Texas Senate Approves Bill Prohibiting Red Flag Laws

Texas Senate Approves Bill Prohibiting Red Flag Laws IMG iStock-884200682

The state of Texas is one step closer to prohibiting the enforcement of red flag laws across the state. 

On March 26, 2025, the Texas Senate passed SB 1362, which bans the enforcement of red flag laws in municipalities statewide. Specifically, this bill, the “Anti-Red Flag Act”, bars lower levels of government from enforcing red flag orders unless a state-level bill is passed, per a KHOU-TV report.

Red flag laws allow courts to temporarily remove firearms from individuals deemed to pose a significant risk to themselves or others. These orders usually permit the seizure of firearms without requiring criminal charges to be filed against said individual. They allow family members, law enforcement, or other designated parties to petition courts for the temporary removal of firearms when someone is perceived to exhibit concerning behavior.

State Sen. Bryan Hughes (R) introduced SB 1362 to protect Texas citizens’ rights to due process. 

The legislation specifically defines red flag orders as those “not issued on the basis of conduct that resulted in a criminal charge for the person who is the subject of the order.”

SB 1362 categorically bars all governmental entities in Texas from recognizing or enforcing red flag orders unless specifically authorized by Texas law. This is applicable to the following individuals and agencies:

• All state government agencies, departments, commissions, bureaus, boards, offices, councils, and courts
• Governing bodies of municipalities, counties, and special districts
• Officers and employees of local governments

SB 1362 additionally prohibits Texas entities from accepting federal funds intended for enforcing red flag laws in the state. One of the most notable facets of SB 1362 is that it subjects individuals to felony charges if they enforce a red flag order against a person in Texas, unless that order was specifically issued under Texas law.

“This bill deals with our Second Amendment rights, well known to people here and across Texas and the country,” Hughes stated during a debate on the Senate floor. He characterized red flag laws as allowing a “person’s firearms to be taken away from them without due process of law.”

Senator Hughes stressed that the bill does not apply to family violence protection orders or cases where criminal charges have been filed. 

The bill was passed along strict party lines, with 20 Republicans voting in favor and 11 Democrats opposing. As of the date of this writing, the bill had passed the Senate but still needed to clear the House of Representatives before becoming law. State. Rep. Briscoe Cain introduced a companion bill, HB 162, in the State House. 

The House version of the bill appears to have stalled in committee, according to Texas Gun Rights President Chris McNutt. The TXGR president described the Senate’s passage of this as “a huge victory for gun owners” while calling on supporters to pressure House representatives to advance the companion bill.

McNutt added, “Texas Gun Rights will not rest until gun confiscation without due process is prohibited across Texas.”

Kyle Rittenhouse, who was acquitted of homicide charges after shooting two men in self-defense during protests in Kenosha, Wisconsin in 2020, testified in support of SB 1362, stating: “I know first-hand the importance of self-defense and the weight that comes with exercising that right. But I also know how quickly false accusations and misinformation can be weaponized to destroy a person’s life.”

Before SB 1362 entered policy discussions, Texas did not have any red flag legislation or similar measures dealing with them on the books. Interestingly, in 2018, following the Sutherland Springs mass shooting that claimed 26 lives, Governor Greg Abbott had included red flag laws as a potential proposal in his school safety plan, though these proposals never gained much traction in the legislature largely due to pressure from pro-gun organizations and public opposition from Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick. 

On paper, HB 162 should be able to pass without problems due to the Republicans holding a 88-62 advantage in the State House.

---

About José Niño

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

from https://ift.tt/OdaN5nq
via IFTTT

Non-Violent Gun Convictions Deserve Trump’s Attention

For decades, this correspondent has considered the possibility of presidential pardons for persons convicted of non-violent offenses which are infringements on the rights protected by the Second Amendment.

In his recent YouTube video, Mark Smith explains his idea for pardons with some details about what was politically possible during the second Trump administration. Smith persuasively argues the Trump administration would be open to pardons for people who have been victimized in prosecutions, which are persecutions of people peacefully exercising their rights.

An individual or organization will be needed who can act as an organizational hub to verify cases and present a list of candidates to the Trump administration. All Second Amendment supporters could nominate candidates to the list of those who should be granted a presidential pardon for non-violent actions which arguably should have been protected by the Second Amendment.

In the video, Smith mentions some qualifications for the list. Not all people who have been persecuted in this manner will qualify for a presidential pardon.

The person has to have been convicted of a federal crime. Far more people have been victimized with state and local prosecutions than for federal crimes. Many are victimized by the process but never convicted.

The conviction must be for a non-violent crime. Mark specifically mentions things like possession of a short barreled rifle, or a silencer, without a tax stamp. This correspondent would add possession of a firearm in a gun free school zone, or perhaps a “straw purchase” of a firearm for someone who has no legal disability from owning a firearm, such as the Abramski v. United States case.

Cases in which a plea bargain was made to avoid prosecution for a violent crime should be avoided. Simple cases are better than complex cases.

Highest priority should be those who are in prison. The second priority should be those who were unjustly convicted and denied their rights. Many can remember injustices going back several decades. No president before Trump has had the courage to pardon people prosecuted and convicted for peacefully exercising rights which should have been protected by the Second Amendment.

We must be careful about ongoing cases. We do not want to “moot” cases that promise to restore Second Amendment rights in the courts. If a pardon is granted, the court may drop the case as moot, where a controversy no longer exists.

This correspondent is not volunteering to create and administer such a program. It is likely to become a full-time job. Perhaps an existing organization could add it as a part of their program. It is likely contributions to such a project could fund the necessary time and expense.

Such a list should be open to public viewing and searching to avoid duplicate efforts.

Here are some obvious and recent candidates:

• Matthew Hoover in the AutoKey case
• Kristopher Justin Ervin in the AutoKey case
• Patrick Tate Adamiak for selling legal gun parts.
• Jeremy Kettler on selling silencers under legal sanction by Kansas
• Gabriel Metcalf, Gun Free School Zone, appeal in progress.

Here are a couple of older cases; there are a large number of them.

• Robert W. Stewart, Jr., political prosecution, from 2001, State restoration of rights considered invalid by federal court.
• David Olofson, transfer of malfunctioning rifle.. so-called machine-gun, 2009.

