Category: Safety

Evidence-Free Hackery: Another Highly Respected ‘Expert’ On the Alleged Conflict of Guns and Public Safety

Crucial Concealment Covert IWB holster open carry Dan Z. for SNW

Oh look…a Robert Spitzer op-ed. Let’s take a look and see what kind of brilliant insights this very respected expert has for us. He is, after all, an academic that antigun courts take super-seriously. The article’s headline itself — What Happens When the Second Amendment Collides With Public Safety? — is based on a false premise. The reality is, the Second Amendment right to carry need not ever collide with “public safety.”

Especially in the context of the Pretti shooting, Spitzer seems to implicitly accept the argument made by some administration officials (and Trump himself) that the mere act of carrying at a protest means you are asking to be shot by police.

This fraught political moment has thus found the Trump administration in the uncomfortable position of taking criticism from both liberals who blame heavy-handed federal agent tactics and conservatives who bristle at the administration’s seeming abandonment of public gun carry rights.

On the one hand, civilian gun carry is indeed a right under the Second Amendment according to the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in the Bruen case where the high court said that individuals have a “right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home.” The court proposed no exception for doing so in a public gathering.

Spitzer says carry is indeed a right “according to the Supreme Court.” Interesting. I thought it was because the plain text of the Second Amendment says we have a right to bear arms, which all relevant historical sources confirm is a reference to public carry.

If you ever wondered why an “expert” like Spitzer (and the other usual suspects) always takes the side of the government in gun rights litigation, you can start with the fact that they clearly don’t believe the Second Amendment protects an individual right at all.

On the other hand, the consequences of such action are clear. Public gun carrying, especially in the context of a public demonstration or similar gathering is, no matter the intentions of the carrier, a terrible idea.

I should have included the very next paragraph. He basically concedes carry is a right (because SCOTUS said so), but then says it’s a terrible idea to exercise that right.

Continue reading “”

What to do about Mexican Drug Cartels: Letters of Marque

By Lee Williams

SAF Investigative Journalism Project

Special to Liberty Park Press

The United States Congress still retains full authority to issue Letters of Marque, although none have been issued for more than a hundred years.

A Letter of Marque was actually a simple concept. They allowed private citizens in private warships to attack enemy vessels during wartime. These privateers could then take ownership of whatever plunder they seized—gold, weapons or the captured ships—after an admiralty court ruled in their favor and took a percentage of the profits.

Letters of Marque were used for hundreds of years across the globe, because they allowed a country to enlarge the size of their navy very quickly and cheaply.

The authority to issue Letters of Marque can still be found in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11 of the United States Constitution: “The Congress shall have Power … to declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water.”

Congressman Tim Burchett, a Republican from Tennessee, and Senator Mike Lee, a Republican of Utah, who both have extremely solid Second-Amendment credentials, have drafted bills that would revitalize the Letters of Marque, in order to target Mexican drug cartels.

Congressman Burchett described the bill in a phone call Monday morning:

“It allows the president to contract out to privateers and go after the cartels,” he said. “These would be top-tier operators, SEALs, Special Forces, Marine Raiders and commando types. Some are still working as private operators. It allows private citizens to act against the cartels. In President Trump’s first term, when he got [Former Iranian Quds Force Commander Qasem] Soleimani, the Democrats just berated our military leaders because they didn’t ask for their permission. If the Democrats still want us to ask for their permission, we got some real problems. This is constitutionally provided and has been done before. We went after the Barbary pirates. It’s constitutionally provided and within the law. In this day and age, we need it. The constitution grants congress the power to grant these letters.”

Senator Lee’s bill is titled “S. 3567: Cartel Marque and Reprisal Authorization Act of 2025.”

It is described as: “A bill to authorize the President of the United States to issue letters of marque and reprisal with respect to acts of aggression against the United States by a member of a cartel, or a member of a cartel-linked organization, or any conspirator associated with a cartel, and for other purposes.”

It was introduced before the latest outbreak of cartel violence, which has targeted American tourists in Mexico.

It specifies that cartels “present an unusual and extraordinary threat to national security and foreign policy of the United States.”

Senator Lee’s bill would allow “privately armed and equipped persons” to use “all means reasonably necessary” to operate outside our borders and seize any individual and their property who the President has determined to be a member of a drug cartel, or a member of a cartel-linked organization, “who is responsible for an act of aggression against the United States.”

