Hegseth Signs Memo Allowing Soldiers to Carry Personal Sidearms on DOW Property

Our military installations have been turned into gun-free zones—leaving our service members vulnerable and exposed.

That ends today. pic.twitter.com/IQ204YepZ0

— Secretary of War Pete Hegseth (@SecWar) April 2, 2026

Military policy on carrying personal firearms just got flipped by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, who signed a memo directing military base commanders to allow personnel—“namely, uniformed service members”—to carry privately owned firearms “while in their nonofficial duty capacity on DOW property within the United States.”

Hegseth signed the memo while announcing the new policy on a video posted on “X” on Thursday. In his announcement, which ran just over 2 minutes, 30 seconds, Hegseth noted, “Before today, it was virtually impossible—most people probably don’t know this—for War Department personnel to get permission to carry and store their own personal weapons aligned with the state laws where we operate our installations. Effectively, our bases across the country were gun-free zones, unless you’re training, or unless you’re a military policeman, you couldn’t carry. You couldn’t bring your own firearm for your own personal protection onto post. Well, that’s no longer.”

In a statement obtained by Ammoland News from Kostas Moros, director of Legal Research and Education for the Second Amendment Foundation, he said, “SAF fully supports Secretary Hegseth’s decision to enable our service members to be able to carry personal firearms on military bases, with any denials requiring a written explanation. SAF believes any ‘gun-free zones’ are constitutionally questionable, and also create soft targets that are enticing to criminals and others bent on violence. The fact that military bases, of all places, have been under such restrictions has long been perplexing to us. Serving your country should not require the wholesale abandonment of the Second Amendment right of armed self-defense. It’s excellent to hear that this dangerous policy is finally changing.”

In announcing this change of policy, Hegseth alluded to past tragedies on military bases, including a December 2019 attack at Naval Air Station Pensacola, Florida which left three men dead and eight other people wounded, and another incident at Fort Stewart-Hunter Army Airfield, Georgia in August 2025. That incident left five soldiers wounded, and was committed by Sgt. Quornelius Radford, using his own firearm. On March 31, he pleaded guilty to several charges, according to WTOC News. He will face further charges of attempted premeditated murder and unpremeditated murder on June 15.

There was another fatal shooting at Holloman Air Force Base in New Mexico on March 17, which resulted in one fatality.

Going back further in history, two separate shootings occurred at Fort Hood, Texas, one in 2009 during which 13 people were killed, and the other in 2014, which left four dead. The 2009 shooting was committed by then-Major Nidal Hasan, using his own firearm, as noted by the New York Times. Hasan was convicted and sentenced to death. Following a series of appeals, which stretched over several years, the U.S. Supreme Court denied Hasan’s final petition for a writ of certiorari. Last September, Hegseth said he would seek formal approval from President Donald Trump for the execution to be carried out, according to Wikipedia.

According to a media release from Hegseth’s office, the undersecretary of war for intelligence and security will be responsible for updating the War Department Manual, which lays out physical security measures for the DOW. This update “will authorize permitting officials to review service member requests to carry personally owned firearms.”

In his video, Hegseth states, “If the rejection of an application is necessary, the rejection shall be in writing and explain the objective, clearly describable, and individualized basis for such decision. The review shall be a dispassionate and commonsense application of applicable law and standards.”

Hegseth’s announcement has literally reversed long-standing policy, and he matter-of-factly explained why it makes sense.

“The War Department’s uniformed service members are trained at the highest and unwavering standards,” Hegseth said. “These warfighters — entrusted with the safety of our nation — are no less entitled to exercise their God-given right to keep and bear arms than any other American. Our warfighters defend the right of others to carry. They should be able to carry themselves.”

He subsequently observed, “Not all enemies are foreign, nor are they all outside our borders. Some are domestic.”

Trump Ousts Pam Bondi as AG, Todd Blanche Takes Over Amid Epstein Fallout

---

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/FDb3Cte
via IFTTT

ATF Set to Introduce New Frames and Receivers Rule

The ATF is preparing a new rule on frames and receivers as litigation continues in VanDerStok v. Bondi. Img Duncan Johnson

In a filing in VanDerStok et al, v. Bondi et al. (formerly VanDerStok v. Garland), the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) has asked the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division, to stay the case for 90 days due to an upcoming rule change.

