Illegal Chinese National Arrested In California Shipping Weapons And Devices To North Korea.

The United States Department of Justice has announced the arrest of an illegal Chinese National on a criminal complaint alleging that he exported shipments of firearms, ammunition and other military items to North Korea. According to the DOJ, the items were concealed inside shipping containers bound from Long Beach.

Shenghua Wen, 41, a Chinese national illegally residing in Ontario, California, was arrested and made his initial appearance on December 3 in the Central District of California. According to an affidavit filed a week prior alongside the complaint, Wen obtained firearms, ammunition and export-controlled technology with the intent to ship them to North Korea, a violation of federal law and U.S. sanctions against that nation.

Among the items seized by law enforcement on August 14 from Wen’s home were a chemical threat identification device and a hand-held broadband receiver that detects eavesdropping devices. Less than a month later, on September 6, law enforcement seized approximately 50,000 rounds of 9mm ammunition, all of which he intended to send to North Korea for military use.

In reviewing Wen’s iPhone, law enforcement discovered evidence of Wen smuggling items from the busy Long Beach harbor through Hong Kong to North Korea in December 2023. Messages retrieved from his cellphones revealed earlier discussions with his co-conspirators, including photographs of controlled items under International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), detailing the shipment of military-grade equipment to North Korea

Between January and April of this year, Wen also sent emails and text messages to a U.S.-based broker about obtaining a civilian plane engine, including text messages on Wen’s iPhone concerning price negotiation for the plane and its engine.

The Chinese national remained illegally in the United States after overstaying his student visa, which prohibits him from possessing any firearms or ammunition. Unsurprisingly, Wen lacks the required licenses from the U.S. government to export any of the weapons, ammunition or regulated devices that were seized at his home.

Wen is charged with conspiracy to violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, carrying a statutory maximum penalty of 20 years in federal prison.

The FBI, ATF, Homeland Security, Defense Criminal Investigative Service and the Department of Commerce Bureau of Industry and Security are investigating. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Sarah E. Gerdes for the Central District of California and trial attorney Ahmed Almudallal of the National Security Division’s Counterintelligence and Export Control Section.

CNN has suggested that the items being shipped are intended to help ‘prepare for a surprise attack on South Korea,’ a notion that makes me question the volume of the shipments and wonder how many additional ‘agents’ of North Korea might exist and be doing this same thing right under the noses of U.S. authorities. The situation also gives rise to thoughts about important work that regulatory and law enforcement agencies must engage in for the best interest of the country and national security rather than wasting resources trying to make criminals out of law-abiding gun owners here in America.

“Imagine filing lawsuit against Glock, getting five paragraphs in, and admitting you fundamentally don’t understand how the gun even works.”

Imagine filing lawsuit against Glock, getting five paragraphs in, and admitting you fundamentally don’t understand how the gun even works.

Holding down the trigger bar will cause a dead trigger – not fire the gun repeatedly. Embarrassing.

Image

Fundamental misunderstanding continues. The G18 achieves auto fire differently than a G17 with a switch does. The trigger bar isn’t “held down” in either case, though.

If holding down the trigger bar is all that was required, you wouldn’t need a switch at all.Image

The G46 has the same dastardly trigger bar that works in the same dastardly way. Making a switch for a G46 wouldn’t be fundamentally different than making one for a G17. But don’t worry, New Jersey says the G46 is cool.Image
Image
This is so unbelievably dumb. Mind numbingly so.Image
Me whenever I don’t know how springs work. Me when I’m the master of Glock knowing. Me when I’m a lawyer getting paid to lawsuit and I just make stuff up.Image
If “remaining lowered” is all that it took, why don’t Glocks go full auto if you assemble them without the trigger bar at all? Permanently lowered if it isn’t installed. Shutting the slide should rip the whole mag, right?Image

The right of self-defense is the first law of nature; in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and when the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction. – St. George Tucker

In the day of the internet, which records and keeps everything, these moron politicians still think they can gaslight people

Tony Blinken Tells Congress ‘No One Anticipated’ Taliban Takeover of Afghanistan.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken testified before Congress on the Biden administration’s chaotic Afghanistan withdrawal in a long-awaited hearing that was originally scheduled for September. Though he claimed that “no one” in the Biden State Department anticipated the Afghan government’s swift collapse, a group of diplomats warned Blinken of that very prospect roughly one month before the Taliban captured Kabul.