Congressman Burchett was asked if he has discussed his bill with President Trump.

“I have not yet, but I put it out there,” he said. “It is constitutionally sound. We live in dangerous times, and we’ve got American people who need it.”

Hope Isn’t a Plan: Is Your Church a Sitting Duck?

Denial isn’t just stupid—it has no survival value. Acting as though the wolves only hunt other sheep in other pastures?  That’s not faith, that’s wishful thinking. So why then do many Christian churches (along with synagogues) opt not to have safety teams?

Are they counting on God’s divine protection? God helps those who help themselves and standing unprepared for evil to come knocking has real-world consequences for real people.

I’ve been to a handful of churches that have top notch safety teams and like many, I’ve been to churches that not only had multiple unlocked and unmonitored entrances — some dark by the way — that had no safety team at all. Unfortunately, unprepared or ill-prepared is still the norm.  Yes, even at events and major religious holidays that bring crowds.

These unprotected churches are sitting ducks.  At one Christmas Eve service I attended, no one had radios or earpieces. No one, save a dad or three who looked like hard-charging alphas, were anywhere to be seen or found. And those men clearly were on dad duty, not part of a safety and security team.

The greeters? Sweet smiles, zero comms. At that service a few years ago, many in the congregation joined me and slipped in through a shadowy lower-level door from the back parking lot…unmanned, unlocked, and unmonitored. It was a perfect back door through which to stage a nightmare. Before, during and after the service?  The pastor stood exposed like a trophy buck in an open field.

I run with security-minded folks, including some who have done it professionally. When I talked about this one particular church they simply shook their heads in disbelief. “They’re one bad incident from going under,” one said.  Indeed.

When one, with sarcasm in his voice, raised the possibility of a super-professional, Secret Service level team, we all laughed. With open side doors and zero visible presence? That’s not discreet, that’s delusional. Unmonitored, dark entrances and an utter lack of thought about congregants’ safety? That kind of negligence is wishful thinking and can turn peace on earth into last rites.

Why do so many religious institutions still play ostrich? Because facing evil means admitting it exists. As for admitting that guns might be necessary to protect people, that’s clearly too icky for the pearl-clutchers in the congregation who think psalms and lordly vibes are body armor enough. As if lunatics and criminals give a damn about holy water and hymnals.

The only thing that stops bad guys with evil in their hearts is a good guy or gal with a gun.

Continue reading “”

 We’ve Been Running a Huge, Real-World Experiment in the Expansion of Carrying Guns in America…Here Are the Results.

The United States is currently experiencing what is likely to be a record-low in homicide, which has occurred at the same time as a massive expansion in firearm carry rights across the country. I have previously written
about how those with carry permits almost never commit crime. State-level data proves it, and even gun-skeptical research organizations have recognized that “evidence generally shows that, as a group, [carry permit] license holders are particularly law abiding and rarely are convicted for violent crimes.”

Yet this irrefutable data didn’t stop the usual antigun suspects from predicting doom when the Supreme Court first issued its ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen in 2022. There, the Court held that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home. Gun control groups angrily claimed that the decision would lead to dramatic increases in violence.

For example, the then-Chief Counsel of Brady, Jonathan Lowy, said that Bruen “is extremist judicial activism at its worst, and Americans may die as a result of what the Court issued in the sanctity of its protected chambers.” John Feinblatt, President of Everytown for Gun Safety, said the Supreme Court chose “to put our communities in even greater danger with gun violence on the rise across the country.” Giffords claimed the ruling would “escalate gun violence,” “spur unlawful militia activity,” “embolden those inclined to vigilante justice,” “increase violence at protests,” and cause “more domestic violence and hate crimes.”

Antigun politicians made similar breathless predictions. Governor Phil Murphy of New Jersey claimed Bruen was a dangerous decision that “will make America a less safe country.” Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg said it “severely undermines public safety not just in New York City, but around the country.” Senator Alex Padilla of California put it more bluntly: “Today’s decision will make our communities less safe, plain and simple.”

Countless other examples abound. I encourage you to follow @2Aupdates if you want to constantly be reminded of all these claims.