The ATF’s Frames and Receivers Rule (officially Final Rule 2021R-05F, titled “Definition of ‘Frame or Receiver’ and Identification of Firearms”) is a 2022 regulation issued by the ATF. It updated the regulatory definitions of “firearm,” “frame,” and “receiver” under the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA). The rule effectively restricts the sale or transfer of most unfinished firearm frames and receivers that are not serialized – colloquially known as “80% firearms.” Although the official term is privately manufactured firearms (PMFs), anti-gun groups have demonized these items as “ghost guns.”

The rule was published in the Federal Register on April 26, 2022, and took effect on August 24, 2022. It remains in force following the U.S. Supreme Court’s 7-2 decision in Bondi v. VanDerStok (2025), which upheld the rule against a facial challenge.

Before the change, federal law generally defined a firearm as a single part that houses the hammer, bolt, or breechblock, and firing mechanism. The new rule expanded this to include partially completed frames or receivers (including certain parts kits) that have reached a stage of manufacture where they are clearly identifiable as an unfinished frame or receiver, or that are designed to, or may readily be completed, assembled, restored, or converted to function as a frame or receiver.

The keyword is “readily.” The ATF defines “readily” as a process that is fairly or reasonably efficient, quick, and easy, taking into account factors such as time, tools, expertise, instructions, jigs or templates, and other elements. According to the ATF, selling a partially completed lower with a jig, template, or instructions can make it subject to regulation.

The rule primarily affects the commercial sale or transfer of unfinished precursor parts. Home builders are still free to privately manufacture their own PMFs without a federal firearms license (FFL) or serial number, as long as the firearms are not for sale and not transferred to prohibited persons.

However, the parts they purchase may now be regulated if sold as kits. Exemptions exist under the rule. A bare forging, a flat sheet without indexing, or a very incomplete kit requiring significant machining, expertise, or time is generally not regulated as a firearm. AR-15 lowers remain the serialized “receiver” under the prior grandfathered classification.

Many are wondering what is changing with the rule. Although the revised rule is still in draft form and the final language is subject to change, AmmoLand News spoke with sources at the ATF to get a high-level overview of the proposed changes. Polymer frames, such as those made by the now-defunct Polymer80, will remain subject to strict regulation. Nothing will change on that front.

Our sources indicate that certain metal products, such as the MUP-1 from JSD Supply, will now be permissible. JSD Supply previously sold an 80% Sig P320 kit before the regulatory change and was rumored to be working on a Sig P365 kit. If the new draft rule remains as currently written, those kits will once again be legal to sell and transfer.

This rule is just one of many expected changes that will lessen the ATF’s grip on the firearms industry. The updated rule isn’t earth-shattering, but it represents progress in rolling back some of former President Joe Biden’s use of government regulation to target law-abiding 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.

---

from https://ift.tt/8oqMXS5
via IFTTT

Trump Ousts Pam Bondi as AG, Todd Blanche Takes Over Amid Epstein Fallout

President Donald Trump removed Attorney General Pam Bondi and named Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche as acting AG, putting the Justice Department under new leadership amid Epstein-related fallout. Image generated with AI, image of Pam Bondi from DOJ.

President Donald Trump informed Attorney General Pam Bondi on Wednesday night that she would be stepping down, according to people familiar with the matter.

The conversation reportedly took place in the Oval Office shortly before Trump delivered a televised address on the ongoing conflict in Iran. By the time he finished speaking, Bondi’s tenure as the nation’s top law enforcement official had effectively come to an end, even though the formal announcement did not come until the following morning.

On Thursday, Trump acknowledged Bondi’s departure on Truth Social, praising her as “a Great American Patriot and a loyal friend.” He also noted that she had served in the role for about a year and would be moving on to opportunities in the private sector. Her deputy, Todd Blanche, has assumed the acting attorney general position.