“Even the U.S. government’s most pessimistic assessments did not anticipate that the Afghan government and security forces would collapse so rapidly in the face of Taliban advances,” Blinken told the House Foreign Affairs Committee on Wednesday.

Twenty-six diplomats, however, sent Blinken a dissent cable in mid-July 2021—one month before the fall of Kabul and six weeks before a suicide bombing attack killed 13 American servicemembers—warning of Afghanistan’s rapid deterioration. Asked why he ignored that cable, Blinken responded, “Very simply because no one anticipated the government and Afghan forces would collapse as quickly as they did.”

Blinken’s appearance comes nearly two months after the Biden official was set to testify before the House committee in late September. But Blinken failed to attend the hearing, defying a subpoena in the process, and only agreed to testify after the November presidential election. Blinken also missed a May deadline to turn over withdrawal-related internal documents, which were requested under subpoena.

Continue reading “”

Discussion Of Final Judgment Item By Item

Judge Joel Cohen’s Final Judgment has been released. Realistically, I think both sides can claim victory as it grants measures to both the New York Attorney General’s Office and to the NRA. On my initial reading of the document, I wish Judge Cohen had gone a bit further. It does emphasize just how important the 2025 Board of Directors election will be for the future of the NRA.

The Final Judgment does follow much of what was said in court in the last hearing. For example, Judge Cohen was critical of the petition process calling it “antiquated” and thought it could be done electronically. That is in the Final Judgment. Another example is that Judge Cohen was leery of having the recommendations from the Committee on Organization on board size die “a quiet death in committee”. The Final Judgment mandates the committee have its proposals ready for the April 2025 board meeting.

The Final Judgment itself covers seven pages and the remainder of the 25 page document is composed of exhibits. The Final Judgment starts with the Stipulations agreed to by defendants Joshua Powell and Wilson “Woody” Phillips. It then goes on to dismiss the 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, and 11th causes of action in the NYAG’s Second Amendment Complaint. These dealt primarily with permanent bars on the named defendants along with items covered in the stipulations. The Final Judgment then moves to the remedial actions that the NRA shall implement.

Continue reading “”

Now, they need to relocate the corporation from New York before James fonds something  else to sue them for .

NRA Successfully Resolves Longstanding Legal Battle with New York Attorney General

December 11, 2024

The National Rifle Association of America (NRA) today announced the successful conclusion of a multi-year legal battle with New York Attorney General Letitia James. In August 2020, James sued to dissolve the Association and seize its assets following a campaign-trail promise to target the Association, its banks, and its donors. After the NRA defeated the NYAG’s “corporate death penalty” claim, James sought a court-appointed monitor to oversee the gun group. The court rejected that request this summer.

In the end, Justice Joel Cohen denied all invasive relief sought by the government. Instead, the court’s order is tailored to compliance and governance measures in the NRA’s interest—many proposed by the NRA itself, and several of which were already underway at the Association. The NRA pays no fines or penalties under today’s judgment. Instead, the judgment entitles the NRA to collect millions of dollars from former executives found to have breached their duties.

“The NYAG sought to shut us down, and then appoint outsiders to oversee management of this historic organization,” said NRA President Bob Barr. “Fortunately for freedom lovers everywhere, this politically motivated attempt failed. This was the ultimate stand at our moment of truth – defeating an unprecedented attack from the highest levels of New York government. The NRA remains strong, safe, and independent – continuing to protect freedoms.”

Today’s judgment caps a six-year saga during which the NRA withstood not only the NYAG’s lawsuit, but a barrage of other blue-state regulatory actions, sweeping congressional inquiries, and a debanking effort by New York officials that became the subject of a blockbuster Supreme Court decision in May. In that case, NRA v. Vullo, all nine justices backed the Association’s First Amendment claims, and the ACLU stood shoulder to shoulder with the NRA against New York.

“The last six years have been difficult for NRA members, staff, and supporters,” said NRA CEO and Executive Vice President Doug Hamlin. “With Judge Cohen’s ruling, we can now put this challenging chapter in NRA history behind us and focus solely on the business of the members and all law-abiding gun owners. The NRA is committed to transparency, compliance, and good governance going forward. Today’s outcome ensures that NRA members can support the Association, America’s oldest civil rights organization, with confidence.”

Trump Assassination Attempt Task Force Determines ‘Failures’ with Secret Service Leadership

On Tuesday, the Task Force on the Attempted Assassination of Donald J. Trump released its final official report, determining that there were “failures in the planning, execution, and leadership” of the United States Secret Service (USSS) leading up to both attempts on the President-elect’s life.

