NSSF PRAISES GEORGIA GOV. BRIAN KEMP FOR SIGNING SECOND AMENDMENT PRIVACY ACT

WASHINGTON, D.C. — NSSF®, The Firearm Industry Trade Association, praises Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp for signing into law HB 1018, the Second Amendment Privacy Act. This NSSF-supported law protects the privacy and sensitive financial information of people purchasing firearms and ammunition in The Peach State. With Georgia, there are now 14 states with laws that protect the Second Amendment financial privacy of their citizens.

The law prohibits financial institutions from requiring the use of a firearm code, also known as a Merchant Category Code (MCC), from being assigned to firearm and ammunition purchases at retail when using a credit card. The law also forbids discriminating against a firearm retailer as a result of the assigned or non-assignment of a firearm code and disclosing the protected financial information. Additionally, the law prohibits keeping or causing to be kept any list, record or registry of private firearm ownership.

“Governor Brian Kemp’s signature on the Second Amendment Privacy Act is yet another example of his firm commitment to protecting the Second Amendment rights of all Georgians. Citizens in Georgia won’t worry that ‘woke’ Wall Street banks, credit card companies and payment processors will collude with government entities to spy on their private finances to illegally place them on gun control watchlists,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President & General Counsel. “NSSF is grateful House Speaker Jon Burns, Lieutenant Governor Burt Jones, Representative Jason Ridley and state Senator Carden Summers for bringing this crucial legislation to become law. No American should fear being placed on a government watchlist simply for exercising their Constitutionally-protected rights to keep and bear arms.”

NSSF worked closely with Georgia legislators to protect private and legal firearm and ammunition purchases from political exploitation. The Second Amendment Privacy Act is designed to protect the privacy of lawful and private firearm and ammunition purchases from being abused for political purposes by corporate financial service providers and unlawful government search and seizure of legal and private financial transactions.

The U.S. Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) admitted to U.S. Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) in a letter that it violated the Fourth Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens that protect against illegal search and seizure when it collected the credit card purchase history from banks and credit card companies of individuals who purchased firearms and ammunition in the days surrounding Jan. 6, 2020. Treasury’s FinCEN had no cause, and sought the information without a warrant, to place these law-abiding citizens on a government watchlist only because they exercised their Second Amendment rights to lawfully purchase firearms and ammunition.

The idea of a firearm-retailer specific MCC was borne from antigun New York Times’ columnist Andrew Ross Sorkin and Amalgamated Bank, which has been called “The Left’s Private Banker” and bankrolls the Democratic National Committee and several antigun politicians. Amalgamated Bank lobbied the Swiss-based International Organization for Standardization (ISO) for the code’s creation. NSSF has called on Congress to investigate Amalgamated Bank’s role in manipulating the ISO standard setting process.

Sorkin admitted creating a firearm-retailer specific MCC would be a first step to creating a national firearm registry, which is forbidden by federal law.

Georgia joins a growing list of states that are standing against the invasion of financial privacy when exercising Second Amendment rights, including Tennessee, Iowa, Kentucky, Wyoming, Indiana, Utah, Florida, Idaho, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, Texas and West Virginia. These states passed laws protecting citizens’ Second Amendment privacy. Other states are considering similar legislation. U.S. Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.) introduced S. 4075, the NSSF-supported Protecting Privacy in Purchases Act in the Senate. U.S. Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) introduced H.R. 7450, with the same title in the U.S. House of Representatives. California’s Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a law requiring the use of a firearm-retailer specific MCC and Colorado passed similar legislation that is awaiting Gov. Jared Polis’ consideration.

Yeah, this’s sure going to help things………..

If it hasn’t become clear to you by now; This new ATF/DoJ rule isn’t to ‘tighten background check’ or somehow stop criminals from getting guns. They know those are futile dreams.

Neither the ATF nor the DOJ care one itty bit about getting more people to obtain FFLs. In fact they go out of their way to rescind FFLs for the piddliest of reasons.
This is merely another tactic to give them the power to prosecute whoever they have on their radar for “dealing without a license”.

Dystopian novels weren’t meant to be instruction manuals, but 1984 and Atlas Shrugged sure do seem to be.

Ayn Rand:
There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them.

One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed or enforced nor objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt.

Well, the demonbureaucraps have finally issued their latest definitions of what it takes to be a eeeee-vil gun dealer. What this really is going to used for it not to point out who should get a FFL, but to propersecute the ‘wrong’ people for ‘dealing without a license’.


Final Rule: Definition of “Engaged in the Business” as a Dealer in Firearms

The pdf document is available here.

ATF Report Finds Licensed Gun Dealers Rarely Supply Illicit Traffickers

The ATF released a decades-long report on gun trafficking this week. There is a lot of data to sift through, but one thing that stands out is how rare it is for a licensed gun dealer to be involved in trafficking.

Just 1.6 percent of cases the ATF examined during a five-year period implicated a Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL), a significant decline from the last time the ATF did a report like this. As Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman explains, that undermines one of President Joe Biden’s key gun initiatives.

It wasn’t all good news for the gun industry this week, though. Gun sales were down for the third month in a row. That should be concerning given how long the hangover from pandemic-era record sales has lasted and the fact that even a presidential election featuring a candidate calling for an “assault weapons” ban hasn’t motivated buyers.