According to multiple accounts, the decision had been in the works for some time. Ammoland News became aware of the discussion as early as December 2025. Tensions reportedly grew in part over the Justice Department’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files. Despite campaign expectations and pressure from lawmakers, the release of those materials has been slow, heavily redacted in places, and widely criticized by both supporters and critics of the administration.

Bondi, a longtime ally of Trump and former Florida attorney general, faced criticism from across the political spectrum. For some in Trump’s base, the Epstein issue became a persistent frustration that never seemed fully resolved.

At the same time, there were quieter concerns among gun rights advocates. Under Bondi’s leadership, the Justice Department continued defending certain provisions of the National Firearms Act (NFA) in court, including regulations involving suppressors and short-barreled firearms. While the department also pushed back against some state-level gun control measures, some Second Amendment supporters had hoped for a more aggressive approach overall. Many pointed out that the DOJ, while attacking state laws, tended to protect federal gun control measures.

With Bondi’s departure, attention is now turning to what direction the department may take next, particularly in ongoing litigation and policy decisions tied to firearms and transparency issues. Gun rights advocates hope that the change at the top will result in the DOJ stopping to defend what they see as unconstitutional laws, such as regulations on suppressors.

Speculation is already circulating about possible candidates to permanently fill the role. Among those mentioned is Lee Zeldin, the former New York congressman who is now head of the Environmental Protection Agency, who has maintained a strong conservative profile and support for gun rights. Zeldin was the co-sponsor of the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act and several other high-profile gun rights bills.

In the interim, Todd Blanche, who has worked closely with Trump in the past and previously served as a federal prosecutor, will lead the department in an acting capacity. Observers expect him to review pending matters, including the Epstein-related materials and active firearms cases.

The change marks another notable shift within the administration as it navigates both domestic policy challenges and international developments. How the Justice Department proceeds under new leadership, particularly on high-profile transparency issues and Second Amendment-related litigation, is likely to draw close attention in the weeks ahead.

Supreme Court Asked to Stop New York’s Lawfare End-Run Around PLCAA

---

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/bQlYGf4
via IFTTT

USPS Moves to Allow Mailing Handguns After DOJ Says Federal Ban Is Unconstitutional

A DOJ legal opinion says the federal handgun mailing ban is unconstitutional, and USPS is now proposing rules that would allow lawful handgun shipments. iStock-1357038188

The Trump Administration, via the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), issued a Memorandum Opinion on January 15, 2026, pertaining to the general ban on the mailing of handguns by use of the Postal Service. The Memorandum declared the federal ban on mailing handguns to be unconstitutional.  This was a significant step toward restoring rights traditionally protected by the Second Amendment.

Our history is full of famous figures ordering firearms by mail, from Bat Masterson to President Theodore Roosevelt.  In 1927, a federal law banning the mailing of handguns went into effect. It is widely regarded as the first federal firearms law.

The Congressional record of the debate shows the purpose was to prevent black people from circumventing existing state and local handgun bans on the carry of concealed weapons by black men.

“Here we have laid bare the principal cause for the high murder rate in Memphis–the carrying by colored people of a concealed deadly weapon, most often a pistol.  Can we not cope with this situation?” – Senator John K. Shields (D-TN), 1924

It took time for the act to be passed and become law. Senator Shields said the primary purpose was to prevent black people from circumventing state and local bans on the possession and carry of concealed handguns. This was done through the interstate shipping of handguns. Shields asserted that no law-abiding citizen had any lawful reason to carry a concealed weapon. The ban only affected the postal service. Private shippers were not banned from shipping handguns.

The current regulation proposed by the Postal Service is designed to bring postal regulations back into conformity with the Constitution, or at least with the OLC Memorandum’s finding.

“The proposed revisions expand the scope of mailable firearms compared to the existing regulations by allowing lawful handguns to be mailed under the same terms and conditions as lawful rifles and shotguns. These conditions continue to require, among other things, that mailed firearms be
unloaded. Additionally, otherwise nonmailable handguns will remain mailable between authorized persons consistent with Section 1715.”

