Thursday, February 26, 2026

Kentucky HB 749 Follows West Virginia in Expanding Citizens’ Access to Modern Machine Guns

Gun Owners of America Backs West Virginia Bill to Allow State-Facilitated Machine Gun Transfers for Civilians, iStock-927994160
Kentucky HB 749 Follows West Virginia in Expanding Citizens’ Access to Modern Machine Guns, iStock-927994160

In a decisive move that reaffirms Kentucky’s proud heritage as a constitutional carry state and a bulwark for unalienable rights, Rep. TJ Roberts (R-Burlington) introduced House Bill 749 on February 25, 2026. This landmark legislation establishes an Office of Public Defense within the Kentucky State Police, tasked with acquiring and transferring modern, select-fire machine guns directly to law-abiding citizens. HB 749 is nothing short of revolutionary: it weaponizes a clear federal exemption to dismantle the artificial, unconstitutional barriers erected by the 1986 Hughes Amendment, restoring to Kentuckians the very arms the Founding Fathers intended for a well-regulated militia and the security of a free state.

Rep. Roberts, a steadfast defender of the Second Amendment who just days ago voted against HB 299, the GOP-backed bill criminalizing Glock switches, has long argued that law-abiding citizens deserve parity with the very tools carried by law enforcement and the military. “Federal law explicitly allows states to sell machine guns to their citizens,” Roberts declared upon filing the measure. His bill does exactly that, sidestepping the Hughes Amendment’s post-1986 registration ban through 18 U.S.C. § 922(o)(2)(A), which carves out transfers “to or by” a state or under its authority. No more overpaying for pre-1986 “transferables” that now fetch $25,000 to $60,000 on the collector market.

Kentucky residents who pass a standard background check may soon be able to purchase true military-pattern full-auto firearms at reasonable prices, AR-15/M16 platforms, squad automatic weapons (SAW), submachine guns, and the arms “in common use” for militia purposes.

The structure of HB 749 is elegant, efficient, and maximally freedom-oriented. It creates the Office of Public Defense inside the Department of Kentucky State Police, empowering the director to procure machine guns “of like kind” to those issued to law enforcement and the U.S. Armed Forces. Purchases will prioritize in-state manufacturers wherever possible, boosting Kentucky’s firearms industry and keeping tax dollars circulating locally. Qualified persons, any adult not prohibited from owning firearms under state or federal law, can buy these weapons at State Police facilities after a clean NICS check. Upon transfer, buyers receive an official state-issued certificate confirming the firearm was acquired “by” the Commonwealth, providing ironclad protection under the federal exemption.

Subsequent transfers between qualified Kentuckians are streamlined through the same office for a modest administrative fee, ensuring these modern arms remain in circulation among responsible owners. If a buyer later becomes prohibited, the bill requires the return of the firearm within seven days. Returned or forfeited guns are resold rather than destroyed, maximizing access and value for citizens. A dedicated Public Defense Fund, seeded by a reasonable surcharge on initial sales and capped administrative fees, covers operations without burdening general taxpayers, a fiscally conservative masterstroke.

For decades, the Hughes Amendment, rammed through on a disputed voice vote in 1986, has treated American citizens as second-class subjects, denying them the rapid-fire capability that criminals and terrorists obtain illegally with ease. Pre-1986 machine guns are collector items; post-1986 models manufactured for civilians have been verboten. HB 749 flips that script. By acting “by” the state, Kentucky nullifies the practical effect of the ban for its residents while remaining fully compliant with federal statute. Federal courts have never invalidated properly structured state transfer programs under this exemption, and with Bruen’s history-and-tradition test now the law of the land, machine guns invented in 1718 and used by American militias for centuries sail through constitutional scrutiny.

Kentucky’s bold step closely mirrors and builds upon West Virginia’s pioneering Senate Bill 1701, introduced just days earlier by Sens. Chris Rose and Zack Maynard with drafting assistance from Gun Owners of America (GOA).

That Mountain State legislation created its own Office of Public Defense to sell identical classes of modern machine guns to qualified residents, proving the model works in Appalachian terrain where rugged individualism runs deep. HB 749 adopts the same proven framework but tailors it to Kentucky’s larger population and robust State Police infrastructure, potentially making implementation even smoother across the Bluegrass. Where West Virginia led by lighting the fuse, Kentucky is ready to detonate the powder keg of restored liberty.

