Category: Safety

Jankovich: Walmart stabbings show flaw in gun control logic

Last weekend, a man walked into a Walmart in Traverse City and stabbed 11 innocent people in a random, brutal act of violence. The scene was horrifying—but thankfully, everyone survived.

The media covered the initial shock. The politicians issued generic statements. But something’s missing — something that always seems to go missing when the narrative doesn’t fit: no one is talking about “knife control.” Why is that?

A knife was used to commit mass violence — just as we’ve seen before with hammers, axes and even cars. These are real tragedies, carried out without a single bullet fired. And yet, no one is proposing sweeping legislation to regulate or ban knives or to require background checks before buying a truck.

Because deep down, we all know the glaring truth: it’s not the object that commits the violence; it’s the person. But the moment a firearm is involved, the story changes. The headlines explode. Politicians scramble to propose more restrictions. And the blame shifts from the criminal to the tool they used.

Police respond to multiple people being stabbed inside a Walmart Supercenter store near Traverse City, Mich. on Saturday, July 26, 2025.
This double standard isn’t just frustrating, it’s dangerous. It distracts from real solutions, and it deliberately ignores the fact that, in Traverse City, a law-abiding citizen with a firearm stopped the attack before more people were stabbed.

When police arrived at the scene, the alleged attacker had already been restrained, held at gunpoint by a shopper.

That’s right: a proverbial “good guy” with a gun stopped a “bad guy” with a knife. It’s textbook self-defense and the outcome we hope for in moments of crisis.

This is the very reason Women for Gun Rights exists. We believe the Second Amendment protects not just the right to “bear arms” — but the right to defend yourself and others when no one else can. At the end of the day, despite the best efforts of law enforcement, you are your own first responder. Your life, and the lives of others, is your responsibility.

This incident also highlights another uncomfortable pattern that truly undermines the efficacy of gun control. Authorities said the suspect had a history of “assaultive incidents.” In other words, they knew he was dangerous and capable of violence. While shocking to hear, this isn’t an isolated occurrence. Over and over, we’ve seen mass casualty events carried out by individuals who were already on law enforcement’s radar. The signs were there. The threats had been made. Reports were filed. But the system didn’t act.

And yet, every time a tragedy occurs, the focus shifts — not to the failures of intervention, but to restricting the rights of law-abiding citizens. Groups like Moms Demand Action and anti-gun politicians push for Red Flag laws, assault weapon bans and magazine limits, as if taking tools away from the responsible will somehow stop the reckless and violent.

But Traverse City shows the flaw in that logic.

The attacker didn’t use a gun. He used a knife. Would a Red Flag law have prevented it? Would a gun ban have saved those people? Of course not. The answer isn’t to criminalize gun ownership — it’s to crack down on actual criminals, take real threats seriously and enforce the laws we already have against people who have proven themselves violent and dangerous.

This is an important moment in Michigan and across the United States. It’s time to stop pretending the tool is the problem and start focusing on the truth: dangerous people are the threat. And guns, in the hands of the right people, save lives.

Marcy Jankovich is the Michigan State Director for Women for Gun Rights.

Well, I can see such as ‘another club in the bag’ so to speak

What We Really Need for Effective Self-Defense: Reliable Non-Lethal Incapacitation.

Recently, Shooting News Weekly shared a quote from Open Source Defense. In short, they called for technological improvements in guns to make them easier to shoot, have higher capacities, and otherwise be more useful for the average human. I agree with the idea that weapons should continue to improve as technology advances.

On the other hand, humans have a tendency to get stuck in a paradigm that keeps us from moving on to better technologies. For example, there’s the famous quote from Henry Ford: “If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.” The automobile was a radical departure from using animal power to get around, and is better for nearly all use cases. But few had imagined that at the time.

To avoid that trap, I propose the industry should set goals and then determine what technologies need to be further developed or created from scratch to meet those goals. This kind of leadership by objective isn’t perfect, but it can help us avoid seeking “faster horses” in the gun world.

One of the biggest things anti-gunners misunderstand is the alleged desire among gun owners to kill people. While there are always a few nutters who fantasize about having an excuse to kill another human being (we can call them the “I wish an MF’er would” crowd), the vast, vast majority of gun owners only want to be able to stop a threat to their lives and those of people they care about.

If it were possible to stop the threat consistently and reliably without the attendant tragedy of ending another human life, that’s what virtually all of us would choose. We have some tools designed for non-lethal incapacitation, but sadly, They’re not reliable enough for life-and-death situations. TASER darts don’t always stick and things like OC spray can be affected by wind, sunglasses, the influence of drugs, etc. That’s why such weapons aren’t good answers to the threat of death or grievous bodily harm. We just can’t take a chance on them not working.

Still, we try to find ways to avoid needing to kill someone. Non-violent dispute resolution tactics like Verbal Judo are widely taught in the firearms community. Farnam’s “Rule of Stupids” (avoid doing stupid things with stupid people in stupid places) has long been taught to people who want to carry a gun for self-defense. Avoiding situations where you might need to use a gun entirely is the key here.