Handguns will be included as “Mailable firearms”.  For mailing within a particular state, shipment of handguns will be required to use “Return Service Requested”. Tracking and signature capture at delivery will be required. For mailing to out-of-state addresses, by those without a Federal Firearms License,  the following is required:

Out-of-State Mailings by Non-FFL Owners: Non-FFL owners may mail Mailable Firearms to themselves or another person in another state for lawful activities under the following conditions.The mailpiece must:

1. 1. Be addressed to the recipient.
      
   2. Include the “in the care of” endorsement immediately preceding the name of the applicable temporary custodian.
      
   3. Be opened by the recipient.
      
   4. Be mailed using a class of mail, product, or Extra Service that provides tracking and signature capture at delivery. 

The reform regulation will not go into effect until the comment period has lapsed. The comment period will begin at the time of publication in the Federal Register, expected on April 2, 2026, and continue for 30 days. Comments can be made after the proposed rule is published. Exactly when the regulation may go into effect is not certain at this time. If this rule is of interest, citizens can influence it through reasoned arguments submitted via comments at the link when the comment period is open.

One of the expected results of being able to send handguns through the postal service is a drop in the cost of ordering handguns remotely, through the Internet, telephone, or by mail. The cost of returning handguns to the manufacturer for warranty service should also drop. The cost of sending handguns through non-postal means has skyrocketed in recent years, along with privacy concerns.

The argument over the utility of concealed weapons continues to this day. Those opposed to an armed population claim that weapons in the hands of ordinary citizens, especially handguns, serve no useful purpose. Those supporting the reasoning behind the adoption of the Second Amendment claim multiple useful and necessary purposes. Research on the subject is divided.

Bans on handguns do not appear to reduce overall homicide rates or suicide rates. Handgun bans appear to be motivated for purposes of political power.

The Second Amendment appears clear on the subject. The Supreme Court has issued a definitive opinion in the Bruen decision. The Second Amendment protects the right to be armed in public.

 

 

---

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/XeYwUPt
via IFTTT

Gun Prohibitionists Using Pincer Strategy with Reports on U.S. Arms in Mexico

Who thinks “lax U.S. gun laws” are responsible for Mexican cartel carnage? IMG iStock-913549340

“They were under siege by a Mexican cartel. Now these civilians fight back with AK-47s and grenades,” The Washington Post reports. “Residents in the Mexican central state of Guerrero are setting up self-defense patrols to keep a powerful cartel out of their mountain towns.”

That’s a good thing, right? Citizens who want to live their lives banding together to defend themselves against evil oppressors? That’s not why they’re posting this.

Because while it seems like the overwhelmed and outgunned Mexican citizens – who can’t rely on the government for justice – fighting for self-defense, freedom, and survival, are doing what any decent human being unwilling to live as a victim or a slave would do, that’s not the point of this story. So, the WaPo feigns understanding and objectivity but then shapes a narrative.

By lumping defenders in with “local gangs and vigilante groups, many of which are allied with the larger cartels,” and noting “Because Mexico has strict gun control laws, the vast majority of arms in Mexico are smuggled from the U.S. by cartels,” they’ve just been redefined as part of the “problem,” their motives notwithstanding. And the larger problem, per a prohibitionist narrative that keeps being recycled, is the carnage is caused by American weaponry being smuggled into Mexico, and that’s all due to the Second Amendment and “lax U.S. gun laws.”

Where have we heard that before?

Gun control doesn’t work in Mexico, why would it work here in the U.S.? pic.twitter.com/KXlAtIb3Tf

— Crime Prevention Research Center (@CrimeResearch1) January 7, 2023

Fingers would be better pointed at Mexico’s pervasive corruption and tyrannical citizen disarmament edicts that have made a cartel black market both lucrative and inevitably bloody. And the narrative perpetuated by the article repeats the lies used so shamelessly to gin up domestic support for gun bans here.

Start with the grenades. These aren’t arms you can pick up at a gun show or from your local FFL.

From my January 2011 report, “Ordnance crossing into Mexico over border—its southern one”:

“Mexico… is also flooded with hand grenades … some of the grenade stockpiles are coming up from leftover military depots in Central America from the 1980s… Some have been taken/bought/stolen from the Mexican army itself.”