Plus, gun-rights lawyer Matt Larosiere joins the podcast to explain why he believes the Second Amendment applies to nearly everyone in the US–even those here unlawfully. That topic has been one of our most-viewed this year. So, it seemed like a good idea to get a bit more in-depth on the topic.

A new ATF report undermines the Biden administration’s rationale for cracking down on gun dealers.

On Thursday, the ATF released Volume Three of the National Firearms Commerce and Trafficking Assessment. The report, the first comprehensive analysis of criminal gun trafficking by the agency since 2000, examined over 9,700 ATF firearm trafficking investigations between 2017 and 2021 to create a picture of the most common sources of black-market firearms.

It found sales by unlicensed private sales and straw purchases represented just over 80 percent of all cases. Stolen firearms accounted for another quarter of the trafficked guns.

On the other hand, the report identified just 136 cases of illegal trafficking by Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs). That represents 1.6 percent of cases during the five-year period.

Continue reading “”

March Gun Sales Top Previous Month

un sales are an important aspect of gun rights. The more people who buy guns, the more people who will, at least in time, become advocates for the right to keep and bear arms. They start to realize that having a gun doesn’t make you stupid, mean, adversarial, or anything else, but it does make you safer from criminals.

And gun sales are good. They’ve been good for a while, but they always seem to pick up when we have a Gun-Grabber-in-Chief occupying the Oval Office.

While President Joe Biden may not know where he is half the time (at best), we know he wants our guns.

Yet March gun sales topped an already strong February.

Americans continue to reach for their wallet when it comes to practicing the right to keep and bear arms, with data suggesting over-the-counter gun sales passing the 1 million mark for the 56th month in a row.

Last month was the 7th-highest March on record in terms of federal background checks for likely over-the-counter gun transfers since the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System was established over 20 years ago.

The unadjusted figures of 2,497,577 checks conducted through NICS last month– while a 15.5 percent decrease from the unadjusted FBI NICS figure of 2,954,230 in March 2023– is 6.6 percent higher than the 2,336,390 logged in February 2023.

When the numbers for last month were adjusted by the National Shooting Sports Foundation to remove gun permit checks and rechecks, the adjusted figure stands at 1,442,061, which is a shallower drop of about 7.4 percent compared to the March 2023 NSSF-adjusted NICS figure of 1,556,492. However, last month’s figures were 14.7 percent ahead of February 2024’s, which came in at 1,343,478.

Industry analysts argue that this massive number of gun sales suggest that Americans are as pro-gun as they ever were, if not more, and I can’t find it in my heart to disagree.

Keep in mind that March’s gun sales outstrip the total number of firearms in private, civilian hands in numerous other countries. That was just a month for us, and not a massively strong month for gun sales, either. I mean, it’s the seventh highest total for March, which means there were six better.

Yet 1.4 million gun sales in March is still important because a significant number of those are likely to be first-time gun buyers. These are people who had no skin in the gun debate before, but now they do. Now they have to think about red flag laws in the context of someone arguing their guns should be taken. They have to think about universal background checks in the context of them buying or selling a gun to a family member or a friend they’ve known since middle school.

That’s why gun owners become gun voters, and now there are more of us.

After April, there will be even more.

Yes, many others of these sales were people buying an additional firearm, and that’s good news as well. We need as many gun sales as possible to keep the industry thriving. Without gun makers and gun dealers, our ability to access firearms diminishes. The right to keep and bear arms only matters if we can actually obtain arms, so those additonal sales are also big.

Buying a product shouldn’t be a political statement, but when it comes to guns, they are. It’s not this side of the debate that made it necessary to make it into a statement, either, but it is and frankly, March was still a hell of a statement.

You remember earlier when the fact that certain car manufacturers were sending data from ‘connected’ cars to LexisNexis and they were selling it to insurance companies who used the info to jack up premiums?

Well, GM (don’t know about Hyundai or others) announced on their OnStar siteAs of March 20, 2024, OnStar Smart Driver customer data is no longer being shared with LexisNexis or Verisk. Customer trust is a priority for us, and we are actively evaluating our privacy processes and policies.


GM stops sharing driver data with brokers amid backlash
Customers, wittingly or not, had their driving data shared with insurers.

After public outcry, General Motors has decided to stop sharing driving data from its connected cars with data brokers. Last week, news broke that customers enrolled in GM’s OnStar Smart Driver app have had their data shared with LexisNexis and Verisk.

Those data brokers in turn shared the information with insurance companies, resulting in some drivers finding it much harder or more expensive to obtain insurance. To make matters much worse, customers allege they never signed up for OnStar Smart Driver in the first place, claiming the choice was made for them by salespeople during the car-buying process.

Now, in what feels like an all-too-rare win for privacy in the 21st century, that data-sharing deal is no more.

FBI Figures Show Crime Fell as Americans Stocked Up on Guns in 2023

FBI figures reported by NBC News on March 19, 2024, show that crime fell during 2023, a year in which there were over one million background checks a month for gun purchases.

On July 4, 2023, the Washington Examiner noted National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) checks for gun purchases have been over a million a month for 47 straight months.

On March 19, 2024, Breitbart News spoke with National Shooting Sports Foundation’s Mark Oliva and he said it has now been 55 consecutive months of one million-plus NICS checks.

This means, leading up to 2023 and throughout 2023, Americans were pouring into gun stores to acquire firearms, yet “fourth-quarter numbers” reported by NBC News showed “a 13% decline in murder in 2023 from 2022, a 6% decline in reported violent crime and a 4% decline in reported property crime.”

