Category: RKBA

Financial Big Brother is Watching You
A brief note on an overlooked nightmare.

A few weeks ago, Ohio congressman and Judiciary Committee chairman Jim Jordan’s office released a letter to Noah Bishoff, the former director of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, or FinCEN, an arm of the Treasury Department. Jordan’s team was asking Bishoff for answers about why FinCEN had “distributed slides, prepared by a financial institution,” detailing how other private companies might use MCC transaction codes to “detect customers whose transactions may reflect ‘potential active shooters.’” The slide suggested the “financial company” was sorting for terms like “Trump” and “MAGA,” and watching for purchases of small arms and sporting goods, or purchases in places like pawn shops or Cabela’s, to identify financial threats.

Jordan’s letter to Bishoff went on:

According to this analysis, FinCEN warned financial institutions of “extremism” indicators that include “transportation charges, such as bus tickets, rental cars, or plane tickets, for travel to areas with no apparent purpose,” or “the purchase of books (including religious texts) and subscriptions to other media containing extremist views.”

During the Twitter Files, we searched for snapshots of the company’s denylist algorithms, i.e. whatever rules the platform was using to deamplify or remove users. We knew they had them, because they were alluded to often in documents (a report on the denylist is_Russian, which included Jill Stein and Julian Assange, was one example). However, we never found anything like the snapshot Jordan’s team just published:

The highlighted portion shows how algorithmic analysis works in financial surveillance. First compile a list of naughty behaviors, in the form of MCC codes for guns, sporting goods, and pawn shops. Then, create rules: $2,500 worth of transactions in the forbidden codes, or a number showing that more than 50% of the customer’s transactions are the wrong kind, might trigger a response. The Committee wasn’t able to specify what the responses were in this instance, but from previous experience covering anti-money-laundering (AML) techniques at banks like HSBC, a good guess would be generation of something like Suspcious Activity Reports, which can lead to a customer being debanked.

If Facebook, Twitter, and Google have already shown a tendency toward wide-scale monitoring of speech and the use of subtle levers to apply pressure on attitudes, financial companies can use records of transactions to penetrate individual behaviors far more deeply. Especially if enhanced by AI, a financial history can give almost any institution an immediate, unpleasantly accurate outline of anyone’s life, habits, and secrets. Worse, they can couple that picture with a powerful disciplinary lever, in the form of the threat of closed accounts or reduced access to payment services or credit. Jordan’s slide is a picture of the birth of the political credit score.

There’s more coming on this, and other articles forthcoming (readers who’ve noticed it’s been quiet around here will soon find out why). While the world falls to pieces over Tucker, Putin, and Ukraine, don’t overlook this horror movie. If banks and the Treasury are playing the same domestic spy game that Twitter and Facebook have been playing with the FBI, tales like the frozen finances of protesting Canadian truckers won’t be novelties for long. As is the case with speech, where huge populations have learned to internalize censorship rules almost overnight, we may soon have to learn the hard way that even though some behaviors aren’t illegal, they can still be punished with great effectiveness, in a Terminator-like world where computers won’t miss anything that moves.

What a crazy time we live in! See you from the Nevada caucus, and watch this space for other news soon.

White House Wants Schools to Gaslight Parents About Guns

The White House wants to enlist school officials to help hoodwink parents about its gun control plans, according to a statement issued last week.

The reason is simple: They want to take advantage of the officials’ credibility, which the White House lacks, especially when it comes to guns.

Teachers and administrators, the White House said in the statement, “can be trusted, credible messengers when it comes to providing guidance on gun violence prevention and safe firearm storage options.”

The new program, which is one of three executive orders Joe Biden issued last week, will be spearheaded by Jill Biden, White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention Director Stefanie Feldman and Education Secretary Miguel Cardona.

“This issue matters to the President. It weighs on his heart every day. And he’s not going to stop fighting until we’ve solved it,” Jill Biden said last week while touting the plan at a “Gun Violence Prevention Event,” which was held in the Indian Treaty Room of the Eisenhower Executive Office Building.

From a civil rights perspective, the most worrisome portion of the White House plan is a customizable “communications template,” which school officials “can use to engage with parents and families about the importance of safe firearm storage and encourage more people to take preventive action by safely storing firearms.”