In the long run, it’s my hope that the industry takes this to heart as it seeks to improve weapon designs and invent new tools for self-defense. Instead of a faster horse — a gun that’s easier to shoot and throws more pieces of metal around — what we really need is something like Star Trek phasers. On one setting, people in that fictional world can reliably knock most threats out when it’s appropriate. The option to kill, however, is still available when it’s absolutely necessary. Kirk’s phaser was also good as a powerful cutting tool, a signal, a source of heat, and many other uses.

We’re probably nowhere near such a weapon yet, but it’s a good north star to guide the industry. Reliable incapacitation might not come from an energy weapon like we see in science fiction, but whatever the path it is that leads in that direction, we should focus on finding it.

Right to bear arms also a responsibility

A violent attack in Traverse City, Michigan, would not have been prevented by any of the myriad proposals for more intrusive “gun control” — the attack, in which 11 people were viciously stabbed, was carried out with a folding knife.

Instead the first gun at the scene of the attack, which authorities are seeking to define as terrorism, was carried by a law-abiding citizen, who helped defuse the situation and coax the alleged perpetrator into surrendering.

The citizen, a retired Marine bearing arms in concordance with the Second Amendment rights we frequently defend in our editorials, acknowledged in an interview with the Detroit Free Press that the Second Amendment is as much a responsibility as a right.

“The only that separated me from the other gentlemen that had stepped in as well was what was I was carrying in my hands,” Derrick Perry said. “I think I would have ran out there or walked out there and helped either way. … It was just a moment of ‘I got a duty to protect.’”

We are not saying that everyone needs to bear this responsibility, or that everyone is well-suited to bear it. We recognize that a society that allows people to pursue their opportunities and exercise their liberties will depend on everybody taking on different responsibilities — the responsibilities they are best equipped to fulfill.

But we believe that the men, women and children of Traverse City should appreciate that Derrick Perry understands that he not only has a right to own and carry a firearm, but as someone willing to train and educate himself on the use of firearms, he has an opportunity to shoulder the responsibility of helping to keep his community safe.

While we are far from the scene of this crime in northern Michigan, we appreciate Perry’s willingness, as a retired Marine, to serve his country and his willingness, as displayed by his bravery that day, to continue to serve his fellow Americans by being prepared to defend their lives and liberties.

We hope people across our nation can learn both to respect the necessity of a sense of responsibility in each of us, and the necessity of respect for the freedoms and liberties that allow us to bear those responsibilities.

Canada Has Proven the Ineffectiveness of Oppressive National-Level Gun Control Laws.

A high profile mass shooting happened in a heavily gun controlled state so, predictably, the civilian disarmament industrial complex has once again jumped onto the argument that we need far more federal-level gun rights restrictions. One of the countries they love to use as an exemplar for gun control Nirvana they seek is Canada.

For the last decade under Justin Trudeau, Canada ratcheted up their gun control laws. This went against what he had promised back in 2010, when he said he would never confiscate guns but that lie really isn’t surprising. We see that with purple and red state Democrats on this side of the border who engage in a sort of gun control taqiyya. They promise not to ban guns like the AR-15 during their campaigns, then support bans after the election (see: Conor Lamb, Jason Kander, and many others).

Under Trudeau, Canada did all of the following, which would make America’s gun control industry swoon if it happned here:

  • Passed new legislation which extended background checks from five years to a lifetime
  • Implemented a point-of-sale registration by business
  • Required authorization to transport restricted and prohibited firearms to locations other than the range (e.g. gunsmiths, gun shows, etc.) through strengthened transportation requirements
  • Prohibited 1,500 models of “assault-style” weapons, the public was offered a grace period to turn them in
  • National freeze on the sale of new handguns
  • Banned another 400 guns by make and model just recently

So, with all of this new gun control, homicides must have surely fallen through the floor, right? After all, that’s the whole point of passing more gun control laws isn’t it?

Nope.

Continue reading “”

The Misogyny of the Anti-Gun Movement

A couple of days ago my colleague Tom Knighton wrote about some examples of misogyny in Second Amendment spaces, but the issue is perhaps even more pronounced among gun control advocates.

As Paige Pearson writes at the National Shooting Sports Foundation’s blog, many gun control groups have institutionalized their opposition to women exercising their Second Amendment rights… and they have become more vocal as more women are becoming gun owners.

The Smoking Gun is Everytown for Gun Safety’s media arm that describes itself as “the online resource committed to exposing the gun industry’s” role “in our gun violence epidemic.” Apparently that includes exposing the evils of marketing and advertising in a manner that attracts 50 percent of your possible customer base.

Enter Greg Lickenbrock, who spoke with three marketing and sociology professors from Oregon State University about their observations in advertising towards American women from firearm manufacturers and retailers.

