“A professional soldier understands that war means killing people, war means maiming people, war means families left without fathers and mothers. All you have to do is hold your first dying soldier in your arms, and have that terribly futile feeling that his life is flowing out and you can’t do anything about it. Then you understand the horror of war. Any soldier worth his salt should be antiwar. And still there are things worth fighting for.”
-General H. Norman Schwarzkopf Jr.

You don’t have to be right. You just have to be reasonable.

‘Bloodied’ man shouted for help before allegedly breaking into another home, getting shot

An alleged intruder is in critical condition after kicking in the door to a Houston, Texas, home Monday night and being shot numerous times by the homeowner.

ABC 13 reported two people were running down the road, one wearing a mask and the other bleeding from the head. The bleeding man eventually kicked in the door to a home and the homeowner shot him.

Click2Houston noted that police are unsure if the man who was bleeding was trying to flee from an assault or some other incident. He was allegedly “going door to door, knocking and trying to get help” prior to forcing entry and being shot.

Houston Police Department Lt. J.P. Harlicka said, “Either he was shot or hit in the head with something or assaulted or something, but he had blood on his head. He went to several doors knocking.”

The second man, who was “wearing a black hoodie, jumpsuit, and mask, ran away” and has yet to be found.

Why do you think I call them ‘bureaucraps’?

Why is ATF Still Leaving Its Options Open for Prosecuting Owners of Braced Pistols?

The saga of ATF’s enforcement of the National Firearm Act’s “short barreled rifle” provisions against braced pistols has been a roller coaster ride of shifting interpretations. NRA-ILA has been keeping up with, reporting on, and advocating for reform the entire time. It seemed we had reached a low point with the publication of the rule Factoring Criteria for Firearms With Attached “Stabilizing Braces” during the Biden-Harris administration. Yet NRA, along with other pro-Second Amendment groups, successfully challenged that rule in court, and its enforcement was enjoined against NRA members, as well as other plaintiff groups in similar suits. Eventually, the rule was vacated in its entirety. Unfortunately, that did not provide the lasting relief many had hoped.

Last year, we reported on ATF audaciously claiming, in the waning days of the Biden-Harris administration, that all braced pistols were subject to the NFA. It then quickly walked backed that position as “overbroad.”

But then NRA exposed the ongoing prosecution of Taylor Taranto for possession of an unregistered SBR, based on allegations concerning a CZ Scorpion EVO 3 S1 pistol with an attached SB Tactical stabilizing brace. Taranto moved to have the charge dismissed. In its opposition to the motion, filed during the Biden-Harris administration, the government claimed:

Although the rule is stayed (and, now, vacated), ATF is not barred from continuing to enforce the underlying statute as it always has: by making case-by-case determinations about whether particular braced firearms constitute “rifles” under the statute. And of course, because the rule reflects ATF’s best understanding of the statute, those determinations will naturally tend to look substantially like the determinations that would follow from applying the clear framework outline in the rule.

We reported on that case in February of 2025, and the SBR charged against Taranto was dismissed, “in the interest of justice,” under the Trump administration that April. The dismissal of Taranto’s NFA charge followed an April 7, 2025, announcement by the U.S. Department of Justice and ATF of a “comprehensive review of [the] stabilizing brace regulations.” This was supposed to include “consultations with stakeholders, including gun rights organizations, industry leaders and legal experts,” with the goal of ensuring the resulting policies are “constitutional and protective of Americans’ Second Amendment rights.”

In the meantime, though, ATF continued to resist attempts by litigants in cases remaining against the rule to obtain final judgments on the rule’s illegality, claiming the issue was rendered moot by the final judgement in the case vacating the rule. This, the agency claimed, rendered the rule “formally nullified and revoked[.]”

A March 16 government filing in the ongoing case of Texas v. ATF has now renewed concerns that the agency reserves the right to continue bringing felony prosecutions under the NFA for possession of unregistered braced pistols. The passage in question is meant to rebut the plaintiffs’ claims that there are still live issues in the case that deserve a final judgment on the merits, rather than dismissal on mootness.

Continue reading “”

Arizona Moves Forward With K-12 Firearm Safety Education Bill

Arizona Senate Bill 1424 has passed the Senate and has passed the House Education Committee and the House Rules Committee. The bill requires school districts and charter schools to provide age-appropriate firearm safety awareness training in all grades, kindergarten through 12th grade.