The template is designed so school officials can insert the name of the school and their letterhead to make it appear as though the document came from the school and not the White House. In fact, neither the White House nor the Biden-Harris administration are even mentioned in the document.

and

Sincerely, [INSERT NAME OF SCHOOL OR SCHOOL DISTRICT ADMINISTRATOR]

“We encourage all school leaders to consider taking steps to build awareness in your school community about safe firearm storage, such as:

  • Share information about safe firearm storage with parents and families in your school communities. You can use the enclosed letter as a resource for parents, families, guardians, and caregivers—as well as teachers and school staff—to help build awareness around safe firearm storage, including what people can do to safely store firearms in their homes and spaces that children may occupy. You can also customize the letter to better meet your community’s needs.
  • Partner with other municipal and community leaders to help improve understanding of safe firearm storage and broader gun violence prevention efforts.
  • Engage other organizations and partners within your community, such as parent organizations, out-of-school time program leaders, nonprofit agencies, and other community-based youth-serving entities who routinely interact with children, teens, families, guardians, and caregivers, to inform them about the importance of safe firearm storage.
  • Integrate information about safe firearm storage into your communications with families, guardians, and caregivers about overall emergency preparedness and school safety.”

Propaganda

There is a lot going on here, and none of it is good.

The White House’s template is classic propaganda, in which a target audience is unaware they are being influenced and unaware of the true source of the message.

It is a psychological operation, or psyop, which targets unsuspecting Americans. Before the Bidens moved into the White House, that wasn’t supposed to happen. Nowadays, it’s become commonplace.

That the White House and its gun control office would publicly propose such a plan proves they do not fear exposure from the legacy media. This, too, is telling. They know who their friends are and don’t worry about repercussions.

School officials will have little choice but to participate in this scam. Secretary Cardona’s letter will see to that.

Joe Biden, or more likely his handlers and puppeteers, have rewritten the rules to further their war on our guns. Now, anything goes, including psyops and other forms of gaslighting and deception.

The White House statement also mentions that faith leaders and law enforcement have credibility in their communities.

There’s little doubt the Biden-Harris administration will make a run at the nation’s clergy next.

18 U.S. Code § 922

(g)It shall be unlawful for any person—
(1)who has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;….. to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.

South Carolina Senate Advances Permitless Carry Bill, Expanding Gun Rights

The South Carolina Senate recently passed a significant piece of legislation that could greatly alter the landscape of gun rights within the state. The bill, nicknamed the South Carolina Permitless Carry bill, seeks to allow individuals to carry concealed handguns without the need for a permit. This move aligns South Carolina with a growing number of states that have adopted similar “permitless carry” laws.

The Senate’s decision came after six days of intense debate, highlighting the contentious nature of gun control discussions in America. The Permitless Carry Bill strengthens the Second Amendment rights by eliminating the permit requirement for law-abiding citizens wishing to carry concealed firearms. This measure not only enhances personal freedom and self-defense but also respects the constitutional rights of South Carolinians.

Critics, however, express concerns over public safety and the potential risks associated with more individuals carrying firearms without undergoing the training and background checks that a permit process typically entails. They fear that this could lead to increased incidents of gun violence and accidents, particularly in situations where disputes may escalate into shootings.

Despite these concerns, the bill received strong support within the Senate, passing with a notable majority. This legislative action signifies a clear shift towards expanding gun rights in South Carolina, reflecting a broader trend observed across several states in the United States.

It is important to note, however, that the bill’s passage in the Senate is just one step in the legislative process. It must still be approved by the South Carolina House of Representatives before it can become law. If enacted, the bill will allow individuals who are legally eligible to own a firearm to carry it concealed in public spaces without a permit, subject to certain restrictions.

As South Carolina moves closer to potentially adopting permitless carry, it joins the ranks of states reevaluating their stance on gun control and the requirements for carrying concealed weapons.

The South Carolina Permitless Carry represents a pivotal moment in the state’s legislative history. Whether viewed as a victory for gun rights advocates or a cause for concern among public safety proponents, its impact will be closely watched by both supporters and critics alike.

Whistleblowers Allege ATF Is Drafting Rule That Could Effectively Ban Private Firearm Sales

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is working on a rule that could effectively ban the sale of firearms between private individuals, agency whistleblowers told a watchdog group.