“The fact that we now see women in these ads, and portraying different ‘characters,’ demonstrates the industry’s efforts to increase ownership among women,” Dr. Brett Burkhardt said.

“After a few years of experimenting with sexualized ads that didn’t correlate with increased sales to women, the industry now seems to have landed on an advertising idea that works: showing women as competent and serious gun owners,” added Dr. Michelle Barnhardt.

Dr. Aimee Dinnin Huff offered her thoughts as well. “There isn’t yet an established female American gun owner identity or image that consumers can latch onto. Many ads still rely on gendered assumptions rather than a nuanced understanding of the different types of relationships women have with firearms,” she said.

Dr. Burkhardt added another thought, stating, “These new and more common depictions of women and firearms are examples of how the industry is seeking to naturalize women’s gun ownership.”

Why shouldn’t gun ownership be considered natural for women? Or, to put it another way, why do anti-gunners want to denormalize half the population exercising a fundamental constitutional right?

To be fair, groups like Everytown are just as opposed to guys owning guns as they are with women exercising their 2A rights. But the anti-gunners can’t stand the fact that more women are choosing to purchase a firearm; whether for self-defense, hunting, competitive shooting, or just because it’s fun to spend time at the range. And they absolutely hate that the firearms industry has recognized that a growing number of women are making up their customer base.

Media still widely misrepresents American gun owners as old, white guys but recent trends in firearm purchasing couldn’t put this caricature to rest any better. Over the past five years, the surge of new first-time buyers has made the gun-owning community the most diverse population of gun owners ever. That’s a good thing – as the Second Amendment is for everyone. And that includes women.

Women are featured more prominently today in advertising because more women are buying firearms for any number of reasons – all good ones – and the industry is listening to them. Women’s nights at neighborhood shooting ranges, women-only firearm training classes and even friend groups choosing to go to the range together are all increasingly more popular activities as women choose to exercise their Second Amendment rights in any safe way they choose.

Marketing has changed over the last few decades to follow the customer. For Lickenbrock and others, that means seeing a lot more women with guns. And that’s a good thing.

I certainly think so, and if you’re reading this I’m relatively sure you’re in agreement with Pearson too. The gun control lobby, on the other hand, isn’t just going to clutch its collective pearls. They too will be targeting women with anti-gun messaging and campaigns designed to discourage them from keeping and bearing arms; portraying it as something that’s far too dangerous for ladies to engage in… and ignoring stories about women saving their own lives thanks to their decision to become a gun owner.

Be Prepared or Be a Serf

You should not live in fear, but you should live with the understanding that there are bad people out there who want you either enslaved or dead. Donald Trump’s courageous strike against the scumbag Iranian mullahs only highlighted the fact that we may very well have hundreds, if not thousands, of sleeper agents within the United States who can act on command to unleash a wave of murder the likes of which we’ve never seen. I wrote a best-selling novel about it. But that’s only one threat. Another threat is homegrown nuts, terrorists, and criminals, to the extent that they differ. And then there is the threat posed by leftists who want to rule over you forever, no matter the cost. You might be out at church, in the mall, or at your own house when it happens, and you better be prepared to deal with it all.

What I’m trying to say is you need to buy guns and ammunition.

The fact is that things are getting uglier. Our opponents are getting uglier, and not just aesthetically (although a lot of them are really unattractive). As Donald Trump racks up win after win, his enemies, both foreign and domestic, are going to get more and more desperate. Obviously, the Iranians, who have killed well into four figures of Americans over the last 50 years, will be looking for payback if their own people don’t hang them from the nearest construction crane first.

Hopefully, by the time you read this, they won’t have struck. We’ve also got, among other disaffected bands of jerks, Hamas, the Houthis, and probably the Hottentots gunning for Americans. For four years under President Biden, the border was wide open with a big flashing “Welcome” sign inviting every Third World psychopath and communist cadre into America. Some of them are sleeping in their sleeper cells. Some of them are running around our college campuses, protected by credulous district court judges who think that the Constitution requires us to put out the welcome mat for people who want us dead.

Here at home, criminals who Soros prosecutors won’t prosecute are walking the streets because these poor, justice-involved persons deserve pity for us making them into criminals with our capitalism and structural racism. Of course, were you even to smudge the line between legal and illegal, they would come down on you like Trump came down on Fordow. There are still plenty of legal aliens out there who kill Americans through drunk driving and murder. And then there are the lunatics, like the guy who thought Tim Walz commanded him to kill because Jazz Hands would be a good senator; anyone who thinks that has already won on his insanity defense.

But the people we should be more concerned about are the leftists enraged at our challenge to their political, social, and cultural supremacy and who would happily shed blood to keep it. We have an entire ruling class that is facing the prospect of losing power for good. It has never been effectively challenged like this since it came into being after World War II, except for short periods, and never so radically. The worst it has ever experienced until now is a temporary slowing of America’s decline into a socialist miasma rather than a complete reversal of the whoosh down that slippery slope. But a reversal is what it’s getting now, and they are frantic to stop us.