We all make incorrect predictions from time to time, but the degree to which opponents of the Second Amendment were wrong is simply astounding.

Continue reading “”

BLUF
Draconian restrictions on the right to armed self-defense in public don’t make peaceable and law-abiding citizens safer. They just render them far less capable of defending themselves and others.

Look at the Defensive Gun Uses that Hawaii Wants to Criminalize.

Late last month, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Wolford v. Lopez, a case challenging a newly imposed Hawaii law that presumptively bans concealed carry permit holders from any private property open to the public (like gas stations and shopping malls) unless they first get express permission from the owner. Combined with other restrictions, the law has the practical effect of making lawful public carry virtually impossible in Hawaii.

Fortunately, the nation’s highest court appears likely to strike down the new restriction. But there’s still so much work left for the court to do when it comes to protecting the right to keep and bear arms—including, specifically, against infringements by the Hawaiian government. Even without the express permission requirement hanging over their heads, Hawaiian concealed carry permit holders will still be prohibited from exercising their rights in an absurdly long list of “sensitive places.”

These include, among other locations:

  • Any bar or restaurant that serves alcohol, regardless of whether the permit holder imbibes;

  • Any “stadium, movie theater, or concert hall”;

  • Any place at which any sporting event of any level of competition is being held;

  • Any beach, playground, or park, including “any state park, state monument, county park, tennis court, golf course, swimming pool, or other recreation area or facility under control, maintenance, and management of the State or a county”;

  • Any parking area adjacent to the prohibited locations above.

Constitutionally, it’s abhorrent. As a matter of public policy, it’s laughable – and dangerous.

Continue reading “”

When Worship Is Attacked, Churches Must Be Prepared to Restore Order
Jordan Howe

Your Church Needs a Response Plan to Ensure Orderly Worship

On January 18, a violent group of “protestors” covertly entered Cities Church in Minnesota and caused a massive disruption of their worship service.

In the days since the event, many Christians have responded in different ways. Some have boasted about the strength and firepower of their congregants (“I’d like to see them try that in my church!”). Others have chosen to emphasize the need for gospel ministry while avoiding any talk about church security (“We just preach the gospel!”).

As both a deacon at my church and a current law enforcement officer for the last decade, I both think about these issues and live them out. That’s why I started Kingdom Defense Training, a ministry designed to train and assist local churches to think more biblically about safety and security. Unfortunately, I would argue that both approaches above overlook the ministerial aspect of church security and fail to recognize that a church must also protect itself physically, civilly, and spiritually.

Continue reading “”

Proposed WV House Bill Would Expand Castle Doctrine, Strengthen Self-Defense Protections

CHARLESTON, WV (LOOTPRESS) — A newly introduced bill in the West Virginia House of Delegates would expand the state’s Castle Doctrine laws, strengthening legal protections for people who use force — including deadly force — in self-defense.

House Bill 4878, introduced on January 28, would broaden when and where West Virginians may legally defend themselves, their homes, and others, while also shielding them from both criminal charges and civil lawsuits when force is lawfully used.

The legislation clarifies that a lawful occupant may use reasonable force, including deadly force, against an intruder or attacker inside a home or residence if they reasonably believe the intruder could cause death, serious bodily harm, or intends to commit a felony.

The bill also extends those protections beyond the walls of the home to include the curtilage — areas immediately surrounding a residence, such as yards, driveways, and porches — and removes any duty to retreat when a person is lawfully present.

Continue reading “”

Know Your Gun: When you trust your life to a tool, you must know it inside and out.

We know that when we are faced with the threat of serious bodily injury or death, our focus will be on the threat. This is not so much a conscious effort as a fact that our natural survival system has taken over. For that reason, our manipulation of our defensive equipment must be practiced until its operation and deployment almost become subconscious functions. This is the main reason so many of us caution against the continual switching back and forth of that equipment—especially our daily-carry guns. While firing the defensive shot should certainly be a conscious decision, getting the gun into play should be a task that can be accomplished without thinking. To accomplish this, one really needs to know their defensive handgun.