Former CIA analyst Jeff Asher commented on the lower crime figures, saying, “It suggests that when we get the final data in October, we will have seen likely the largest one-year decline in murder that has ever been recorded.”

There was a similar situation after gun sales surged in 2013. Breitbart News pointed out that private gun sales skyrocketed during 2013 with 21,093,273 background checks, and, according to the FBI, “offenses” in the categories of violent crimes and property crimes decreased during the first six months of 2014.

On a broader scale, Breitbart News observed a 2012 Congressional Research Service study showing gun ownership jumped from 192 million privately owned guns in 1994 to 309 million in 2009. At the same time, the “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” of 6.6 per 100,000 Americans in 1993 fell to 3.6 per 100,000 in 2000 and as far as 3.2 per 100,000 in 2011.

Tell me about it. My insurance premium went up 10% and the Tahoee is a year older…..Of course I’m a year older too and ‘seasoned citizens’ supposedly are higher risks as they get older.


Why auto insurance costs are rising at the fastest rate in 47 years.

As car prices moderate from a pandemic-era surge, insurance has pushed the cost of car ownership to the brink for many Americans.

New data out this week showed auto insurance costs rose 20.6% from the prior year in February, matching January’s increase as the most since December 1976, when costs rose 22.4% over the prior year.

On an annual basis, motor vehicle insurance costs rose 17.4% in 2023, the most since a 28.7% increase in 1976, according to data from the BLS.

The sticker shock hitting many American drivers is being driven by a rise in accidents, the severity of accidents, and geographical factors combining to create a perfect storm and push costs higher.

The most alarming factor driving insurance costs higher is more severe claims.

“In general, the numbers of crashes, injuries, and fatalities are up, and inflation has made the cost of repairs more expensive,” AAA spokesperson Robert Sinclair told Yahoo Finance.

Sinclair said motorists developed “bad habits” on the road during pandemic lockdowns, contributing to current behavior. For example, as the New York Times reported earlier this year, researchers in Nevada discovered that during the pandemic, motorists were speeding more (and driving through intersections), seat belt use was down, and intoxicated driving arrests were up to near historic highs.

Sinclair also pointed to NHTSA data, which found that in 2021, at the height of the pandemic, road fatalities increased by 10.5% to their highest level since 2005, even while most Americans stayed at home. The NHTSA said it was the highest percentage increase it had ever seen. The agency found that fatalities in 2022 only decreased by 0.3% as compared to 2021.

Insurance tech firm Insurify found that auto insurance premium hikes were “largely due to the skyrocketing price of auto parts and the increasing number and severity of claims.” And while increases may moderate, analysts still believe further premium hikes are on the horizon.

“While the magnitude of rate increases is likely to ease somewhat, after several years of double-digit increases, some lingering claim cost inflation and adverse claim severity and frequency will likely lead to a ‘higher for longer’ auto rate environment,” CFRA analyst Cathy Seifert told Yahoo Finance.

Not surprisingly, severe accidents leave insurance companies with rising loss ratios, or a share of premiums collected that insurers paid out in claims.

Continue reading “”

Nevada Court Signals Suit Against Smith & Wesson Is Improper

Amid ongoing litigation brought by anti-gun Smith & Wesson shareholders over continued AR-15 production, Nevada’s Clark County District Court signals no “substantial likelihood” Smith & Wesson will be found liable, saying the activist shareholders appear not to be aligned with the company’s best interest and requiring them to post a half-million-dollar bond to continue their suit.

On December 5, 2023, Breitbart News reported that that lawsuit against Smith & Wesson was brought by a group of anti-gun nuns, shareholders all, who claimed the gun maker “knowingly allowed the Company to become exposed to significant liability for intentionally violating federal, state, and local laws through its manufacturing, marketing, and sales of AR-15 style rifles and similar semiautomatic firearms.”

The plaintiffs made clear they were aware of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) but suggested the Act does would not protect Smith & Wesson because they continued making AR-15s after one of their rifles was used in a high profile shooting.

The nuns suggested the “board’s unwillingness to exercise any oversight whatsoever in connection with the Company’s illicit manufacturing, marketing, and sales of AR-15 rifles” removes the company from PLCAA protections.

However, a record of the February 20, 2024, exchanges between Clark County District Judge Joe Hardy and attorneys for both plaintiffs and defendants tells a story which shows Smith & Wesson is unlikely liable in the suit.

Hardy noted various reasons for this unlikelihood, one of which was a victory for the anti-gun shareholders would deliver not “benefit the corporation or its security holders.” The transcript of court proceedings make clear that Hardy does not believe the anti-gun shareholders’ positions are in line with the vast majority of Smith & Wesson shareholders.

On December 5, ,2023, Breitbart News noted that the anti-gun shareholders described AR-15 rifles as “machineguns” which should be regulated under the National Firearms Act (NFA). Having posited this argument, they then claimed Smith & Wesson violates federal law by not limiting sales to buyers who submit to NFA guidelines/requirements.

Moreover, the anti-gun shareholders claimed “AR- 15-style rifles have been the weapon of choice for the killers responsible for the deadliest mass shootings in American history, including the recent mass murders in: (i) Buffalo, New York; (ii) Uvalde, Texas; (iii) Highland Park, Illinois; (iv) Colorado Springs, Colorado; (v) Nashville, Tennessee; (vi) Louisville, Kentucky; (vii) Allen, Texas; and (viii) Lewiston, Maine.”

