Category: Politics

I mean, I’ll take what I can can get, but how about Short Barreled Shotguns and Any Other Weapons too, huh?

House Appropriations 2027 Funding Bill Ends Suppressor, Short Barrel Rifle Registration

You may recall that language in the One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB) removed registration for suppressors and SBRs early on, but that language was later removed, resulting only in the removal of the $200 tax stamp fee.

House Appropriations Committee member Rep. Andrew Clyde (R) responded by showing that the tax was the basis for registration and that now, with the tax gone, the registration should be gone as well. But the registration of suppressors and SBRs has continued since the OBBB took effect, and the GOP-led House Appropriations Committee is trying to end it.

On Wednesday Clyde posted to X, “I secured a measure in the OBBB to zero out NFA taxes for short-barreled firearms and suppressors. $0 tax = Zero registration. Yet the DOJ is currently defending this NFA registration. While litigation is ongoing, your tax dollars shouldn’t fund invalidated NFA requirements.”

Moreover, Gun Owners of America noted that the 2027 funding bill not only deregulates suppressors and SBRs, but also defunds regulatory gun controls instituted by the ATF during the Biden administration.

The funding bill defunds “Biden export restrictions,” among other things.

Virginia Governor Gets Bad News on Background Check Bill

Since the Virginia General Assembly approved a revised version of the bill last week, there’s been a whole lot of confusion about Virginia’s HB 1525, which raises the age to purchase handguns from 18 to 21 and requires the Virginia State Police to resume conducting background checks on private sales. Governor Abigail Spanberger’s amended version contained language that declared the act an emergency, which would allow it to take effect immediately, but the legislature did not approve the changes with a 4/5ths vote, which is supposedly what’s required in order for that “emergency” provision to be adopted.

The Virginia legislative website lists the effective date for HB 1525 as July 1, but the Virginia State Police put out a notice on Tuesday that declared the law is already in effect. That was the good news for Spanberger.

The bad news? The VSP won’t be resuming background checks on private sales of firearms anytime soon… at least not without a court order.

Gun Owners of America and VCDL had threatened to seek contempt charges against the head of the VSP if they abided by Spanberger’s edict, and it looks like the VSP didn’t see that as an idle threat.

Keep in mind that there are three parts to HB 1525; a ban on those under 18 from possessing handguns and “assault firearms” except under limited circumstances, the ban on handgun and “assault firearm” sales to adults under the age of 21, and the edict to the VSP to start enforcing the enjoined universal background check law. The only portion of the law that the state police say will not be enforced is the section of law regarding background checks on private sales of firearms, and as far as the agency is concerned it’s now against the law for a 20-year-old to purchase an AR-15 in Virginia, even through a private sale.

Of course, as of July 1 it will be illegal for any adult over the age of 21 to purchase an AR-15 too. The sale ban wasn’t the primary motivation for HB 1525. It was the restoration of the state’s universal background check law, and the VSP just said that isn’t happening until a judge tells the agency it can resume enforcement.

So what will that take? The case cited by VSP has concluded, with then-Attorney General Jason Miyares declining to appeal the decision. Current AG Jay Jones attempted to intervene before he took office, but the Virginia Court of Appeals shut down that effort fairly quickly.

According to Virginia law:

Any court wherein an injunction has been awarded may at any time when such injunction is in force dissolve the same after reasonable notice to the adverse party, or to his attorney of record, in which notice shall be set forth the grounds upon which such dissolution will be asked, unless such grounds be set forth in an answer previously filed in the case by the party giving such notice.

Note the word “may” there. It sounds to me like Jones can ask the Lynchburg circuit judge to lift the injunction, but Judge F. Patrick Yeatts is under no obligation to abide by that request. It’s unclear whether the plaintiffs would be allowed to reply to that request or whether Yeatts could ask for additional briefings or even hold another round of oral arguments, but in any case the decision is left to the court that granted (or upheld) an injunction. This particular statute doesn’t even say that Yeatts’ decision could be appealed, though that might be covered in another part of Virginia’s statutes.

