BLUF
In the unlikely event Mexico’s case is not dismissed, President Sheinbaum would do well to remember that discovery in civil litigation in America goes both ways

Trump Designating Cartels Terrorists Isn’t ‘Worrisome’ To Lawful U.S. Gun Manufacturers

The assertion that U.S. firearm manufacturers ‘sell arms to criminals’ is a flat-out lie.

President Donald Trump’s State Department has officially designated several murderous drug cartels, including Tren de Aragua and MS-13, as foreign terrorist organizations. Bloomberg Opinion columnist Juan Pablo Spinetto labeled that decision “worrying” while attempting to argue against the president’s move.

Never mind the thousands of lives lost every year to drug cartel violence in both Mexico and the United States. Pay no attention to the more than 250,000 American deaths since 2018 from illegal drug use by fentanyl smuggled into the United States from Mexico across a virtually open Biden-era border. Disregard that after four years of woeful inaction by an American president barely at the steering wheel, the new Trump administration is following through with the campaign promises he made to the American people to protect them from such violence. Spinetto has other concerns.

While describing to readers why, in his determination, President Trump’s move forward to label Mexican narco-terrorist drug cartels as international terrorist organizations would be “worrisome,” Spinetto takes an uninformed and bogus potshot at the lawful and highly-regulated U.S. firearm industry.

“The proposal to treat cartels as terrorists … adds significant collateral risks: Anyone who has contacts with narcos, knowingly or not, could be accused of collaborating with terrorists, from avocado producers in Michoacán that pay to stay alive to the US gun industry that has been selling arms to criminals,” Spinetto writes. The assertion that U.S. firearm manufacturers “sell arms to criminals” is a flat-out lie.

Mexico, of course, has no Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for its citizens and the one and only firearm retailer in the country is in the heart of Mexico City, located on a military base. Firearms legally exported from the United States to the Mexican military have gone through rigorous and thorough end-to-end security checks, attempting to ensure that American-made guns do not fall into the hands of anyone else, especially the cartels.

After all, there are documented reports of Mexican soldiers defecting to work for narco-terrorist drug cartels, bringing with them over 150,000 firearms stolen from Mexican armories. Virtually all of the firearms used by the Mexican drug cartels, on the other hand, are illicitly possessed illegal arms unlawfully smuggled into Mexico by a network of drug cartels, through theft or straight-up government corruption. These facts are well known. Spinetto knows all of this too, of course, but the facts are inconvenient for his argument.

Continue reading “”

BLUF: (YAY!)
The departure of Hicks was bemoaned by anti-gun activist groups such as Brady who characterized the sacking as “chilling.”

30 Senators Tell ATF to Get With Trump 2A Agenda as Agency’s Top Lawyer Canned

A group of 30 Republican lawmakers on Thursday “strongly encouraged” the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives to begin scrapping Biden-era anti-gun rules.

In a five-page letter to ATF Deputy Director Marvin G. Richardson— who has been leading the agency since the recent departure of the bureau’s avowedly anti-gun Director Steve Dettelbach– the senators urged the regulator to align its policies with “President Trump’s Second Amendment priorities” as laid out in his recent Executive Order.

Specifically, the letter calls on ATF officials to work with Attorney General Pam Bondi to quickly identify and rescind policies that allow “unlawful firearms regulations” to include the agency’s “Engaged in the Business,” “Pistol Brace,” and “Ghost Gun” rules as well as its “Zero Tolerance” policy under which ATF has revoked the licenses of FFLs over minor bookkeeping violations.

The senators said, “We urge you to immediately align ATF’s rules and policies with the President’s strong support for the Second Amendment.”

Further, the GOP lawmakers took aim at the agency’s huge cache of decades-old gun dealer records, urging ATF to destroy the reportedly hundreds of millions of ATF Form 4473 firearm transaction forms and allow FFLs to also destroy such records over 20 years old. The Biden administration had issued a rule that such records had to be maintained forever, creating what many argue is the foundation of a backdoor gun registry.

Continue reading “”

Massachusetts vs. the Second Amendment

In Massachusetts, a legal battle is unfolding that should resonate with every conservative who values the sanctity of the Second Amendment. Escher v. Mason isn’t just about firearms; it’s a litmus test for how we view adulthood, responsibility, and constitutional rights in contemporary America.