Ironically, they do not mention the April 16, 2007, Virginia Tech University shooting in which an attacker armed with two handguns killed more people than were killed in any of the seven attacks they laid at the feet of AR-15s. The Virginia Tech attacker killed 32 people.

The court also ruled that the plaintiffs’ use of graphic images in their filings apparently had no legitimate reason to be included.

The judge also required the plaintiffs’ to post $500,000 as a bond in this case, which means that if Smith & Wesson wins, the plaintiffs’ will forfeit that money. This too signals that the judge is skeptical of the merits of the plaintiffs’ arguments, and is making them put real skin in the game to continue the challenge.

AR-15 rifles–and AR-15 variants–are made by numerous companies and comprise the most popular rifle and rifle platform in the United States.

What kind of demand exists for the AR-15 rifle/platform? On January 12, 2024, Breitbart News pointed to National Shooting Sports Foundation numbers showing there were over 28 million AR/AK-style rifles in the U.S. as of 2021, and that figure has certainly seen exponential growth during the past three years.

The suit is Adrian Dominican Sisters v. Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc., No. A-23-882774-B in the District Court of Clark County, Nevada.

The Internet Of Things really is hot garbage.


Automakers Are Sharing Consumers’ Driving Behavior With Insurance Companies.

Kenn Dahl says he has always been a careful driver. The owner of a software company near Seattle, he drives a leased Chevrolet Bolt. He’s never been responsible for an accident.
So Mr. Dahl, 65, was surprised in 2022 when the cost of his car insurance jumped by 21 percent. Quotes from other insurance companies were also high. One insurance agent told him his LexisNexis report was a factor.
LexisNexis is a New York-based global data broker with a “Risk Solutions” division that caters to the auto insurance industry and has traditionally kept tabs on car accidents and tickets. Upon Mr. Dahl’s request, LexisNexis sent him a 258-page “consumer disclosure report,” which it must provide per the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
What it contained stunned him: more than 130 pages detailing each time he or his wife had driven the Bolt over the previous six months. It included the dates of 640 trips, their start and end times, the distance driven and an accounting of any speeding, hard braking or sharp accelerations. The only thing it didn’t have is where they had driven the car.
On a Thursday morning in June for example, the car had been driven 7.33 miles in 18 minutes; there had been two rapid accelerations and two incidents of hard braking.
According to the report, the trip details had been provided by General Motors — the manufacturer of the Chevy Bolt. LexisNexis analyzed that driving data to create a risk score “for insurers to use as one factor of many to create more personalized insurance coverage,” according to a LexisNexis spokesman, Dean Carney. Eight insurance companies had requested information about Mr. Dahl from LexisNexis over the previous month.
“It felt like a betrayal,” Mr. Dahl said. “They’re taking information that I didn’t realize was going to be shared and screwing with our insurance.”
In recent years, insurance companies have offered incentives to people who install dongles in their cars or download smartphone apps that monitor their driving, including how much they drive, how fast they take corners, how hard they hit the brakes and whether they speed. But “drivers are historically reluctant to participate in these programs,” as Ford Motor put it in a patent application that describes what is happening instead: Car companies are collecting information directly from internet-connected vehicles for use by the insurance industry.
Sometimes this is happening with a driver’s awareness and consent. Car companies have established relationships with insurance companies, so that if drivers want to sign up for what’s called usage-based insurance — where rates are set based on monitoring of their driving habits — it’s easy to collect that data wirelessly from their cars.
But in other instances, something much sneakier has happened. Modern cars are internet-enabled, allowing access to services like navigation, roadside assistance and car apps that drivers can connect to their vehicles to locate them or unlock them remotely. In recent years, automakers, including G.M., Honda, Kia and Hyundai, have started offering optional features in their connected-car apps that rate people’s driving. Some drivers may not realize that, if they turn on these features, the car companies then give information about how they drive to data brokers like LexisNexis.

Continue reading “”

Former NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre Has Cost the Gun Rights Movement North Of A Billion Dollars

Former CEO of the NRA, Wayne LaPierre, has finally admitted virtually everything that he’s been accused of over the past five years, and a jury has found him liable for padding his own pockets to the tune of $5.5 million.

LaPierre’s hand-picked Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer, Woody Phillips was also found liable for $2 million in personal profit at NRA members’ expense, and the NRA itself (really the NRA’s current Board of Directors) was found to have failed in its fiduciary obligations to shepherd and safeguard the members’ assets. Keep in mind that none of this really takes into account the millions paid to “consultants” with nothing of substance to show for it, or the hundreds of millions spent on lawyers and the losses in membership and revenue over the past five years.

All told, the bogus spending and lost income amount to something north of a billion dollars!

Now, New York Acting Supreme Court Justice Joel Cohen has the difficult task of deciding how best to remedy the situation. Unfortunately, there’s an important absence in Justice Cohen’s courtroom: the members of the NRA!

On one side of the table is Letitia James, the Attorney General of New York, who, during her election campaign, pledged to destroy the NRA and called it a terrorist organization.
On the other side of the table is the ridiculously overpriced lawyer William Brewer for the NRA (the Board), whose firm has been paid approximately $2 million per month – every month – for the past 5 years.