Critics from the gun-control lobby will predictably screech about “arming the streets” and “blood in the holler.” Their hysteria collapses under basic facts. These sales require the same rigorous background checks as every lawful firearm purchase. Criminals already possess full-auto capability through illegal conversions, 3D-printed parts, and black-market imports, the very devices HB 299 futilely targets. Law-abiding Kentuckians, however, have been priced out of modern defensive arms by federal overreach.

A well-armed populace is the ultimate deterrent: studies from constitutional carry states show violent crime rates dropping as lawful gun ownership surges. Historical precedent is overwhelming, from the minutemen at Concord who carried the era’s most advanced arms, to the Swiss citizen-soldiers who keep military select-fire rifles in their homes today.

The Second Amendment was never about hunting ducks or plinking at the range; it was written to ensure that the people could meet government force with equivalent firepower if tyranny ever threatened.

Economically, HB 749 is pure gold for Kentucky. Affordable machine guns will drive demand, spurring investment in local manufacturers, gunsmiths, and ranges. Freedom-minded Americans from restrictive states will travel here for training and purchases, boosting tourism and hospitality. Revenue from the Public Defense Fund strengthens public safety infrastructure without new taxes. And unlike the elitist pre-1986 market that reserves full-auto ownership for millionaires and celebrities, this program democratizes access exactly as the Founders intended when they rejected standing armies in favor of an armed citizenry.

Rep. Roberts’ consistency shines through. His opposition to HB 299 wasn’t about protecting criminals; it was about rejecting feel-good infringements that fail to disarm the bad guys while burdening the good. By introducing HB 749 immediately after that vote, he sends an unmistakable message: Kentucky will not erode the Second Amendment; it will expand and restore it. The bill’s findings implicitly echo the state constitution’s robust protection of the right to keep and bear arms “for the defense of themselves and the state.”

Passage of HB 749 would mark Kentucky as the second state in a rapidly growing freedom movement. Texas, Idaho, Montana, and others are watching. GOA and grassroots patriots across the Commonwealth are already mobilizing in support. Contact your state representative. Testify at committee hearings. The window is open now, while Republicans control the legislature, and Governor Beshear’s veto can be overridden.

The tree of liberty is watered not just with the blood of patriots, but with the resolute action of legislators willing to hand citizens the modern tools of self-defense and resistance. Kentucky’s HB 749 does precisely that. By following West Virginia’s courageous example in SB 1701, the Bluegrass State is declaring: American citizens are not subjects to be disarmed by federal fiat. We are sovereign people, entrusted by the Constitution with the arms necessary to remain free.

This is the fight for the Republic. Kentucky is answering the call. The rest of America should take note and follow.

Contact Chairman Willis Now: SB1071 Could Restore Access to Modern Machine Guns, If It Gets a Hearing

Minnesota Advances Semi-auto Firearm Ban Allowing Warrantless Home Inspections of Gun Owners


About John Crump

Mr. Crump is an NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people from all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons, follow him on X at @crumpyss, or at www.crumpy.com.

John Crump




from https://ift.tt/heDHmTl
via IFTTT

Grand Rapids Mayor Takes Cover After Saying Gun Owners Should be Ashamed

President podium iStock-676327038
Michigan gun owners were insulted by Grand Rapids Masyor David LaGrand, who thinks they should be ashamed for owning firearms. IMG iStock-676327038

One day after Grand Rapids, Michigan Mayor David LaGrand initially ran for cover after stating during a public meeting Monday evening that gun owners should be ashamed—initially telling a reporter through a spokesperson that he “respectfully declines to be interviewed” about the controversy—he issued a lengthy statement in an effort to justify his remarks.

A video of LaGrand making the comments has gone viral across social media. The Democrat mayor was not reserved about his feelings toward gun owners.

In the video, Mayor LaGrand stated, “Nobody gardens with a gun, right? Nobody changes their tire with a gun. What they’re for is killing human beings and so it’s really hard. I think as a community we have to start having some shaming around gun possession. I think if you’ve got a gun, you should be ashamed of yourself. I really do.”

“Now, I’m sorry, that’s gonna be the soundbite of the night,” he continued, “and the NRA, the NRA is gonna be mad at me, but like, you know, I, I get that we got a Second Amendment, I get it. But, you know, you also should be ashamed of yourself if you smoke. That’s not against the law. I think if you own a gun, you should be ashamed of yourself, and you should really do some self-reflection. And I think that’s, I, I just see so much more harm just like cigarettes. I see so much harm, more harm done than benefit.”