The only negligent discharge with injuries I ever witnessed in a training class involved an older fellow who had carried a revolver in his law-enforcement career. Now, retired and working security, he had decided to carry a striker-fired pistol. The only trouble was that he had not taken the time to actually learn his new gun, and had real trouble keeping his finger off the trigger when the sights weren’t on the target. The double-action revolver trigger requires a significant amount of pressure, so this gross violation of the safety rules probably never resulted in a negative outcome for him, but that’s pure luck. With the lighter trigger of a striker-fired pistol, luck is less available. As you might guess, he shot himself in the leg while improperly reholstering his new gun.

Sometimes manufacturers make things difficult, like Smith & Wesson with its Models 39 and 59. Those were good, solid guns, but you pushed the safety up instead of down—the opposite of the single-action semi-automatics. If someone wasn’t really checked out on those, they might get a click instead of a bang or vice versa, either of which could create problems depending upon the situation.

So, it is critical for the armed citizen to totally familiarize themselves with their chosen defense gun. This means knowing how to safely load and unload the gun. It involves knowing the proper manipulation of all the various safety controls the gun might have. And, it involves knowing what the most common malfunctions might be and how to deal with them. All of these things are not going to be learned in a day, but take time and training. Once these things are learned, they must be practiced.

While the semi-automatic pistol is certainly the most popular defensive handgun, revolver shooters don’t get a free pass. Do you know how to keep your ejector rod from backing out? Do you know how to avoid having a spent cartridge get stuck under the ejector star? Finally, in the midst of a gunfight where you can only get a partial reload into your revolver, which way does the cylinder rotate? We know that Colts rotate clockwise whereas Smith & Wesson rotate counterclockwise, but what about the double-action Taurus or your Ruger SP101? You’d better find out.

Knowing the gun one carries is probably the main reason why many of the old-timers have stayed with guns of older design. It’s not that the new guns aren’t as good, it’s just that the older models are what these folks grew up with. They know them, know how they operate, know their shortcomings and know how to deal with any types of problems that might arise. That’s what knowing your gun is all about—the ability to effectively bring it into play without a lot of conscious thought.

By contrast, an old-timer of my acquaintance—a double-action revolver guy of long standing—advises that he is going to switch to a 9 mm for everyday carry. He has spent a good deal of range time and is satisfied with the function and accuracy of his new choice. Nonetheless, his next step is to attend a class at Gunsite with his new gun. All of which is part of the process of knowing your gun.

Finally, to end this piece on a lighter note, I would share this humorous—and probably apocryphal—story of a young man who just had to have a 1911. Obviously, he had never even fired one prior to his purchase. Within days, he was back in the gun store complaining that his new gun jammed. The in-house gunsmith checked it, cleaned and oiled it and reported that he hadn’t found any problem.

Sometime later, the young shooter returned, still complaining about his gun jamming. This time the gunsmith, after checking the gun, took the customer back to the shooting trap so he could witness the gun being fired. The gunsmith fired an entire magazine into the test trap and the slide locked back. “Look! It jammed again,” said the customer.

Know your defense gun. I mean really know your chosen defense gun. It is important.

Report: Murders Plummeted in 2025; Meanwhile, Gun Ownership Up

New data shows a dramatic decline in homicides in 2025 from the previous year, even though industry data shows the number of guns in private ownership has gone up. (Dave Workman)

By Dave Workman

A new report from the Council on Criminal Justice says homicides have declined more than 20 percent in 2025 from the previous year, based on data from 40 large U.S. cities, and the media is playing it up.

As note by the New York Times, “Last year will likely register the lowest national homicide rate in 125 years and the largest single-year drop on record.”

According to the Council on Criminal Justice report:

  • Looking at changes in violent offenses, the rate of reported homicides was 21% lower in 2025 than in 2024in the 35 study cities providing data for that crime, representing 922 fewer homicides. There were 9% fewer reported aggravated assaults, 22% fewer gun assaults, and 2% fewer domestic violence incidents last year than in 2024. Robbery fell by 23% while carjackings (a type of robbery) decreased by 43%.
  • When nationwide data for jurisdictions of all sizes is reported by the FBI later this year, there is a strong possibility that homicides in 2025 will drop to about 4.0 per 100,000 residents. That would be the lowest rate ever recorded in law enforcement or public health data going back to 1900, and would mark the largest single-year percentage drop in the homicide rate on record.

This has occurred at a time when gun ownership appears to be at record levels in the U.S. Raw data from the FBI’s National Instant Check System shows more than 2 million background checks each month during 2025, and adjusted data from the National Shooting Sports Foundation shows gun sales have declined, but they are still healthy.