The instruction is to be objective and not promote firearms ownership or any political position. The instruction is to be limited to accident prevention and personal safety awareness. It is to include guidance on safe firearms storage in homes and vehicles. The instruction is to provide guidance on what to do if a firearm is encountered, including not touching it and notifying an adult.

Inside the bill, there is a long list of restrictions on six things that may not be included in the instruction:

 3. NOT INCLUDE ANY OF THE FOLLOWING:

(a) A LIVE FIREARM.

(b) AMMUNITION OR SIMULATED AMMUNITION.

(c) A DEMONSTRATION THAT INVOLVES HANDLING, OPERATING, LOADING, UNLOADING OR FIRING A FIREARM.

(d) INSTRUCTION THAT IS INTENDED TO TRAIN STUDENTS IN THE USE OF FIREARMS.

(e) A MORAL JUDGMENT REGARDING LAWFUL FIREARM POSSESSION.

(f) AN INQUIRY, SURVEY OR REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ABOUT WHETHER A STUDENT, STUDENT’S PARENT OR MEMBER OF THE STUDENT’S HOUSEHOLD OWNS, POSSESSES OR MAY POSSESS A FIREARM OR ABOUT THE FIREARMS STORAGE PRACTICES OF A STUDENT, STUDENT’S PARENT OR MEMBER OF THE STUDENT’S HOUSEHOLD.

The Arizona Citizens Defense League (AZCDL) supports the legislation.

An advocate for gun storage legislation made the argument that the legislature should pass a bill requiring safe storage of guns instead.  The SB 1424 is considered a partisan bill, supported mostly by Republicans, according to Legiscan.

Fatal firearms accidents have declined greatly since the 1930’s high mark. The number of firearms per person has increased about 3X during that period.

Firearms are among the many hazards children encounter as they grow up. Education, not prohibition, is the surest answer to their safety.

The bill has passed the Arizona legislature, which is narrowly controlled by Republicans. Republicans have a 17-13 advantage in the Senate and a 33-27 advantage in the House. SB 1424 might avoid a veto from Governor Hobbs (D), but it seems unlikely. Governor Katie Hobbs has earned a reputation for the number of vetoes she has given. Governor Hobbs is facing serious re-election challenges. She might sign SB 1424 to claim she is not against rights protected by the Second Amendment.

SB 1424 severely restricts what may be taught to students. This may be necessary to secure passage in a legislature with a very small Republican majority.

The bill is a step toward greater understanding of firearms safety. It makes students more aware of firearms. It has the advantage of not being overtly against the ownership or use of firearms. As “age-appropriate” instruction on firearms safety, later grade levels might include information about the legal status of firearms in Arizona. It is difficult for people to obey the law if they do not know what the law is. Firearms are among the many potentially hazardous items children encounter as they grow up.

It is far better to gun-proof the child than to attempt to create a gun-free environment.

Be nice if they also offered it as a ‘pistol’ with a brace.

Rock River Arms Celebrates “No Tax” with the New Retro A1 Carbine SBR

Rock River Arms wants to remind everyone that the newly implemented “zero tax” on NFA items doesn’t only apply to suppressors but also to Short-Barrel Rifles (SBRs).

To celebrate, RRA introduces the new 10.5-inch A1 Carbine SBR.

This retro A1 Carbine SBR is an ideal pairing for anyone looking to run a suppressor on a high-mobility, exceptionally maneuverable defensive AR platform. This “old school is the new cool” configuration is the perfect SBR for those who value operational simplicity and no-fail performance as the base for their suppressed home defender. With its lightweight, chrome moly 10.5-inch A-1 barrel assembly and CAR gas system, the A1 Carbine SBR with an attached suppressor (suppressor not included) is compact and easy to handle in close quarter environments.

The A1 Carbine SBR comes chambered in 5.56 NATO/223 Rem. and is built on RRA’s forged LAR-15M lower receiver and forged A1 carry handle upper. The barrel is fitted with a conventional F-style front sight/gas block and A1 flash hider (1/2-28 thread) and hosts a classic A-1 triangular handguard.

Two variants of the A1 Carbine SBR are offered: one with a multi-position M4-style stock and the other with a fixed entry stock. Both include RRA’s A1 grip and single-stage trigger.

If you’ve been considering purchasing an SBR for personal or home defense, the A1 Carbine SBR from Rock River is the ideal candidate and now is the perfect time to make your move.