Later that year, I cited ATF actions concerning inert grenade hulls and controlled delivery to Mexico and attempts to retaliate against whistleblower Peter Forcelli by trying to undermine his credibility (also see my  AmmoLand interview with Forcelli and review of his book).

And there’s one other major lie being told, and this is a long known and calculated one originated by a veteran gun prohibitionist group.

The civilians are “Armed with military-grade weapons smuggled from the U.S.,” WaPo declares. Again, “thanks” to the National Firearms Act and the Hughes Amendment, “military grade” (full -auto capable) rifles are not something you can just “straw purchase” from a gun store and drive across the border. Whoever is getting the military stuff is getting it through corrupt official sources. The lie being promoted here plays right into the hands of the Violence Policy Center, that uses it to agitate for semi-auto bans:

“The weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons—anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun—can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons.”

Then there’s the other jaw of the pincer.

“Inside the Supply Line Delivering American Guns to Mexican Cartels,” The New York Times headline proclaims. “A surge of weapons is flowing from the U.S. to Mexico. These firearms — sourced from gun shops, shows, websites and apps — are funneled across the border to fuel the country’s most violent crimes.”

Heavy on anecdotes and estimates, the same old tricks used prior, during, and after Operation Fast and Furious “gunwalking” have been dusted off for reuse with a new generation of readers.

“About 80 percent of weapons seized by Mexican authorities come from the United States, [Mexico’s security minister, Omar Harfuch] said at a recent news conference,” readers are further “informed.”

“[B]oth Sinaloa Cartel and its rival Jalisco New Generation Cartel are increasingly armed with weapons like grenade launchers, grenades, machine guns and assault rifles,” they are told. What they’re not told is what “gun shops, shows, websites and apps” sell those things to Americans.

From a report I posted in 2009,

I’d like to share with you a bit of testimony, from the Statement of David Ogden, Deputy Attorney General, United States Department of Justice, before the United States Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs hearing entitled “Southern Border Violence: Homeland Security Threats, Vulnerabilities, and Responsibilities”, presented March 25, 2009. Just a small bit, really, but a critical one, almost lost in the 20 pages of his statement:

According to ATF’s Tracing Center, 90 percent of the firearms about which ATF receives information are traceable to the United States.

Read it again and compare it to what the antis are saying. It’s very different, isn’t it?

It’s not guns “seized” by Mexican authorities. It’s the unknown percentage of those seized then submitted to ATF for tracing. Both Minister Harfuch and The Times know that.

And from another:

What is being ignored is the fact that the United States government (via Departments of Defense and State) sells thousands of military and non-military firearms to foreign governments, including Mexico and Central and South American countries…Many of these governments are notoriously corrupt and unstable. Moreover, we know that individuals in the Mexican police and military have ties to the drug cartels. It is highly reasonable, if not probable, that many of these weapons (and those sold to these nations in previous years), have now made their way onto the black market and thereby being funneled into the hands of the Mexican drug cartels. If traced by the BATFE, any of the firearms above would return as “originating in the US.”  Origination in the US clearly does not equate to an origination in the lawful US civilian market. [Emphasis added]

“Conviction of Top Mexican Cop Shows Corruption Problem, Not U.S. Guns,” I reported for Firearms News 14 years later. “Former Mexico Public Security Secretary Genaro Garcia Luna is guilty of drug trafficking, also showing new points on American guns in Mexico.”

And from a 2021 AmmoLand report:

U.S. Guns-to-Mexico Reports Suggests ‘Deja Vu All Over Again’

No one is saying U.S. guns don’t get smuggled into Mexico just as certainly as drugs are smuggled from there to here. A reporter wishing to make that case will absolutely be able to find untold examples to exploit. But when they don’t present the complete picture and then rely on recycling the same canards that were debunked years ago, it needs to be called out by those who know better. Especially when “experience hath shewn” the point behind the propaganda is to gin up low information voter support for being swindled out of their rights.

The answer is to expose corruption and enhance border security, not undermine the security of a free state by infringing on the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

(NOTE: Some of the substantiating links used in this article go to stories from discontinued websites that are only available via the Internet Archive (“Wayback Machine”), and may load slowly or time out.)