As I predicted last week, the issue of Virginia’s universal background check law is almost certainly headed back to the courts. I have no idea what the ultimate outcome will be, but at least in the short term Spanberger’s attempt to get around this court order has officially failed.

Bearing arms: Shifting views among gun owners on a foundational right

Reporter Patrik Jonsson has been writing about guns for 15 years. As the Monitor’s beat reporter in the American Southeast, Patrik has covered gun violence and gun rights; coffee shops banning firearms and stand-your-ground-law advocates using them; mass shootings and the National Rifle Association, and whether the gun itself has become a “sacred object” in America.

In this week’s magazine, he writes about a new twist in what has become one of this country’s most emotional, and debated, issues: a growing liberal embrace not just of guns themselves, but of an approach to the Second Amendment long associated with the conservative right.

“I’ve covered so many angles on the Second Amendment,” Patrik told me. “I’ve done stories about liberal gun owners, I did a story about women gun owners, I did a story about the complications of being a Black gun owner.” But Patrik started noticing something new after the killing of Alex Pretti, an intensive care nurse fatally shot by federal agents in Minnesota earlier this year.

Why We Wrote This

The Monitor’s longtime Georgia bureau chief, Patrik Jonsson, noticed a shift in thought among gun owners: a mistrust of government on the political left.

During the COVID-19 pandemic and a wave of Black Lives Matter protests, Patrik explains, a growing number and diversity of Americans started turning to firearms in hopes of defending themselves from criminals. This, according to scholars, was an expansion of what is sometimes called “Gun Culture 2.0” – a perception of guns as being primarily for self-protection rather than for hunting or military use.

(Previously, those on the left were more likely to identify with gun control advocates, who point to research showing that firearms in the home increase the risk of violence there.)

After Minnesota, though, Patrik found a growing, cross-partisan belief that guns are necessary not just to protect oneself from criminals, but also from the government.

Mr. Pretti had been carrying a licensed handgun – a fact used by some government officials to at first justify his shooting and later raised by citizens across the political spectrum worried about federal overreach.

“What happened after Alex Pretti … was this simmering sense on the left that, ‘Maybe the folks on the right were correct? What if the state falls into the wrong hands?’” Patrik told me.

“if the state falls into the wrong hands” he says

Judge Alex Kozinski –
The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed – where the government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once.”

He started to look for data, he says, and found early indications that thought might be shifting.

“This is at the heart of the story – this rethinking of the Second Amendment on the left and what that means,” Patrik says.

Kentucky Legislature Overrides Governor’s Vetoes on Two Pro-Second Amendment Bills

Key Takeaways

  • Kentucky General Assembly overrode Governor Beshear’s vetoes on two pro-Second Amendment bills, restoring liability protections and enabling concealed carry for adults aged 18-20.
  • House Bill 78, the PLCAA Clarification Act, protects the firearms industry from civil lawsuits linked to criminal misuse of their products.
  • House Bill 312 allows provisional concealed carry licenses for adults between 18 and 20, who can later apply for standard licenses.
  • Supporters argue that the veto overrides affirm constitutional rights and combat unjust age discrimination in carrying firearms.
  • The legislation signals to anti-rights advocates the need to stop blaming the firearms industry for crimes.

FRANKFORT, KY — The Kentucky General Assembly voted to override Governor Andy Beshear’s vetoes of two pro-Second Amendment bills this week, restoring liability protections for the firearms industry and opening a path for law-abiding adults between the ages of 18 and 20 to carry concealed.

The two bills — House Bill 78 and House Bill 312 — had each passed with wide legislative support before the Democratic governor sent them back. Kentucky lawmakers returned to Frankfort and voted to override both.

HB 78: Protecting the Firearms Industry from Frivolous Lawsuits

House Bill 78, known as the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms (PLCAA) Clarification Act of 2026, establishes legal protections for firearm and ammunition manufacturers, distributors, and retailers against civil lawsuits arising from the criminal or unlawful misuse of their products. The bill builds on protections already provided by the federal PLCAA, which some courts have failed to apply as Congress intended.

