The Left considers the fight over free speech to be a political death struggle, and they are right about that. If anything deserves to be strangled in its crib it is the Left’s current assault on the First Amendment.
–Thomas DiLorenzo
August 25, 2026
Grassroots Legislative Report—August 24, 2026
By Tanya Metaksa
What’s New— State Legislatures: California: for the final week of the session with six bills yet to be passed;; Politics: Remaining Primary Elections Calendar: End of August primary elections with listing of endorsed candidates. More primary elections to be held in September
State Legislatures: Still in session:
States running through to Dec. 31: Michigan, New Jersey, and Ohio. Pennsylvania session runs through Nov. 30.
California: The legislature has been working through many bills including onerous gun bills. As we enter the final legislative week there are still bills waiting to be considered on both the floor of the Senate and the House. In the Senate
- AB1753 – “Clarifies” Gun Violence Restraining Order rules by including ammunition in the same process used to seize firearms. In practice, it further bolsters red flag laws that have already taken away rights from lawful gun owners while avoiding basic due process.
- AB1974 – California is still trying to confiscate firearms they hold for temporary safekeeping. This bill makes it even more difficult to get any back
- AB2047 – Limits the sale of 3D printers unless they include “firearm blueprint detection algorithms.” This broad restriction on legal technology raises serious concerns about free speech, innovation, and the rights of everyday Californians— including countless STEM teachers and tech professionals who depend on these tools. But the legislators don’t care about the Bill of Rights violations when they concern gun owners.
In the Assembly:
- SB948 significantly expands California’s Firearm Safety Certificate requirements by mandating a minimum four-hour class with live-fire and official instruction starting in 2028. Crime involving guns isn’t caused by a lack of rules, but this bill adds more time and expense for law-abiding gun owners while doing nothing to stop criminals.
- SB1220 creates a new misdemeanor crime that bans guns and results in a 10-year firearm ban for anyone convicted of dealing with a gun that has altered identifying marks or a removed serial number. California already classifies this behavior as a misdemeanor; this bill just adds another way to lose your constitutional rights over a growing list of lesser offenses.
- AB1743 after passing the Senate, requires a concurrence vote in the Assembly. This bill seeks to expand the access to firearms’ owners’ information. A concern since personal gun owner information was widely leaked in 2022.
Post Offices are no longer off-limits to gun carrying customers
The Office of Legal Counsel’s Aug. 12, 2026 opinion
The Office of Legal Counsel’s Aug. 12 opinion concludes that 18 U.S.C. § 930(a) does not criminalize an otherwise law-abiding person’s carrying of a constitutionally protected firearm for self-defense into a post office that is generally open to the public. OLC grounds that conclusion principally in § 930(d)(3), which exempts the “lawful carrying” of firearms in a federal facility “incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.”
Holding
OLC reads self-defense as a paradigmatic “lawful purpose.” Accordingly, a person may come within the statutory exception when:
- The person may lawfully possess and carry the firearm under applicable federal and state law.
- The person has a lawful reason to enter the particular post office—for example, it is open to the public.
- The firearm is carried for a lawful purpose, such as self-defense.
The opinion rejects DOJ’s earlier, narrower litigation position that the “other lawful purposes” exception should be limited to purposes related to the facility itself, such as hunting-related activity. OLC says the statute requires a lawful purpose for both entering the facility and carrying the firearm, but does not require those two purposes to be related.
Statutory analysis
Section 930(a), enacted in 1988, generally makes knowing firearm possession in a “Federal facility” a misdemeanor, with enhanced felony consequences if the weapon is used in a crime. A post office falls within the statute’s definition because it is a federal building or leased space in which federal employees regularly work.
But § 930(d)(3) expressly excludes “the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.” OLC gives the exception a broad, ordinary-language reading:
- “Lawful carrying” excludes prohibited persons and those violating valid state carry laws.
- “Other lawful purposes” includes self-defense, which is central to the Second Amendment under District of Columbia v. Heller.
- The inclusion of hunting does not confine the exception to hunting-like or facility-specific activities; hunting and self-defense are commonly paired in federal firearms statutes and constitutional doctrine.
