Gun Schtuff – MILESFORTIS

What Happens if DOJ Stops Defending Silencer Regs?

Now that Attorney General Pam Bondi has signaled the Justice Department is re-evaluating its stance that silencers aren’t “firearms” protected by the Second Amendment, what happens if the DOJ reverses course and suddenly declines to defend their inclusion in the National Firearms Act?

We wouldn’t suddenly see suppressors available for sale with a simple NICS check, unfortunately. That would require changing the NFA itself, which in turn would require congressional approval. The House may very well give its approval to the SHUSH Act, but it’s gonna be tough to get 60 senators on board with the change. So what impact would a DOJ reversal have in practical terms?

The NFA has been a flashpoint for advocates, who say that silencers are not frequently used in crime and believe that the silencers and other weapons regulated under the law, including machine guns and short-barreled rifles and shotguns, are protected by the Second Amendment. A decision by the Justice Department not to defend the law may, however, make it harder for gun rights groups to challenge the law at the Supreme Court.

“If Trump administration decides not to prosecute people under for illegal silencer possession while in office, that’s a good short-term win, that’s what a lot of gun rights activists will want,” said Stephen Gutowski, a gun safety instructor and founder of The Reload.

However, Gutowski added that if Democrats regain the White House in four years, “They can just reverse the policies and go back and start prosecuting people again, because the law was never found unconstitutional or invalid.”

If the Trump administration just decides not to enforce the NFA regulations surrounding suppressors, I don’t think that would actually be much of a win for gun owners, though it might provide some short term benefit for suppressor buyers and the companies that make them. What would stop the next Democratic administration from zealously prosecuting those companies or anyone who purchased/possesses a suppressor not registered or taxed under the NFA?

The best option may be for the Trump administration to decline to defend the current statute and not raising any objections to anti-gun AGs intervening as defendants in ongoing litigation. Then the full weight of the DOJ could be directed to side with the plaintiffs in these lawsuits, while allowing the cases to continue to make their way to SCOTUS.

Gun safety groups, for their part, say that silencers put people at risk by make a mass shooting harder to hear and contend that because silencers reduce the recoil when a gun is fired, it could make it easier for a gunman with a semiautomatic to shoot with fewer interruptions.

“Silencers in the wrong hands create serious public safety risks,” Everytown for Gun Safety writes on their website. “The loud and distinctive noise that a gun makes is one of its most important safety features: when people hear it, they realize they may need to run, hide, or protect others.”

The group also raises concerns that removing silencers from the NFA would allow them to be purchased without a background check.

Frankly, if suppressors aren’t “firearms” as the DOJ (and at least one federal court contends), then they arguably shouldn’t be included in the National Firearms Act as a restricted firearm. And yes, their removal from the NFA could allow their purchase without a background check, but if they’re merely an accessory then so what? What other firearm accessory requires a background check of any kind, much less a detailed check and an extra $200 tax?

Of course, whether there are five justices on the Supreme Court at the moment who are ready to remove suppressors from the NFA is very much an open question, especially after Wednesday’s 7-2 decision upholding the ATF’s rule treating unfinished frames and receivers as completed firearms. The bottom line is even if the Trump administration is on board with the idea, deregulating suppressors is going to be a challenge, whether it’s through the legislative or judicial branches.

On March 11, 1963, US Defense Secretary Robert MacNamara ordered the adoption of the M16 rifle by the US military. Designed by Eugene Stoner, it was a scaled down and improved version of his 7.62 NATO chambered AR-10

Leave guns to the professionals

In December of 2024, in Secret Service Secret Marksmanship, I took to task the unnamed Secret Service Agent who fired at least six shots at the second Trump wannabe assassin from a distance of only a few feet and missed every shot. One would think Secret Service agents on a presidential detail would be better shots. One would apparently think wrongly. One would also think they’d be better shots than the average local patrolman. In that case at least, one would also think wrongly.

One of the articles of faith and narratives of anti-liberty/gun cracktivists is the police are highly trained marksmen. We must leave guns to them because Normal Americans aren’t so highly trained and will just shoot themselves, their families and worse, they might shoot criminals. The truth is quite different.