Readers are welcome to suggest additional cases in the comments. Please follow the guidelines above.

Federal cases only, non-violent, and which have already been convicted of a federal crime, where the Second Amendment is implicated, and a pardon is appropriate.

---

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.

from https://ift.tt/izYS0Ms
via IFTTT

About the Federal Investigation of the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department for Second Amendment Violations

The U.S. Justice Department’s Special Litigation Section describes itself merely as one of several sections working within the Civil Rights Division.

In truth, they are much more than that.

The Special Litigation Section was created to protect people in several areas, including those in jails or prisons, individuals with disabilities, confined youth and “people who interact with state or local police or sheriffs’ departments.”

This last bit is why Attorney General Pam Bondi told the Justice Department to investigate the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department for violating their residents’ Second Amendment rights. The DOJ will definitely send in its Special Litigation Section. They are pros at investigating cops, and Bondi hinted they may have more agencies to review.

“As part of a broader review of restrictive firearms-related laws in California and other States, the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division today announced an investigation into the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department to determine whether it is engaging in a pattern or practice of depriving ordinary, law-abiding Californians of their Second Amendment rights,” Bondi’s press release states.

Los Angeles County Sheriff Robert G. Luna, who became the department’s 34^th Sheriff just 17 months ago, has more than 17,000 staffers, sworn and non-sworn. Luna became sheriff after a 36-year career at the Long Beach Police Department, where he served as Chief. However, should the Special Litigation Section get the case, there is absolutely nothing he can do to prevent them from determining whether his staff were, as Bondi described in her press release, “engaging in a pattern or practice of depriving ordinary, law-abiding Californians of their Second Amendment rights.”

Sheriff Luna may try to slow the federal investigators’ progress and keep them from finding and reporting the truth, which would be futile. What Bondi didn’t say is that the Special Litigation Section has never lost a case – not a single one.

When the Section has completed its investigation, which can take months or even years, they present the Sheriff or Chief of Police with two documents: a federal complaint and a consent decree. The two documents are virtually identical except for their titles. If the chief law enforcement executive doesn’t sign the consent decree and agree to make substantive changes to their agency, the investigators file the complaint in federal court where, as stated, they always win.

Bondi was very clear about the allegations she believes were committed by the LASD. Their deputies can take more than 18 months to process concealed handgun license applications. She pointed out that the U.S. Supreme Court has strengthened the Second Amendment, which it considers a “fundamental, individual constitutional right,” but the LASD still has issues.

“This Department of Justice will not stand idly by while States and localities infringe on the Second Amendment rights of ordinary, law-abiding Americans,” Bondi said. “The Second Amendment is not a second-class right, and under my watch, the Department will actively enforce the Second Amendment just like it actively enforces other fundamental constitutional rights.”

Regan Rush, Special Litigation Section Chief, did not respond to emails seeking her comments for this story.

Much of how her staff operates is withheld from the public, but the best way to judge the Section’s effectiveness is by taking a close look at how they operated in the past.

Previous consent decrees

In March 2003, I was an investigative reporter at the Virgin Islands Daily News. I wrote “Deadly Force–A Special Investigative Report,” which was 44-pages long and examined the Virgin Islands Police Department’s shootings from January 1985 to December 2003.

It found:

• In the 85 shooting incidents reviewed, 65 of the victims were unarmed.
• The 85 police shootings resulted in the deaths of 28 people.
• Only 17 of the 72 people who were shot at by the police and survived were charged.
• VIPD records unit lacked information about involved officers and shooting victims and the findings of any investigation into the shootings.
• VIPD employed an outdated use of force policy that failed to provide officers with clear guidelines regarding the circumstances under which the use of deadly force would be justified and included illegal guidance indicating that deadly force could be used to protect property.
• Although VIPD required officers to pass an annual firearms certification examination, VIPD had not conducted annual weapons certifications for more than two years.
• In at least six cases VIPD officers shot at moving vehicles.

This Justice Department did not like the special report’s findings at all.

“The report included descriptions of 77 cases in which either officers had allegedly pointed or fired their weapons under questionable circumstances or the case files related to the shooting incidents contained little or no information reflecting that any investigation of the use of force was conducted. The report also summarized 20 cases in which VIPD officers, often off-duty at the times of the incidents, brandished or fired weapons during personal arguments or fights,” the DOJ said in a press release. “The disturbing and unflattering portrait presented by the ‘Deadly Force’ report was one of a police department whose officers were poorly trained, too quick to use firearms, and immune from serious consequences for improper and in some cases illegal uses of deadly force. The article called for various actions to be taken in response to its findings, including an investigation by the Special Litigation Section of DOJ’s Civil Rights Division.”

The Special Litigation Section and the VIPD signed a consent decree a few years after the news was published. However, today – more than 22 years after the first story was published – the VIPD still remains under close federal supervision because they have not made adequate changes to a series of consent decrees to end the civil case.

Two consent decrees in Delaware had opposite results. Delaware’s state government was able to make changes and avoid decades of federal inspections and supervision for problems I found in its prison system and psychiatric center, which it cleaned up in just a few years.

How LASD’s Sheriff Luna will respond is not yet known, but it may be difficult for him. The best advice is to quickly realize he is no longer in charge. The DOJ is. Hopefully, he will stop his deputies from depriving residents of their Second Amendment rights.

If Sheriff Luna doesn’t act soon, he may become just another unemployed top lawman who lost his job because he underestimated the Justice Department’s little-known but powerful Special Litigation Section.

This story is presented by the Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project and wouldn’t be possible without you. Please click here to make a tax-deductible donation to support more pro-gun stories like this.

---

About Lee Williams

Lee Williams, who is also known as “The Gun Writer,” is the chief editor of the Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project. Until recently, he was also an editor for a daily newspaper in Florida. Before becoming an editor, Lee was an investigative reporter at newspapers in three states and a U.S. Territory. Before becoming a journalist, he worked as a police officer. Before becoming a cop, Lee served in the Army. He’s earned more than a dozen national journalism awards as a reporter, and three medals of valor as a cop. Lee is an avid tactical shooter.