Every move William Brewer has made in that time has done nothing but dig the NRA’s hole deeper.

AG James and her office have a legal obligation to represent and protect the interests of the members of the NRA. Does anyone believe that she is, or has any interest in living up to that legal obligation? Is the interest of the NRA membership her primary motivation – or any part of her motivation – in this action?

William Brewer, III, the New York lawyer who claims residence in Dallas (and who was a big contributor to Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and “Beto” O’Rourke (Seriously!), is supposedly representing the NRA. You’d think that his obligation would be to the NRA members, but that doesn’t appear to be the case. He was initially hired by Wayne LaPierre and has spent almost all of his efforts over the past 5 years making terrible legal moves that gave every appearance of protecting LaPierre at NRA members’ expense. Then, right before the trial started last month, LaPierre stepped down for “health reasons.”

Brewer then declared that the NRA’s position has always been that the Association was the victim of “unscrupulous vendors and insiders,” and, with LaPierre’s departure, the NRA has fixed all of the problems that allowed that victimization…

Sitting next to Brewer at the table isNRA Board President Charles Cotton and the NRA Board of Directors. Like AG James and attorney Brewer, Cotton and the Board have a legal, ethical, and moral duty to act in the best interest of the National Rifle Association – its members.

Well, there’s a problem. Like AG James and Attorney Brewer, President Cotton and the NRA Board appear to have divided loyalties as well.

Not only did they sit by and allow LaPierre, Phillips, and those “unscrupulous vendors” [read friends of Wayne] to siphon hundreds of millions of dollars out of NRA accounts over at least two decades, when the evidence of the corruption came to light in 2019, they rallied around LaPierre, loudly pronounced him innocent of any wrongdoing, and shunned, defamed, and denounced anyone who dared to even ask questions or suggest an investigation.

Rather than demanding an accounting and miscreants’ heads on pikes, Cotton and the assembled Board took every action to cover Wayne’s increasingly exposed backside.

Even as LaPierre’s story shifted over time, with new lies replacing old lies and newer lies replacing the previous lies, Cotton was at the forefront, repeating the lies – and adding in a few of his own – while defending LaPierre at every turn with the docile Board meekly “believing” and parroting each and every iteration as gospel.

So where is Justice Cohen supposed to turn to find a voice that truly represents NRA members?

He certainly can’t have any confidence that AG James, Attorney Brewer, or the officers or directors of the NRA truly represent the interests of rank-and-file NRA members. With this menagerie of conflicted and self-serving individuals, how is the judge supposed to determine what’s best for the NRA and its members? He should realize that the majority of NRA members who vote in Board elections and keep reelecting the same people to the Board, don’t trust the legacy media at all and get almost all of their trusted information about the NRA from NRA publications, which are controlled by the current regime. If he removes the obviously complicit Board members, how many would be left, and how many of those are incompetent and/or cowardly?

It would be pretty arrogant and presumptuous to suggest that the four of us who are running as reform candidates for NRA Board seats in the current 2024 election (Phil Journey, Rocky Marshall, Dennis Fusaro, and me, Jeff Knox) could speak for all NRA members. We do think we understand most members’ interests better than any of the previously mentioned characters, but who could possibly fairly represent three to four million others, and how is the judge supposed to find those representatives?

As you might have guessed, I have a few ideas on this topic.

The NRA has thousands of volunteers working every day all around the country.

From local state Friends of NRA committees, to Volunteer election Coordinators, to coaches, Range Safety Officers, match coordinators, Hunter Safety Education instructors, gun club officers, state association leaders, and more. Most of those volunteers, though not all of them, work through or under their local state association. The state associations are the natural heirs and beneficiaries of NRA’s assets, and they actively work to serve the needs of the NRA members in their state. While not all NRA members in a state are members of the state association, all members of the state associations are NRA members, and they are typically the most active and involved NRA members in the state.

Judge Cohen needs ready access to people who can authoritatively speak for NRA members. State associations and other NRA state affiliates are in the best position to provide him with that access.

It is my hope that the judge will remove all officers and directors who have failed in their fiduciary obligations to NRA members, appoint a Special Master or Receiver to oversee a thorough housecleaning and reorganization of the Association, and appoint a Members’ Committee, made up of candidates recommended by the various state associations, to help guide and direct that reorganization.

It all sounds simple on paper, but there’s a lot to do in a very short time.

  • The first step is to convince you that this is a good idea that should be pursued.
  • The second step is for you to help convince your local state association leaders that they really need to get involved and run with this idea.
  • The third step is for the state association leaders to petition the judge and convince him that he needs their help. Finally, the judge and the state association leaders will need to come up with some guidelines and processes for nominating candidates and submitting them to the judge.

The key to all of this is the involvement of state association leaders, and the key to getting those leaders involved is your advocacy. This can only happen if large numbers of NRA members begin pushing the idea at their local gun clubs and directly petition their state associations. Begin by sharing this article with your gun-owning friends and the leadership of your local clubs, Friends of NRA committees, and state association leaders. Follow that with calls and emails asking those leaders to take immediate action.

The NRA is literally on the verge of insolvency. The Association’s future is about to be decided by a New York judge who has limited knowledge or experience with the NRA or NRA members, and his only points of reference are the NRA-hating Attorney General, legacy media, and the self-serving NRA “leaders” who got the Association into this mess in the first place. The judge needs an alternative source of information. He needs to give NRA members a voice in the future of their organization, and a Members’ Committee nominated by state associations could provide that voice.