Kentucky’s House of Representatives voted 80 to 19 to override the veto. The Senate voted 31 to 6.

State-level PLCAA measures have become increasingly necessary. A number of antigun states have enacted laws designed to circumvent the federal PLCAA and allow the very sort of frivolous lawsuits the federal law bars. The NSSF has described this coordinated effort as a wave of lawfare aimed at financially crippling the firearms industry.

NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel Lawrence G. Keane addressed the governor’s reasoning directly. “Governor Beshear acknowledged when he vetoed this bill that this legislation would prevent frivolous and harassing lawsuits for violence committed by criminals,” Keane said. He added that Beshear chose to side with gun control special interest groups that want to use the courts to accomplish what they cannot accomplish through legislation.

Keane put the issue plainly. “Members of the firearm industry are no more responsible for the actions of criminals than Kentucky’s bourbon distillers are responsible for drunk driving deaths,” he said.

HB 312: Concealed Carry Licenses for Adults Ages 18 to 20

House Bill 312 authorizes the Kentucky State Police to issue provisional concealed carry licenses to adults between the ages of 18 and 20. Those who receive a provisional license can later apply for a standard license through their county sheriff or through the KSP online system. The bill passed both chambers before Gov. Beshear vetoed it.

CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb said the governor was practicing age discrimination by denying full rights of citizenship to young adults who can serve in the military, start businesses, get married, and run for office.

The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA) had called on the legislature to act after the veto. “We are both delighted and proud of the Kentucky legislators who returned to Frankfort for these important votes,” Gottlieb said.

What This Means

Gottlieb said the Kentucky override should be seen as a signal to anti-rights advocates to stop blaming an entire lawful industry for the country’s violent crime problem and to stop restricting the rights of an entire age class.

The Second Amendment is a fundamental civil right. It does not begin at age 21, and it does not end because a criminal misused a product. Kentucky’s legislature affirmed both of those principles this week. The firearms industry can do business without being punished for crimes it did not commit, and law-abiding young adults in Kentucky can now pursue their right to carry for personal protection.

There Are No ‘Moderate’ Democrats When it Comes to Gun Rights.

Virginia’s Gov. Abigail Spanberger is determined to make her mark in the Old Dominion. She campaigned for office as a moderate Democrat, but Virginians are learning quickly that they’ve been hoodwinked. The reaction is astounding.

A recent poll conducted by George Mason University and The Washington Post found that Gov. Spanberger earned the highest disapproval rating from Virginians of any governor since 1994. Forty-six percent of Virginians disapprove of Gov. Spanberger’s job performance, just three months into the job. To put that into perspective, Gov. Spanberger won by 15 points in her race against former Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears. Her performance is also a glaring contrast to former Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s 53-39 job approval rating at the same point in his administration, according to Fox News.

Chief among those headwinds are two issues that the firearm industry is tracking very closely. First, Gov. Spanberger is expected to sign into law SB 749, which would unconstitutionally ban the purchase of Modern Sporting Rifles (MSRs), or the AR-15-style semiautomatic rifles — the most common rifle in America — as well as semiautomatic shotguns used for hunting and home defense and many pistols and standard capacity magazines. Gov. Spanberger is also considering a bill, HB21, that would attempt to circumvent the bipartisan Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) to allow frivolous lawsuits against firearm industry members for the criminal misuse of firearms by remote third parties.

Add to that, Gov. Spanberger is backing a referendum effort to gerrymander the Congressional districts in Virginia that would bring a new hyper-partisan Virginia congressional delegation to Congress. If successful, it would change Virginia’s 11 Congressional districts that are currently comprised of six Democrats and five Republicans to 10 Democrats and just one Republican.

Continue reading “”

Matt Van Swol at it again:

WE CAN LAUNCH 4 HUMAN BEINGS OFF INTO THE EMPTY VOID OF SPACE TO TRAVEL A QUARTER-MILLION MILES TO SHOOT PHOTOS OF THE DARK SIDE OF THE MOON…

…BUT WE CANNOT GET 60 PEOPLE IN BUILDING IN DC TO PASS A BILL THAT SAYS YOU SHOULD PROVE YOU’RE A CITIZEN TO VOTE.