Putting on the blue suit and a badge does not bestow upon police officers magical shooting abilities beyond the abilities of citizens. Only a small portion of any police force are gun guys and girls. Most police officers have only a single gun: their agency-issued handgun. The only training they get comes from their basic academy—private or public—and whatever refresher training their agency provides. Periodic qualification doesn’t count. Unless a given officer spends the time and money in regular practice and in advanced, private training, that’s all they’ll ever have.

For most agencies, qualification is a once-a-year burden. Ammo is expensive, and so is taking officers off the street. They have to be replaced by other cops at overtime rates. Qualifications normally fire no more than 50 rounds at never-changing stationary targets at known ranges, usually no greater than 25 yards, and commonly no greater than 15 yards. Often, strings of fire aren’t timed, and only 70% proficiency is the usual standard. Officers pass if they miss only 30% of their shots.

Even better, officers are allowed to reshoot the course of fire as many times as necessary to pass. Were that not true, were officers required to be 70% proficient on demand, far too many would fail, which means they’d be desked until they could meet that standard, or fired, which is much too expensive.

Don’t ask how often officers clean their handguns, whether they’ve been trained to do it or have the proper equipment.

Keep in mind large blue city police agencies tend to have even lower standards. Their executives are politicians who have to reflect their boss’s beliefs if they want to keep their jobs. That means they don’t like guns, don’t like cops and trust neither. They’re not going to do what’s necessary to ensure officers have a high degree of shooting ability. Two examples illustrate reality:

The New York City Police Department issues guns with 12-pound trigger pulls. Standard Glocks have 5.5 pound triggers. The heavier the trigger, the harder it is to shoot accurately. NYPD brass are worried about negligent discharges, so they issue hard to shoot guns. The results are predictable:

In 1990, NYPD officer hit potential was only 19%. That means 81% of the rounds they fired at criminals missed. At less than three yards, they hit only 38% of the time. From 3-7 yards, 11.5% and from 7-15 yards, only 9.4%

Some of those less than 3-yard shots were at muzzle-touching range. There are many cases on record of police officers emptying their guns at crooks at inside-a-phone-booth range and missing every shot. Those 1990 results haven’t improved with time. Heavy triggers combined with poor training have inevitable consequences. We now move to Los Angeles, setting for innumerable police dramas where sharp shooting cops never miss.

In 2013 LAPD Officer Christopher Dorner, a large black man, was fired for cause and began hunting superiors he thought responsible. He was reportedly driving a pickup truck. Eight LAPD officers, including a supervisor, were covering the home of a LAPD Captain, a potential Dorner target, when a blue pickup entered the neighborhood. Those eight officers unleashed 103 rounds at the truck, which did not contain Dorner but two Hispanic women delivering newspapers.

This was a classic example of “me too!” police shooting. One officer shoots at something and every nearby officer, having no idea why they’re shooting, joins the fun.

Fortunately, their marksmanship was reliably poor. They hit the truck, seven nearby homes and nine other vehicles. The women were only wounded. They were awarded $4.3 million, and none of the officers were disciplined.

I’m not denigrating the police. I used to be one. They do a difficult job that requires they always be right amazingly well. But shooting is a perishable skill. Unless one learns the right techniques and regularly practices and improves, they’ll fail under stress. Many citizens spend that necessary time and money. Most cops don’t.

As with politicians we get the police, and police marksmanship, we deserve.

Triple-Shock X Ammo: TSX Bullets Explained

Triple-Shock X Ammo

The Triple-Shock X is Barnes Bullets’ premium hunting rifle ammunition. Commonly referred to as Barnes X bullets, this line of ammo comes in most rifle calibers, and the bullet is quite unique in that it uses a fairly thin diameter hollow section in the tip compared to similar styles. The thin section works extremely well to create a uniform expansion effect when it impacts a target.

Another thing that makes this and related Barnes ammo lines unique, is they don’t have a bullet core. You’re firing solid copper with the TSX, and it works better than you’d imagine, especially if you’ve used cored bullets or solid lead for years. This bullet type came out in 2004, and has been popular among hunters, rifle shooters and reloaders ever since.