The video was posted to Facebook, where it had gotten some 77,000 views at the time this story was filed.

But late Wednesday, LaGrand’s office provided this statement to Ammoland News:

“I want to clarify my recent remarks regarding gun ownership to ensure my intent and perspective are clearly understood by the community. We must be willing to confront the reality of gun violence in our city, and I hope we can move forward together to find solutions that keep our families safe. As a former prosecutor, I saw firsthand that handguns are used disproportionately in the commission of crimes, domestic disputes and suicides, leading to devastating injuries and the tragic loss of life. Now, as Mayor, I continue to bear witness to the aftermath of that violence. I see the pain it causes families and the damage it inflicts on the fabric of our neighborhoods. I am fully aware that the Second Amendment and state law limit the policy options available to a municipal leader. I cannot legislate this pain away. Therefore, my comments were not a signal of impending policy, but an expression of personal frustration and deep sorrow. My goal was to shift our community conversation away from the status quo and toward a serious, honest dialogue and provide an opportunity for all of us to reflect on what truly responsible gun ownership looks like.”

It is not an apology, nor does he back away from his initial comments about gun owners being ashamed.

The event was described as a regular forum called “Mayor Monday,” during which LaGrand apparently also declined to talk about the recent fatal shooting of a black man by Grand Rapids police. When AmmoLand reached out to the mayor’s office both by telephone and email, there was not an immediate response.

A subsequent call from city spokesman Steve Guitar lasted less than a minute. After delivering the mayor’s message, he added, “That’s all I’m going to say.” Later, Guitar notified a reporter that the statement would be forthcoming.

LaGrand’s “shame” comments have apparently generated a lot of heat, and not just within the state. His remarks about “shaming” gun owners hit a nerve with gun owners across the country. Whether his subsequent statement will make any difference remains to be seen.

There is no telling what full impact LaGrand’s comments might have on Grand Rapids or the entire Wolverine State. In an email sent to LaGrand, these questions were asked:

  • Why do you believe gun owners should be ashamed for owning firearms?
  • What is your interpretation of the Second Amendment?
  • Article 1, Section 6 of the Michigan state Constitution says, “Every person has the right to keep and bear arms for the defense of himself and the state.”  Why should Michigan residents, or anyone else, be ashamed for exercising a constitutionally enumerated right?
  • This year, the Michigan Department of Natural Resources will receive $23,914,949, its annual share of the federal Pittman-Robertson federal aid to wildlife conservation program, funded by a special excise tax on firearms and ammunition. Hunting and shooting contribute millions of dollars to the Michigan economy each year. Why should all of those outdoorsmen and women feel ashamed over that?

Nothing in LaGrand’s statement responds to any of these questions. Here are some facts dug up by Ammoland: Michigan fields about 550,000 to 600,000 hunters annually, and according to the Lansing State Journal, last year saw a lower deer harvest than during the 2024 season, based on data from the Department of Natural Resources. The harvest last year was about 129,000 deer, while hunter numbers over the past two decades appear to have declined about 30 percent, according to published reports.

Still, that’s a lot of Michiganders who own guns.

According to the annual concealed pistol license report from the Michigan State Police (MSP), for 2024-2025, the total revenue from fees paid for CPL applications came to $16,460,062.00, which is above the five-year average of $12,009,968.00. According to an email from the MSP, there are currently 845,237 approved CPLs in the state. The Crime Prevention Research Center’s most recent annual report on concealed carry shows between 10 and 15 percent of eligible Michigan adults are licensed to carry.

Translation: Firearms-related activities contribute considerable amounts of money to the Michigan economy, while Mayor LaGrand thinks all of those people who own guns should be subject to shaming by their friends and neighbors.

At the same time, gun ownership and concealed carry appear to be healthy in the state, Michigan homicides have declined. Last year, according to the Detroit News, homicides in the Motor City fell to their lowest point in several decades, with 165 slayings logged last year.


About Dave Workman

Dave Workman is a senior editor at TheGunMag.com and Liberty Park Press, author of multiple books on the Right to Keep & Bear Arms, and formerly an NRA-certified firearms instructor.

Dave Workman




from https://ift.tt/92zMa8J
via IFTTT

DeStefano Fundraiser Addresses Donation Integrity Concerns

They don’t just want our guns, they want our names, and are willing to destroy anyone who won’t surrender them. Judge-Court-Law-Gun-Rights-iStock-2180021491

“David, this article is the first article I have read that mentions the GiveSendGo account for DeStefano and I’m pretty sure I read everything posted here or emailed to me by Lee The Gun Writer Williams,” AmmoLand comment poster DIYinSTL noted. “I’m sure it will grow as word spreads. Currently at $650. I’d like to know more about … who will receive the funds.”