I figured the demoncrap would

Gov. Beshear vetoes bill seeking to lower age for concealed carry permit

FRANKFORT, Ky. —
A bill that would have lowered the age to obtain a concealed carry permit in Kentucky has been vetoed by Gov. Andy Beshear.

Beshear announced Thursday he vetoed House Bill 312.

The bill sought to lower the age to get a concealed carry permit from 21 to 18.

He vetoed it alongside House Bill 78, which sought to “establish liability protections for manufacturers and sellers of firearms against specified legal actions arising from criminal or unlawful use of firearms or ammunition.”

“Three years ago, a senseless act of gun violence took the life of my friend Tommy and four others. Tonight, at an event honoring Tommy and his impact, I vetoed House Bills 78 and 312,” Beshear wrote in a post on X. “While I believe in the second amendment, these pieces of legislation would allow minors under the age of 21 to carry concealed deadly weapons and protect firearm manufacturers and sellers from liability for gun violence. We must take steps to protect our people and allow them to seek justice for deadly acts like those families have suffered from. Vetoing these bills was the right thing to do.”

While Beshear vetoed the two bills, lawmakers can override them once they reconvene on April 14-15.

Of course the current governor of Kentucky is a demoncrap, so we’ll see if he vetoes it.

HB 312 allowing adults under 21 to bear arms sent to governor

FRANKFORT – Members of the General Assembly voted to approve HB 312. This bill, sponsored by State Representative Savannah Maddox of Dry Ridge, is a straightforward but important statutory update that would allow eligible, law-abiding Kentucky adults between the ages of 18 and 20 to exercise their constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

“This measure recognizes that many responsible young adults already legally vote, sign contracts, join the military, serve in combat, start a family, own a business, and work in law enforcement fields, yet under current law, these adults are prohibited from carrying a firearm concealed for self-defense,” Maddox said. “This creates a dangerous inconsistency. If we recognize their adulthood and the responsibilities that come with it in every other area, we can’t deny them the ability to protect themselves and their loved ones.”

HB 312 would allow law-abiding Kentuckians age 18 to 20 years-of-age to obtain a provisional concealed carry license, which has the same requirements as Kentucky’s standard concealed carry license: background check, training, and proficiency in handling and operating a firearm.

“This bill strikes the right balance between individual liberty and personal responsibility by ensuring that young adults who choose to carry a firearm do so through a clear, lawful process,” Maddox said. “The Second Amendment is clear that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Adults 20 and under are very much part of the people. State law should recognize those rights equally.”

The measure would align Kentucky with 25 other states that recognize that law-abiding citizens age 18 to 20 have a constitutional right to carry concealed for self-defense.

“I believe in constitutional carry for all law-abiding American adults. This bill is a good faith step forward that meets in the middle and gives young adults a lawful path to exercise their rights,” said State Senator Aaron Reed, R-Shelbyville, who carried the bill in the Senate. “This matters because every adult deserves a right to defend themselves, especially our daughters, who today are often left without that clear protection.”

Virginia Illustrates Insidious Anti-Gun Threat

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

How SBRs and SBSs Got Trapped in the NFA’s 1934 Gun Control Scheme

The story of how short-barreled rifles (SBRs) and short-barreled shotguns (SBSs) ended up regulated under the National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934 is one of the clearest examples of unnecessary federal overreach, bureaucratic accident, and enduring infringement on Second Amendment rights. What began as a panicked response to 1930s gangster violence morphed into a permanent regulatory trap that punishes law-abiding Americans for owning common, useful firearms, configurations that have legitimate sporting, defensive, and historical purposes, while doing virtually nothing to stop actual crime.