Look at the things they’re trying to impose on us and look at how they are not just being stopped but are being turned around. Last week, there was a major Supreme Court case that basically said, “No, there is no constitutional right to mutilate children, dummies.” They really thought they had it. If Kamala Harris had won, they would have. You would have seen the Constitution interpreted to create an affirmative right to cut your children’s bodies apart to conform to the delusions of mentally ill kids or their Munchausen mommies. But because of Trump and his appointments, that didn’t happen. And you saw the Democrats react. Every single one of them was mad about it. Why, not letting young ‘uns be mutilated was the worst thing in the history of ever. Move over, Dred Scott, because not being able to carve up the kiddies is like the Fugitive Slave Act on steroids.

Today, they’re losing across the board. Abortion. DEI. Illegal aliens. We’re not just slowing their roll; we’re rolling them back. Do you think they’ll sit still for it? Do you think they’re just going to allow everything that they’ve built, every mile they’ve trekked in their Gramscian march through the institutions, come to naught?

No, they’ll fight – and I write about it in my upcoming novel, America Apocalypse: The Second American Civil War (you can pre-order now). But the trouble is not going to start with big movements of troops across the battlefields. It’s going to be smaller, more directed actions against particular people – people like you. We had a small-scale insurgency from the late-60s to the mid-70s in this country in which hundreds of people died, and thousands of bombs were detonated by leftist, urban terrorists, mostly spoiled college brats who decided that since the working class wasn’t going to rise up, they would just start killing. Two people already tried to kill Trump. We’ve all seen the statistics that over half of Democrats are open to the idea  of murdering their political opponents. At some point, somebody’s going to pick up a gun and start trying to make that happen on a larger scale.

You don’t want to be caught short. You don’t want to be caught unprepared. It’s not fair that we have to go through our lives taking into account the fact that there are other Americans who would hurt us because we refuse to live under their boot heel, but life isn’t fair. That’s the way it is. Nothing is free, especially freedom. It isn’t going to guard itself, and you’re not always going to be able to rely on the government to protect you either logistically – when seconds count, the police are minutes away – or intentionally, like when the FBI and other law-enforcement organizations under President Eggplant made the conscious choice to allow leftist terrorists to flourish while focusing on such crimes as conservatives’ premeditated petitioning of school boards and Catholics intentionally praying. Even today, blue city cops will do nothing about illegal aliens, including ones who are even more criminal than they all are by virtue of being illegal aliens.

So, prepare. Get the equipment you need. Get the training you need, and not only about shooting guns but about understanding the legal aspects of lawful deadly force. You also need an understanding of basic emergency medical aid, like how to stop the bleeding. Talk to your family about what to do in bad situations. Talk to your neighbors about sticking together if things get ugly. You are your own first responder.

You understand why they want you to be afraid. You understand why they want you disarmed. It’s because when you are not afraid and when you are prepared to defend yourself, your family, your community, and your Constitution, they can never intimidate you. They can never take what is yours from you. And they can never rule over you.

‘Girls Just Wanna Have Guns’ coming to Coeur d’Alene

COEUR d’ALENE — It’s not uncommon for North Idaho women to have guns in their home — but many lack the skills needed to use one effectively in a self-defense situation.

Adelina Mae is looking to change that.

Mae began “Girls Just Wanna Have Guns,” a woman-owned and operated business, after realizing her own mother didn’t know how to use the guns her father kept in the home.

“My mom of all people, who has had guns in her house for a long time, did not know how to use the gun in her own nightstand,” Mae said.

Based in Arizona, “Girls Just Wanna Have Guns” holds events for women in cities across the country to teach them just about everything there is to know about owning and operating a gun, from holding it correctly to aiming, shooting and reloading.

“We go through everything as though you haven’t seen a gun in your life,” Mae said.

Mae said it’s common for women to have limited experience with shooting because they often receive help from their husbands, fathers or other men in their life out on the range.

“Most women, when they go to the range, their husband will load the gun and everything and they’ll just pull the trigger,” Mae said, “but it’s the same gun they would grab and need to operate if something happens at home.”

“Girls Just Wanna Have Guns” hosts events by women, for women, Mae added, because some women may have their reasons to not want to learn about guns from a man, such as survivors of domestic violence.

“It gives them a big sense of confidence and independence,” Mae said. “They know they are doing everything they can to protect themselves.”

Later this month, Mae is bringing “Girls Just Wanna Have Guns” to Coeur d’Alene — a homecoming of sorts, as Mae’s parents that inspired the business live in Athol.

The June 28 event will include about three hours of dry fire, hands-on learning at the Fernan Rod and Gun Club. Attendees also receive goody bags with essentials for a day on the range — all in pink and black.

Tickets to the event are $175 and can be purchased at girlsjustwannahavegunsevents.com. Info: @girlsjustwannahavegunss on Instagram.