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

A Cautious Sigh of Relief in New Mexico

Opinion By Darren LaSorte

Michelle Lujan Grisham at a rally. By AFGE – #Handsoff Budget Rally, CC BY 2.0 creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0, via Wikimedia Commons

The quick, regular order legislative session in New Mexico, where strict gun control legislation had been making its way through committee consideration, came to an end on Saturday at noon.

The good news? Those gun control bills, that would restrict the rights of law-abiding New Mexicans and do nothing to hold criminals accountable for their crimes, failed to advance.

The bad news? New Mexico’s Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham isn’t happy and Second Amendment supporters in the state know very well she’s gone above and beyond before to enact dubious and unconstitutional gun control laws outside the normal process.

Stalled Out

Thankfully, Second Amendment supporters in the Land of Enchantment turned out in full force over the past several days and weeks to make their voices heard loudly and clearly. They don’t support Gov. Lujan Grisham’s gun control activism.

Two bills in particular where auspiciously close to gaining approval and proceeding to her desk for approval but legislators wised up, listened to constituents and chose not to proceed.

The bills in question included SB 318, which is an attempt to get around the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), that would open the door for frivolous litigation against firearm industry members from both private actors and the state’s attorney general based on nothing more than the marketing and advertising material of firearm companies, third party vendors and firearm retailers. It’s a lawfare tactic that began decades ago by antigun mayors in New Orleans, Chicago and New York City. These include others such as former disgraced New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, when he was serving as President Bill Clinton’s Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. He organized dozens of local housing authorities to bring lawsuits against gunmakers and threatened the industry with “death by a thousand cuts.”

The mad dash push by New Mexico gun control activists toward the legislative cut-off line also included a push for SB 279, which would have banned the sale and manufacture of almost every semiautomatic long gun available. If that weren’t problematic enough, it also required existing owners to “certify” that they lawfully possessed the firearm before the ban took effect; essentially setting up a gun registry of those New Mexicans who already own a Modern Sporting Rifle (MSR). Those are the AR-15-style semiautomatic rifles that are more commonly-owned today than there are Ford F-150 pickup trucks on the road. For those counting at home, that’s more than 30 million MSRs in circulation today. City and state-level bans on MSRs have become more frequent at the same time as many more millions of law-abiding Americans have purchased them for any number of lawful reasons and the U.S. Supreme Court continues to deliberate whether or not to hear a challenge on the constitutionality of banning these commonly-owned firearms.

Not in the Clear, Yet

Not unexpected, Gov. Lujan Grisham made it clear that she wasn’t satisfied with the inaction of the legislature and she vowed to plow ahead on her own, invoking her power to call a special legislative session for “related and germane” pet issues. After all, this is the governor who two years ago infamously declared,

…“If there’s an emergency … I can invoke additional powers. No constitutional right, in my view … is intended to be absolute.”

This time, after Saturday’s regular order deadline came and passed effectively stalling out the gun control bills, the governor’s tone sounded eerily similar.

“While we made progress on universal free school lunch, literacy, water planning, and firefighting resources, I cannot ignore that we failed to adequately address the public safety crisis facing our state,” the governor said in a statement. “With 270 public safety bills introduced this session and only a handful passed, we have not met our responsibility to New Mexicans.”

The governor’s special session tease came on the heels of a gang-related criminal shooting that happened Friday night at “an unsanctioned car show.” Las Cruces police have already arrested one adult and three teenagers and charged them with crimes involved in the shooting. The three teens are already barred from legally owning firearms so no existing or additional laws would change that.

Cam Edwards at Bearing Arms connected the straight line from dots commonly used by gun control activists when criminal shootings occur inevitably leading to calls for more gun control laws that are ignored by criminals and only penalize the law-abiding.

“While Grisham and gun control activists are already pointing to the incident as evidence that an ‘assault weapon’ ban is needed, Las Cruces Police Chief Jeremy Story told reporters on Saturday that all of the more than 50 shell casings that were found at the scene came from handguns.”

Tom Knighton, writing in Townhall, added on a prescient point as well. “How anyone thinks an incident of two people getting guns illegally is a failure of too few gun control laws is beyond me. Instead, what we see here is a specific location where crime was becoming more and more of a problem and that local police say they were too short-staffed to actually do anything about,” Knighton wrote.

Staying Vigilant

Law-abiding gun owners in New Mexico have seen this show before. That’s the good news, if it can be described that way. The governor could very possibly overreact and overreach with strict gun control executive orders or additional gun control laws in her special session that do nothing to hold criminals accountable for their crimes and only penalize law-abiding New Mexicans. In the past, she’s been called out by even the most ardent gun control supporters for her overreach.

Those who value community safety and revere the Constitution can be relieved legislators on their own weren’t able to pass more gun control during the normal process during New Mexico’s 60-day legislative session. But all must remain vigilant for when the governor likely calls a special session to inevitably try it on her own.

NSSF will be watching.

Mexico Aims to Reshape the US Firearm Industry by Suing Gun Makers

New Jersey & Minnesota Sue GLOCK INC in Latest State-Level Assault on Gun Rights

---

About The National Shooting Sports Foundation

NSSF is the trade association for the firearm industry. Its mission is to promote, protect and preserve hunting and shooting sports. Formed in 1961, NSSF has a membership of thousands of manufacturers, distributors, firearm retailers, shooting ranges, sportsmen’s organizations, and publishers nationwide. For more information, visit nssf.org

from https://ift.tt/BX6nP4J
via IFTTT

GOA FOIA Shows NICS Being Used to Monitor Gun Owners in California

GOA FOIA Shows NICS Being Used to Monitor Gun Owners in California IMG ATFHQ Instagram

In April of 2021, AmmoLand News discovered through a leak a secret government program that monitors firearms purchases using the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). Once the article was published, Gun Owners of America (GOA) filed multiple Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to determine the extent of the program. Now, according to a Zero Hedge article, it has been discovered that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has been using the system to monitor Americans from California to see if they are violating state law with their gun purchases.

Information obtained during an FBI background check when buying a gun is supposed to be deleted after 24 hours, but when a NICS monitoring request is approved, the FBI doesn’t delete the information and passes it onto the ATF. The people the ATF is monitoring are not prohibited from owning firearms. In many cases, they are not even suspected of committing crimes. The ATF monitored people for their associations and the feeling that the target might commit a crime in the future. The NICS monitoring program was open to all ATF agents and departments that wanted to monitor someone. The subjects of the surveillance were never notified by either the ATF or FBI.