In the early 1930s, America was gripped by sensational headlines about organized crime: the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre, Bonnie and Clyde’s exploits, and Al Capone’s Thompson submachine guns. Politicians and the media hyped “gangster weapons,” with sawed-off shotguns singled out as tools of the underworld. Attorney General Homer Cummings and the Justice Department pushed for federal action, but they knew an outright ban on firearms would likely violate the Second Amendment. Instead, they cleverly used Congress’s taxing power to create a de facto prohibition through heavy fees, registration, and paperwork.

The initial bill, H.R. 9066, was far broader than the bill that passed. It targeted machine guns, silencers, short-barreled shotguns and rifles (under 18 inches), handguns, pistols, and revolvers.

The $200 transfer tax (equivalent to roughly $4,800–$5,000 today) was designed to be prohibitive, pricing ordinary citizens out while supposedly tracking criminals. To close an obvious loophole, drafters added short-barreled rifles and shotguns: if handguns were taxed and registered, a criminal (or citizen) could simply buy a cheap rifle or shotgun and saw it down to handgun-like concealability, bypassing the rules entirely.

Continue reading “”

GOA:
WV: Setting the Record Straight on SB 1071

In recent days, West Virginia Senate President Randy Smith released a public statement regarding SB 1071, the Public Defense and Provisioning Act. His comments have created confusion about the bill’s drafting, legality, and level of expert review.

It is essential that West Virginians have the full and accurate factual record. Many of the claims made about SB 1071 do not reflect the truth, and the following information provides a clear, fact-driven response based on verifiable legal authorities and documented expert analysis.

A Bill with Momentum — and an Unexpected Intervention

The fight for modern firearms equality began in early February. West Virginia made national history when it became the first state in America to introduce legislation authorizing the lawful sale of post-1986 machine guns under the federal carve-out in 18 U.S.C.922(o)(2)(A).

SB 1071 immediately ignited excitement among legislators, industry leaders, and grassroots supporters. Other states quickly took notice—several have already copied West Virginia’s language, and more are preparing to introduce their own versions.

A flash poll conducted by Gun Owners of America showed overwhelming enthusiasm among West Virginians, with 94 percent saying their out-of-state family and friends would be more likely to move to West Virginia if this bill became law. The momentum was real, and the nation was watching.

SB 1071 was introduced by Senator Chris Rose, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and the committee advanced the bill with overwhelming support. But immediately after that vote, the bill seemed to vanish.

Chairman Tom Willis, who had reported the bill out of Judiciary, was himself confused about why it had not moved to the Finance Committee as expected. This unusual stall prompted West Virginians across the state to begin calling their Senators, demanding Sen. Chris Rose (left), sponsor of SB 1071, stands with Senate President Randy Smith.
answers about what had happened to a bill that had just passed committee with overwhelming support.

In response to the growing public concern, Senate President Randy Smith publicly stated that he personally made the decision to halt SB 1071, clarifying that the choice did not come from Chairman Willis or the Judiciary Committee. This admission dramatically shifted the understanding of events. What many initially believed to be procedural delay within Judiciary now appeared to be a direct intervention from Senate leadership.

Additionally, several advocates and legal experts have raised serious concerns that President Smith may have been relying on information provided by an outside individual who strongly opposed SB 1071 and may have misrepresented key legal facts about the bill.

According to these observers, this misinformation appears to have played a significant role in shaping the Senate President’s decision—ultimately stopping a bill that had strong public support, clear legislative interest, and validation from some of the most respected constitutional attorneys in the country.

This context is essential for understanding how SB 1071 was derailed and why an accurate factual record matters as West Virginians evaluate what happened and determine the path forward.

Continue reading “”

Georgia Senate Passes SB572 to Strengthen Self-Defense Protections and Expand Civil Immunity for Lawful Use of Force

Key Takeaways

  • Georgia Senate passed SB572 to strengthen legal protections for self-defense use of force.
  • The bill introduces a presumption that defensive force is reasonable under specific legal conditions.
  • SB572 maintains existing limits on self-defense claims and expands protections against civil lawsuits.
  • The legislation allows evidence of abuse in self-defense cases and clarifies immunity from criminal prosecution.
  • Next, SB572 will move to the Georgia House; if passed, it will become law.