The important thing to note is that there are armed antifa thugs embedded in these protests.
And they’re STUPID.
So follow the ‘Stupid Rules™’:
Don’t go Stupid places, with Stupid people, at Stupid times, and do Stupid things.

Innocent bystander mistakenly shot dead at Utah ‘No Kings’ protest was ‘Project Runway’ designer
Police chief confirms victim was ‘not the intended target’ when peacekeepers fired at suspect carrying rifle

An innocent bystander who was a fashion designer that appeared on “Project Runway” died over the weekend after he was shot during a “No Kings” protest in Utah, police said Sunday.

The victim was identified as Arthur Folasa Ah Loo, a Samoan designer who appeared on the hit Bravo show and a married father of two.

He was shot during the Saturday protest, which attracted around 10,000 people, and died later that night, Salt Lake City Police Chief Brian Redd said.

“Our victim was not the intended target,” said Redd, who added that Ah Loo, 39, was just participating in the march.

Redd said Ah Loo was mistakenly shot by one of two event peacekeepers in neon vests who opened fire after a suspect, identified as Arturo Gamboa, 24, ran toward the crowd with a rifle.

They saw Gamboa pull out a rifle before raising it in a firing position before moving toward a crowd of protesters, Redd said. One of the men in the vests fired three times, striking Gamboa and the victim, who later died.

Gamboa was wounded and was allegedly found with a rifle and a gas mask in his backpack. Paramedics took Gamboa to the hospital. Detectives later booked Gamboa into the Salt Lake County Metro Jail on a charge of murder.

Two SWAT medics performed life-saving care on the victim before he was taken to a hospital, where he later died, police said. The shooter was cooperating with investigators, police said.

Gamboa, who did not fire a shot, doesn’t have any criminal history, the chief said.

Ah Loo appeared in Season 17 of “Project Runway” in 2019 and returned for “Project Runway Redemption.” He also created couture for cast members of “The Real Housewives of Salt Lake City” and was invited by the late Queen Elizabeth II to present his collection at Buckingham Palace during London Fashion Week, the New York Post reported.

Utah state Rep. Verona Mauga told KSL-TV that she was with Ah Loo hours before he was killed.

“Afa is a person who believed in equity and equality for all people and all communities. He believed that everyone was deserving of basic human rights,” Mauga said. “And that’s why he was there. He was with his community and he was with people he cared about, marching and rallying for all of those things that make our community, like, really great.”

An online fundraiser to pay for Ah Loo’s funeral has raised more than $200,000.

JAMA? What else is new?

JAMA Pediatrics Publishes Extremely Flawed Studied Titled: “Firearm Laws and Pediatric Mortality in the US”

A new study in JAMA Pediatrics asserts that states with “permissive” gun control laws experienced higher pediatric firearm mortality rates following the 2010 Supreme Court decision in McDonald v. Chicago. The study analyzed data from 49 states spanning 1999 to 2023. This has to be one of the dumbest studies done in a long time. After Public Health officials fumbled the COVID response, you’d expect some hesitation before trusting their research on crime, a field far outside their expertise. The fact that they don’t even mention policing and law enforcement in discussing crime rates should provide some warning to the media.

We have previously written extensively on the false claim made in the first sentence of this study: “Firearm deaths are now the leading cause of death among US children and adolescents” (see here and here).

Unlike typical research, which compares crime or suicide rates before and after states change their laws and contrasts those changes with states that didn’t alter their laws, this study ignores how laws change over time. It takes what could be panel data which allows one to account for average differences across states and years (so-called fixed effects). The paper limits there discussion to a purely cross-sectional comparison. The purely cross sectional comparison cannot be used for any discussion of causation. They don’t even try to account for basic factors like law enforcement practices—such as arrest and conviction rates, imprisonment rates, or the death penalty—that influence crime. Nor do they account for any factors that might explain changes in suicides or accidental gun deaths in the 2011 to 2023 period.

The study categorizes the level of gun control laws in each state into one of three broad categories and assumes that there laws remain constant over time, and lumps many different laws together in an arbitrary manner. Are these additive? Do we simply add a concealed-carry law to a safe-storage law to universal background checks? For these gun control advocates, is a red flag law twice as important as having lots of gun-free zones? There is so much arbitrariness in how a measure that combines these different laws and even what laws to include. How did they decide to have eight strict gun-control law states, eleven permissive states, and 30 most permissive states? Why not 1/3rd in each of these different categories?

The methodology falters in several ways. It relies on the epidemiological concept of “excess deaths,” commonly used to gauge the impact of diseases like Covid-19. The authors applied Poisson regression, using only a time trend as a control variable, to estimate expected deaths for three state groups. They labeled the gap between predicted and actual deaths as “excess deaths,” attributing these to permissive state laws. This gap, however, could simply reflect error or residuals, encompassing random error, omitted variables, heteroskedasticity, serial correlation, measurement errors, and other statistical challenges inherent in such analyses.