OLC also notes that its conclusion does not cover weapons independently forbidden by law, nor does it give carte blanche to carry at postal facilities that are not generally open to the public, such as facilities on military bases or beyond airport security.
Constitutional rationale
Although OLC says it need not formally decide § 930(a)’s constitutionality, it invokes constitutional avoidance: interpreting the exception broadly avoids serious Second Amendment questions. In OLC’s view, a general ban on carrying ordinary firearms for self-defense in public-facing post offices would presumptively burden conduct protected by the Second Amendment under Bruen and Wolford.
The opinion finds substantial historical difficulty with treating ordinary post offices as “sensitive places” analogous to legislatures, polling places, or courthouses:
- The postal system has existed since the Founding, and mail-related violence was a recognized problem.
- Yet early Congresses responded by punishing mail robbery and attacks on mail carriers, not by barring firearms in post offices.
- Federal restrictions on firearms in federal buildings appeared only in 1964, and post-office-specific regulations appeared in 1972.
- OLC concludes that the apparent absence of a founding-era or nineteenth-century analogue casts serious doubt on a categorical prohibition in public post offices.
Practical significance
The opinion is an authoritative Executive Branch interpretation for DOJ, not a Supreme Court ruling or a direct invalidation of the Postal Service’s existing firearms regulation, 39 C.F.R. § 232.1(l). Its practical position is that § 930(a) should not be used to prosecute a qualified, law-abiding person merely for carrying a constitutionally protected firearm for self-defense into a post office held open to the public. The opinion is expressly limited to that setting and does not resolve the legality of firearm restrictions at other federal facilities.
August 31 Primary Elections Calendar:
Oklahoma primary runoffs and a South Carolina Republican special-primary runoff
OKLAHOMA PRIMARY RUNOFF
GOVERNOR: Both candidates: Republican Mike Massei and Republican Gentner Drummon were given “A” by the NRA Political Victory Fund.
State Senate: District 18: Jack Stewart; District 34: Dana Prieto
State House: District 18: David Smith
SOUTH CAROLINA PRIMARY RUNOFF
Although the NRA-PVF has given both Senator Darline Graham (who was appointed Senator by President Donald J. Trump upon the death of her brother Lindsay Graham) and Ralph Norman who is running against her an A rating, on August 21 President Trump held a rally in South Carolina for Darline Graham.
Pentagon dubs M18 handgun ‘safe and reliable’ after review
The Pentagon is defending the safety of M17 and M18 handguns — military versions of the controversial SIG Sauer P320 — saying that “there has never been a mechanically caused accidental discharge” involving the service weapon.
The Aug. 7 statement followed a review of the Modular Handgun System, a program led by the Army’s Project Manager Soldier Lethality, initiated after an airman was shot and killed because of an alleged “uncommanded discharge” with an M18 handgun.
Last year’s incident resulted in an immediate inspection of all M18 handguns issued by the Air Force Global Strike Command as well as a temporary pause of their use, which was lifted a month later.
Additionally, three airmen involved in the deadly shooting were charged with lying to investigators. They claimed the gun just “went off” when the shooter slammed his duty belt against a desk, when in reality, he had pointed it at the victim in a “joking manner.”
According to the statement, the Army has investigated all reports of incidents involving MHS pistols discharging without a trigger pull, and firearms mishaps account for less than 0.006% of all MHS pistols issued.
“All investigated incidents of alleged ‘uncommanded discharges’ have been traced back to the trigger being pulled,” Army officials say, adding that they blame “public speculation and online misinformation” for the safety concerns regarding the handgun design.
However, the civilian version of the handgun has been linked to dozens of injuries and a handful of deaths, with victims claiming the gun discharged a round without a trigger pull. In turn, the design has been the subject of more than 100 legal challenges since it was introduced in 2014, with varying outcomes.
In many of the lawsuits, attorneys argue that the design’s passive safeties can fail to adequately prevent unintentional manipulation of the trigger. It’s important to note that unlike the civilian P320, the M18 and M17 pistol designs are equipped with a manual safety.