Empower Oversight, a nonpartisan watchdog representing one of the Hunter Biden Internal Revenue Service whistleblowers, says that ATF whistleblowers informed it of a 1,300-page document being drafted by the agency that would require background checks for all firearm sales, including those between two private individuals. The new rule would “effectively ban private sales of firearms from one citizen to another,” according to a press release from Empower Oversight.

Empower Oversight submitted a records request to the Department of Justice seeking more information about the rule.

The rule would “violate the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution,” according to Empower Oversight President Tristan Leavitt. Leavitt also said the rule would “circumvent the separation of powers in the Constitution.”

Empower Oversight points out that the ATF’s rule could redefine individuals who occasionally sell guns as being “engaged in the business of dealing in firearms,” thus requiring them to acquire a Federal Firearms Licensee and run background checks on whoever they’re selling to.

In the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986, Congress established that the term “engaged in the business” of selling guns “shall not include a person who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby.”

Leavitt pointed out that the courts would likely strike down the rule and argued that it is likely a ploy to fire up the Democratic base during an election year.

Private background checks are popular with voters, according to polling data.

A poll conducted by Morning Consult and Politico in 2022 found that 81% of registered voters supported background checks at gun shows and for private transfers.

Support for background checks is lower among Republicans than among Democrats. A 2021 Morning Consult and Politico poll found that 77% of Democrats supported background checks for all gun purchases, compared to just 53% of Republicans.

While Americans are open to background checks, banning certain kinds of firearms is unpopular among Americans.

Only 27% of Americans supported banning handgun ownership as of October 2023, according to Gallup. An April 2023 poll conducted by Monmouth University found that more Americans opposed an “assault weapons” ban than supported it.

The Biden administration has consistently pushed for stricter gun laws.

President Joe Biden pushed a rule that forced people who owned pistols with arm braces to register them as short-barreled rifles, Politico reported. Pistol braces remain legal as states and gun rights groups sue the ATF over the rule.

Registering a short-barreled rifle with the ATF carries a cost of $200. The National Firearms Act, the law requiring the registration of short-barreled rifles, was last updated in 1986.

Short-barreled rifles are illegal in some states.

Biden also banned the sale of firearm parts lacking serial numbers, which can be used to construct “ghost guns,” and has continuously pushed for a so-called assault weapons ban, according to Fox News Digital.

Some gun rights groups are ready to fight the ATF’s rule should it come to fruition.

“The records of these sales will eventually end up in the ATF’s firearm registry database,” director of federal affairs for Gun Owners of America (GOA) Aidan Johnston told the Daily Caller News Foundation. The ATF maintains a registry of firearms sales, the Washington Free Beacon reported.

Johnston said GOA is “actively preparing to take legal action if and when Joe Biden’s administration releases their rule change.”

Empower Oversight and the ATF did not immediately respond to the DCNF’s requests for comment.

Living with a gun

I never wanted a gun. There are days when I forget I have it, locked up in a smart safe under a pile of clothes in a dresser. I still take it out to the range about once a month, but I spend more time looking at its disassembled parts on the cleaning table — the harmless viscera of the killing machine — than aiming it at the target. At home, if I pick it up, I just hold its slick black body in my hand, fingers wrapped around the grip. It doesn’t feel as heavy as I thought a gun would be — 20 ounces. The weight of a Bible. Or, perhaps, of two human hearts. I put it back in the safe, cover the safe with jeans. But I can’t hide the unease I feel — or is it shame? — about living with a gun in America.

Continue reading “”

South Dakota Lawmakers Push To Protect Gun Owners’ Rights.

While gun owners in many states face a legislature hostile to their rights, pro-freedom lawmakers in South Dakota are pushing to protect gun owners’ rights in the Mount Rushmore State.

In the past week, lawmakers have passed two pro-gun bills—House Bill 1035 and Senate Bill 39—and the measures now go to Republican Gov. Kristi Noem for her consideration.

House Bill 1035, introduced by Rep. Kevin Jensen, extends the renewal period for those holding enhanced carry permits. The enhanced permit is an optional permit that allows approved permit holders the ability to present the permit to a retailer when purchasing a firearm, in lieu of undergoing a background check through NICS.

According to the bill’s language: “A person who holds an enhanced permit to carry a concealed pistol may renew the permit through the sheriff of the county in which the person resides. The period for renewal begins 12 months before the permit expires and ends 30 days after the permit expires.”

Previously, enhanced carry permit holders couldn’t begin the renewal process until 180 days before the permit’s expiration date.