---

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/pSNJrQu
via IFTTT

Metcalf’s Shotgun Returned After Ninth Circuit Tossed Billings Gun-Free School Zone Case

Gabe Metcalf with his returned single-shot 20-gauge shotgun and six rounds of ammunition. Image Courtesy of Gabe Metcalf’s Mother, Vivian.

In the Gun Free School Zone case against Gabriel Metcalf in Billings, Montana, the authorities have returned Gabriel’s single-shot 20-gauge shotgun, an ammunition pouch, and the six rounds of 20-gauge ammunition that were seized when Gabriel was arrested on August 23, 2023.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the case illegitimate and remanded it to the District Court with instructions to dismiss. The Ninth Circuit opinion was sent to the District Court on September 23, 2025, just short of two years after Gabe was arrested.

AmmoLand has been at the forefront of reporting on this case, with over two dozen articles over the course of the last two and a half years.

Officer Stroble returned Gabe’s shotgun, ammunition, and ammo pouch. He does not appear happy or friendly. Image courtesy of Gabe Metcalf and Mother.

It is not clear if the officers were acting on behalf of the Billings Police Force or the ATF/Billings Police Task Force. Gabe says Officer Stroble was the officer who arrested him two and a half years ago as an officer in the task force. The arrest was a federal arrest based on the federal Gun Free School Zone Act.  The task force was used to arrest Gabe after the Billings police, on a local TV station, said they could not arrest Gabe because he was not breaking the law.

Gabriel won his case in the Federal Courts. The Ninth Circuit did not say the Gun Free School Zone law was unconstitutional. They said Gabe should never have been indicted and tried.

Gabe and his mother, Vivian, suffered significant damages during the two and a half years of punishment by process in the courts. Gabe spent a month in jail and years on probation. His mother stopped her business as a seamstress. Their budding recycling business was destroyed. Their reputation was damaged, relationships destroyed. When I spoke with Gabe and his mother, I learned that Gabe’s property, particularly the shotgun, had not been returned months after the case was dismissed.

It has been common for police departments to fail to return property, even to those who win in the courts. Forcing the police to comply often costs more than the property is worth. My suggestion to Gabe and his mother was that they contact Gary Marbut for advice.

Gary Marbut is the founder and President of the Montana Shooting Sports Association MSSA. He is a legendary figure in Montana’s Second Amendment community.

Gary put forward the idea of sending a letter from the MSSA to a candidate for the US Senate in Montana, Kurt Alme. Kurt Alme was the United States Attorney for Montana, appointed by President Trump. Alme resigned from the US Attorney’s office on March 6, 2026. Gary sent the letter on March 10, 2026.

 

Kurt Alme’s predecessor had been appointed by President Biden. Kurt has good contacts in the US Attorney’s office in Montana. Timothy J. Racicot is currently the acting United States Attorney in Montana.  U.S. Attorney Racicot was the acting U.S. Attorney assigned to the position by President Trump before Kurt Alme was appointed as the U.S. Attorney in Montana in 2025.

Racicot was the First Assistant U.S. Attorney during the previous administration, before becoming acting U.S. Attorney. Kurt Alme was Racicot’s boss for five months, from October 7, 2025 to March 6. 2026. The Ninth Circuit ordered the District Court to dismiss the case on September 23, about two weeks before Kurt Alme was appointed to be the United States Attorney for Montana, and became Timothy J. Racicot’s boss.

Kurt Alme was not in charge when the Metcalf Gun Free School Zone case was being prosecuted. It may be Kurt Alme was unfamiliar with the case, as it was ordered dismissed before he was appointed.

On March 10, Gary Marbut sent Kurt Alme a letter to remind him of the case. On March 20, 2026,  Gabe’s shotgun was returned by Officer Strobel. Stroble is said to be the same officer who had arrested Gabe. Gabe and his mother received a phone call on or about March 20th, which was difficult to identify. When called back, the officer on the phone wanted Gabe to come to their office to pick up the shotgun.  