Since the SIG design won DoD approval in 2017, M17 and M18 pistols have become the standard-issue sidearm for the Army, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Navy. There are more than 400,000 currently in service.
Gun rights lawsuit aims at Colorado’s state & local carry restrictions.
DENVER–Colorado is facing yet another lawsuit over statewide and local gun rights restrictions, this one challenging the state’s concealed carry permitting and the City of Denver’s open-carry ban.
The latest lawsuit, brought by the National Rifle Association and two out-of-state gun owners, argues that the state and city’s carry laws “together leave otherwise qualified nonresidents who travel to Denver with no lawful means to carry a handgun there for self-defense.”
The complaint marks the latest in a line of recent legal challenges, brought by both gun rights groups and the Trump administration, targeting restrictive gun laws in Colorado.
The U.S. court system is 100% broken, and nothing shows that fact better than this case out of Pennsylvania.
Safon Gump was accused of fatally shooting Gregory Prince, but the trial that would have brought justice to Gump derailed because one of the jurors got high in the jury room.
TribLive has the details:
Because Gump remains in custody — and court rules prohibit jurors from seeing a defendant in handcuffs for fear it could prejudice them — jurors were returned to their fifth-floor room to await the all clear to leave for lunch.
When Common Pleas Judge Edward J. Borkowski’s tipstaff arrived to release the jurors, Seman said, ‘He’s immediately hit with the smell of marijuana.’
Then, one of the jurors ‘looked at him and said, ‘It wasn’t me.”‘
This is where things really went off the rails.
The prosecution and the defense both agreed that if the juror had a prescription it was fine, and the judge said no one would be in trouble for the incident, but all the jurors also swore that they were not taking any medications that could affect their judgment in the case, so the judge needed to figure out who it was.
One by one, the jurors were brought to the judge’s chambers privately and questioned.
They all answered no in chambers, as well.
The judge also asked the jurors if anyone had ingested anything legally or illegally while in the jury room.
‘All of them denied it,’ Seman said.
The defense asked for a mistrial and the judge agreed to it.
Guilt-Trip Didn’t Work, So Now Regulations Follow Gun Store’s Recent Move
It’s amazing how guns and alcohol are treated similarly despite being very different. I don’t just mean that one is a liquid and one is a solid. Elementary science is too obvious, after all. What I mean is that while alcohol can and sometimes is consumed on the premises of a retail location, guns are almost never used on those premises. Unfortunately, many towns try to act like they are.
Goleta, California wasn’t one of those. Maybe they didn’t think it would ever be an issue, but when a gun store secured a location that had been vacant for three years, some members of the community lost their minds. They tried to guilt-trip the owner.
It didn’t work, so now they’re trying something “new,” but it’s as old as governments.
City of Goleta representatives said they have taken note. They acknowledged that there are no current restrictions on where a gun store can open within town limits. A business license was issued to Goodland Guns to operate in the new location in early June.
Continued public outcry over the issue, however, has sparked action at city hall.
“We are going to bring some options back that could lead to a change in our zoning or an ordinance that would put potentially more restrictions where gun stores could be located,” Goleta City Manager Robert Nisbet told SFGATE via phone Tuesday.
Nisbet said the issue is slated for discussion at the upcoming City Council meeting on Sept. 1.
He said while he couldn’t speak for what the City Council will ultimately decide to do, he noted that he believes it is “looking forward to putting greater restrictions on [gun stores].”
Nisbet noted that while the city currently allows gun shops only in commercial zones, it would be unable to ban them altogether. “There’s the Second Amendment, the right to bear arms,” he said. “Cities cannot really restrict gun stores [wholesale] within a city. You can’t do it.”
“The general concept is to make it more restrictive, what we define as sensitive zones, places like a daycare,” he added.
Again, it’s not like gun stores are notorious shooting locales. There aren’t stray bullets flying hither and yon from the parking lot.
People go in, conduct perfectly lawful business, and then leave.
