
You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life. – Winston Churchill
October 12, 2025

Newsom Signs Glock Ban Bill Into Law
California Gov. Gavin Newsom has been calling himself a Second Amendment supporter for several months now, but if anyone had any doubts about his lack of sincerity those can now be put to rest. On Friday afternoon the governor signed AB 1127 into law, which will outlaw the sale of Glock handguns in the state starting in January.
In addition to AB 1127, Newsom also signed legislation that will require sales of gun barrels to go through an FFL and a background check, as well as AB 1078, which replaces California’s “1-in-30” handgun rationing law (which is already on hold thanks to a lawsuit) with a “3-in-30” law. The bill, however, states that California will return to its previous one-gun-a-month scheme if it’s ultimately upheld by the courts.
As you can imagine, gun control activists are thrilled to see California become the first state in the nation to outlaw the sale of some of the most popular pistols in the country, and they’ll be making a major push for other blue states to adopt similar bans in the months ahead. From Everytown for Gun Safety:
“We applaud Governor Newsom and state lawmakers for putting California at the forefront of the fight against DIY machine guns, which are just as scary as they sound,” said John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety. “It speaks volumes about the gun industry’s fixation on profits that only a new law can force it to take the most basic steps to prevent mass carnage.”
“Governor Newsom, state lawmakers, and California volunteers continue to prove that the days of putting gun industry profits over our lives are long gone,” said Angela Ferrell-Zabala, executive director of Moms Demand Action. “DIY machine guns should never have had a pathway onto our streets, and today, we’re taking a big step to get them out of our communities. Our movement will keep fighting to hold reckless gun manufacturers accountable — because they shouldn’t get to profit off our tragedies.”
AB 1127 theoretically allows for Glock to change the design of its Gen 3 model to block the installation of illegal switches, but even if the company could take that step CalDOJ would view the redesigned pistol as a new firearm subject to the state’s handgun roster, and it would be rejected due to a lack of a magazine disconnect feature. That’s the reason why newer Glock models haven’t been approved for sale in California, though the Gen 3 was previously grandfathered in to the roster.
The NRA is already vowing to sue Newsom over the ban.
My guess is most of the other national Second Amendment groups will soon be filing suit as well, and we’ll probably see a coalition or two combining forces to take on the new laws.
So far there’s been no word from Glock on the new legislation, which is part of a broader effort to prohibit the sale of the popular handguns. The cities of Chicago, Baltimore, and Seattle are also suing the company, claiming the gunmaker is willfully allowing the illegal conversion of their pistols into full-auto machine guns through the installation of illegal switches. New York also has a similar Glock ban bill pending in the legislature, and now that Newsom has signed AB 1127 into law that could start moving as well.
The gun control lobby can’t ban handguns outright, so their new strategy is to go after the most popular pistols on a piecemeal basis. In the short term, Glock sales will likely skyrocket in California, but unless AB 1127 is stayed via an injunction those sales will come to a screeching halt once the new law takes full effect.
The Second Amendment Holds More Weight Than ‘Uncle Dick’s Deer Stand’
In a Senate Judiciary Committee Oversight Hearing this week, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi faced questions regarding her leadership of the Justice Department.
But at the hearing, U.S. Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) used her time questioning the nation’s top law enforcement official to repeat her canned comment about her ‘Uncle Dick’s deer stand’ when reiterating her support for legislation that would infringe upon citizens’ Second Amendment rights by banning popularly-owned firearms.
Stop us if you’ve heard this one before.
Illogical Reasoning, Rinsed and Repeated
Opening her time on the microphone, Sen. Klobuchar set the scene for an attack on our right to keep and bear arms. Addressing AG Bondi, Sen. Klobuchar got to her point.
“In 2018, after the Parkland shooting, you were attorney general and there was a bill called the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Act and the bill banned bump stocks and enacted red flag laws and raised the minimum age to purchase a firearm in Florida from 18 to 21 and you actually defended the law in court from a challenge from the NRA and we know that I’m in favor of an assault weapon ban. Period,” she said.
“I look at these bills, and I think ‘Does this hurt my Uncle Dick and the deer stand?’ – we have a proud tradition of hunting in Minnesota – I don’t think they do,” Sen. Klobuchar suggested.
Sen. Klobuchar has referenced her Uncle Dick numerous times when discussing her belief that Modern Sporting Rifles (MSRs) can and should be banned.
Since she brought it up, though, NSSF views gun control bills through the lens and with the knowledge that our Founding Fathers didn’t add the Second Amendment to the Constitution in response to a rogue deer herd. They added it as a guarantee that law-abiding Americans had the Constitutional right and means to keep and bear arms to keep a new government in check.