Triple-Shock X Features

Lead-Free: Like many specialty lines from Barnes Bullets, the TSX ammo line is lead-free. This is a perk if the area you’re hunting in doesn’t allow lead bullets. This bullet is usable everywhere lead is banned, but may be considered a hollow point in most areas (but not all).
Solid Copper: The solid copper bullet offers great weight retention, and it maintains its structural integrity much better than a lead or jacketed bullet. This means you will get better weight retention and deeper penetration than with other bullets that will fragment to a much greater degree than the solid copper.
Circumferential Grooves: These grooves are what make the copper bullets from Barnes perform so well in regards to barrel fouling. They are the product of years of research to keep copper as a viable bullet material.
Thin-Diameter Hollow Point: The hollow point in the Triple-Shock X is narrow compared to similar brands, but with the copper bullet, it works just right. Each shot will expand into four razor sharp cutting edges on impact, unless a hard object like bone is encountered.

Triple-Shock X Uses

This is a great rifle ammunition developed for hunting. The sheer number of calibers offered is impressive, ranging from .224 caliber to the .577 Nitro. If it can be hunted, Barnes makes a Triple-Shock bullet for the job.

This wouldn’t be a very good home defense ammunition, however, unless you had significant distance between you and would-be attackers. These bullets were designed to travel long distances with relatively flat trajectories and to devastate their target on impact.

The Triple-Shock X is one of the more premium ammo lines by this particular manufacturer, and if you’re looking for a lead-free alternative hunting ammunition, this is a very popular choice with great reviews. The one bullet style that rivals this from Barnes is the Tipped Triple-Shock X.

US Forest Service Closes Majority of Pike National Forest to Target Shooting, Sparking Legal Objections

Colorado – The U.S. Forest Service (USFS) has finalized a sweeping ban on dispersed recreational shooting – where forest visitors set up targets and practice shooting in an undesignated, undeveloped location – across 73% of the 1.1 million-acre Pike National Forest, a move that has drawn significant opposition from Second Amendment advocates.

The decision, part of the agency’s Integrated Management of Target Shooting Project, aims to address what officials call “unacceptable risks to public safety” as the forest sees increased use from hikers, cyclists, and off-roaders.

Under the new policy, over 800,000 acres will be off-limits to dispersed target shooting, while six designated shooting ranges will be developed with noise abatement features and safety measures. The closures will be implemented in phases, with areas near Rampart Range Road, previously subject to emergency orders, among the first to be restricted. The agency insists that the plan balances public safety, resource management, and recreational shooting opportunities.

“This decision marks the transition from one era of recreational shooting into the next,” said Douglas County Board of Commissioners Chair George Teal, who supports the ban.

The move has also been praised by the Southern Shooting Partnership, a coalition of government and utility agencies that have worked for years to address shooting-related conflicts in the region.

However, gun rights advocates argue that the ban is a clear violation of the Second Amendment.

The Mountain States Legal Foundation’s Center to Keep and Bear Arms has filed an official objection, challenging the Forest Service’s authority to restrict firearms-related activities on such a massive scale.

“By restricting the people’s right to engage in dispersed target shooting within the Pike National Forest, the USFS is attempting to regulate arms-bearing conduct in violation of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution,” the foundation’s objection states.

Continue reading “”

Franklin Armory and FRAC Defeat ATF, Judge Rules Words Mean Things.

The U.S. District Court in North Dakota today issued its opinion in the Firearms Regulatory Accountability Coalition (“FRAC”)-Franklin Armory firearms classification-related lawsuit against ATF. In his ruling, Judge Daniel M. Traynor vacated the ATF’s prior misclassifications of Franklin Armory’s Reformation and Antithesis firearms. Judge Traynor’s ruling solidifies what the firearms industry has known for years—that the ATF has been abusing its firearms technology classification powers.

Per the Court’s opinion:

Franklin Armory presented a square peg, and ATF shoved it into a round hole. If Congress wanted “shotgun” to be a catch-all category for anything that doesn’t fit “rifle,” it could have done so. . . . . It is not for ATF to redefine the terms because it thinks Congress didn’t intend a certain outcome. Therefore, ATF exceeded its authority in defining “smoothbore” as anything lacking “functional rifling.”

FRAC and Franklin Armory are reviewing the Court’s ruling and seeking further guidance from legal counsel as to the future of both Reformation and Antithesis under the law. Judge Traynor’s opinion declares that the “ATF classification of the Antithesis and reclassification of the Reformation [are] VACATED.” In response to ATF’s arguments, Judge Traynor retorted that “Administrative agencies need to remember they are in the executive branch and leave legislating to Congress.”