He’s referring to a GiveSendGo Account established to “Help Lawrence DeStefano Fight Unjust Charges,” one trying to raise a substantial amount of money for the extradited IndieGuns owner who is essentially alone defending himself against the unlimited power of a vindictive New York State looking to make an example of him. As a brief synopsis, DeStefano is facing 521 years in prison for shipping gun kits to New York customers. Unlike the other companies targeted by State Attorney General Letitia James, DeStefano has refused to turn over customer lists, and thus has been singled out for total destruction as an example to any who might defy the orders of the violence monopolists.

See the AmmoLand archive of filed reports for more details but as summarized by a source:

Attorney General Letitia James sued 10 national gun distributors for violating state and local laws by selling, trafficking, and shipping illegal ghost gun parts into New York, marking a major use of state public nuisance laws. Indieguns is still the only company that refused blanket customer data

The point of this article is not to go through those reports again (or to broach why “pro-gun” Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis did not fight the extradition, something that merits investigation)  but to assist in the fundraising, especially since of the substantial amount being sought, only a mere fraction has been collected to date. Some of this is no doubt due to gun owner apathy, a phenomenon this correspondent has been decrying for years, but the posted comment reflects another concern: Why send our hard-earned money to an unknown quantity?

To address that, AmmoLand has reached out to friends of DeStefano, who must remain anonymous due to legal considerations. New York is going after everyone associated with the man they think they can tack a charge on to, and there is a gag order on the case constraining what everyone can say that raise criminal liability issues. Behind-the-scenes colleagues are not beyond the reach of Letitia James to pursue for any on-the-record comments they make. As with the Operation Fast and Furious whistleblowers who provided information to Mike Vanderboegh and myself, which made breaking the story possible, such reasoning has valid precedent and I have committed to protecting my sources. The bottom line is I know who I’m dealing with, have confidence in the integrity of this effort, and will not break faith with them in the face of legal demands.


What follows are questions and answers relevant to the fundraiser:

DC: How did you arrive at the $620,000 goal? How do you envision the money being disbursed and spent, and what oversight can you provide to assure contributors that their donations and your expenses will be properly accounted for?

We are offering full transparency of this fundraiser and will post updates for every dollar spent; honestly the goal amount is severely understated for what we wish to do for Lawrence to have a fighting chance at this case. We arrived at this figure when Lawrence told us he vows to repay each and every donator’s dollar figure amount upon his release and he had approximately $620,000 seized in cash/gold alone, not including the unfathomable value of stock seized.

DC: You’d initially tried to set the fundraiser up on GoFundMe. What happened?

It was shut down by GoFundMe, for violations of supporting a “violent criminal.”

DC: Have you applied for assistance from any of the national gun groups? If so, have any shown interest or promised to help?

Yes, we have sought out resolves from multiple groups to little assistances as most are currently scared of the case and losing major donators.

DC: This next question doesn’t really deal with fundraising, but I think it’s necessary to put the importance of this in perspective: What, in your opinion, makes this significant and deserving of support from not just gun kit customers, but from all gun owners?

The reason this case is so important is this will set president for future cases in disarming the populace. Even though they have done nothing wrong federally in the arms of state overreach.


I just can’t give readers more than that because I am convinced the reluctance to of my contacts to come forward is well-founded. There’s also an issue of personal liability for refusing to disclose sources.

My longstanding position is that I never ask readers to do anything I’m not already doing myself. I donated $10 early on—it doesn’t have to be much, but if every reader here did the same—and went the important extra mile of spreading the word and sharing the link to this article along with your personal thoughts to those within your spheres of influence, it would go a long way toward helping a man who will not be broken to save himself by selling others out.

There is an object lesson that should not be lost on any of us: If the government can destroy us for not surrendering our rights and bending a knee when ordered, and turn the screws when we don’t betray our countrymen, how confident are we, when it’s our turn in the barrel, that we can count on our brothers in arms to come to our aid?

If you’d like to help, start here, where regular updates show how money collected is being expended, and then go the extra mile and tell your friends.


About David Codrea:

David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating/defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament. He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” is a regularly featured contributor to Firearms News, and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.