The ATF’s NICS Business and Liaison Unit would send batches of monitoring requests to an FBI’s NICS Alert Services (NAS) team member. That team member would enter the targets of the ATF investigations into the system for monitoring. The ATF would then get an alert from the FBI every time the subject of the surveillance purchases and transfers a firearm. The FBI calls the system “Sentinel.” Some activists compare the program to the ‘Pre-crime” system in the movie “Minority Report.”

The ATF would provide the FBI with the target’s name, date of birth, gender, race, social security number, FBI number, state record number, state of residence, and place of birth. The requesting special agent could choose a monitoring time frame of 30, 60, 90, or 180 days. The ATF must say what potential crime the person is expected to be involved in or connected to. The special agent must list why they believe the person should be monitored.

One of the reasons given for monitoring an individual’s gun purchase is that an ATF agent out of Chicago thought he might take the firearm back to California, where it is prohibited for being an “assault weapon.” The Bureau is responsible for enforcing federal law, but this unnamed ATF agent seems to be using his power to help the Golden State enforce its gun laws, which exceed the power of the ATF.

The reason for monitoring is listed as: “MFG/SELL/TRANS/ETC ASSAULT WPN (30600(A) PC), STATE OFFENSE CODE 52509, FELONY 2; ILL POSS ANY ASSAULT WEAPON (30605(A) PC), STATE OFFENSE CODE 52510. FELONY.”

BREAKING

ATF & FBI are spying on Californians’ out-of-state gun purchases to enforce CA’s unconstitutional “assault weapons” ban.

FOIA docs obtained by GOA expose how far the government will go to violate your rights. We’ll keep fighting to abolish this tyrannical system. pic.twitter.com/4WTh2k9VyE

— Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) April 2, 2025

Other times the ATF monitored people who “might” buy a gun to riot. One instance highlighted the ATF monitoring a man that the Bureau feared might be buying guns to use during the riots of the summer of 2020. The target purchased a shotgun, which the ATF used as the reason for the monitoring of all his future firearm purchases. Using a lawful purchase to justify monitoring someone’s constitutionally protected activity is disturbing to many in the gun community.

The ATF also monitors people who spend more on guns than the Bureau thinks they should. The Bureau would monitor someone who spends beyond their means on firearms. Yet, people often spend beyond their means on other things, such as cars. The ATF doesn’t provide the percentage of a person’s income it considers to be excessive, but the fact is that many Americans live beyond their means and that is one of the reasons many struggle with debt. It might be more logical to assume that someone is not good with money before jumping to the conclusion that they are involved in something illicit.

Another gentleman was monitored because he “had a habit” of buying guns to tinker with them. When he was finished tinkering, he would sell them. This is a perfectly legal hobby, but the ATF believed that such activity required additional scrutiny. What the man did to warrant monitoring is something that a lot of the gun world could be targeted for. Many gun owners buy guns to shoot at the range and experiment with. Once they get their feel of the firearm they sell it and purchase a new one. Far from being the exception, this is common in the Second Amendment community. It might be time for Kash Patel to step in and end the practice of NICS monitoring because of situations like these.

Abuses of the system is rampant, but if the ATF is helping states enforce gun laws, it would be another overreach by an agency with a long history of overstepping its power. The NICS monitoring program is only supposed to be used for official ATF use. By doing the bidding of anti-gun states, the ATF is demonstrating that it can’t be trusted to use the program responsibly. It gives gun rights activists one more reason to push Congress to defund, defang, and eventually disband the ATF.

---

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.

from https://ift.tt/lJw6kyM
via IFTTT

Cory Booker’s Gun-Control Hypocrisy Exposed: Armed Staffer Arrested at Capitol While Senator Filibusters for “Safety” ~ VIDEO

While Senator Cory Booker was grandstanding on the Senate floor during a marathon speech attacking Republicans, one of his closest staffers—whom he’s called a “best friend”—was being arrested for illegally carrying a gun into the U.S. Capitol. That’s right: while Booker ranted for hours about supposed threats to democracy, his longtime driver and security sidekick, Kevin Batts, was cuffed and charged with “carrying a pistol without a license.”

Let’s just call this what it is: another shining example of “guns for me, but not for thee.”

Batts, a retired Newark police detective, wasn’t some unknown intern. He’s been on Booker’s personal detail for nearly two decades. And according to Capitol Police, Batts didn’t even go through the normal security checks—he was escorted around security by a Member of Congress. The implication? Someone knew he was carrying and didn’t want it detected.

Think about that. The same Cory Booker who’s never met a gun control bill he didn’t love—the same guy pushing for “assault weapon” bans, universal background checks, magazine limits, and laws that would disarm you for living in a “sensitive place”—is walking around the Capitol with a buddy likely serving as de facto armed security. Meanwhile, the rest of us are told we shouldn’t need guns because we have police.

Senator Cory Booker’s best friend longtime driver, and security sidekick, Kevin Batts IMG Instagram Cory Booker

Hypocrisy, Meet Reality.

Let’s make something clear: under federal law, no one is allowed to carry a firearm on Capitol grounds, not even a retired cop with a permit.

If you or I had done what Batts did, we’d be facing federal charges and likely jail time. But because this guy is part of Team Booker? Crickets from the anti-gun crowd. The same folks who would’ve had a meltdown if this had been a staffer for Marjorie Taylor Greene or Rand Paul are dead silent. Not a peep from Brady, Giffords, or Moms Demand.

Alan Gottlieb of the Second Amendment Foundation put it best: “Cory Booker has never met a gun control law he didn’t like… but it’s okay for him to have armed security while he labors to keep every average citizen disarmed.”

The Double Standard is Disgusting.

And it’s not new. Remember when Ted Kennedy’s bodyguard was busted in the Capitol with an Uzi? Or when Diane Feinstein pushed gun bans while carrying her own pistol? Or is Kamala Harris claiming she’s “pro-gun safety” while owning a gun herself?

These people don’t actually hate guns. They just hate you having one.