ATLANTA, GA – The Georgia Senate has passed legislation that would strengthen legal protections for people who use force in defense of themselves or others.

Senate Bill 572 passed the Georgia Senate on March 6 by a vote of 30 to 23. The measure has now moved to the Georgia House of Representatives. It received its first and second readings on March 9 and March 10 and is currently pending before the House Judiciary Non-Civil Committee.

The bill was sponsored by Senators Brian Strickland, Jason Anavitarte, Randy Robertson, Steven McNeel, Bo Hatchett, and Blake Tillery. The legislation proposes several changes to Georgia law related to justification defenses, immunity from prosecution, and civil liability following a defensive use of force.

Below is a breakdown of the major provisions included in the bill.

Continue reading “”

It’s easy to tell when a politician favors state power over the rights of the people

Wyoming Governor Vetoes Second Amendment Protection Act

For the second year in a row, Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon has vetoed legislation aimed at preventing law enforcement from enforcing federal gun laws. Gordon’s veto was hardly unexpected, given that last week he called the proposed amendments to the state’s Second Amendment Protection Act an “embarrassment” and described it as fundraising disguised as legislation.

Gordon, who vetoed a similar bill last year, cast it as an affront to local law enforcement during the radio show.

“So, when you have 23 sheriffs come in and say, ‘This Second Amendment protection act does nothing more than what we already have in law, except it imposes penalties on our local law enforcement — and criminal charges, potentially.’ That is devastating,” Gordon said.

He continued: “It’s a bill that’s brought from out-of-state interests. It’s a fundraising thing. And I’m sick of Wyoming people being used as, you know, some treasure trough, some well of funding.”

Gordon’s veto drew condemnation from groups like Firearms Policy Coalition, which had some choice words for the governor in response to his post on X about rejecting the legislation.

Gordon may enjoy the taste of shoe leather, but it’s also worth noting that just like last year, this session’s SAPA bill was heavily pushed by Wyoming Gun Owners, one of multiple groups run by the Dorr brothers, who bill their groups as “no compromise” organizations but have been accused of primarily using the Second Amendment as a grift by politicians and other 2A activists (Incidentally, the Dorrs also set up a 501(c)3 called Six Brothers Disaster Relief, Inc. that had its non-profit status revoked by the IRS in 2022 after failing to file its Form 990 disclosures three years in a row).

While Gordon may be right about Wyoming Gun Owners’ real mission, though, this years SAPA bill did get majority support in both chambers… including buy in from the handful of Democrats in the legislature,

Continue reading “”

Trump Says He Won’t Sign Any New Legislation Until the SAVE Act Is Passed

President Donald Trump has signaled that the SAVE America Act is now the single greatest legislative priority ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. He announced Sunday morning on Truth Social that he would not be signing any other bills until the Senate forces the election integrity bill through the gridlock of the silent filibuster.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has said that he is completely fine with shutting the Senate down, and that Democrats pass the bill to secure American elections under end circumstances. Polling numbers have shown that Democrats are wildly opposed to the will of even their own voters, as a new poll has shown that half of Democrat voters support voter ID measures. The poll showed that nearly 70 percent of independents want these common sense measures as well.

The bill is such a high priority for Republicans that Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton indicated that he would be willing to suspend his campaign against Sen. John Cornyn if GOP leadership would end the silent filibuster to pass the SAVE Act.

Virginia House Passes Amended Version of Senate’s ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban

Virginia Democrats continue to advance a number of gun control bills, with the House of Delegates approving an amended version of the Senate’s ban on so-called assault weapons and large capacity magazines on Wednesday.

The major change to the legislation is the new definition of “large capacity” magazines, which is now arbitrarily set at 15 rounds instead of 10. The House version of the gun and magazine ban was also modified in a Senate committee on Wednesday, and it looks to me like the two bills are now compatible with each other, which would avoid the need for a conference committee to negotiate on the final language for the bills once they’ve been approved by both chambers.