Senate Bill 39, introduced by state Sen. Michael Rohl, would, if signed by the governor, place restrictions on homeowners’ associations (HOAs) regarding their regulation of firearms.

According to the measure’s language: “A homeowner’s association may not include or enforce a provision in a governing document that prohibits, restricts or has the effect of prohibiting or restricting the lawful possession, transportation or storing a firearm, any part of a firearm, or firearm ammunition, or discharge of a firearm.”

Sen. Rohl says the bill would help residents who live under homeowner associations better protect themselves.

“A sign doesn’t keep out bad guys with guns,”  Sen. Rohl said. “We want good guys with guns.”

Both measures are likely to be signed by Gov. Noem, who is a strong Second Amendment supporter. In fact, at last year’s NRA Annual Meetings, Noem, who spoke at the convention, signed an executive order on stage blocking state agencies from contracting with large banks that discriminate against firearm-related industries.

“It’s not just the media and big government that are attacking our rights,” Noem said at the time. “Now we’ve seen banking institutions go after industries that they disagree with. None have been more impacted than those who support the Second Amendment. Well, not on my watch: I won’t stand for it—not in South Dakota.”

How the second amendment is treated as a second class right by California Democrats.

You clearly want more innocent children to die if you don’t pass more gun-control. You can try and dress it up, but that is the basic marketing pitch for gun-control. You have to ignore the millions of violent crimes we stop and the lives we save each year for that emotional appeal to have a prayer of making sense.
What is passing strange is that the lawyers for the state of California are trying to sell a similar sales pitch to the 9th Circuit Court.

This story started last year when the US Supreme court confirmed that ordinary citizens have the right to bear arms in public. More to the point, governments violate our rights when they infringed on our right to bear arms. In reply to that federal ruling, anti-rights states like California discovered a new cause. Urged on by the campaign donations of anti-gun billionaires, the legislature made a surprising discovery. The places where trained, investigated, and licensed citizens had been carrying guns for decades were suddenly discovered to be “sensitive” places. Who knew?

California’s SB2 made almost every public place and commercial location into a new “gun-free” zone. In theory, we understand places like a jail, a prison, and a secure courtroom to be a sensitive place. We are legally prohibited from carrying a personal firearm in those rooms. The state is responsible for our physical safety in those areas because we have been disarmed as we passed through the security check point.

Now bear with me a moment as I show you a few of the places that California turned into disarmed-good-guy zones.

California said that hospitals, nursing homes, medical offices, and urgent care facilities are gun-free zones. So are their parking lots. That means honest citizens like you can’t go armed to the business that shares a parking lot with the doc-in-a-box-urgent-care office. I am positive that there isn’t a cop guarding every urgent care office. What you might not know is that people are often attacked in hospitals and their parking lots. Criminals like to rob weak people as they cross the parking lot while carrying plastic bags filled with drugs.

I know there isn’t a policeman or sheriff’s deputy at every bus, train, and ferry terminal. There isn’t a cop at every restaurant chain where you can buy a beer. There isn’t a security fence and a magnetometer screening portal at every concert or public gathering. There certainly isn’t much security at every school and playground. None of that matters and the California legislature said that honest citizens should be disarmed even though they were trained, vetted, and licensed to carry.

But its for the children! Don’t you care about them?

Unfortunately, those facts don’t matter to the California legislature. They want you disarmed anyway, and the legislators won’t be blamed for the rising rate of crime. To be fair to the Democrat legislators, those facts probably don’t matter to a majority of judges on the 9th circuit court either. I’m sorry, but these are the consequences we warned you about before the last election.

Right now, the California “gun-free” zone law is enjoined while the case is appealed. Here is the full list of prohibited places where honest citizens are disarmed.

South Carolina Senate to Vote on Making State the 28th for Constitutional Carry

The South Carolina Senate is expected to vote later this week whether the Palmetto State will become the 28th constitutional carry state.

The legislation is House Bill 3594. The NRA-ILA noted the legislation was passed by the South Carolina House last year and sent to the Senate to be taken up in early 2024.

On February 2, 2023, Breitbart News reported that South Carolina State Rep. Bobby Cox (R-Greenville) put forward H.3594 to secure constitutional carry in the state.

HB 3594 is now before the state Senate and it was debated on the state Senate floor last week. It is expected that “debate will continue on Tuesday, with a vote expected to take place on or before Thursday, February 1st.”

