Notes from the Resistance
So, say the Democrats do well in the midterms and go on to retake the White House. What will that mean for all the progress made on advancing the Second Amendment over the past few years? [More]
What will it take to undo all the progress that’s been made on the Second Amendment in recent years? Stay home on November 3 and find out.
May we assume those circumstances to get the replica to DOJ HQ include “Only Ones” exemptions? The FOIA response doesn’t say. [More]
Just don’t you try getting one of these if you live in DC…
The August 2026 issue of Firearms News is now available at diverse, equitable, and inclusive newsstands throughout the Republic (of course you could just take advantage of lower subscription prices).
I have three pieces this month:
Looking at the work Stamboulieh has done on gun owners’ behalf over the years, those who know him have full confidence that he is not switching sides but will now be positioned to be even more effective at advancing justice. [More]
View this as a positive development. Even though I’m losing my lawyer, I do.
By requiring all attendees to enter via a newly built enclosed exhibit hall, fair management is essentially saying, “Hold our beer. [More]
I may go just to establish standing.
Guns allowed at Ohio State Fair but not in buildings; BFA’s Rieck calls it ‘ridiculous’ [More]
My AmmoLand piece reposted, which allows more to see it. I’m contemplating a follow-up with a county fair that says “Hold our beer.”
It’s instructive as to the end goals of what the prohibitionists term “commonsense gun safety laws,” that is, a monopoly of violence held by those who would rule with an iron fist. It’s for exactly those reasons that the Second Amendment was enacted in the first place. [More]
The collectivist monsters who demand discarding the Constitution and disarming the rest of us hide songs they used to publish threatening to “kill [us] all with knives and guns” as a key objective of their “revolution.”
“Fair patrons are not permitted to bring guns inside any structures, including barns, food establishments and concert venues.” [More]
What is the dominant, supposedly “pro gun” Ohio GOP afraid of?
The bottom line is just because it’s Texas hardly means that “gun rights” can be taken for granted. [More]
The enemy is mobilized, equipped and organized, with no shortage of ground troops. Committed defenders, willing to give it their all, are few.
Remind you of anything?
I’ll be joining host Mark Walters today at 4 Eastern. [Listen/Watch]
The July 2026 issue of Firearms News, featuring my articles:
is now available at diverse and inclusive newsstands throughout the Republic.
Or you could save yourself a trip and subscribe.
Have a contemplative Semiquincentennial Independence Day. If you’re not armed, you’ll be doing it wrong. [More]
I turned this one in in May and forgot it was due out, so I guess I lied when I said I’d be back Monday. And as long as I have your attention, check out another day-relevant piece from Firearms News: “It’s not just ‘The Fourth’ or ‘The Fourth of July,’ it’s Independence Day!”
It’s good, a victory actually, that people who would like to ban guns – and that, of course, is their ultimate goal – have a sense that it’s not going to happen politically, at least in the near term. But just because they talk about “progress” without prohibitions doesn’t mean they’ve given up on the idea. [More]
Just because “progressive” policies have enabled a subset of violent and resentful morons with a sense of unearned entitlement, anger management issues, and poor impulse control is no reason to make demands against the rest of us being able to repel them.
Lancaster County Circuit Court Judge John Martin issued a preliminary injunction on June 25 in the Crump v. Katz complaint against Senate Bill 749, Virginia’s “assault weapon” and magazine ban, blocking statewide enforcement until Dec. 31. The law was set to go into effect July 1. [More]
This summary was submitted before the news broke that NRA won a second injunction.
The need to apply consistent criteria is not only a matter of basic fairness, but of law. [More]
The very first comment needs to be addressed. With an initial estimate of 50 FTEs processing applications, the need to minimize subjectivity and establish consistency should be self-evident, especially noting how DOJ has shown it can still be all over the board on 2A, even under a “pro-gun administration.”
Further noting this is a rule and not a law, it’s not hard to see how lack of clear criteria could allow all kinds of negative dispositions under a new administration for those applicatons already in the pipeline before it terminates the program altogether.
Revised to update case name, defendants and plaintiffs, and added notice at start about injunction being denied/current case status. [More]
The question on everyone’s mind: Will the case be appealed? They have 15 days. He would like to and will give the matter serious consideration. [More]
I’ve updated “Judge Rules Against Injunction in Militia Challenge to VA Gun Ban” with a synopsis and transcript of yesterday’s Zoom meeting.
“Plaintiffs challenge these prohibitions solely under the militia clause of Article I, Section 13 of the Constitution of Virginia. They do not rest their case on the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, nor on the individual right to keep and bear arms also embodied in Article I, Section 13,” the complaint declares. “Their argument is simpler and more fundamental: the militia clause guarantees the existence of a ‘well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms.’” [More]
My Firearms News column elaborates on some case details not included in my Saturday AmmoLand exclusive.
GOA and GOF Petition the Virginia Supreme Court for a Preliminary Ruling on Virginia’s Looming “Assault Firearms” Ban [More]
In related news, SAF is throwing financial support behind another case first reported on by yours truly.
Simply put, as noted in the Statement of Facts, “The weapons banned by the act are the arms of the citizen militia.” [More]
While the other challenges are on hold, this unique complaint is still scheduled to be heard.
Important record correction
The Crump case also notes:
Plaintiffs do not bring any claim or seek any relief under the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Rather, they proceed only under Article I, Section 13 of the Constitution of Virginia.