EPA - The War on Guns

More Lead for the Condors

The EPA Spent $620,000 On Guns And Ammo [More]

Did they do an environmental impact study first…?

Shot Full of Lead

A federal court on Friday rejected a long-fought effort by environmental groups to force a ban on lead ammo in a national forest, providing a key win for hunters, the National Rifle Association, and the United States Forest Service. [More]

It’s been a long time coming. Last night I brought out the Center for Biological Diversity gorilla hand ashtray to celebrate.

Now sue them.

[Via JR]

Connect the Dots

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court in Sackett v EPA issued a major ruling cutting back on the authority of the EPA and by extension all federal executive branch agencies such as the ATF to enact laws via regulations. The Sackett opinion contains powerful language that can likely be used against the ATF in various contexts including in the ongoing legal fights over the bump stock ban and the pistol brace rules. Mark Smith breaks it down. [Watch]

If you think about it, this is also a powerful argument against the phony “single issue” deflection.

It’s all related. That’s because it’s not about guns, it’s about freedom.

[Via Jess]

A Climate of Restraint

“Congress did not grant EPA…the authority to devise emissions caps based on the generation shifting approach the Agency took in the Clean Power Plan,” the majority wrote, referring to an Obama-era power plant regulation. [More]

Agencies need Constitutionally-delegated authority and the executive branch can’t just usurp powers? Who knew?

And if anything ought to freeze Greta’s face into a permanent bitter scowl, this should do it…

[Via WiscoDave]

HOW THINGS WORK AROUND HERE

Satisfaction Guaranteed

Anyone not happy with anything on this site at any time will get 100% of all money they paid to me refunded, no questions asked. (No gratuities solicited or accepted.)

Comment House Rules

Keep them on topic. Trying to hijack threads really grinds my gears. No spam.
I moderate them so I’ll get to them when I can.
No threats against anyone except me. No fights–this is my place and if things get ugly, I treat unruly visitors the same way as I would in my home. Do not feed trolls–I’ll take out the trash.
Try to keep it clean.
I’m the final arbiter. If you don’t like the rules, start your own damn blog.

WarOnGuns Correspondents

Story tips received via email and social media messages will be credited. Just let me know how you want to be recognized (real name, first name/last initial, or screen name.)

Link Policy

I maintained a WogRoll at the old Blogspot place predicated on reciprocity with like-minded RKBA-related sites. Truth be told, I never got much in terms of site visits to make the effort worth the time. I may try to do something again in the future, but for now, my hands are more than full trying to get a new site started.

Advertising Disclosure

This is a placeholder for now because I have not done ads on the old blog for years. In case I ever start them up here, this will be the policy in effect: The FTC has some fool nonsense rules about ads on blogs or some such and presumes authority over the First Amendment to compel the unfunded mandate that we who earn ad revenues make some kind of disclosure so you don’t think we’re getting paid to say nice things about people or God knows what, meaning they must think you’re stupid, too. I have had a few ads on the old site in the past and may do so again if I think it’s worth a try. Combined, I probably couldn’t buy a box of good cigars each year, let alone a bottle of George T. Stagg, and that is somehow supposed to compromise my morality to force me to say nice things about products and services I don’t mean simply in exchange for filthy lucre. If you believe that, leave now–you’re not smart enough to be here. Bottom line, aside from welcoming a sponsor, I will do no posts related to their products or services, or reviews of what they offer without complete disclosure.

About “The Only Ones”

So named from a comment by DEA agent Lee Paige, who told a classroom full of kids he was “the only one” qualified to be armed and then promptly shot himself in the foot, the purpose of this feature has never been to bash cops. The only reason I do this is to amass a credible body of evidence to present when those who would deny our right to keep and bear arms use the argument that only government enforcers are professional and trained enough to do so safely and responsibly. And it’s also used to illustrate when those of official status, rank, or privilege, both in law enforcement and in some other government position, get special breaks not available to we commoners, particularly (but not exclusively) when they’re involved in gun-related incidents.