David Codrea




from https://ift.tt/iwWZvgc
via IFTTT

Wednesday, February 25, 2026

Contact Chairman Willis Now: SB1071 Could Restore Access to Modern Machine Guns, If It Gets a Hearing

SB1071 Could Restore Access to Modern Machine Guns, If It Gets a Hearing, iStock-2231875950
SB1071 Could Restore Access to Modern Machine Guns, If It Gets a Hearing, iStock-2231875950

In a bold move that could position West Virginia as the undisputed leader in Second Amendment protection, state Senators Chris Rose and Zack Maynard introduced Senate Bill 1071 on February 23, 2026, the final day for new Senate bills this session. Titled the Public Defense and Provisioning Act, SB1071 would create a state-run Office of Public Defense within the West Virginia State Police to procure and sell modern, select-fire machine guns directly to qualified, law-abiding citizens.

The bill is now bottled up in the Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Sen. Tom Willis (R-Berkeley). Without a public hearing and swift advancement, this historic legislation will die before it ever reaches the floor. That is why every gun owner, hunter, veteran, and freedom-loving West Virginian must immediately pick up the phone and email Chairman Willis at 304-357-7867 and tom.willis@wvsenate.gov.

Tell him clearly: “Schedule a hearing for SB1071 now. West Virginians demand the right to defend themselves with the most effective arms available under the law.”

This is not hyperbole. SB1071 represents one of the most significant opportunities in decades to reclaim ground lost to federal overreach. For nearly 40 years, the 1986 Hughes Amendment has banned civilians from purchasing newly manufactured machine guns. Pre-1986 transferable machine guns now sell for tens of thousands of dollars due to artificial scarcity. The result? Only the wealthy elite or those who already own them can afford true select-fire capability.

SB1071 flips the script using the very language Congress wrote into federal law. The Hughes Amendment, codified at 18 U.S.C. § 922(o), explicitly states that the machine gun prohibition “does not apply with respect to a transfer to or by, or possession by or under the authority of, a State or any department or political subdivision thereof.”

The bill creates a state agency that purchases machine guns and transfers them “by” and “under the authority of” the State of West Virginia. These transfers are therefore fully compliant with federal law and, critically, exempt from the National Firearms Act’s $200 transfer tax because they are government-facilitated.

The bill’s legislative findings lay out the constitutional case in crystal-clear terms. Citing District of Columbia v. Heller, it reminds lawmakers that the Second Amendment protects “all instruments that constitute bearable arms,” including those “not in existence at the time of the founding.” Machine guns are the very “arms of modern warfare” that the Founders intended citizens to possess to maintain a well-regulated militia capable of repelling invasions, suppressing insurrections, and resisting tyranny. West Virginia’s own Constitution, Article III, Section 22, guarantees the right to keep and bear arms for “defense of self, family, home and state, and for lawful hunting and recreational use.”

Qualified persons, any adult who can legally possess firearms under state and federal law, would undergo standard background checks at State Police troop headquarters. The Office would, where possible, prioritize West Virginia manufacturers, operate distribution points using existing facilities, and issue official state certificates of transfer. Subsequent transfers between qualified citizens would require a simple $275 re-transfer fee through the Office (waived for heirs). A $250 surcharge per gun plus a modest administrative fee (capped at $50) would flow into a new Public Defense Fund to cover costs, generating revenue for the state without raising taxes.

Gun Owners of America (GOA), which drafted the bill, calls it a “smart, lawful approach that operates within the language already written into federal law.” Erich Pratt, GOA’s Senior Vice President, and state allies emphasize that this is not about expanding government bureaucracy. No new buildings or massive staff are needed. It uses existing State Police infrastructure. Yet the economic upside is enormous: affordable machine guns will draw new residents, boost firearm manufacturers, create jobs in sales, training, and ranges, and position West Virginia as a Second Amendment destination. Imagine gun enthusiasts from across the country flocking to the Mountain State to purchase and train with equipment previously reserved for the ultra-wealthy or law enforcement.

Critics will scream “machine guns for civilians!” But the facts destroy that hysteria. Law-abiding citizens have owned fully automatic firearms since the founding of the United States. The federal government itself has long allowed states, municipalities, and even universities to possess machine guns. The U.S. military routinely transfers automatic weapons to National Guard units and police departments.

Why should ordinary citizens, the ultimate militia, be denied the same tools?