As reported by Breitbart, the task force’s five-month investigation focused on both the attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania on July 13th and the second attempt in West Palm Beach, Florida on September 15th. In the former attempt, President-elect Trump was wounded by gunfire in his right ear, while one rallygoer was killed and two others were critically injured, before the gunman was killed by the Secret Service. In the second attempt, the gunman was spotted by Secret Service and fled before firing a shot, and was arrested later the same day.

“The report text, unanimously approved by the Task Force on December 5, highlights significant failures in the planning, execution, and leadership of the Secret Service and its law enforcement partners,” the task force declared in a press release summarizing its findings. “The Task Force-approved report also proposes 37 actionable recommendations related both to the security failures on July 13 and to overarching structural changes that the Secret Service and Congress must consider to strengthen security measures and prevent similar security failures in the future.”

With regards to the July 13th attempt, the task force’s report noted that, rather than any one singular moment that allowed the gunman to nearly assassinate the then-former president, there had instead been “various failures in planning, execution, and leadership” which created “an environment in which the former President” and the audience at the rally were “exposed to grave danger.”

Almost immediately after the first attempt, the Secret Service faced widespread and bipartisan condemnation for the obvious security failures that allowed the 22-year-old gunman to gain access to a nearby rooftop with an entire rifle in hand. Multiple civilians spotted the armed and suspicious-looking man and tried to point him out to law enforcement, who apparently did nothing in response to these warnings. His motives remain unknown.

By contrast, the response to the second attempt in Florida was much swifter. An agent noticed the barrel of the gunman’s rifle protruding from the bushes at the Trump International Golf Course, where then-candidate Trump was playing a round of golf. The Secret Service opened fire, scaring the gunman away, before he was apprehended later by local law enforcement. The second would-be assassin, Ryan Wesley Routh, had become a fanatical supporter of Ukraine since the start of their war against Russia, and was apparently motivated by what he perceived as insufficient support for Ukraine by former President Trump.

The Supremes have never been all that big on taking ‘interlocutory’ appeals, that is, the case hasn’t been heard and ruled on all the way through the lower courts.

Justice Thomas’s Statement Reaffirms Sword-Shield Dichotomy
“A defendant can always raise unconstitutionality as a defense ‘where a statute is invalid upon its face and an attempt is made to enforce its penalties in violation of constitutional right.'”

Today [the 9th] the Supreme Court denied cert in Wilson v. Hawaii, which I wrote about here. Justice Thomas wrote a statement respecting the denial of cert, joined by Justice Alito. The posture of the case is a bit unusual. The defendant was convicted of carrying a firearm without a license. At the time, Hawaii imposed a “may issue” conceal carry law. It turns out that Wilson had never applied for a carry permit. To challenge his conviction, the defendant argued that Hawaii’s carry law runs afoul of Bruen. However, the Hawaii Supreme Court held that he could not raise the Second Amendment as a defense against the carry regime. Justice Thomas explains:

There, the [state] court invoked state standing law to avoid any meaningful Second Amendment analysis. It held that, because Wilson had not applied for a license and had not been charged with violating the licensing statute itself (which was not a criminal statute), he lacked standing to challenge the particulars of the licensing regime. Id., at 12–13, 543 P. 3d, at 444–445. Instead, he could argue only that the Second Amendment categorically forbids state licensing regimes. Because that is not the case, the court held, Hawaii’s prohibitions on unlicensed carry “do not graze Wilson’s Second Amendment right.”

Justice Thomas explained why this approach is mistaken:

A defendant can always raise unconstitutionality as a defense “where a statute is invalid upon its face and an attempt is made to enforce its penalties in violation of constitutional right.” Smith v. Cahoon, 283 U. S. 553, 562 (1931). A “long line of precedent” confirms this point. See, e.g., City of Lakewood v. Plain Dealer Publishing Co., 486 U. S. 750, 755–757 (1988) (collecting cases).

Even though Wilson was not being prosecuted for violating the civil registration law, the defendant could still challenge the government’s enforcement action based on the unconstitutionality of the gun control law.

Here, the Defendant does not need any sort of cause of action to raise the unconstitutionality of the statute. The Constitution is being used as a “shield.”