Meanwhile, law-abiding citizens are demonized, red-flagged, and disarmed in the name of “public safety,” while violent criminals like Sharon Evans in North Carolina rack up dozens of felonies and walk free to kill. Evans had 37 felonies and nine misdemeanors in under two years. He was caught repeatedly with stolen guns and cars, and he even strangled a woman—and yet, he kept getting released. Eventually, he killed an innocent man on the way to dialysis.

So, let’s recap:

• Booker’s staffer, armed illegally = no national outrage.
• Gun control groups = silent.
• Everyday Americans = disarmed in “sensitive places”.
• Violent repeat offenders = back on the street.
• Politicians = protected by armed friends and privilege.

It’s no wonder more Americans are embracing their Second Amendment rights and rejecting the elitist hypocrisy of politicians like Cory Booker. If the people crafting the laws don’t follow them—and are quietly surrounded by guns themselves—why should we trust anything they say?

• You don’t get to push for disarmament while sneaking your armed buddies past security.
• You don’t get to rail against “gun violence” while turning a blind eye to the revolving-door justice system, letting actual violent criminals go free.

And you definitely don’t get to claim the moral high ground while enjoying protections you’re actively trying to deny the rest of us.

---

Cory Booker: “The filibuster is being abused and needs to be reformed.”

Also Cory Booker: Is about to abuse the filibuster for 24 hours straight. pic.twitter.com/osO9zp39z4

— Gain of Fauci (@DschlopesIsBack) April 1, 2025

Senator Cory Booker’s net worth soared from $807,000 in 2018 to $15 million today. He is still yapping and won’t shut up because they’re onto that money, and the left all cheering for it. While we’re distracted, they shuffle to hide the cash. How do these Democrats get so… pic.twitter.com/qT9LCUnAA9

— ??ê? ??ê? (@TheThe1776) April 2, 2025

---

Gun rights are not just for the politically connected. They’re for everyone. Especially those without private security details and friends in high places.

It’s time the double standard ends. Equal protection doesn’t just mean equal laws—it means equal rights, including the right to keep and bear arms. Speak Out! Because the louder we are, the harder it is for hypocrites like Senator Cory Booker to keep lying to the public while hiding behind armed privilege.

Stay armed. Stay aware. Stay free. Stay Dangerouse.

Is Cory Booker Dangerous, Or Just Stupid When It Comes To The Constitution? #GUNVOTE

Why Cory Booker Sucks When it Comes to Gun Rights

from https://ift.tt/aRNbq5r
via IFTTT

60 Days In, How Is AG Pamela Bondi Doing Defending the 2nd Amendment?

Opinion

How Is AG Pamela Bondi Doing? Take Our Reader Poll!

It’s been roughly 60 days since Pamela Bondi stepped up as Attorney General under President Trump, and the pro-gun community is talking.

For those of us who live and breathe the Second Amendment, a Trump appointee like Bondi comes with big expectations. Two months in, though, the word on platforms like X and in gun circles is a mixed bag. Is she the 2A defender we’ve been waiting for, or is she falling short?

Read the rundown based on what’s out there, and take our reader Poll!

The Good: Bondi’s Pro-Gun Moves

Bondi’s made some moves that have gun folks nodding in approval. In February, she fired the ATF’s General Counsel, Pamela Hicks, with a sharp statement: “These people were targeting gun owners. Not going to happen under this administration.”

WATCH: Pam Bondi chastises ATF and celebrates the firing of former Chief Counsel Pamela Hicks. ⁰⁰“These people were targeting gun owners. Not going to happen under this administration,” the Attorney General says. pic.twitter.com/0sXm2RggSG

— Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) February 22, 2025

That’s a solid hit against an agency we all see as overreaching. Then, in late March, she launched a DOJ investigation into Los Angeles County’s Second Amendment practices, declaring, “The Second Amendment is not a second-class right.” Pro-gun groups have given her a thumbs-up for that, calling it a strong first step.

These actions show she’s willing to push back on anti-gun efforts, and that’s got some folks hopeful.

The Bad: What’s Happening with Adamiak?

Then there’s the Patrick “Tate” Adamiak case, and it’s a sore spot. This former Navy sailor’s been in prison for 30 months, facing a 20-year sentence, all tied to what Lee Williams calls fake ATF evidence—think toy guns twisted into “machineguns” by a questionable ATF tech. Federal prosecutors under Bondi’s DOJ are still fighting his appeal, sticking to the ATF’s story. Lee’s recent article laid out the details, and the pro-gun reaction was fierce. Some asked why Bondi isn’t stepping in to stop this. Others demanded she sack the prosecutors involved.

For a guy who just wants to serve his country again, it’s tough to see her not acting. Is she too tied up, or is this not on her radar?

The Ugly: Trust Issues Hang Around

Here’s the kicker: Bondi’s got a past that doesn’t sit right with everyone. As Florida’s AG, she backed red flag laws and age restrictions for gun purchases after Parkland. That’s still fresh for a lot of gun owners—X posts from the last two months keep bringing it up, pointing to her “unconstitutional” stances. Even with her recent pro-2A actions, some see her as inconsistent. There’s grumbling that DOJ attorneys under her are still pushing anti-gun arguments in court, like in cases challenging young adults’ rights.

It feels like she’s half in the fight, half stuck in the old habits.

What’s the Buzz?

The pro-gun crowd’s divided. On X, some praise her ATF shakeup but say she needs to do more. Others argue she’s swamped fixing a messed-up system, the FBI Deputy Director, Dan Bongino, dropped a message saying, “Just because you don’t immediately see it doesn’t mean it isn’t happening.” However, not everyone’s buying that excuse.

Just because you don’t immediately see it doesn’t mean it isn’t happening.

— Dan Bongino (@FBIDDBongino) April 3, 2025

“A patriot’s losing his rights for what?” one voice shot back. There’s speculation she might not even know about Adamiak, with hopes pinned on a Trump pardon instead. Meanwhile, calls to flood her inbox and the White House with messages are gaining traction—complete with how-to guides floating around. The vibe? We’re watching closely and not staying quiet.

