second amendment, and liberty versus tyranny and the almighty dollar.

They are dead to me. So, too, with any other manufacturer who makes the same decision they did.

Source.

Department of Justice (DOJ) official Harmeet Dhillon announced that her agency is unveiling a gun rights-focused section on Monday, promising Americans that “a lot more action” on gun rights enforcement will be taken.

Dhillon, who works as an assistant attorney general for the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, said that her division had started a Second Amendment section this month.

“I’m really excited about this,” said Dhillon. “For the first time, the DOJ Civil Rights Division and the DOJ at large will be protecting and advancing our citizens’ right to bear arms as part of our civil rights work.”

“As Attorney General Pam Bondi has said, the Second Amendment is not a second-class right, and I couldn’t agree more with my boss,” she added.

According to Dhillon, the department will fight a variety of state and local courts on gun issues, particularly difficulties around concealed carry permits.

“Some of the things we’re seeing, and that is going to be the focus of our work around the country, includes multi-thousand-dollar costs for citizens to apply for concealed carry permits,” she said.

“Other jurisdictions are having unreasonably long delays. Other jurisdictions are outlawing guns that should be protected by the Second Amendment under the recent Supreme Court precedent.”

She also emphasized that gun rights “equalizes the ability of those of us, women, people with disabilities, and others who might otherwise be more vulnerable to be able to protect ourselves.”

None of that is correct. I’m not interested in the DOJ using its power to ensure permitting schemes are faster. I want the DOJ to go to court all over American and argue that permitting schemes are unconstitutional and immoral.

Here’s the bottom line for me about this new department.

I … don’t … care.

If you had wanted to prove that you are defending the 2A, you shouldn’t have recently defended the NFA in court. And you should have ensured that Trump pressured gun controllers Cornyn and Thune to get rid of the NFA for SBRs and suppressors. The House was willing, but the controllers weren’t. And Trump didn’t care.

Everything else is just smoke and mirrors.

I told you we would never forgive you for your treachery concerning the bill, ugly, awful bill. I was being truthful when I said that.