There are currently 27 constitutional carry states in the Union. Those are: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

New Mexico Senator Can’t Defend Waiting Period Bill, Predicts SCOTUS Will Reverse Itself on Bruen Instead

Continue reading “”

New Data Shatters Liberal Myths About Gun Violence & Constitutional Carry

Amid constant leftist fearmongering about the supposedly disastrous consequences of allowing Americans to exercise their Second Amendment freedoms, new data shows that expanding rights for responsible gun owners – and actually punishing gun crimes – makes states safer.

According to a report from Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost released in January, “six of Ohio’s eight largest cities saw less gun crime after the state’s ‘constitutional carry’ law took effect.” In June 2022, Ohio became the 23rd state in the nation to legalize constitutional carry, or permitless carry, which allows residents to carry a concealed firearm without having to undergo a burdensome and time-consuming permitting process. Since then, four more states have passed constitutional carry, bringing the total to 27.

Notably, Ohio’s law as well as constitutional carry laws in other states still prohibit certain people from buying or possessing a firearm, such as felons, people convicted of domestic violence, and individuals with serious mental health conditions. Legal gun owners in Ohio are also still prohibited from carrying inside schools and government buildings, and are not allowed to consume any alcohol while carrying, also tracking with other states.

As has been the case wherever conservatives advance pro-Second Amendment legislation, Ohio liberals vehemently opposed the institution of constitutional carry, insisting that it would lead to a rise in gun violence. Columbus Mayor Andrew Ginther called permitless carry “reckless and dangerous,” while the Ohio Democrat Party predicted the change would “make all Ohioans less safe” and increase gun crime.

But the data cited by Yost’s office shows that the exact opposite occurred. In the capital of Columbus and Ohio’s largest city, the rate per 1,000 residents of crime incidents involving a firearm declined from 10.79 in the period June 2021 to June 2022 (one year before constitutional carry took effect) to 9.55 in the period June 2022 to June 2023 (one year after constitutional carry took effect). Every other major city in the state except Cincinnati and Dayton saw a similar decline.

As Yost emphasized, the report does not “downplay the very real problem of crime in many neighborhoods in our cities – you don’t need a research team to see that gun violence destroys lives, families and opportunity.” However, he continued, “The key takeaway from this study is that we have to keep the pressure on the criminals who shoot people, rather than Ohioans who responsibly exercise their Second Amendment rights.”

Continue reading “”

Alaska joins 28-states in urging Biden admin to not restrict ammunition sales

Alaska Attorney General Treg Taylor signed onto a 28-state letter to the Biden administration, responding to another letter that had urged the administration to restrict ammunition manufacturers who receive federal funds from selling ammunition to citizens.

“We Have seen this administration take full advantage of wordplay to restrict the rights of American citizens,” Gov. Mike Dunleavy said in a Jan. 26 statement. “Politicians, ignorant of the tools and practices they fight to restrict, use catchphrases like ‘military grade’ to create the illusion that these rights are not meant for the average citizen. They hate that law-abiding citizens have these rights and will use these underhanded tactics to take them away if allowed. I will always fight to preserve those rights given to citizens at the time our nation was founded and the ability to exercise those rights. In this case, that means fighting to ensure that citizens who have the right to arms also have reasonable access to ammunition.”

The original letter, written by leaders of several Democrat-led states requests that the Biden administration investigate Lake City Army Ammunition Plant. The letter claims that ammunition manufacturers who receive federal funds should not be allowed to also sell ammunition to the general public, and states that the ammunition has been used by mass shooters to commit crimes.

The response letter, joined by Alaska, argues that this restriction would limit law-abiding citizens’ ability to obtain ammunition and to exercise their Second Amendment rights.

240125-Letter

New Mexico House Committee Moves 3 Gun Bills Forward


Nice PID

Gun control legislation continued to make headway in the Legislature Thursday, with three key bills getting through a House committee as Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham proclaimed she remains confident the controversial measures will eventually land on her desk.

One bill would limit magazine sizes and ban some types of semiautomatic rifles; one would raise the age to legally buy or possess an automatic or semiautomatic firearm from 18 to 21; and one would impose a 14-day waiting period on gun purchases. All three advanced out of the House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee on 4-2 party-line votes and now head to House Judiciary.