I truly believe Judge Cohen wants to do the right thing. He’s been very fair and reasonable throughout this whole long, drawn-out process. Let’s get the judge what he needs to make good decisions about the future of our organization. Let’s get our state associations to intervene in this case and give our members a real voice in the upcoming trial and the Association’s future.

Georgia Bill Makes Property Owners Liable for Injuries in Gun-Free Zones

Georgia House Bill 1364 makes property owners liable if a legal concealed carrier is harmed while barred from being armed for self-defense on the owner’s property.

HB 1364 says, “Any lawful weapons carrier who is prohibited from carrying… and who is injured… shall have a cause of action against the person, business or other entity that owns or legally controls such property,” according to 11 Alive.

The bill is sponsored by State Rep. Martin Momtahan (R).

Momtahan explained his motivation for introducing the legislation.

He said, “All we want to make sure is, if you’re in the store or anywhere and it has a ‘no gun’ sign, then that store needs to understand they have absolute custodial care of that person [who’s denied the ability to be armed].”

The text of HB 1364 clarifies that any posting that bars legal gun owners from being armed for self-defense must be accompanied by signage that makes clear the land owner understands his custodial duties:

Any public notice posted on a property that includes language which provides that weapons are prohibited on such property shall also contain language citing this Code section and providing that any lawful weapons carrier who is prohibited from carrying his or her weapon, including a concealed weapon, while on such property shall be under the absolute custodial care of the person, business, or other entity that owns or legally controls such property.

 

BLACK HILLS PICKS UP $30 MILLION NAVY/MARINE CORPS AMMO CONTRACT

South Dakota-based Black Hills last week beat out five other ammunition makers to deliver 9mm ammo to the Navy and Marine Corps.

The $30,885,083 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract covers the procurement, manufacturing, testing, inspection, and packaging of 9mm barrier blind cartridges to the Navy and Marine Corps. These will be for use in the services’ front-line 9mm pistols including the Beretta M9 and SIG Sauer M17 and M18.

The rounds were chosen for “combat purposes to provide enhanced terminal effects,” as described by the contracting agency, the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Corona Division, in Norco, California. NSWC Corona first listed the contract opportunity last June and had six competitive bids submitted.

Although it is not disclosed what loads were submitted for testing, Black Hills introduced its Honey Badger Line of self-defense ammo in 2015, which used a monolithic copper solid projectile to consistently penetrate barriers. In its 100-grain +P version, the Black Hills Honeybadger 9mm archives 1,250 FPS velocity out of a 4.4-inch test barrel and generates 347 foot-pounds of energy. The company also makes a 125-grain Subsonic Honeybadger.

 

The Black Hills 125-grain 9mm Subsonic Honeybadger
The Black Hills 125-grain 9mm Subsonic Honeybadger. (Graphic: Black Hills)

Compare this to the standard M1152 load developed by Winchester which was selected in 2016 as the ammunition supplier for the U.S. Army Modular Handgun System program. Using a 115-grain flat nose full metal jacketed bullet, the 9x19mm Luger round has a distinctive shape. With a brass case and military primer, it has an advertised velocity of 1,320 FPS at the muzzle which translates to 445 foot-pounds of energy. Downrange these shifts to 1,301/432 at 5 yards and 132/387 at 25 yards, according to the tables provided by the company.

The work on the Navy’s new barrier blind cartridge will be performed at Black Hills’ Rapid City plant and is expected to be completed by February 2029.

Judge Declares Fargo’s Ban on Home-Based Gun Businesses Goes Too Far

For several years the city of Fargo, North Dakota has prohibited FFL’s from operating out of their homes, but the state legislature took aim at that restriction last year and passed a law that bans localities from establishing zoning ordinances that specifically include firearms and ammunition based businesses.

The city almost immediately filed suit challenging the law, but this week state District Judge Cherie Clark ruled against Fargo; tossing out the city’s lawsuit and rejecting its argument that the zoning preemption law violates the state constitution and the home rule powers granted to local authorities.

“While the Court agrees that (the North Dakota Constitution) intends for ‘maximum local self-government,’ the law is not settled that this language alone provides home rule cities the right to legislate on topics the state legislature has limited,” the judge wrote.

But she also expressed concerns about the Legislature’s actions: “If the legislature continues to pare home rule powers, home rule cities lack the discretion to address important issues impacting their respective and unique communities.”

What, exactly, is so unique about Fargo that federal firearms licensees shouldn’t be allowed to operate a home-based business? The city has never offered a good explanation, instead blithely asserting that it “does not want its residents to utilize their homes in residential areas as gun stores.”

Well, tough. There’s no prohibition in either state or federal law that precludes home-based FFLs, and it doesn’t appear that any other locality in the state has tried to erect any similar barriers, so why should FFLs in Fargo be punished or forced to spend money on a brick-and-mortar location, especially if they’re selling guns on a part-time basis?

This is actually the second law that the state legislature has adopted to deal with Fargo’s restrictions, but the city was successful in defending its ordinance in 2021, which led lawmakers to try again last year.

Bill sponsor and Republican state Rep. Ben Koppelman told a state Senate panel in April that the issue came to greater attention in 2016 when, because of the ordinance, the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives refused to renew the federal firearms licenses of Fargo dealers who sold out of their homes.