West Virginia’s proud heritage of independence makes this bill a perfect fit. From the coal fields to the hunting camps, Mountaineers have always understood that freedom requires the means to defend it. SB1071 honors that spirit. It says to every veteran who carried an M4 in combat: “You defended us with these arms; now you can own them too.” Tells every mother protecting her family: “You don’t have to settle for semi-auto when the law allows better.” It tells tyrants and criminals: “In West Virginia, the people are armed as the Founders intended.”

The timing could not be more critical. The 2026 Regular Session began January 14 and adjourns March 14. Bills must exit committees by the 47th day (early March). SB1071 was introduced on the 41st day. Every hour counts. Without a hearing in the Judiciary, it cannot advance to Finance or the full Senate. Chairman Willis holds the gavel. He decides the agenda. He decides whether West Virginians get to testify in support.

That is why your voice matters right now. One call or email is good. Ten calls from your gun club are better. A coordinated flood from every county is unstoppable. When the phone lines light up and inboxes overflow with polite but firm constituent demands, committees move. History proves it.

Contact Chairman Tom Willis today:

Phone: 304-357-7867

Email: tom.willis@wvsenate.gov

Sample script: “Chairman Willis, I am a law-abiding gun owner. SB1071 is a common-sense, constitutionally sound bill that uses existing federal law to restore access to modern firearms for qualified citizens. Please schedule a hearing immediately and move it forward. West Virginians are watching, and we expect real leadership on the Second Amendment.”

Copy your own senator and representative, too, but prioritize the Chairman. He is the gatekeeper.

This fight is bigger than one bill. If West Virginia succeeds, other pro-gun states will follow. The roadmap is set: state agencies can legally transfer machine guns to citizens. The Hughes Amendment’s stranglehold begins to crack.

Opponents of gun rights know this. They will lobby quietly against a hearing. They hope apathy wins. Do not let them. West Virginia’s motto is “Mountaineers Are Always Free.” Prove it.

Gun owners built this state’s reputation for fierce independence. Now is the moment to defend it legislatively. Pick up the phone. Send the email. Do it today. Do it tomorrow. Keep doing it until Chairman Willis schedules the hearing.

The future of the Second Amendment in West Virginia and potentially the nation hangs in the balance. Let your voices be heard loud and clear in Charleston.

GOA Backs West Virginia Bill to Allow State-Facilitated Machine Gun Transfers for Civilians

What to do About Mexican Drug Cartels: Letters of Marque


About John Crump

Mr. Crump is an NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people from all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons, follow him on X at @crumpyss, or at www.crumpy.com.

John Crump




from https://ift.tt/vxmHdFk
via IFTTT

Texas’ District 23 Pits RINO Against Popular Gun Rights Champion

Texas’ Republican Primary election is less than a week away. The Texas delegation to the U.S. House of Representatives has 38 members. That’s second only to California. Twenty-five of the Texas reps are Republican; 13 are Democrats.

Texas District 23 is big. Covering most of the southwest part of the state, its land area is about half the size of Georgia’s. It’s pretty much wide-open spaces with a fairly low population density.

District 23 has been a competitive seat for Republicans. Since January 2021, Tony Gonzales, a San Antonio native and Navy veteran, has represented District 23 in the House. Gonzales is a centrist-moderate Republican.

In May 2022, the wheels came off. The tragedy at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde sent Texas gun-grabbers into a frenzy, promoting the gun control snake oil like the fast-talking hustlers from the old-time medicine shows. With all the tears and lurid details about the victims, it should have been a sure thing.

The “blame-it-on-the-guns” strategy failed when much of the furor and outrage instead targeted the army of law enforcement officers that was not deployed while the killer was still active.

Meanwhile, in Washington, Texas Senator John Cornyn led a group of Republicans into an alliance with Democrats led by Connecticut Senator and gun-control zealot Chris Murphy to produce legislation to make it look like Congress was doing something

The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act of 2022 (BSCA) was the result. Joe Biden praised the bill and began perverting it as soon as his signature was dry.

Tony Gonzales was the only Texas Republican to vote in favor of the BSCA. He also voted against the Border Safety and Security Act.

In 2023, Texas Republicans censured Gonzales for his votes. He was only the second person to be censured by the party.

In August 2023, another wild card was added to the deck when Brandon Herrera tossed his hat in the ring. There was a whole lot of pearl-clutching as the outspoken and irreverent Herrera campaigned.

Brandon Herrera is a well-known GunTuber. Beginning in 2014, he has grown his channel to 4.18 million subscribers and gotten over 850 million views. A year later, he formed The AK Guy, a 07/02 FFL/SOT manufacturer focused on Kalashnikov rifles.