Gabe insisted his shotgun be returned to where it had been seized.

Within half an hour, on March 20th, at about 0930, the shotgun was returned. Such a quick response makes it appear the return was considered a high priority.

Because of the nature and high profile of the case, and because Kurt Alme had already resigned as United States Attorney before the letter from Gary Marbut was sent, there is no documented evidence that the letter was responsible for the shotgun being returned. The timeline implies that such may be the case.

Gabe’s mother, Vivian, reminded the officers who were returning the shotgun, the front door did not work properly. According to Gabe’s mother, it was unnecessarily damaged when the officers served a warrant on August 23, 2023, the day Gabe was peaceably arrested outside his home.

Gabe was arrested when he went to talk to officers at a parking lot across the street outside his home. Gabe said he took the initiative to talk to them. He had the understanding the situation would be resolved in his favor. Gabe said he had left the shotgun inside, as he had said he would do, to the same officers, days earlier.

The arrest, indictment, trial, appeal, and dismissal were all uncalled for. 

It is unknown if Gabe and his mother will ever be made whole for their years of suffering and punishment by the process.

Gabe’s Mother, Vivian, has established a GiveSendGo site.

---

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/n1HqpvX
via IFTTT

From ‘Military Machine Gun’ to .22 Replica: KIRO 7’s UZI Story Changed Fast

Screenshot from KIRO 7’s March 20 coverage showing the station’s original “military machine gun” framing. Image: Screenshot/KIRO 7

In the category of image over substance, Seattle’s KIRO 7 appears to have turned a felon-in-possession arrest into yet another misleading anti-gun scare story.

On March 20, KIRO 7 ran the headline: “Military machine gun found on public bus rider during KCSO increased patrols.” In the story, the station reported that King County Sheriff’s Office deputies encountered a man smoking marijuana on a bus, removed him from the bus, and during a pat-down found “a gun — an Uzi with a silencer” concealed under his shirt and tucked down his pants. KIRO then told readers, “An Uzi is a military-grade machine gun that is generally illegal to own in the United States.”

That is a dramatic claim. It is also one that appears not to match the gun KIRO showed its audience.

By the very next day, KIRO’s own follow-up reporting described the seized firearm differently. Instead of repeating the “military machine gun” line, the station referred to it as “a reproduction .22 caliber Uzi-style machine gun with a fake suppressor.” That wording is still sloppy, because a semi-automatic .22 replica is not a machine gun. But it strongly suggests the original story exaggerated what deputies had actually recovered.

That distinction is not a technicality. If the firearm shown was in fact a .22-caliber UZI-style replica, labeling it a “military machine gun” was not just imprecise wording. It gave viewers a false impression about what the suspect actually possessed.

Product listings make the likely explanation even more obvious. Walther has marketed a semi-automatic UZI .22 LR tactical rimfire replica, describing it as a UZI rimfire replica and explicitly identifying it as a semi-auto .22 LR rifle, not a select-fire submachine gun.

That appears consistent with what KIRO eventually reported: a “reproduction .22 caliber Uzi-style” firearm with a “fake suppressor.”

KIRO correctly reported that the man was a convicted felon, which would make his possession of any firearm unlawful regardless of whether the gun was a real machine gun or a semi-auto .22 clone. That was already a valid story. The real offense was serious enough on its own. There was no need to inflate it into a “military machine gun” narrative if the object shown was actually a rimfire replica.

Unfortunately, this kind of framing has a long history. In its well-known paper on “assault weapons,” Violence Policy Center openly argued that public confusion between machine guns and semi-automatic firearms could be politically useful, writing that “anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun.” That line has aged better than the media outlets that keep proving him right.

If King County deputies recovered a firearm from a prohibited person, report that. If the gun was a .22-caliber UZI-style replica with a fake suppressor, report that too. But telling the public a “military machine gun” was found on a bus rider, then quietly shifting to “reproduction .22 caliber Uzi-style” language later, is bad reporting and exactly why people have shifted away from mainstream media sources.

DOJ Responds to Gun Rights Restoration FOIA Request

---

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/3z8nOW1
via IFTTT