The Bottom Line

Bondi’s at a turning point. She’s got the power to be a Second Amendment hero, but she’s got to prove it. Firing ATF brass and probing LA County are big, but letting an innocent guy sit in jail while her team plays hardball? That’s a miss. Her past raises eyebrows, but her next moves could settle the score. Two months isn’t the whole story, but it’s enough to show where she’s leaning. Right now, it’s anyone’s guess.

What Do You Think?

This is our fight, and AG Bondi’s on the hot seat. Take a minute to hit the poll below and weigh in—your opinions matter.

How Is AG Pamela Bondi Doing? Take Our Reader Poll!

Federal Prosecutors Now Using ATF’s Lies and Fake Evidence to Harm Former Sailor’s Legal Appeal

DOJ Launch Investigation Into Second Amendment Violations by the LASD

---

About Tred Law

Tred Law is your everyday patriot with a deep love for this country and a no-compromise approach to the Second Amendment. He does not write articles for Ammoland every week, but when he does write, it is usually about liberals Fing with his right to keep and bear arms.

from https://ift.tt/N5CVdzh
via IFTTT

Colorado’s Assault Weapons Ban: Controversial SB25-003 Heads to Governor’s Desk

Istock

Colorado gun owners are facing an unprecedented assault on their Second Amendment rights as Assault Weapons Ban SB25-003, the state’s most restrictive gun control measure to date, awaits Governor Jared Polis’ signature after passing both chambers of the legislature last week.

The legislation, which narrowly passed the House 36-29 with all 22 Republicans and 7 Democrats voting against it, creates a burdensome licensing scheme for purchasing semi-automatic firearms with detachable magazines. Set to take effect August 1, 2026, the law represents the most aggressive attempt yet by Colorado Democrats to restrict firearm ownership under the guise of public safety.

Assault Weapons Ban: What CO Gun Owners Need to Know

At its core, SB25-003 establishes a state-controlled permitting system that effectively creates a registry of gun owners. While sponsors claim the bill “isn’t a ban,” the reality is far more concerning. Under the new law:

• Semi-automatic rifles, shotguns, and gas-operated pistols that accept detachable magazines can no longer be purchased without jumping through extensive government hoops.
• Buyers must obtain a new “Firearms Safety Course Eligibility Card” through a complex application process.
• Applicants must submit to additional background checks beyond what’s already required at the point of sale.
• County sheriffs will have discretion over who receives approval to exercise their rights.
• Approved applicants must complete mandatory training courses (either 8 hours of combined hunter safety and basic gun safety, or a 12-hour “Extended Firearms Safety Course”).
• Gun buyers must pass a government-designed test with 90% or better accuracy.
• The entire process creates a searchable database of government-approved buyers, effectively establishing a gun registry.

Notably, the bill also bans bump stocks and forced reset triggers outright.

A Solution in Search of a Problem

Despite Democrats’ claims that this measure will reduce mass shootings, statistics tell a different story. The types of firearms targeted by this legislation are used in only about eight homicides per year in Colorado, according to data compiled by gun rights activists.

“The passage of this bill is not only an assault on our rights, but it is absurd to think it will stop mass shootings, as if mass shooters lack training and a license will instill morals in an evil person,” stated Lesley Hollywood in her analysis of the legislation. “Additionally, the firearms this bill targets are used in a fraction of murders, with them being responsible for approximately 8 murders a year in Colorado.”

The arbitrary nature of the bill is further highlighted by its exemption list, which allows continued purchase of 38 specific firearms without the licensing requirement, including the Ruger Mini-14 Ranch Rifle and Springfield Armory M1A—semi-automatic rifles functionally similar to those being restricted.

Live Inventory Price Checker

	Ruger Mini-14 Ranch 5.56mm NATO 18.5in Blued Semi Automatic Modern Sporting Rifle - 20+1 Rounds - Brown	Sportsman's Warehouse	$ 1099.99
	Ruger Mini 14 Ranch .223 Remington Rifle, Black Synthetic - 5817	Palmetto State Armory	$ 1269.99 $ 1103.99
	Ruger Mini 14 Ranch .223 Remington Rifle, Black Synthetic - 5817	Palmetto State Armory	$ 1349.99 $ 1049.99
	Ruger Mini-14 Ranch 5.56mm NATO 18.5in Blued Semi Automatic Modern Sporting Rifle - 5+1 Rounds - Brown	Sportsman's Warehouse	$ 1049.99

Follow the Money

Perhaps most concerning for sportsmen and outdoor enthusiasts: the funding for this gun control scheme will come directly from Colorado Parks and Wildlife’s Outdoor Parks and Recreation Fund—the same fund supported by hunting licenses, fishing permits, and the $29 state park pass added to vehicle registrations.

As noted in reports analyzing the bill, “The funding for this license to buy program will come out of CPW’s Outdoor Parks and Recreation Fund which gets a lot of its funding when you add the $29 state park pass to your car registration. It also gets funding from hunting and fishing licenses, state park camping fees, and more. Any money you give to CPW from here forward will be funding your own disarmament.”

What Happens Next?

Governor Polis has ten days to sign or veto the bill once it reaches his desk. While his office claims they worked with sponsors to address “major concerns,” they have not confirmed whether he plans to sign it.

Gun rights organizations are mobilizing rapidly, with the Colorado State Shooting Association launching a petition demanding Polis veto the measure. Constitutional challenges are certain to follow if the bill becomes law.

Second Amendment advocates are already looking to the 2026 elections as an opportunity to hold accountable the legislators who supported this unprecedented restriction on Coloradans’ rights.

As the Colorado State Shooting Association stated in their petition, “We the undersigned being registered electors in the State of Colorado, in recognition of the right to keep and bear arms guaranteed to us by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and repeatedly reaffirmed by the United States Supreme Court, including recent decisions such as Bruen, hereby demand that Governor Jared Polis veto Senate Bill 25-003, or the Semi-Automatic Firearm Ban, in the case it is approved by the legislature and placed upon his desk for signature into law.”