Thursday’s lengthy hearing — almost six hours in all — got emotional at times, with some teen students expressing fear about being the victims of gun violence and some gun rights advocates striking a defiant tone. Supporters of the bills said the measures will save lives in a culture enveloped in gun violence, while opponents said they violate the constitutional right to keep and bear arms and will not stop criminals who illegally access guns from committing gun violence.

Continue reading “”

Analysis of New Mexico Gun Ban Bill Predicts Widespread Defiance

New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s proposed ban on gas-operated semi-automatic firearms gets its first committee hearing today with the House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee set to consider HB 137, and the bill is already drawing some red flags from the New Mexico Attorney General’s office as well as the Law Offices of the Public Defender.

A fiscal impact report prepared by the Legislative Finance Committee released on Wednesday details some of the concerns over the bill, including the prediction from both the AG’s office and the Administrative Office of the Courts that the bill would be subject to a costly legal challenge if it’s signed into law. According to the Legislative Finance Committee, taxpayers can be expected to fork over almost half a million dollars for Attorney General Raul Torrez to defend the law in court, though it’s unclear if the LFC is  accounting for the cost of lawsuits filed in both federal and state court. In addition to the legal bills, the fiscal analysis estimates it will take at least $200,000 each year for the Attorney General to enforce the measure if it takes effect.

NMAG advises, to perform the tasks HB137 assigns to it, it will need highly specialized technical staff to ensure its listing of applicable weapons is up to date, given constant updates to firearms and accessories. It will require a ballistics and firearms expert on staff to handle its responsibilities under the act and to coordinate with DPS and the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms and Explosives, at approximately $115 thousand per year, plus benefits, plus an investigator at approximately $85 thousand per year, plus benefits.

The Law Offices of the Public Defender (LOPD) expresses concern over potential widespread noncompliance should HB137 be enacted, leading to an unquantifiable increase in workload and expenses. LFC staff estimates this potential cost as indeterminate but minimal, which likely can be absorbed within its current budget.

While the public defender’s office may be able to absorb the cost of defending individuals charged with violating Grisham’s gun ban, the LFC predicts that the measure will also lead to a little more spending on incarceration if it’s enacted.

Continue reading “”

OPINION: The true intent of the Democrats’ anti-militia bill is to infringe on firearm training
This bill paints a target on the back of every law-abiding gun owner.

As a law-abiding citizen of this great country, I can form my own militia if I so choose, appoint myself colonel, enlist my friends as privates or PFCs, and we can run around the woods until we all keel over from heatstroke or heart attacks — whatever comes first. It’s all perfectly legal, at least for now.

We have the right to criticize our government. We can sit around the campfire at our secret militia base nursing our sore muscles and fire ant bites and talk about how Joe walks like a penguin, or how it would take Kamala a good 20 minutes just to tell you you’re on fire. It’s all perfectly legal and protected speech, at least for now.

We have the right to train with our firearms. We can draw from a holster, shoot while moving, practice CQB and send as much lead downrange as our bank accounts will allow. It’s all perfectly legal conduct, at least for now.

However, a new bill making its way through Congress known as the “Preventing Private Paramilitary Activity Act of 2024,” would make all of this illegal or at least suspicious enough to draw scrutiny from the feds. More importantly, it would paint a target on the back of every single American gun owner, which is the actual intent of this ill-conceived and extremely unconstitutional legislation.

To be clear, if Joe Biden ever signs this bill, the second he puts down his crayon the feds will flock to local gun ranges in numbers that will make it nearly impossible for actual members to find a place just to park. This bill would give them license to investigate anyone who trains with a gun in order to determine whether they’re a militia member — and don’t think for a second that they won’t.

The FBI recently investigated law-abiding Americans whose sole transgression was shopping at a Cabela’s or a DICK’s Sporting Goods. Evidently, the FBI, the country’s so-called premier law enforcement agency, wasn’t aware DICK’s stopped selling guns and ammunition eons ago. Nowadays, the most dangerous thing on their shelves is a pickleball paddle.

When the Framers wrote the Second Amendment, militia membership was not only encouraged, it was required. All able-bodied men were instructed to own a firearm, powder and shot and to keep them clean and serviceable in the event they were ever needed. Now, under the guise that it might be militia-related, a handful of lawmakers are trying to criminalize firearm training — especially anything tactical. In my humble opinion, it is just another step toward their ultimate goal of total civilian disarmament.

Continue reading “”