There were four candidates for the Republican nomination for District 23. Nobody got 50% of the total vote, so Texas state law calls for a runoff between the two candidates who received the largest number of votes.

The runoff was held on May 28, 2024. Gonzales won narrowly, by 354 votes.

Herrera’s political viewpoint is somewhere to the right of Gonzales’. He makes no pretense of being moderate or politically correct. From what I have seen, he enjoys talking and interacting with people.

One thing is for sure: Brandon Herrera will be a better friend to gun rights and the Second Amendment.

Texas District 23 truly is a battleground. Not between a Republican and a Democrat: between two Republicans.

To make an interesting election even more compelling, Tony Gonzales is now embroiled in a scandal concerning an alleged affair with a staff member who later took her own life. It will come as no surprise that Herrera has urged him to resign.

This race clearly needs popcorn.

Supreme Court Shake-Up? Alito Exit Could Hand Trump Critical 2A Appointment

West Virginia Introduces Bill to Repeal the State’s Machine Gun Ban


About Bill Cawthon

Bill Cawthon first became a gun owner 55 years ago. He has been an active advocate for Americans’ civil liberties for more than a decade. He is the information director for the Second Amendment Society of Texas.

Bill Cawthon




from https://ift.tt/LWZ9cKz
via IFTTT

Florida Bill Exempts Church Security from Private Security Regulations

Florida Bill Exempts Church Security from Private Security Regulations, iStock-483083604
Florida Bill Exempts Church Security from Private Security Regulations, iStock-483083604

The Florida Legislature is close to reforming the requirements for voluntary armed security in churches. The bill exempts voluntary church security members who have concealed carry permits from the requirements of Florida statutes that regulate the members of private security services. Private investigative, security, and repossession services are regulated under Chapter 493 of the Florida Statutes. Section 6102 spells out who the provisions of the chapter shall not apply to.

HB 95 has cleared its House committees and was added to the House Second Reading Calendar on Feb. 10, 2026. SB 52 passed the Senate 39–0 on Feb. 11, 2026, and has been sent to the House.

The Florida Legislature is poised to pass HB 95/ SB 52. The bills are similar, while the Senate version is slightly broader, covering multiple houses of worship. Senate bill, SB 52, has passed the Senate committees and the Senate unanimously. The near-identical House bill, HB 95, has been unanimously passed by the House committees and is ready to be presented to the full House for a vote. A few members of the committees were absent during committee votes.

The bill makes a relatively minor change to the regulation of church security. Unarmed church security was exempt from regulation. This bill exempts volunteer church security who have concealed carry permits from the regulations of Florida statutes.

The previous paragraph 13 of Section 493.6102 will not be changed:

 (13) Any individual employed as a security officer by a church or ecclesiastical or denominational organization having an established physical place of worship in this state at which nonprofit religious services and activities are regularly conducted or by a church cemetery to provide security on the property of the organization or cemetery, and who does not carry a firearm in the course of her or his duties.

The new paragraph will be paragraph 16 of Florida statutes 493.6102. From flhouse.gov:

493.6102 Inapplicability of this chapter.—This chapter shall not apply to:

(16) Any person who on a voluntary basis provides armed security services on the premises of a church or ecclesiastical or denominational organization having an established physical place of worship in this state at which nonprofit religious services and activities are regularly conducted, if:

(a) The person providing the armed security services holds a valid license to carry a concealed weapon or firearm issued pursuant s. 790.06.

(b) The security services are provided exclusively on the premises of a church or ecclesiastical or denominational organization, including any property owned or leased by the church or ecclesiastical or denominational organization for worship, education, or religious activities.

(c) The person providing the armed security services did not receive any compensation for such services. For purposes of this paragraph, the term “compensation” does not include reimbursement for reasonable expenses actually incurred and related to the cost of training or the cost of equipment necessary for providing the security services.

The reform bill appears popular, without opposition. It is expected to pass and be signed by Governor Ron DeSantis. It will become law as of  July 1, 2026.

In 2021, Governor DeSantis signed HB 259, which allowed people with concealed carry permits to carry on church property unless the religious institution has a policy explicitly forbidding the carry of concealed firearms. The previous law restored the choice to religious institutions instead of preemptively forbidding the carry of concealed weapons on the grounds of churches, unless the administration of the religious institution specifically allowed it.

Armed volunteers have served as church security since colonial days. During the colonial period, several colonies required church members to bring their weapons to church services.