RRA A1 Carbine SBR Specifications

  • Caliber: 5.56 NATO/223 Remington
  • Barrel: 10.5-inch lightweight chrome moly
  • Upper Receiver: forged A1 w/carry handle
  • Lower Receiver: forged RRA LAR-15M
  • Trigger: RRA single-stage
  • Handguard: A1 CAR triangle
  • Buttstock: M4 adjustable or fixed entry
  • Grip: RRA A1
  • Muzzle: A1 flash hider / 1/2-28
  • MSRP: $1,135 (entry stock); $1,150 (M4 stock)

To see the full range of firearms, components, and accessories offered by RRA, visit RockRiverArms.com.

Virginia Illustrates Insidious Anti-Gun Threat

I’ve joked before that Virginia’s politics swing back and forth like an unlatched screen door in a hurricane. From red to blue to red to blue, all so fast it makes your head spin.

But last year’s elections opened the door for a lot of troubling things in Virginia, up to and including their redistricting plan that seeks to essentially wipe out Republican representation from the state, and with it, support for gun rights. Sure, there’s one district, but only because there was no way to gerrymander the state badly enough to make it solid blue.

However, Virginia reveals an insidious threat because the state is too purple to suddenly swing this far left.

Progressive groups are behind a wave of tougher restrictions on firearms, wielding a quiet power that Second Amendment proponents worry could unravel gun rights in friendly territory.

Earlier this month, Virginia lawmakers sent a spate of gun bills tightening firearms restrictions to Gov. Abigail Spanberger’s (D-VA) desk. It’s a development fueled by Moms Demand Action, and one that one of the country’s most prominent pro-gun rights organizations fears foreshadows things to come in other purple states.

“Virginia is a purple state, and so having this sweeping, massive gun control package in the state that’s got a lot of gun owners, to see that happen and happen so rapidly should really be alarming to everybody in this country,” National Rifle Association’s Director of Public Affairs, Justin Davis, told the Washington Examiner.

“It’s really just a blueprint of what’s to come in this country. This is a trial balloon for the midterm elections,” he said. “They’re seeing what they can pass in a purple state? What is the backlash from that? And how do people react?”…

Davis said many such state races can be “so easily” flipped with small “injections“ of cash. Due to progressive activism, every state is “ripe for flipping at any time,” he said.

“To think that the stuff they’re pushing here is happening in Virginia should wake up every single purple state in the country, any place that is, it was in the realm of what a ‘moderate state’ is that there’s a very well-trained, very concerted effort to get progressives elected positions,” Davis said. “There are people who literally look at these races, race by race, and say, ‘How do we make sure that we can flip this for a broader scale, to flip this state to pass these same leftist laws?’”

Groups like Moms Demand Action and Everytown for Gun Safety are specifically named for injecting a significant amount of cash into the race, and the truth of the matter is that these groups will run ads that feature policies other than gun control, usually pretty progressive ones.

So what happens is that for a few million dollars, they can push a candidate who might not appear all that bad in the grand scheme of things–remember, Spanberger tried to position herself as a moderate, and a lot of people listened–only to take office and start trying to run the table with things like gun control.

Virginia is a purple state, but the current agenda in Richmond looks like something you’d expect in California.

No, it doesn’t help that Virginia governors can only serve a single term at a time, thus meaning they never have to worry about re-election. That means they can trot out their agenda on day one, and other than the midterms, there’s nothing stopping them from going as far left or right as they’d like. In this case, it means trotting out the most ridiculous anti-gun agenda you’re ever going to see in any part of the South.

This is something we need to be on guard against and work to counter if we don’t want to see our rights destroyed at the state level.

Would-be intruder shot by Rancho Cordova homeowner after forcing way into home

A Rancho Cordova homeowner shot and wounded a man Thursday night who tried to force his way into the home after making threats to kill one of the occupants, according to the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office. Deputies said the man, who was known to the homeowner but did not live at the residence, tried to force entry about 9:15 p.m. into the home in the 2900 block of Hunt Drive.

The two people inside the home — an adult man and woman — called 911 and repeatedly told the man to leave, sheriff’s officials said.

The 25-year-old man told the victims multiple times he was going to kill one of them, according to the Sheriff’s Office. He then broke a window and entered the home, prompting one of the victims to open fire, officials said.

Deputies responded to the scene and the man was taken to a hospital with a gunshot wound that was not considered life-threatening. After being medically cleared, the man was booked into the Sacramento County Main Jail on suspicion of felony burglary and making threats to commit a crime resulting in death or great bodily injury, according to the Sheriff’s Office.

He was being held on $100,000 bail and was scheduled to appear in court Monday