Continue reading “”

We Must Protect the Right to Self-Defense Nationwide

For the past several years, America has been undergoing a self-defense awakening. From urban centers to rural towns, more Americans spanning all walks of life are making the personal decision to arm themselves for protection. The USCCA has seen firsthand this growing movement — a reflection of citizens taking responsibility for their own safety in an uncertain world.

As a former FBI Supervisory Special Agent, I have spent my 30 year career in law enforcement focused on keeping Americans safe. I understand the importance of preparation, awareness, and the right to self-defense. Today’s environment — marked by rising crime, strained law enforcement resources, and growing concerns about personal security — has prompted a renewed commitment among everyday Americans to take proactive steps in safeguarding themselves and their loved ones.

To put this into context, in 2024, there were over 15.2 million background checks processed through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), according to the NSSF, the Firearm Industry Trade Association, marking the 65th consecutive month with over 1million checks. This underscores a sustained commitment to responsible firearm ownership following pandemic-level highs.

Organizations like the USCCA are encouraged by the tremendous support from Americans across the country who are purchasing a firearm and seeking proper training. Yet right now, because of an antiquated patchwork of state laws, there are tremendous legal risks for law-abiding gun owners who simply want to protect themselves and their families. For example, if a gun owner carries a concealed weapon into a state that does not recognize their permit, they may be charged with a felony or misdemeanor, even if they’re otherwise following the law.

Earlier this year, a bill that would create a federal standard allowing law-abiding gun owners with concealed carry permits to legally carry in other states, was introduced in the House of Representatives. H.R. 38, the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act, sponsored by Representative Richard Hudson (NC-09), has the potential to be one of the most significant pieces of self-defense legislation passed by Congress in recent years.

This critical framework will bring much-needed clarity to the current patchwork of state laws, which often leaves gun owners uncertain about when and where they can safely exercise their rights, ultimately compromising their safety and the security of their families. By recognizing concealed carry permits issued in any state, the bill empowers responsible gun owners to exercise their fundamental right to self-defense, regardless of state boundaries. If enacted, this crucial legislation will keep us all safer, safeguarding and bolstering Americans’ right to defend themselves and ensuring firearms are in the hands of responsible gun owners.

The bill’s momentum in the House of Representatives represents a move in the right direction, a resounding wave of support for ensuring that Second Amendment rights are respected from coast to coast. It appears now, more than any other point in recent history, there is the political will both in Congress and in the White House to safeguard the fundamental right to self-defense.

President Trump’s administration is already taking decisive action to protect the Second Amendment. Earlier this year, an Executive Order directing a review and rollback of unconstitutional, anti-gun policies from the previous administration represents a strong step toward restoring and strengthening Americans’ right to self-defense.

The message from Americans is clear: the right to self-defense must be protected, not punished. More than half a million citizens have already signed a USCCA-sponsored petition urging Congress to pass national concealed carry reciprocity—demonstrating broad, diverse support from across the country.

As communities continue to grapple with crime, Americans are standing up and saying enough is enough. No longer should responsible gun owners be criminalized for acting on their Constitutional right to protect themselves or their loved ones. There’s a growing national realization: self-defense is not just a right—it’s a necessity. Congress now has a historic opportunity to respond—to recognize that self-defense is not just a right, but a necessity—and enact national reciprocity to protect the Second Amendment for millions of gun owners nationwide.

Rob Chadwick is the Director of Education & Training for the United States Concealed Carry Association (USCCA)

In Dangerous Times, Train for Self-Defense
My wife and I built our defensive skills with six days of sweat, dust, and the right mindset.

If you’re going to own a tool, it’s best to know how to properly use it. That’s as true for firearms as it is for chainsaws. Given the rising temperature of American politics, including escalating violence against people and property, my wife Wendy and I decided it was time to up our game when it came to self-defense. To that end, we enrolled in Gunsite Academy’s Defensive Pistol class.

Continue reading “”

New Oklahoma law changes how guns can be used to protect property: What ‘defensive display’ means

Oklahomans can now legally point a firearm or other weapon at someone if they are defending their home, private property or business under a new law signed by Gov. Kevin Stitt.

Existing state law allows people to point weapons in self defense, but House Bill 2818 expands the justified “defensive display of a firearm or other deadly weapon” to include defense of property.

The new law took effect immediately after Stitt signed it on Thursday, May 16.

During debate on the House floor, Democratic lawmakers questioned the law’s author, state Rep. Jay Steagall, on responsibilities of a gun owner and whether Oklahoma youths would interpret the law to allow flashing a weapon as an acceptable response to fear of confrontation.

“We don’t have any control over the way someone else perceives something. There’s not a way for me to legislate that,” Steagall said during a presentation in March. “But what we can do is provide a clear definition of what’s lawful and what’s not lawful when it comes to the display or the pointing of a firearm.”