Nondangerous Felons Retain Gun Rights in Florida

The Deadly Fraud of Forced Helplessness: Why “Gun-Free” Zones are a Gift to Killers


About Dean Weingarten:

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of Constitutional Carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

Dean Weingarten




from https://ift.tt/TrAHtEW
via IFTTT

Tuesday, February 24, 2026

Colorado Bill Criminalizing Computer Code Sparks Constitutional Battle Over Gun Rights and Free Speech

data binary code information 3d guns digital iStock-Suebsiri 1010690668.jpg
Colorado Bill Criminalizing Computer Code Sparks Constitutional Battle Over Gun Rights and Free Speech, iStock-Suebsiri 1010690668.jpg

Colorado lawmakers are pushing legislation that would criminalize possession of computer code used to manufacture firearms, triggering fierce backlash from Second Amendment advocates who warn the measure represents an unprecedented attack on both gun rights and free speech protections.

House Bill 26-1144, introduced by Democratic Reps. Lindsay Gilchrist and Speaker Pro Tempore Andy Boesenecker alongside Democratic Sens. Tom Sullivan and Katie Wallace, passed the House Judiciary Committee on February 18, 2026, by a 7 to 4 party-line vote after hours of testimony. The measure now heads to the full House for consideration.

The legislation builds on Colorado’s existing 2023 ghost gun law by banning manufacturing firearms or firearm components using 3D printers, CNC milling machines, or “similar devices.” More controversially, it criminalizes possession of digital instructions like CAD files or code for programming these machines if authorities determine the person possesses them with “intent to manufacture” or “intent to distribute.”

Distributing such digital files to anyone in Colorado who is not a federally licensed firearms manufacturer would also become illegal. A first offense carries Class 1 misdemeanor charges with potential jail time, while a second or subsequent offense escalates to a Class 5 felony punishable by one to three years in prison, mandatory two-year parole, fines up to $100,000, and loss of firearm ownership rights. The bill takes effect July 1, 2026, if signed into law.

Gun rights organizations have mounted fierce opposition centered primarily on constitutional concerns. The National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action warned that HB26-1144 “prohibits the possession of digital instruction files and/or code related to firearm components by private individuals, raising First, Second and Fifth Amendment violation implications” and “sets forth a dangerous precedent for enforcement and policing of the internet by state officials.”

Beyond First Amendment concerns, critics attack the bill’s definitions as dangerously broad and its enforcement standards as unconstitutionally vague. The legislation defines “3D printing” to encompass CNC milling machines and “similar devices,” which opponents argue sweeps in a massive range of standard manufacturing tools used by machinists, hobbyists, and small businesses, not just 3D printers.

The Colorado State Shooting Association, the state’s official NRA affiliate, formally opposes HB26-1144 alongside the broader suite of Democratic gun regulation measures. State Rep. Ava Flanell, a Republican from Colorado Springs and former firearms instructor, called the bills “heavy handed” and warned they “will make it harder for responsible citizens to exercise their rights,” arguing the legislature should focus on “holding criminals accountable” rather than restricting tools.

Scott James, the Weld County Commissioner for District 2, criticized this legislation, stating that it “pushes Colorado into trying to police information transfer across the internet through a state criminal statute.” He added that the passage of this bill would be “a recipe for courtroom fights and selective targeting, not a clear recipe for better safety.”

The National Shooting Sports Foundation has long argued that 3D printing is a “high cost, limited production technology that does not present a public safety risk” and that criminals are not meaningfully using 3D printing to produce firearms. 

As of late February 2026, HB26-1144 has cleared the House Judiciary Committee and awaits a vote from the full Colorado House of Representatives. Given the party-line nature of all votes so far and Democratic control of the legislature, passage is considered likely, but legal challenges, particularly on First Amendment grounds, are widely anticipated.  If Colorado criminalizes the possession of ones and zeros on hard drives while exempting licensed manufacturers, the state will have crossed a constitutional line that transforms peaceable citizens into felons for possessing information, setting the stage for what could become a landmark free speech case that extends far beyond firearms.

Third Circuit Rules 3D-Printed Gun Files Are Not Protected Speech

GOA Backs West Virginia Bill to Allow State-Facilitated Machine Gun Transfers for Civilians


About José Niño

José Niño is a freelance writer based in Charlotte, North Carolina. You can contact him via Facebook and X/Twitter. Subscribe to his Substack newsletter by visiting “Jose Nino Unfiltered” on Substack.com.

José Niño




from https://ift.tt/mS9QWcb
via IFTTT