FRAC President & CEO, Travis White, stated that “the ATF has egregiously abused the firearms technology classification process, and this is a landmark ruling in reining in such abuses.”

Franklin Armory President Jay Jacobson said, “we spent years trying to reason with ATF leadership as they failed to classify firearms correctly. We hope that future agency leaders will stick to the law as passed by Congress. All we ever wanted was a good referee, not someone to throw the game.”

Judge Traynor’s summary judgment ruling in FRAC v. Garland, No. 1:23-cv-00003, can be found here.

CDN media

The built in gun lock that nobody wanted.

Leak Shows ATF Continues to Disregard Court Orders on FRTs

In a recent Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) leak released by AmmoLand News and Gun Owners of America (GOA), the government agency shared its fears about 3D-printed machinegun conversion devices (MCD), but not everything the ATF listed is an MCD.

The ATF included the Super Safe AK in its documents, claiming it was in a drop-in auto-sear (DIAS). The issue with that designation is that the Super Safety is not a machinegun or an MCD. It is a forced reset trigger (FRT), and the Bureau might be violating a court order by designating the device as a machinegun in its January 15, 2025, documentation.

Each time a shooter uses the AK Super Safe, they must pull the trigger. The statute definition of a machinegun is a firearm that expels more than one round per function of the trigger. For each function of the trigger, the Super Safety only expels a single round. It does not fit the definition of a machinegun as defined under the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA). The Supreme Court has already ruled that the ATF cannot change the statutory definition of a machinegun in the Cargill case.

The Cargill case involved a bump stock. SCOTUS found that since a shooter must pull the trigger between each round, a bump stock is not a machinegun. The Cargill case has been referenced in NAGR v. Garland, which challenged the ATF’s definition of FRTs as machineguns. In that case, the judge found that only one round is expelled per trigger function. The judge issued an injunction against the ATF from taking enforcement actions against the owners and manufacturers of FRTs. Yet, the ATF is still informing law enforcement agencies that FRTs are machineguns.

The ATF also refers to the AK Super Safe as the AK-DIAS. The AK-DIAS is not the same as the AK Super Safe. The AK-DIAS is a separate project and is a machinegun conversion device. It does convert a semi-automatic AK into a fully automatic firearm. The AK Super Safe engages the safety between every round making it impossible to fire automatically. It appears that the ATF is trying to conflate the two different devices which could lead to confusion amongst law enforcement, and the false arrest of Americans for possessing something that is completely legal.

This situation isn’t the first time the ATF rebelled against the courts or the White House. The ATF was criticized for disregarding an executive order demanding that diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) positions be eliminated. The order explicitly stated that those employees should be placed on administrative leave, and agencies should not try to hide them. The ATF did the opposite of the order. Lisa T. Boykin was the ATF’s “Chief Diversity Officer” responsible for implementing DEI at the Bureau. After President Trump issued the order, her title was changed to “Senior Executive.”

The ATF also recently came under fire for disregarding multiple court orders blocking the pistol brace rule. In that case, the ATF told a Gun Owners of America (GOA) member that their CZ Scorpion equipped with a brace would have to be registered with the NFA division of the ATF and pay a $200 stamp fee, or they could be charged with a federal felony. The ATF said that even though the rule was blocked, they could interpret the statute however they wanted. GOA forced the issue, and the ATF finally issued a retraction.

The situation is similar in this case. Even though the courts have barred the ATF from taking action against FRTs by a permanent injunction, they seem to be doing just that. Many view the Bureau as an out-of-control rogue government agency that ignores the law and does what it wants to do. This situation doesn’t instill confidence in those running the ATF, including the default head of the Bureau, Marvin Richardson.

Some have campaigned for Richardson to become the permanent head of the ATF, but this situation is the third time in a month that the ATF has disregarded a Presidential or court order. It leads many to wonder if Richardson is complacent or incompetent.

SAAMI Announces Acceptance of New Cartridges

The Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers’ Institute ®Inc., (SAAMI®) has announced the acceptance of three new rifle cartridges for SAAMI standardization, according to The Outdoor Wire.

SAAMI is the organization at the forefront of promoting firearm safety by creating standards that ensure safety, reliability and interchangeability of firearms, ammunition and components.