In its annual report, NSSF included this caveat: “Though not a direct correlation to firearms sales, the NSSF-adjusted NICS data provide an additional picture of current market conditions. In addition to other purposes, NICS is used to check transactions for sales or transfers of new or used firearms.

“It should be noted that these statistics represent the number of firearm background checks initiated through the NICS. They do not represent the number of firearms sold or sales dollars. Based on varying state laws, local market conditions and purchase scenarios, a one-to-one correlation cannot be made between a firearm background check and a firearm sale.”

When NSSF released its annual report on firearm production in the U.S., including import and export data from 2023, it estimated there were 506.1 million firearms in civilian possession from 1990 to 2023. It has likely increased from that figure by several million.

Establishment media reports on the plummeting murder statistics have ignored or carefully avoided any mention of increased gun ownership and the number of firearms in private hands.

For several years, the gun prohibition lobby has been adamant with predictions that increased private gun ownership would result in a dramatic increase in homicides. This new report suggests otherwise.

 

Personal Defense Tip: The Castle Doctrine Isn’t Absolute.

As part of January’s general grab-bag of weirdness, a Texas man is being charged with murder after he shot an armed home intruder. I know what you’re thinking: What about the castle doctrine? Not to mention it’s Texas. So what’s going on?

The comment section on the rather vague news reports are filled with opinionated social media experts claiming this guy will be out in no time and that he should totally sue local law enforcement for wrongful imprisonment. So, what’s the truth?

The truth is the castle doctrine isn’t absolute. That means you can’t do whatever the heck you feel like in your own home. Rules, people…there are rules.

Disclaimer: As always, please remember that I’m not an attorney and this isn’t legal advice. It’s simply information (and a dose of supposition) based on experience.

Continue reading “”

Man Fought off a Mountain Lion Weeks Before a Suspected Fatal Colorado Attack
A suspected deadly mountain lion attack on New Year’s Day that killed a woman hiking alone was preceded by another harrowing encounter in the same area

A solo hiker who authorities believe was killed by a mountain lion on a remote Colorado trail on New Year’s Day was not the first person to encounter one of the predators in the area in recent weeks.

Gary Messina said he was running along the same trail on a dark November morning when his headlamp caught the gleam of two eyes in the nearby brush. Messina used his phone to snap a quick photo before a mountain lion rushed him.

Messina said he threw the phone at the animal, kicked dirt and yelled as the lion kept trying to circle behind him. After a couple of harrowing minutes he broke a bat-sized stick off a downed log, hit the lion in the head with it and it ran off, he said.

The woman whose body was found Thursday on the same Crosier Mountain trail had “wounds consistent with a mountain lion attack,” said Kara Van Hoose with Colorado Parks and Wildlife. An autopsy is scheduled for next week, said Rafael Moreno with the Larimer County Coroner’s Office.

Prior warnings and the hunt for a culprit

Wildlife officials late Thursday tracked down and killed two mountain lions in the area — one at the scene and another nearby. A necropsy will help determine if either or both of those animals attacked the woman and whether they had neurological diseases such as rabies or avian flu.

A search for a third mountain lion reported in the area was ongoing Friday, Van Hoose said. Nearby trails remained closed while the hunt continued. Van Hoose said circumstances would dictate whether that lion is also killed.

Based on the aggressiveness of the animal that attacked him on Nov. 11, Messina suspects it could be the same one that killed the woman on New Year’s Day.

“I had to fight it off because it was basically trying to maul me,” Messina told The Associated Press. “I was scared for my life and I wasn’t able to escape. I tried backing up and it would try to lunge at me.”

Continue reading “”

The Trace Tries Desperately to Make ‘Gun Violence’ Numbers Look Bad

This year, we’ve seen a significant downturn in so-called gun violence. While some like to say we’re just rebounding from the pandemic spike, the truth is that this seems to be a bit more. It’s been a good year, all things considered, though maybe not enough to reach levels akin to other developed nations.

Then again, when you take guns out of the equation, we’re still more violent than those countries, so I’m not really going to expect that to change anytime soon.

At The Trace, though, they need to continue with their mission to champion gun control under the guise of journalism, and that means taking the truth and trying to make it sound so much worse than it actually is.