SAF Drops Major Lawsuit Challenging Colorado’s Excise Tax on Guns & Ammo

Rhode Island Democrats Poised to Push Through ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban

 

from https://ift.tt/un8BT3Q
via IFTTT

Judge Rules NRA Fraud Case Can Proceed: What Gun Owners Need to Know

Justice Decency Integrity Law Order Courts AdobeStock_314651986

On August 6, 2019, David Dell’Aquila and others filed a civil class action lawsuit against Wayne LaPierre, the NRA Foundation, and the Brewer law firm for fraud by soliciting donations for specific purposes and then spending them for other purposes, specifically benefiting LaPierre and others.

Over the next five years, the complaint was amended twice. In its latest form, the defendants are the NRA and Wayne LaPierre. The NRA Foundation’s advertising agency Ackerman McQueen is accused of fraud. The plaintiffs class are those who donated to the NRA from 2015 to the present. CEO LaPierre is accused of being at the center of the fraudulent scheme. A  number of alleged improper personal expenditures are specified in the amended complaint. For example:

• LaPierre repeatedly approved private flights for his wife and extended family when he was not a passenger. In total, these lavish private flights cost over one million dollars and were neither authorized by the NRA board nor were in any way related to advancing the NRA’s mission.
• LaPierre and his family repeatedly took extravagant yachting trips in the Bahamas and trips to Europe, financed by an NRA contractor, but LaPierre repeatedly failed to disclose these gifts. The details of these gifts were detailed in a recent expert report filed in the NYAG litigation—revealing that LaPierre paid approximately $100 million of the NRA’s money to the contractor, MMP Entities (an Ackerman affiliate), in exchange for lavish personal benefits. 
• The NRA reimbursed LaPierre more than $1.2 million dollars for personal expenses, including Christmas gifts, airfare and lodging for his extended family, membership in a golf club, and travel to and from film shoots. In addition, several million dollars each year were allocated to LaPierre’s personal security, which included extravagant purchases such as an armored vehicle.

On March 26, 2025, Judge William L. Cambell, Jr., Chief Judge for the United States M.D. Tennessee issued an opinion ruling for the plaintiffs. After five and a half years of legal maneuvering, the judge ruled the third amended complaint was legally viable; the case could move forward and would not be dismissed by the court.  It is likely that discovery in the case will be granted reasonably soon, as a motion to stay discovery pending the motion to dismiss was rendered moot by the opinion for the plaintiffs. From the opinion of the court:

As discussed above, Plaintiffs have sufficiently alleged a RICO claim. With regard to Defendant’s second argument, Plaintiffs point to allegations that the NRA “agree[d] to participate in the conduct of the affairs of the NRA Foundation enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity,” specifically, that NRA had a “decades-long arrangement pursuant to which the NRA solicited funds through the [NRA Foundation] under false pretenses, transferred those funds to the NRA, and laundered them through Ackerman [McQueen] to support Mr. LaPierre’s extravagance.” (Doc. No. 171 at 16; TAC ¶¶ 58-76, 147-153; 177). For purposes of the motion to dismiss, these allegations are sufficient to plausibly allege that the NRA “objectively manifested an agreement to participate” in the RICO enterprise.

The paragraph above does not indicate that the plaintiffs will prevail in this case. The court’s order only indicates the plaintiffs have shown there is a legally viable case that should not be dismissed. There is a long legal battle ahead, with many possibilities, including a settlement of the case before trial.  At stake are many millions of dollars of alleged fraud on the part of the defendants.  Much information is already available from the proceedings in the NRA legal battles in New York.

This case is separate from the New York case. This lawsuit is attempting to recover damages done to those who donated to the NRA and who allege fraud and a RICO claim, as shown in the above paragraph from the opinion.

It appears there are several possibilities for appeal in this case. The defendants have incentive to keep the case moving, as long as the cost of the defense is less than the cost of a settlement. The defendants may win the case, or they may choose to settle the case.

A jury trial has been asked for by the plaintiffs. It is uncertain how long the case will continue.

---

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.

from https://ift.tt/SzW7R3I
via IFTTT

Are Anti-Gunners Stubborn or Brain Dead? Criminals Ignore Gun Laws

The dirty little secret of gun control laws is that they don’t prevent criminals from misusing guns! (Dave Workman)

The highly-publicized arrest of a 17-year-old double-homicide suspect in Pierce County, Washington over the weekend serves as a stark reminder that restrictive gun control measures which affect only law-abiding citizens do not prevent—and never will—the criminal misuse of firearms.

It’s the “dirty-little-not-so-secret” failure of the gun prohibition movement.

The teen, identified as Isaiah Davion Williams, has been charged as an adult on two counts of first-degree murder and one count of second-degree unlawful possession of a firearm, according to Seattle’s KOMO, the local ABC affiliate.

Coverage of the incident and the suspect by the Seattle Times goes into greater detail. In 2024, the suspect “pleaded guilty…to two counts of third-degree assault for an incident in which he used a gun as a ‘bludgeon’ to hit a woman in the face repeatedly” in 2023. Also in 2023, he was charged with fourth-degree assault by King County prosecutors for allegedly hitting another teenage boy in his school locker room.”

In the assault case, the Times revealed, “A judge ordered his juvenile rehabilitation sentence be suspended in favor of community supervision, which included mental health treatment and volunteer work.” In the other assault case, “That charge was dismissed as part of a resolution through his guilty plea to third-degree assault,” the newspaper said.

Lastly, Williams “pleaded guilty to unlawful possession of a firearm for allegedly attempting to enter the King County Superior Courthouse with a loaded firearm, that police later determined was stolen from a gun dealer.”

This is hardly a problem confined to Washington state. CBS News is reporting the arrest of a 17-year-old in Ramsey County, Minn., “after authorities say they confiscated at least 10 ghost guns or handguns equipped with switch devices.”

The CBS report noted, “The Ramsey County Sheriff’s Office reported that a raid on a home on the east side of St. Paul resulted in the recovery of “ghost guns, automatic machine guns, multiple extended magazines and enough ammunition for multiple drive-by shootings.”

Out in Marin County, Calif., the San Jose Mercury News is reporting investigators “arrested a federal probationer on allegations of methamphetamine sales and gun offenses.” When lawmen searched the suspect’s home in San Rafael and a storage unit in Richmond, they reportedly found 14 firearms, including stolen guns.