Click on the cartridge name to open the introduction package.

7mm Backcountry – The 7mm Backcountry (7mm BC) was introduced by Federal Premium Ammunition (The Kinetic Group) with a 170-grain bullet traveling at a velocity of 3,000 fps and a Maximum Average Pressure of 80,000 psi.

25 Creedmoor – The 25 Creedmoor (25 CM) was introduced by Hornady Manufacturing Company with a 134-grain bullet traveling at a velocity of 2,810 fps and a Maximum Average Pressure of 62,000 psi.

338 Advanced Rifle Cartridge – The 338 Advanced Rifle Cartridge (338 ARC) was introduced by Hornady Manufacturing Company with a 175-grain bullet traveling at a velocity of 2,050 fps and a Maximum Average Pressure of 52,000 psi.

For further information on these new cartridges please visit https://saami.org/technical-information/cartridge-chamber-drawings/.

CMP Resumes Surplus M1911/M1911A1 Pistol Sales

Civilian Marksmanship Program▸The First Shot

▸CMP Resumes Surplus M1911/M1911A1 Pistol Sales

The Civilian Marksmanship Program (CMP) is excited to announce the immediate resumption of surplus U.S. Army M1911/M1911A1 pistol sales! These historic firearms, cherished for their role in U.S. military history, are now available to qualified US Citizen customers.

Key Details:

Pistol Availability: The CMP currently holds a substantial inventory of a variety of Pistol Grades, many ready to ship to consumers, and expects to fulfill a significant quantity of orders.
Free Shipping: Those purchasing a CMP M1911 pistol will receive free shipping and handling (a $25 value).
Updated Process: Given the quantity of on-hand pistols, we reorganized our sales fulfillment structure and our staff is ready to process orders in a timely manner without the use of the Random Generated Number (RGN) process, as in past M1911 sales. Additional detail on fulfillment information and sequencing follows below.

Continue reading “”

Concealed Carry Corner: Self-Defense Ammo Options

Welcome back to another episode of Concealed Carry Corner. Last week, we talked about self-defense ammunition and why it’s important along with a few things to keep in mind. If you happened to miss that article, be sure to click the link here to check it out. This week, I want to take a further look at some great options for self-defense ammo and what each type of ammo offers. Let’s take a closer look at some of the top self-defense ammo options.

Continue reading “”

Congressman Ben Cline Reintroduces Hearing Protection Act

Washington, January 15, 2025

Today, Congressman Ben Cline (R-VA) reintroduced the Hearing Protection Act (HPA). This legislation reduces the overly burdensome barriers required to purchase a firearm suppressor to ease access for law-abiding citizens simply trying to obtain the hearing protection they need.

“Americans who enjoy hunting and target shooting should be able to do so safely and legally without facing burdensome government regulations,” said Rep. Cline. “The Hearing Protection Act will reclassify suppressors, making it easier for law-abiding gun owners to protect their hearing while enjoying recreational activities. It’s time to ensure that our Second Amendment rights are upheld, allowing responsible citizens to enjoy their freedoms without unnecessary obstacles.”

Congressman Cline was joined by Rep. August Pfluger (R-TX), Rep. Ron Estes (R-KS), Rep. Riley Moore (R-WV), Rep. Aaron Bean (R-FL), Rep. Claudia Tenney (R-NY), Rep. Randy Weber (R-TX), Rep. Barry Moore (R-AL), Rep. Troy Nehls (R-TX), Rep. Burgess Owens (R-UT), Rep. GT Thompson (R-PA), Rep. Rob Wittman (R-VA), Rep. Richard Hudson (R-NC), Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL), Rep. Kat Cammack (R-FL), Rep. Buddy Carter (R-GA), Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA), Rep. Michael Bost (R-IL), Rep. Jack Bergman (R-MI), Rep. Brad Finstad (R-MN), Rep. Mike Collins (R-GA), Rep. Sam Graves (R-MO), Rep. Chuck Fleischmann (R-TN), Rep. Fulcher (R-ID), Rep. Gus Bilirakis (R-FL), Rep. John McGuire (R-VA), Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-AL), Rep. Addison McDowell (R-NC), Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD), Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN), Rep. David Kustoff (R-TN), Rep. William Timmons (R-SC), Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-GA), Rep. Jeff Crank (R-CO), Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-VA), Rep. Kevin Hern (R-OK), Rep. Steve Womack (R-AR), Rep. Brian Babin (R-TX), and Rep. Celeste Maloy (R-UT) as original cosponsors.