The Senate’s vote on HB 217 could come as early as today, and Gov. Abigail Spanberger could conceivably sign the bill into law next week. Interestingly, Spanberger has yet to sign any of the gun control bills that have passed out of the General Assembly, including a gun storage mandate and an expansion of the state’s “red flag” law.

With the legislature set to adjourn on March 14, my guess is that Spanberger will wait until the Democrats entire anti-2A package is ready for her to sign, and then she’ll make a big press event complete with representatives from all the major gun control organizations. So what else is likely to pass between now and next Saturday?

Based on the Virginia Citizens Defense League’s legislation tracker, I think we can expect the following infringements to be enacted into law:

– legislation allowing gun makers, distributors, and sellers to be sued for the actions of criminals under a public nuisance standard and for violating a vague “code of conduct” imposed on the industry.

– a ban on the possession and manufacture of unserialized firearms

– a $500 penalty and the towing of any vehicle where a firearm is left visible inside

– an end to Virginia’s universal reciprocity for concealed carry licenses and a much more restrictive standard put in place by the anti-gun Attorney General

– the creation of the Virginia Center for Firearm Violence Intervention and Prevention, which will serve as a job placement program for the gun control lobby as well as creating and pushing junk research aimed at promoting gun control efforts.

– turning all state-owned or leased buildings into “gun-free zones”

– a firearm “give back” program allowing people to turn their firearms over to the state police

– a ban on openly carrying most long guns in places open to the public

– creating a new “gun free zone” starting 100 feet outside of any polling place or outside a building where a local electoral board is meeting

– new requirements for mandated concealed carry training courses, including instructor certification by the Department of Criminal Justice Services

Some items, like a proposed “permit-to-purchase,” an 11% excise tax on the sale of firearms and ammunition, and a $500 tax on the sale of suppressors, have been pushed back until 2027, but Democrats haven’t entirely given up on those ideas.

Earlier today I noted the effect that these gun control bills are having on Virginia gun sales, but they’re also having an impact on local politics. On Wednesday the Virginia Citizens Defense League provided an update on the resurgence of the Second Amendment Sanctuary movement in the Commonwealth, and reported there are now 48 localities and sheriffs that have reaffirmed their stances. I’m happy to say that includes my home county. The full list can be found here, and VCDL has also provided links to comments made by some sheriffs, like this from Campbell County Sheriff Whit Clark.

Considering the proposed Virginia Firearms legislation, the Campbell County Sheriff’s Office reaffirms its unwavering support for the 2nd Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens.

The Campbell County Sheriff’s Office will not infringe upon the constitutional rights of citizens to legally possess obtained firearms, magazines, ammunition, or related equipment.

It is the heritage of citizens of Campbell County to bear arms for hunting and sport and to have for their protection for the use for self-defense. The residents of Campbell County are responsible gun owners who value safety, liberty and the rule of law.

As your Sheriff, I remain committed to ensuring public safety while steadfastly defending your constitutional right to keep and bear arms. Our office will continue to serve this community with integrity, respect and dedication.

I’d like to see every sheriff in the Commonwealth go on the record as Clark has, and I encourage Virginia gun owners to reach out to their county supervisors and sheriffs and encourage them to take a public stand in support of our Second Amendment rights and against the flagrant attack on those rights by the Democrat majority in Richmond. We aren’t going to be able to defeat many of these infringements at the statehouse, but we can and will fight them in court… and we can also press our local law enforcement to exercise their discretion not to enforce any laws that trample on our civil liberties.

Senate Republicans Shoot Down Iran War Powers Resolution

Senate Republicans successfully defeated a vote Wednesday on the Iran War Powers resolution, which would require President Donald Trump to make his case to Congress before taking additional military actions against Iran.

Virginia Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine forced the vote on the war powers resolution, which comes after the Senate voted down a similar effort when the U.S. bombed three Iranian nuclear sites last June.

The vote comes as the U.S. and Israel launched strikes against Iran over the weekend, killing its Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Iran has retaliated by launching missiles at Israel and U.S. military bases in the Middle East.

The motion to advance the resolution out of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee failed by a vote of 47-53, according to The Hill.