However, Justice Thomas does not say that “A defendant can always raise unconstitutionality,” full stop. It can always be raised as a “defense” or a “shield.” But for the Constitution to be raised as a “sword” to seek affirmative relief, a cause of action is needed. Justice Thomas recognized this principle in last term in DeVillier v. Texas:

Constitutional rights do not typically come with a built-in cause of action to allow for private enforcement in courts. See Egbert v. Boule, 596 U. S. 482, 490–491 (2022). Instead, constitutional rights are generally invoked defensively in cases arising under other sources of law, or asserted offensively pursuant to an independent cause of action designed for that purpose, see, e.g., 42 U. S. C. §1983. (slip op. at 5.)

Wilson should have been able to invoke the Second Amendment defensively, but could only assert it offensively with a cause of action.

Justice Thomas continues to bring clarity to an area of that is often misunderstood.

For those interested in reading further, Seth Barrett Tillman and I discuss the sword-shield dichotomy in Sweeping and Forcing (pp. 389–404); see also Anderson v. Griswold, Colo., 543 P.3d 283, 348, 351 & n.7, 356 (Colo. Dec. 19, 2023) (Samour, J., dissenting) (citing Sweeping and Forcing, supra) (adopting the sword-shield dichotomy as basis for dismissing plaintiffs’ purported Section 3 action).

Should We Get Ready For a NFA Amnesty?

For the past several weeks, President Trump has been very busy naming his cabinet appointments.  One that is still uncertain is his choice to become the new BATFE Director. The current director, Steven Dettelbach, is a clueless anti-gun buffoon who can’t give congressmen a straight answer.  Many American gun owners are hopeful that DJT will appoint 07/02 FFL holder, gun designer, and pro-gun pundit Brandon Herrera as the new Director.  If that happens, it will surely inspire some boisterous celebration. In addition to his vows to slash the ATF’s budget and operations, Herrera has also promised to begin a series of National Firearms Act (NFA) registration amnesty periods.  There was a provision for tax-free amnesty periods written into the Gun Control Act of 1968. But thusfar, just one 30-day amnesty was held, back in 1968.  That amnesty was very poorly publicized, and not many gun owners took advantage of it.

Today, there are probably hundreds of thousands of unregistered full autos in the country. And there are parts in civilian hands to quickly make a million or more. What can I say, but: Americans just love to tinker.

Under the Hughes Amendment to the Firearms Owners Protection Act (FOPA) of 1986, the number of Federally transferable machineguns was arbitrarily frozen.  As of November 2006, the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record (NFRTR) held registrations for 1,906,786 weapons. These included 1,186,138 destructive devices, 391,532 machine guns, 150,364 silencers, 95,699 short-barreled shotguns (SBSes), 33,518 short-barreled rifles (SBRs), and 48,443 weapons categorized as “any other weapons,” (AOWs.) Since then, the number of SBRs, SBSes, and suppressors has risen sharply, but the number of registered transferable machineguns has hardly changed at all.

Not only did the Hughes Amendment freeze cause the prices of full auto guns to inflate radically, it also left Americans with no opportunity to legally build and register any new $200 tax stamp machineguns. Many did so in defiance of the law, risking Federal felony prosecution. Most of those guns are kept very well hidden, mostly underground.

I am hopeful that Brandon Herrera will indeed become the new ATF Director.  And I am fully confident that he will keep his promise and consult with the new Attorney General to open at least one six-month-long amnesty period, with tax-free registration of machineguns, partly or fully-finished machinegun receivers, autosears, and other NFA-restricted items. Once that amnesty window opens, the clock will begin ticking.  So owners of semi-auto firearms who wish to become legal registered full-auto owners will have to get busy. They will need to either drill existing receivers or bring any unfinished receiver blanks or tubes up to a recognizable level of completion and apply serial numbers, so that they can be registered before the amnesty period expires.

Continue reading “”

FOIA Shows the Extent of ATF Monitoring Americans Through FBI’s NICS System

In April of 2021, AmmoLand News learned from a source inside the FBI that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) was using the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) to monitor Americans’ gun purchases.

These Americans were not prohibited people and were not guilty of any crime. Many of the subjects were not even suspected of a crime. The ATF monitored people for their associations and the feeling that the target might commit a crime in the future. The NICS monitoring program was open to all ATF agents and departments that wanted to monitor someone. The subjects of the surveillance were never notified by either the ATF or FBI.

After the story went public, the FBI admitted that the program did exist but spun it as a key tool for law enforcement to prevent straw purchases. Most privacy advocates pushed back and believed that it was an overreaching government hellbent on violating the gun buyers’ privacy. One unknown thing was the exact number of people the FBI was monitoring for the ATF.

Continue reading “”