The Hearing Protection Act is supported by the American Suppressor Association (ASA), the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the National Rifle Association (NRA), the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation (CSF), and the Academy of Doctors of Audiology (ADA).

“The Hearing Protection Act is the epitome of commonsense legislation. Law-abiding citizens should not have to pay a tax to protect their hearing when they exercise their Second Amendment rights. The American Suppressor Association applauds Rep. Cline for his leadership and willingness to fight for the rights of gunowners across the United States,” said Knox Williams, ASA President and Executive Director.

“Congressman Cline’s Hearing Protection Act will have the federal government recognize firearm suppressors for what they are. These are accessories to a firearm that make recreational shooting and hunting a safer experience,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel. “These safety devices reduce the report of a firearm to a level that won’t cause instant and permanent hearing damage. Despite Hollywood’s depictions, they do not mask the sound of a firearm. The focus should be on removing barriers to safe and responsible use of firearms and dedicating resources to ensuring firearms are safeguarded from those who should never possess them. Strict regulatory control of firearm accessories, and the parts of those accessories that have no bearing on the function of a firearm, is unnecessary and not the wisest use of federal resources. NSSF thanks Congressman Cline for his leadership for ensuring safe and responsible use of firearms and dedicating necessary resources where they are most needed.”

“Onerous and unnecessary government regulation shouldn’t prevent America’s hunters and recreational shooters from protecting their hearing while exercising their constitutionally protected freedoms,” said John Commerford, Executive Director of NRA-ILA. “Suppressors do not silence firearms, but they are proven to reduce the severity of hearing loss. On behalf of our millions of members, NRA thanks Representative Ben Cline for introducing the Hearing Protection Act.”

“The Hearing Protection Act has been a longstanding priority for the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation (CSF), and we are excited to see this legislation reintroduced. Suppressors are one of the fastest growing and most popular accessories for sportsmen and women, unfortunately, current law makes acquiring suppressors an overly burdensome process, which would be addressed by this legislation. CSF thanks Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus Member Rep. Ben Cline for introducing this legislation, and we look forward to working with him in the 119th Congress to improve the suppressor purchasing process,” said CSF President and CEO Jeff Crane.

Read the full text of the bill here.

Congressman Ben Cline represents the Sixth Congressional District of Virginia. He previously was an attorney in private practice and served both as an assistant prosecutor and Member of the Virginia House of Delegates. Cline and his wife, Elizabeth, live in Botetourt County with their two children.

Gun sales: lies, damned lies and statistics

With Donald Trump about to regain the White House and Republicans in control—barely—of both houses of Congress, gun owners and Americans who think they might want to be gun owners someday can relax, right? Right? Beginning January 20, 2025, the federal government probably won’t be harassing gun dealers or trying to write extra-constitutional rules to turn millions of Americans into instant felons for possession of guns or accessories that were lawful the day before, right? Let’s review the status quo on the way to an answer.

For 65 consecutive months, Americans have bought more than a million guns. That’s measured by NCIC record checks mandatory whenever one buys a gun—or guns—from a federally licensed gun dealer after filling out the standard ATF Form 4473. Private sales surely count for many more, but aren’t recorded.

After 2024 monthly gun sales — as measured by adjusted NICS data — trailing 2023 for most of the year, they started to accelerate in July and jumped even more in August. This may be due, at least in part, to the impending election. Americans tend to hedge their bets every four years by stocking up on firearms and related gear. And then there’s the general state of society that seems to have an increasing number of people concerned about self-defense.

Graphic: FBI data via NSSF. Public Domain.