“What is at issue is whether we want local governments creating gun control or whether we want gun regulations to remain a state-controlled issue,” Koppelman said in April. “Without this bill and in light of the (2021) court opinion, I think local political subdivisions could propose all sorts of local gun control, and based on the anti-gun track record of the City of Fargo Commission, I think we could expect it.”

Both sides in the lawsuit agree that the issue at hand goes beyond the zoning laws in question, and instead touches on the ability of home-rule localities to pass their own laws in any number of areas. But even though the North Dakota Constitution compelled the state legislature to come up with a home-rule statute and lawmakers granted home-rule communities the authority to adopt ordinances, resolutions, and regulations that provide for public health, safety, morals, and welfare, it’s still within the state’s authority to declare certain subjects off-limits to local control.

Three years ago the legislature adopted a preemption law stating:

1. A political subdivision, including home rule cities or counties, may not enact a zoning ordinance or any other ordinance relating to the purchase, sale, ownership, possession,transfer of ownership, registration, or licensure of firearms and ammunition which is more restrictive than state law. All such existing ordinances are void.

A state judge ruled that Fargo’s home-based FFL zoning prohibition could still be enforced because the state had no regulations concerning commercial firearms sales. While most of us would conclude that any zoning ordinance would be more restrictive than a state law that doesn’t exist, District Judge Stephannie Nicole Stiel sided with Fargo’s argument that the ordinance in question wasn’t more restrictive than state law because state statutes were silent on commercial gun sales sales.

That’s not the case these days, thanks to the legislature’s response last year, and Judge Clark made the right call, even though her editorializing on the legislature’s actions was completely unnecessary. Fargo officials could still appeal Clark’s decision, but the odds of success are pretty long, and it would be a waste of time and taxpayer money to try to keep this needless ordinance in place instead of accepting home-based FFLs and the tax revenue they generate.

NRA Loses Corruption Case, LaPierre Liable for Millions

Manhattan, New York — The National Rifle Association failed to safeguard its donor’s funds while Wayne LaPierre diverted millions toward lavish personal expenses.

That’s the finding a six-person jury handed down on Friday after a week of deliberations. They sided with New York Attorney General Letitia James (D.) against the NRA and its leadership. In addition to the group and its former CEO Lapierre, the jury also ruled against former Treasurer Woody Phillips and General Counsel John Frazer.

The six-member jury in the civil case found LaPierre did $5.4 million worth of harm to the NRA by using its charitable funds to pay for things like private jet travel. They determined he’d already paid back about a million dollars of that harm, but also that there was enough evidence to bar him from being the group’s CEO in the future.

They found Phillips had violated his duty to work in good faith for the NRA, and that his briefly-lived post-employment contract was an unauthorized related-party transaction. However, they found it didn’t do any monetary harm to the organization. Similarly, the jurors found Frazer had violated his duty to the group and authorized “materially false” statements the NRA made on a government disclosure about related party transactions, but they also found his actions didn’t cause the group monetary harm and there wasn’t cause to remove him.

The jury also found a series of payments made to board members or people related to NRA employees were not properly approved ahead of time, but all but two–hair and makeup for Wayne LaPierre’s wife and speaking fees for former NRA president David Keene–were properly approved after the fact. However, they also found the NRA did not have a proper whistle-blower policy for years and did nothing to prevent retaliation against eight whistle-blowers identified in the case.

Judge Joel Cohen is now tasked with deciding what remedies are appropriate for the damages the jury has identified. What he decides will determine the future of the nation’s largest gun-rights group. In addition to barring LaPierre from working with the NRA or other non-profits, he could force the former CEO to pay the organization back for expenses the jury found were unlawful. But he could also appoint a monitor to oversee the NRA’s operations, which might completely transform the group’s leadership and internal operations.

A significant overhaul of the most prominent gun group in America will have a substantial impact on gun politics throughout the nation, especially since it’s far from clear the group can recover.

Of course, the corruption allegations and legal ordeal have already made a tremendous mark on the NRA. Since news of the illicit spending broke in 2018, the group has experienced an unprecedented exodus of members. Millions of people have abandoned the organization, with nobody quite sure how many remain. That’s led directly to a funding shortfall that has forced the group to slash spending on key programs, such as gun safety training and political campaigns, while pouring an unprecedented amount into controversial legal bills.

The group has continued to see declines in fundraising and will likely only be a shadow of its former self in the upcoming 2024 presidential election.

LaPierre, who resigned in the middle of the trial, and the NRA have argued that downfall was AG James’s goal from the beginning. They noted she had promised to investigate the group during her campaign, which she said wasn’t a charity but a “terrorist organization.” Her initial complaint sought the total shutdown of the NRA.

“The fact is, Letitia James set out to destroy the NRA, and the best way to do that was to destroy Wayne LaPierre,” P. Kent Correll, who represents the former CEO, said in closing arguments.

However, Judge Cohen and an appellate court rejected the argument that the case was solely a political attack when the NRA sought to have it dismissed. However, Judge Cohen also removed dissolution as a potential remedy because he argued it would be detrimental to NRA members–the people James is tasked with protecting in the suit.