What is considered ‘defensive display of a firearm’ under House Bill 2818

According to the new law, defensive display of a firearm includes the following:

    • Verbally informing another person that you possess a firearm or have one available – “I’ve got a gun”
    • Exposing or displaying the weapon in a manner where a reasonable person would understand that it’s meant to protect against unlawful force
    • Placing your hand on a firearm while it’s “in a pocket, purse, holster, sling scabbard, case or other means of containment or transport

This is the latest law to expand gun rights in Oklahoma, a state known for its permissive rules on the ownership, carrying and use of firearms. Another proposed law recently sent to the governor’s desk for his approval would allow elected municipal officials and judges with a valid firearm license to carry concealed guns in buildings leased or owned by their city, if a policy is approved by the city council.

In the United States, most states follow some version of the Castle Doctrine, which allows the use of deadly force in self defense. According to an analysis by FindLaw, however, state laws vary when it comes to which locations or specific situations allow someone to claim their use of force was justified.

The National Conference of State Legislatures notes that Oklahoma is one of 28 states where the person claiming self defense has no duty to attempt retreat before firing their weapon. It’s also one of just 10 states that allow that person to “stand their ground.”

In 2019, Stitt signed legislation on the “constitutional carry” of handguns. The measure loosened the state’s gun laws, allowing most adults to carry a loaded, concealed firearm without a permit.

As I understand it, the Israelis have these strict gun laws because they’re afraid the number of their citizens, who are actual Arabs, would more easily be armed to aid and assist their terrorist minded brethren when an opportunity presented itself.

Israeli National Security Minister Wants US Gun Laws at Home

Israel is a country in a tough spot. They have people who don’t just want to defeat them militarily all around them, and some inside their own borders, but who want them eliminated from the planet. They’re openly calling for genocide, and that includes voices all across the world, including within our own country, for some idiotic reason.

Because of that, there are certain laws in place that try to make the nation a tough target for anyone to take on.

You might be able to beat Israel in a war, but they’re damned sure going to make you pay for it first. They kind of take that “Never Again” thing seriously, and for good reason.

But they still have a lot of gun control. That’s not exactly conducive to being as hard a target as possible. Now, an Israeli minister has taken a look at the American gun culture and figures that Israel should adopt similar laws to the United States.

Israel’s controversial National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir recently visited the U.S., where he met with Jewish groups, law enforcement officials and politicians, as well as facing several clashes with protesters.

The shouting critics, however, did not appear to bother Ben-Gvir, who was a right-wing activist in his youth….

Prior to his meeting with Mast, Ben-Gvir had the chance to visit his home state where he saw something that he wanted to take back with him to Israel: gun culture.

Ben-Gvir has long been an advocate for wider distribution of firearms in Israel, and while he was visiting the U.S., he took time to see how America handles guns. He had the opportunity to visit both a shooting range and a gun store, which he said was “fascinating.”

“I was surprised by the quantity and types of weapons available. Even I haven’t reached that level,” Ben-Gvir told Fox News Digital.

He spoke about how critics have accused him of arming militias, which he denies. When speaking with Fox News Digital, Ben-Gvir said that the weapons he distributed in Israel “saved many lives.”

“I believe we need to learn a from the Americans. One of the important lessons is their policy on weapons,” Ben-Gvir told Fox News Digital. “I’m not sure I would distribute arms to the same extent, but I definitely believe in expanding access because citizens have the right to defend themselves.”

Gun culture in Israel has changed since the Oct. 7 massacre. Before the attacks, Israel was strict about who was eligible to obtain a firearm. Pre-Oct. 7, firearm licenses were restricted to those who live and work in high-risk areas, licensed tour guides and those who served with Israeli police or IDF security forces, among a few other specified categories, according to an Israeli government website from 2019.

Frankly, they should “distribute arms to the same extent” as the US, in part because then October 7th might have gone very differently. As it was, some Hamas fighters were killed by armed civilians who made the terrorists pay for all the Israeli blood they wanted to spill.

Yet more guns in more hands might have actually changed everything, up to and including potentially preventing that particular atrocity.

Less than a month before that attack, Hamas lashed out at armed Israelis.

*cough* *cough

They knew what they had planned and hoped to have more Israelis disarmed as a result, thus potentially making their vicious attack all the worse.

While not every Israeli would own a gun, even if they could do so easily, imagine what it would be like for the neighbors of the gun nuts who had a lot of AR-15s or AK-47-style rifles. Hamas is coming, but the neighborhood gun nut has put a fighting rifle in the hand of every man, woman, and child on the block with enough ammunition to beat back an army.

Or even just a few rifles among close friends.

Anything is better than being a sitting duck when so many people want you purged from humanity.

Kansas Supreme Court affirms product liability immunity of gun maker, seller in civil suit

Case centers on wounding of ESU football player in mishandling of Beretta

TOPEKA — The Kansas Supreme Court agreed Friday with a district court decision tossing a lawsuit filed by a former Emporia State University football player shot by a teammate who mistakenly believed that disassembling his newly purchased handgun required pulling the trigger.