Continue reading “”

Smith & Wesson’s Walnut 1854 Rocks the .45 Colt

Now, the company has shifted back to old-school gear, offering not only the 1854 Walnut, but a new chambering in .45 Colt. We were delighted to get our hands on one, marking the first time we’ve fired .45 Colt from a S&W lever gun.
Table of Contents

Video Review
S&W Model 1854 Traditional Walnut
Range Time
Field Notes
Final Thoughts

Wolfe Publishing
John Taffin’s Book of Small-Bore Sixguns, Semiautomatics and Single-Shots

The Machine Gun Win Now Before the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals
United States v. Morgan (24-3141)
Charles Nichols

Last August, Federal District Court Judge John W. Broomes issued two findings. The first was that the two machine guns the defendant was charged with illegally possessing are ““bearable arms within the original meaning of the [Second” amendment.” The second was “the government has failed to establish that this nation’s history of gun regulation justifies the application of 18 U.S.C. § 922(o) to Defendant.”

Judge Broomes then dismissed the charges. The Federal government filed a timely appeal, and filed its opening brief on appeal on December 12th. On December 29th, the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence filed an Amicus brief in support of the government. On Monday, January 6th, the Defendant filed a disfavored (but unopposed) motion for a thirty-day extension to file his answering brief on appeal. The motion was granted the same day. I am reliably informed that an Amicus brief will be filed in support of the Defendant.

Judge Broomes also said that some kinds of machine guns are not arms protected by the Second Amendment, and his decision says nothing about what restrictions or prohibitions the government could place on the carrying (bearing) of machine guns because the Federal law only makes it a crime to possess unregistered machine guns, not carry them.

Additionally, this is an interesting case because the case was prosecuted in the district court, and the opening brief on appeal was filed by the Biden administration. The reply brief and all further proceedings from January 20th onward will be by the Trump administration. The Trump DOJ attorney can simply acquiesce in the case, meaning he can concede that the law is unconstitutional but assert that President Trump will continue to enforce the law, including in this case. The latter is particularly important because if the President does not aver that he will continue to enforce the law, including against the Defendant, then the Court of Appeals could simply dismiss the appeal without deciding the case for lack of a “live case or controversy.”

Putting machine guns to the side for the moment, this quote from the Defendant’s motion for an extension of time is particularly telling, “The government’s brief is 36 pages long. The table of authorities is an additional 15 pages long and includes citations to roughly 200 cases, statutes, and legal texts. Many of the sources relied on by the government are hundreds of years old and were not cited by the government in the district court.”

The Federal criminal court system is rigged against defendants. Had the Defendant’s attorney failed to cite authorities or make properly worded objections in the proper manner at the appropriate time(s) in the trial court, then his failure would be subject to what is called “plain error review” on appeal, and he would almost certainly lose.

Will the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals afford the Federal government a more deferential standard of review? Will the Court of Appeals contrive some way around the NYSRPA v. Bruen mandate that the burden of proof lies with the government?

Time will tell. The appeal should be fully briefed in two months, after which the Court of Appeals can make a decision at any time.

You can read many of the briefs for free from CourtListener at the following links.

United States v. Morgan (24-3141) 10th Circuit Court of Appeals Docket.

United States v. Morgan (6:23-cr-10047) District Court, D. Kansas Docket.

Americans Likely Bought More than 15 Millions Guns in 2024

Americans still really love guns, as highlighted by the latest statistics for over-the-counter retail firearm sales from last year.

The year-end data published by the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System show 28,097,205 checks were logged between Jan. 1 and Dec. 31, 2024, with the busiest single week being that of Black Friday, which saw 613,380 checks.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation analyzed the figures for last year, and after removing checks and rechecks for firearms permits, found that no less than 15,239,011 checks were for likely retail gun sales. Further, 2024 continued a now 65-month trend of consumers purchasing over a million firearms monthly.

“We are proud that NSSF member companies continue to serve the American public that chooses to exercise their Second Amendment rights by the millions each month,” said NSSF President and CEO Joe Bartozzi. “These background check figures show strong sales and that today’s firearm manufacturers are delivering high-quality products. We are proud that our member companies continue to exceed the high standards that law-abiding Americans demand when it comes to the products that allow them to exercise their Second Amendment rights.”

Going past the NICS data, the true number of guns sold nationwide is even higher.

This is because federal background check numbers don’t include private person-to-person gun transfers in most states or cases where a carry permit is used as an alternative to the background check requirements of the 1994 Brady Law, which allows the transfer of a firearm over the counter by a federal firearms license holder without first performing a NICS check. Further, it doesn’t capture homemade firearms unless assembled on serialized frames or receivers, or purposely registered by the builder with local authorities.