What Nisbet, though, is telling us is that they’d rather have left a commercial property vacant where it apparently had a history of being broken into and vandalized, thus making it more of an eyesore, than see a business move in and restore it into working order.
Goodland Guns owner Dan Ashton sat down with Cam on Thursday to talk about the situation, but from my point of view, he’s done nothing wrong, and some people in Goleta need to get their knickers untwisted.
Of course, what follows from this kind of “thinking” is that gun stores get relegated purely to higher crime areas, then get blamed for the higher crime, even though they’re simply not allowed to operate elsewhere.
Nisbet himself said it. The concept is to make it more restrictive to do business if you’re a gun store owner. Daycares aren’t going to be impacted by a gun store’s location unless some parent gets distracted by whatever Kel-Tec came up with next instead of remembering to pick Junior up on time. That’s about it.
Story of my life
“Your understanding and consent are not required for someone to take your life, kill your loved ones, and destroy all you hold dear.”
– Dr William Aprill
Carry your tools.
Mind your surroundings.
Respond accordingly.
August 24, 2026
The limitation of tyrants is the endurance of those they oppose.
— Frederick Douglass
August 23, 2026
TSA Flags Child’s Cowboy Costume, Forces SC Woman to Miss Flight
The Transportation Safety Authority was created in the aftermath of 9/11. Its mission was to stop terrorists from taking dangerous weapons, which now includes box cutters, onto planes. Honestly, it’s an important mission, but TSA isn’t very good at its job. The stories of issues are legion, and when you look at who TSA recruits, it’s no wonder.
And really, the big problem is that there’s no exercise of common sense. I’ve seen some of the things TSA confiscates from people looking to board flights, and they’re not always actual weapons. Much of the time, it’s obvious they’re not weapons.
Like, for example, a cowboy costume for a woman’s nephew.
Passing through airport security lines when you are running short on time is already a high-wire stress management act. But what would you do if a miniature accessory in a toddler’s dress-up costume triggers a full-blown firearm protocol at the checkpoint? For South Carolina creator Lila Mack (@lilamack), that nightmare came true.
Mack’s routine transit day allegedly collapsed into an expensive overnight detour in Arkansas. The culprit? A gift she packed for her nephew. In a candid TikTok storytime, Mack broke down the agonizingly slow security confiscation that cost her a seat on her plane and forced an unexpected $160 layover.
Filming her debrief from the hotel bathroom, Mack showed off the gift, sarcastically dedicating the video to her nephew. “If you’re my two-year-old nephew watching this, I hope you love your new cowboy costume with gun holsters and no gun that cost me a flight and $160,” she joked.
A toddler’s cowboy costume triggered an unexpected firearm alert
The travel nightmare allegedly began while Mack was heading through security screening with her carry-on luggage. At this time, she was already rushing to make a tight boarding window. Inside her bag was a gift for her two-year-old nephew: a small cowboy costume complete with tiny faux holsters and a plastic toy prop.
Now, in fairness, Mack was kind of dumb for bringing that costume in her carry-on bag. I’m a big fan of packing important things in a carry-on, in part because I typically fly Delta, which a comedian once described as standing for Don’t Expect Luggage Today at All. So, my advice is keep a change of clothes and other important things in the carry-on, and be prepared to buy toiletries when you get to your destination, just in case.
But putting a toy gun in there? That’s just begging for a run-in with TSA.
On the flip side, they’re toy guns for a toddler. They’re not remotely real, and anyone with half a brain should be able to see that. No one is hijacking an aircraft, particularly in a world where air marshals are a thing, with a toy gun made for a toddler’s costume.
They’re just not.
Sooner or later, TSA needs to get its crap together and focus on legitimate security and not on trying to pretend they’re on top of things by screwing up travel plans over obvious toys.
An Airsoft gun? Maybe, because those look real enough to worry people, especially those unfamiliar with guns.
A couple of toy cowboy pistols, though?
Give me a freaking break.
One of the ordinary modes, by which tyrants accomplish their purposes without resistance, is, by disarming the people, and making it an offense to keep arms.
–Joseph Story
August 22, 2026