Continue reading “”

Anti-liberty/gun cracktivist’s
By Mike McDaniel

Some things, death and taxes among them, never change. In the same category are the specious arguments of anti-liberty/gun cracktivists. Whenever a horrific crime like a mass shooting occurs, they blame the gun and the Americans who would never commit such a crime.

They also have additional narratives they hope Americans can be tricked into believing, such as virtually every mass attack is carried out by white men, all of whom are domestic terrorist, racist, transphobic white supremacist, Ultra-MAGA, Nazi, haters determined to destroy “our democracy.”

One such cracktivist is apparently John Davenport:

Graphic: Fordham University Faculty Site. Public Domain.

Dr. Davenport tells us the idea of greater security for students and the public at large is a “fallacy,” and “would not make us much safer.” He should know.  He’s a professor of peace and justice studies, which obviously makes him an expert about peace and justice  and stuff.

Think about it for a minute. How much would it actually cost to put armed guards in every single store and restaurant, every 300 feet or so on beaches and at open air events, in every movie theater and every 200 feet at concerts, at every entrance to every building at any hospital, college, school, church, temple or mosque, at all streets junction where lots of traffic piles up – and so on?

Actually, he’s sort of right. In 2013 even the NRA was advocating armed guards in every school. The usual suspects were against that, and the idea eventually died because the costs were—and are—simply too high. The numbers aren’t exact, but there are more than 110,000 K-12 public and private schools in America.  missiongraduatenm.org/number-of-schools-in-the-us/  Putting even one, full-time armed guard in each school is prohibitively expensive, and far more than one would be necessary.

Continue reading “”

Apparently, Nevada doesn’t have an immunity from civil suits statute for the lawful use of force that Missouri and several other states do.

Police investigate fatal shooting of intruder as experts explain Nevada’s Castle Doctrine

LAS VEGAS (KTNV) — Las Vegas Metro Police are investigating after a valley homeowner fatally shot an intruder last week, officials said.

Once the investigation is complete, Metro will send the case to the District Attorney’s office for a “self-defense review.”
WATCH | Nevada’s Castle Doctrine explained

The incident comes just a week after police say another homeowner shot two armed men who approached him in his garage.

In the wake of these recent shootings, I spoke with Michael Johnston, a use-of-force expert and CEO of Code 4 Consulting, about what rights homeowners have in these situations. Johnston is also a retired Henderson Police captain.

“The Castle Doctrine is designed to protect you and your family when you are in your home or in your car. You don’t have to wait to be injured, but there does have to be some level of threat that you feel personally in the need of self-defense,” Johnston said.

However, Johnston warns that taking action without sufficient threat can have serious consequences.

“While the Castle Doctrine is designed to protect you from the criminal side of a homicide, right, because the taking of another human life is a homicide, to make it justifiable would be the Castle Doctrine. But on the flip side is the civil litigation that could come on the backside of it. So while you might be justified criminally, there’s always a civil side that you have to be concerned with,” Johnston said.
Former Clark County District Attorney David Roger says there are three things prosecutors look at when considering these cases.

“So a person can use deadly force in self-defense under the following circumstances… First, they can’t be the aggressor. You have to be in actual fear of your safety or the safety of another person, and your fear has to be reasonable,” Roger said.

Both experts say homeowners should make sure they know Nevada law before defending their home.

The Lead “Crisis” And Regulatory Squeeze

How To Turn A Legitimate Concern Into A Backdoor Ban

The dangers of lead (the mineral, not the concept of pointing your gun ahead of a moving target) are not a myth, and shooters shouldn’t pretend otherwise. It’s a naturally occurring element used extensively in shooting sports with well-documented health risks. Anyone who spends time around firearms — especially indoors, in high-volume training, or at poorly managed ranges — should understand those risks clearly.

The problem isn’t that lead is dangerous. It certainly can be — just like chainsaws, motor vehicles and guns themselves — but the individual risks are easily reduced. The bigger problem for gun enthusiasts and hunters is how that danger is being selectively framed, exaggerated, and weaponized to make shooting sports increasingly expensive, impractical and regulated out of reach.

This is not about safety anymore. For anti-gunners, it’s about regulatory leverage.

Continue reading “”