“In short, the Complaint does not allege the type of public harm that is the legal linchpin for imposing the ‘corporate death penalty,’” he wrote in his opinion. “Moreover, dissolving the NRA could impinge, at least indirectly, on the free speech and assembly rights of its millions of members.

But he let the case proceed because the allegations “tell a grim story of greed, self-dealing, and lax financial oversight at the highest levels of the National Rifle Association.”

In addition to the argument about James’s political motivations, the NRA focused much of its defense on the claim it had already instituted enough reforms to self-correct. It argued that many of the illicit expenses at issue in the case did happen, but the NRA had since fired some of those involved and established internal controls to address the problems. It also attacked as unreliable former insiders, including board members and executives, who testified against those claims in court.

“The NRA Board of Directors, which is the seat of the NRA’s corporate governance, acted in good faith and with ordinary care,” the NRA’s lawyer argued.

“Ladies and gentlemen, when you’re caught in the act, saying you’re sorry now, saying that you’ll do better, doesn’t mean you didn’t take the cookie,” the AG’s lawyer responded.

As has been the case with some current NRA insiders, the group’s current leadership failed to convince the jury they resolved the issues.

Neither the NRA nor the AG responded to requests for comment.

Judge Cohen will now schedule the next trial phase, where he will be responsible for determining the final settlement of the case.

Jury finds NRA and ex-CEO Wayne LaPierre liable in civil corruption trial

The jurors determined there was cause to remove LaPierre and that he owes the organization nearly $4 million.

Former National Rifle Association CEO Wayne LaPierre has been ordered to pay nearly $4 million to the nonprofit after a jury on Friday found him liable in a civil corruption trial brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James.

The defendants, which included the NRA itself, the organization’s general counsel and corporate secretary John Frazer and former treasurer and chief financial officer Wilson “Woody” Phillips, were accused of using the nonprofit as a “personal piggy bank” in a civil lawsuit filed by James in 2020. James alleged that they violated nonprofit laws and misused tens of millions in NRA funds for personal gain.

After a week of deliberation, the jury agreed that the attorney general had proved her case, finding each of the defendants liable for violating their statutory obligations. The jury determined that LaPierre cost the organization more than $5 million but had already repaid $1.4 million. Phillips was held to have harmed the group to the tune of $2 million; the jury did not put a dollar amount on Frazer’s violation.

In their argument, attorneys for the NRA had sought to distance the organization from LaPierre, who announced his resignation as CEO just days before the trial began in January, after more than 30 years at the helm. Sarah Rogers, representing the organization, said in opening arguments that LaPierre, though a “valuable and visionary leader, was “not always a meticulous corporate executive” and questioned why the NRA was even a defendant in the case.

LaPierre’s attorneys, however, maintained that he used private jets not for personal gain, but to raise funds for the organization and for gun rights causes — even as LaPierre himself testified that he improperly expensed private flights and failed to disclose accepting luxury vacations from vendors.

“He was a visionary,” his lawyer P. Kent Correll said in closing arguments on Thursday. “He was a genius.”

NY vs. NRA: Statement by Former BOD Timothy Knight

The verdict in the NY vs. NRA case is due shortly.

Although I believe the case had some political motivations behind it based on the words of the New York Attorney General when she was running for office, I don’t think NRA members should dismiss the grave concerns revealed in what is now several court cases.

I, along with a few other directors, expressed concerns over the misappropriation of funds both internally and then later publicly in 2019.

We recognized who our boss actually was: our fellow members who were faithfully paying their dues.

We did not believe the NRA Board and management were holding to the mission of the Association, nor were they being transparent about expenses. Every NRA Director has a duty to the members, the law, and the NRA’s mission statement. Several of us were dismissed from our committees and accused of disloyalty towards the NRA for raising our financial concerns. Most Board members were too scared to stand up to Wayne and his cronies, especially Marion Hammer. Other Board members were part of the management cabal themselves and had no intention of changing a thing. So, the Board circled their wagons and remained silent. They were unwilling or unable to speak up or divided on where their loyalties lay.

The current NRA Board has failed in its duty to the NRA members, and I think that every single Board member who hasn’t openly spoken up about reform and responsibility should resign immediately.

Our Association deserves bold, honorable, and honest Board members focused on their legal responsibilities and on the members who elected them. No more should they focus on those who can dole out favors, vacations, car rides, consulting fees, and other grafts. We need to stop electing the silent, the complicit, or those who hope to be “trusted remainders” when this all blows over. Board members who are 2nd Amendment heroes, politicians, or captains of industry might once have been effective for our association. They are no longer effective and need to resign as well.

To fix our association, we need a much smaller board with term limits as well as a significant revision of the structure the board operates under. Strict disclosure rules for Board members and management need to be enforced and shared with NRA members during the annual meeting. This information should be disclosed to everyone during the main members’ business meeting, which is open to the public.

I trust the members who make up the association and in the mission statement that should always keep it focused. We need new leadership and a new board now. If both do not change, the slow degradation of our once great association will do more damage to our civil rights, hunting culture, gun safety education, and competitions that we can ill afford. My fellow members, if the court does not grant you the remedy you think is deserved, please stop supporting the do nothing, ne’er do wells, and the faded heroes.

I look forward to the day when the NRA, once again, through hard work and results, regains the trust of millions of law-abiding gun owners. We are stronger when we stand together as hunters, competitors, enthusiasts, advocates, and educators.

Timothy Knight
NRA Board of Directors 2015-2019