The Massachusetts law in question, House Bill 4885, strips legal adults aged 18 to 20 of their right to purchase, possess, or carry semiautomatic firearms and handguns. This isn’t merely overreach; it’s a direct assault on the clear text of the Second Amendment, which does not discriminate by age among “the people.” If we are to take our Constitution seriously, we must defend the rights of all citizens, not just those deemed “mature enough” by the state’s paternalistic gaze.

At the heart of this legal challenge lies a fundamental conservative principle: the inviolability of individual rights. The Founders did not carve exceptions into the Second Amendment for age. They understood that freedom and responsibility go hand in hand, which is why 18-year-olds have been historically recognized as adults — capable of voting, joining the military, and, yes, bearing arms. The Militia Act of 1792, enacted shortly after the ratification of the Second Amendment, explicitly included 18-year-olds in the national defense, expecting them to be armed like their elders.

This historical precedent is not just a footnote but the bedrock upon which the plaintiffs in Escher v. Mason stand. They argue that there is no traditional basis for denying these rights to young adults. The Supreme Court’s decisions in Heller and Bruen have made it abundantly clear that firearms “in common use” are constitutionally protected. Semiautomatic firearms and handguns are the dominant tools of self-defense in modern America. To deny these to a segment of the adult population is not only anachronistic but egregiously unconstitutional.

Continue reading “”

Gun Ownership – Right Not Privilege

Democrats continue to pass laws infringing the uninfringeable right to  “keep and bear arms.” Count on that, as it happens over and over. Where does it end? From Maine to California, Democrat legislators and governors trample the rights of law-abiding gun owners. Thank God, for good judges.

Beyond the saving grace of sane, reasoned, reasoning, historically faithful Supreme Court justices, the federal bench is divided – in favor of Democrat appointees. While we hope political views are replaced by reading plain text and history after a lifetime appointment, that is not always true.

Luckily, judges exist with enormous integrity, understand their oath, no interest in being a legislator, governor, member of Congress, or president. They read the law, review history, and interpret. One such judge resides in Maine, Lance Walker. His recent 2nd Amendment decision is powerful.

Last August, Maine’s legislature – together with Maine’s Democrat governor – passed a bill that aimed, as so many Democrat bills do, to restrict gun rights. While not the constitutionally reprehensible “red flag law” – defeated by Republicans and citizen groups like AMAC – it was bad.

The law aimed to eclipse Second Amendment rights in Maine, specifically imposing a three-day waiting period for acquiring a firearm – on top of a background check. True, nine states and DC have waiting periods, and so far the US Supreme Court has not yet reviewed and repudiated them.

True, the US Supreme Court turned back challenges (in January ) to other Second Amendment restrictions, specifically by Maryland (waiting period, weapon style) and Rhode Island (magazine size). But the US Supreme Court is selective, as well as overwhelmed by cases on appeal.

Bottom line: The Maine federal district judge issued a preliminary injunction – blocking a transparent Democrat power grab. Finding: Plaintiffs are likely to prevail on merits, irreparable harm is likely for Mainers who need a firearm for self-defense, equities tip toward gun owners, and an injunction is in the public interest.

Maine Democrats, represented by Democrat Attorney General Aaron Frey, argued citizens may have a right to keep and bear arms, not to acquire them. The judge shredded that nonsense, noting no one can “keep and bear” without “acquiring.”

Nor does the Bill of Rights say your rights to speech, worship, gun ownership, or anything else kick in after 72 hours. If you interpreted the Bill of Rights that way, we would have “prior restraint” on speech, restrictions on when, where, and whether you can worship, and other nonsense.

Interestingly, Democrats are adept at finding ways to suspend rights and did so – as many Mainers will recollect – during COVID. Not only has “cancel culture” been afoot, but restrictions on gathering for prayer, which seem unthinkable, were pushed by Democrat lawmakers.

On guns, the recent ruling by Judge Walker makes clear a waiting period has no constitutional basis, offends the Constitution, and creates “indiscriminate dispossession” and “temporary disarmament.”

He continues, noting history does not support such restrictions, as there is “no suitable regulatory analog” to justify this limit on a right to keep and bear arms; it is not an “objective, narrow, or defined “ regulation. In short, this act is like “prior restraint,” indefensible and unconstitutional.

Interestingly, the Augusta, Maine Democrats – out of touch with their own State, like Maine’s Democrat Congressman Jared Golden who pushed for more gun control – argue waiting periods are justified by the Constitution notwithstanding, to stop the use of guns in suicides.