In 2018, Andre Lewis bought a Beretta APX 9mm handgun at Bass Pro Outdoor World in Olathe. While idling his Dodge Charger at a downtown Emporia stoplight several months later, Lewis decided to show his front-seat passenger, Marquise Johnson, that he knew how to take the gun apart. Court records show Lewis was convinced the gun wouldn’t fire with the magazine removed and that the trigger had to be pulled before disassembly the weapon.

Lewis was wrong on both counts, and the bullet that had been in the chamber struck Johnson in his left leg. The wound resulted in amputation of the limb below the knee.

Johnson’s attorneys filed a product liability lawsuit against gun manufacturer Beretta and retailer Bass Pro Shops. The suit alleged Bass Pro sold and Beretta manufactured a defective and unreasonably dangerous handgun.

“Unintentional shootings like Marquise Johnson’s are preventable,” said plaintiff’s attorney Jonathan Lowy. “Like any other product, guns can and should be made as safe as possible to make injuries less likely.”

The District Court in Lyons County granted summary judgment in favor of the firearm maker and seller based on a reading of the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. The PLCAA forbids lawsuits against manufacturers or sellers when a person criminally or unlawfully misused a firearm. This federal immunity designed to shield the gun industry wouldn’t hold if the gun was used as intended or in a reasonable way.

The case attracted an amicus brief from Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund that argued the immunity law applied only if the “volitional act, apart from the discharge, constitutes a criminal offense.”

In a split decision, the Kansas Court of Appeals reversed the district court and determined the federal statute didn’t offer immunity to defendants in this case because Lewis didn’t intend to discharge the gun.

In an appeal to the Kansas Supreme Court, however, the firearm manufacturer and dealer argued the Court of Appeals came to the wrong conclusion about application of the federal law and that liability immunity existed because Lewis deliberately pulled the trigger. The state Supreme court found that argument persuasive.

“We hold that firearm sellers’ interpretation is a better reasoned and more accurately reflects Congress’ intent as reflected in the text of the PLCAA,” said Supreme Court Justice K.J. Wall.

Wall, an appointee of Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly, said factual disputes about whether Lewis’ actions made him culpable for a criminal offense would typically be resolved by a jury. However, the justice said, it was a violation of state law for Lewis to discharge the gun on a public road.

“Under the unique facts of this case,” Walls wrote, “any dispute about Lewis’ mental state cannot save Johnson’s lawsuit from the PLCAA’s immunity provision.”

He said the Court of Appeals erred by reversing District Court Judge Merlin Wheeler’s decision to grant summary judgement against Johnson.

The court record indicated Lewis purchased the Beretta after reviewing Bass Pro Shop’s “10 commandments of safe gun handling,” which included a rule about keeping the muzzle pointed in a safe direction. Apparently, Lewis reviewed the rules before signing a form to acknowledge he had read them.

The Beretta was accompanied by a user manual that explained the gun could fire even after a magazine had been removed. In addition, the booklet stated the gun’s striker-deactivation button allowed users to disassemble the gun without pulling the trigger.

The Beretta APX had a warning stamped on the gun frame that was on point in the case: “FIRES WITHOUT MAGAZINE.”

Idaho Panhandle School Board Okays Armed Teachers

The St. Maries, Idaho School District, located in Benewah County at the confluence of the St. Joe and St. Maries rivers southeast of Coeur d’Alene Lake, has okayed teachers to carry guns on campus and in classrooms following a 4-0 vote to finalize the policy.

Under the policy described by the Spokane Spokesman-Review, in order for a staff member to be approved to carry on campus, he/she must have an Idaho enhanced concealed carry license, go through a background check and 40-hour firearms training course which includes de-escalation and threat assessment instruction, and they must be screened and interviewed by local law enforcement.

St. Maries is the largest city in Benewah County.

MyNorthwest noted that School Board Chairman Seth Stoke said none of the volunteer teachers or staff who are armed will be identified.

“They can assume that everybody is armed,” he said. “The whole idea is not knowing who is carrying.”

The plan is in reaction to a rise in school shootings over the past 25 years. MyNorthwest pointed to a report from the American Academy of Pediatrics, which said “there were 1,453 school shootings from the 1997–1998 school year to the 2021–2022 school year.

“The most recent five school years have had a substantially higher number of school shootings than the prior 20 years,” the group said.

Firearms carried by staff must be personally owned, and either carried or placed in a district-approved lock box at all times.

The Spokesman-Review noted another development in school security is also in the works. The school board approved a three-year agreement with Panacea NW Region Corporation, a school security consulting firm based in Hayden, which is north of Coeur d’Alene. Panacea NW will conduct emergency response training with school district staff and parents.

The Spokane newspaper said a majority of residents in the community support the armed teacher program, while school staff is “about evenly split.” Some staff reportedly support having an armed school resource officer with the Sheriff’s Department on campus instead. Such an officer was hired last month, the Spokesman-Review reported.