Meanwhile, WKRN in Nashville, Tenn., is reporting the arrest of a 34-year-old man on probation for offenses in 2022. Police reportedly found more than 300 grams “of powder that tested positive for fentanyl” along with “a fully loaded Glock handgun with an extended magazine, a Taurus handgun and a short-barreled AR-15.”

The common denominator in all of these cases is the criminal backgrounds and/or underage possession of firearms. Teenagers, like convicted adult felons, cannot legally purchase handguns anywhere, and they cannot legally carry concealed handguns, yet in the Pierce County case, the two people killed were both apparently carrying guns. One was 19 and the other 15, published reports say.

Google up the term “illegal gun possession” and one might come up with reports like the one in the Laredo Morning Times describing charges against a Texas man who possessed firearms. The suspect is a convicted felon.

Over in Evansville, Ind., a recidivist named Marquell Lockridge is off to prison after being convicted of illegal possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, according to WFIE News.

The gun prohibition lobby and its allies in state legislatures and on Capitol Hill either don’t “get it” or actually don’t care that criminals ignore gun control laws. All of the restrictive measures adopted anywhere in the country only affect law-abiding citizens. Honest people are inconvenienced, penalized and presumed to be guilty of crimes which haven’t been committed.

Critics of tougher gun laws—the grassroots gun rights activists—believe all of the restrictions are actually designed to discourage people from exercising their Second Amendment-protected right to keep and bear arms.

For example, out in Washington, anti-gun lawmakers are pushing legislation House Bill 1163, which requires a permit-to-purchase a firearm. This mandate would include completion of a gun safety course, including a live-fire exercise, and starting in November 2026, would also apply to obtaining and renewing concealed pistol licenses. If the law is adopted, firearms rights groups have already vowed to mount challenges in court. The bill is up for a hearing this Friday before the Senate Ways and Means Committee.

How this might affect Washington CPL applications remains to be seen. The state Department of Licensing told Ammoland News that March ended with 700,943 active CPLs. The number is up from February’s 699,350 active licenses.

It amounts to a signal that Evergreen State residents are not buying any of the arguments that stricter gun control laws will make them safer. With more than 21 million active carry licenses across the U.S., people in other states have obviously reached the same conclusion while anti-gun politicians continue to bury their heads in the sand.

---

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.

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

Attacking U.S. Gun Laws Because of Haitian Gangs is Right Out of the Prohibitionist Playbook

A corrupt monopoly of violence results in uncontrollable corruption and violence, and the “answer” from gun prohibitionists is more laws against those inclined to obey them? (U.S. Department of Defense)

“Haiti Doesn’t Make Guns,” The New York Times reported Sunday. “So How Are Gangs Awash in Them?”

Who wants to guess where they’re going with this?

“Critics say not enough is done to regulate the sale of weapons in the United States to straw buyers, an illegal practice in which people buy guns on behalf of another person, including traffickers,” the report dutifully claims. “The practice is responsible for a large number of the arms that wind up used in crimes in Mexico and throughout Latin America.”

Anybody else getting a “This is how Operation Fast and Furious ‘gunwalking’ started” vibe? Because it is. The parroted narrative was that “Lax American gun laws” were responsible for Mexican cartel carnage. Lather, rinse, repeat.

“That’s where you can stop this,” The Times article quotes Jonathan Lowy, founder of Global Action on Gun Violence.  He’s the former Chief Counsel and VP Legal for Brady, whose group operates at the same address as the Violence Policy Center, and who has been behind efforts like Mexico suing U.S. gun makers and a  lawsuit filed in the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights arguing “that Inter-American human rights law requires the United States to prevent firearms manufacturers, distributors, and dealers from recklessly making and selling guns in ways that cause deaths and injuries.”

“If you stop the flow of guns and bullets, the gangs eventually, literally, run out of ammunition,” the story quotes William O’Neil, “the UN Independent Expert on the Human Rights Situation in Haiti.”

So, The Times go-to guys on what the public will be told about this are career globalist gun-grabbers. Figures. God forbid they should cite anyone who doesn’t share their goals or at least file this story under “editorial.”

We learn there are “20 armed groups operating in Port-au-Prince, some who carry AR-15 and Galil assault rifles, shotguns and Glock handguns. The United Nations estimates that between 270,000 and 500,000 firearms are circulating illegally in Haiti, with most weapons in the hands of gangs.”

And homicides are rising (how many of the victims are violent criminals themselves is left unreported).

That they’re violating Haiti’s strict gun laws, and that criminals don’t obey laws, don’t seem to  factor into the equation here.

But go ahead and stipulate “straw purchases” take place and smuggling occurs. What kind of numbers are we talking about here?

In January, Dominican customs authorities scored “37 guns.” In February, they seized “nearly two dozen firearms.” That’s the way of prohibition. Make something of value illegal, and people will find ways to profit from it, violently if that’s the only way.

Which people?

“Gangs sometimes acquire guns and ammunition by attacking police stations in Haiti or by bribing local police officers into providing weapons,” the report concedes.  “Nearly 1,000 police guns were diverted in the past four years, the U.N. said last week, and police officers have been reported to sell them on the black market.”

“In November, Dominican authorities arrested several Dominican police officers accused of smuggling nearly one million rounds of ammunition from a police depot,” the report adds.

“Last month, a 31-year-old police officer in St. Cloud, Fla., pleaded guilty to purchasing and reselling at least 58 firearms,” the report continues.

“A former security officer for Haiti’s chief of police was arrested in Florida in December after investigators linked him to nearly 90 firearms,” the report goes on.

Are we staring to see a pattern here? They really are following the same playbook as Mexico, aren’t they?

“Conviction of Top Mexican Cop Shows Corruption Problem, Not U.S. Guns”

That and an illegal alien from Guatemala, who would have never even been in the U.S. save for Democrat open borders policies, “recruited straw purchasers to illegally buy 900 firearms — including assault rifles — that he then transported from Florida to the Dominican Republic and Haiti.”

So, the answer from the gun-grabbers, naturally, is more “gun control” over you and me. And a quick scan of the Google “News” feed shows the media is doing a full-court press to drive that point home.

Also See: ‘Commonsense Gun Safety Law Paradise’ Haiti Continues Descent into Hell

---

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.

from https://ift.tt/rt1HYhx
via IFTTT