Perhaps surprisingly, I take things as they come, and think hard about what is right. I am a trained constitutional lawyer, litigated in multiple states, clerked on a US Court of Appeals for a Reagan appointee, and grew up with guns, from .22s to shotguns, was an NRA “safe hunter” at age 12.

I decided to look into suicides, not because that issue would cancel the US Constitution, but just to understand what was afoot. I learned more than I bargained for. Maine is – compliments of the Democrat lack of leadership – awash in mental health issues, drug addiction, and depression.

Much that should be right is wrong, businesses going bankrupt, taxes unsustainable, housing unaffordable, good jobs fleeing, education in collapse, families in distress, anxiety and suicide high.

But here is a fact no one talks about, further lying to Maine’s Democrats and their push to take away rights.  Nationally, the top five causes of suicide are poisoning, cutting, gassing, hanging, and drowning – then guns. Should we try to stop suicides? Yes.  Violate the US Constitution? No. ]

The recent ruling by Judge Walker, in Beckwith v. Frey, is solid jurisprudence. If leftist Democrats continue to go after Maine gun owners, they will find the US Supreme Court siding with Walker. Until then, maybe common sense is about to make a comeback. Guns are a right, not a privilege. Period.

Robert Charles is a former Assistant Secretary of State under Colin Powell, former Reagan and Bush 41 White House staffer, attorney, and naval intelligence officer (USNR).

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.

One of the painful signs of years of dumbed-down education is how many people are unable to make a coherent argument. They can vent their emotions, question other people’s motives, make bold assertions, repeat slogans– anything except reason.
– Thomas Sowell

Self Defense & A Long Life Is Yours, But Only If You Want It

“The stupid neither forgive, nor forget. The naive forgive, and forget. The wise forgive, but never forget!” ~ Thomas Szasz.

This response to my Quip of yesterday titled “Being A Warrior Is A Foreign Concept For Most Modern Jews” from a long-time Jewish friend and student:

“For one, I am in agreement with your comments of yesterday.
Yet, the majority in the Jewish Community (at least the part of it with which I am familiar) will blatantly ignore your advice.
Why?

Despite recent history being reason-aplenty for unilateral armed self-protection, the majority of Jews I know immediately ‘push-back’ when the subject of guns, and lethal-force inherent to them, comes up.

Even when I bring up the subject discretely in casual conversation, the response is usually, ‘Oh no! I would never have a gun in my house,’ or the boringly classic ‘Guns are dangerous!’

I conclude there is no point in continuing the discussion!
‘Ignorance is Bliss,’ but it is fatal bliss, as we’ve seen so often!

Yes, I’m frustrated.”

My reply:

My dear friend,
The absolute refusal to face facts that you describe is frustrating indeed, but it is hardly confined to the Jewish Community!

Naive, soft-headed liberals are everywhere, many among Christians, even atheists.

Enlightenment and subsequent delivery from dangerous stupidity require sincere repentance, and the smug of all flavors is just incapable of it.

They would rather die than admit they’re wrong, even when it’s obvious

Unhappily, many will get the martyrdom they think they want!

Of course, they’ll sheepishly ‘change their minds’ at the last minute when they’re staring death in the face, but by then, it will be too late!

History does not deal kindly with arrogant, self-deceiving fools, no matter their religion, as we’ve witnessed over and over!

“Taking the law into your own hands?’

The law IS in our hands!

‘Law enforcement’ is not something sovereign citizens seize from police officers. It is a societal function that citizens delegate to civil police. In doing so, we do not abdicate our own sovereignty nor our duties as citizens. The ultimate responsibility is still ours. When people we hire as police are either unwilling or unable to perform that function at the critical moment, there is no law or standard that says we cannot perform it for ourselves.

Indeed, when personally threatened, we have no choice!

/John

GOP Lawmakers Introduce Bills to Make North Carolina 30th Constitutional Carry State

Republican lawmakers have introduced legislation to make North Carolina the 30th constitutional carry state in the union.

The Daily Tar Heel reported that both bills–HB 5 and SB 50–“would allow U.S. citizens with no felonies and no mental illness-related charges, over the age of 18, to conceal carry a weapon.”

The House bill also contains language that would “allow elected officials to conceal carry weapons in legislative buildings and offices in Raleigh.”

It is interesting to note that at least one NC state Senator who opposed constitutional carry during the 2023-24 session is a sponsor on the carry legislation now.

South Carolina became the 29th constitutional carry state on March 7, 2024, just two days after Gov. Jeff Landry (R-LA) signed legislation making Louisiana the 28th constitutional carry state.