Mislabels and Misinformation
Another key point to address is the term ‘assault rifle,’ which has been attributed to Adolf Hitler after he referred to the MP 43 (Maschinenpistole) by the German word Sturmgewehr – “assault rifle” in English. That the firearm, which became known as the Sturmgewehr 44, features an intermediate cartridge, controllable automatic fire, and a higher rate of fire, is not an accurate comparison to the MSRs of today.
Here in the United States, the term ‘assault weapon’ didn’t even exist in the lexicon of firearms before 1989. In 1988, anti-gun activist Josh Sugarmann, who was the communications director for the National Coalition to Ban Handguns, recommended that gun-control groups use public ignorance and fear to ban everything they can stuff into the phrase “assault weapon.”
Sugarman wrote, “Assault weapons … are a new topic. The weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons—anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun—can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons…. Efforts to restrict assault weapons are more likely to succeed than those to restrict handguns.”
In the past several years, though, Americans have purchased Modern Sporting Rifles (MSRs) by the millions and are becoming more aware of the firearm’s functionality and operation. They aren’t buying the lies repeated by gun control groups and their elected allies who seek to ban the popular firearm.
In fact, firearm industry data has shown over the past few years while law-abiding Americans purchased firearms at a blistering pace, the MSR was a popular choice, including among first-time gun owners. Since 1990, there are more than 30 million MSRs in circulation today. That includes more than 4.5 million in the last three years alone. That makes the MSR more popular and commonly-owned today than there are Ford F-150 pickup trucks on the road.
I wonder if Uncle Dick drives an F-150?
The Cold Hard Truth
Unfortunately for Sen. Klobuchar and her gun control allies, America has already experimented with a ban, and facts overwhelmingly prove the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban did not reduce crime.
“These are just incredibly popular firearms… they are commonly owned, commonly used,” said political economist and assistant professor William English of Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business. “At the end of the day, it is a rifle that I think is very easy to shoot, it’s very easy to control, not a lot of recoil.”
“So, it’s a good gun,” English added, when speaking with Washington Examiner’s Paul Bedard. “And to see it become widely owned, I suppose, makes sense in that context.”
Clearly, We the People agree. Sen. Klobuchar should take note.
A Handgun is No Longer Enough: The Evolving Standard for Armed Self-Defense
The Sovereign Citizen and the Imminent Threat
The right enshrined in the Second Amendment was not a mere allowance for hunting or personal security; it was a profound constitutional imperative designed to ensure the survival of the republic.
As Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story stated, the right to keep and bear arms “has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers.” Furthermore, James Madison argued that an armed citizenry, trained and ready, is “the best and most natural defense of a free country.” Their intent was clear: a free state is secured by a citizenry that is equipped to defend itself against the three distinct threats of tyranny, foreign invasion, and domestic unrest.
Today, this core mandate remains profoundly true, especially in the face of alarming official warnings. The National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) recently issued a sobering advisory that the U.S.-designated terrorist group Al-Qaida and its Yemen-based affiliate (AQAP) remain intent on striking America. This is not a theoretical threat; it is a live intelligence concern.
READ MORE: US National Counterterrorism Center warns of threat from al Qaeda
This reality has been sharply articulated by law enforcement leaders. My local Butler County, Ohio, Sheriff Richard K. Jones, reflecting on warnings from the FBI regarding imminent terrorist threats, stated, “The terrorists are here… it is just a matter of time before they attack. The national government can’t take care of it all. There are more local police than the FBI. It all comes down to preparing for it.” To meet this level of threat, preparation must surpass outdated standards.
Deadly stabbing at Southgate Kroger ruled self-defense, prosecutors say
A deadly stabbing at a Southgate Kroger on Oct. 7 resulted in the death of 23-year-old Ramon Vazquez after an altercation with 33-year-old Charles Hinton. Vazquez attacked Hinton, who then stabbed Vazquez twice in self-defense, according to prosecutors. Hinton will not be charged for the stabbing but faces charges for carrying a concealed weapon, as he illegally possessed the knife used in the incident. Hinton is set to be arraigned on Oct. 11.

October 11, 2025
In my opinion, those in the California justice system who had anything to do even tangentially with this should all be prosecuted as accessories and charged under the felony murder rule. I will be generous though, and just for them, allow them to be sentenced to life without parole. The killer though better get the death penalty.
California Ignores Detainer and Releases Serial Criminal Illegal Alien; He Kills 6
A serial criminal removed from the United States multiple times for being an illegal alien and arrested for multiple offenses, including drunk driving, was released last year by the state of California despite a federal detainer. He subsequently murdered six people.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) finally caught up with Beto Cerillo-Bialva in September, but the illegal alien had had numerous encounters with law enforcement before. Unfortunately, however, the legal apparatus simply did not insist on holding him for his crimes, at least in sanctuary-state California.
“This serial criminal killed six innocent souls. Governor Newsom has blood on his hands. This serial criminal should have never been released by California authorities,” mourned Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin in a DHS press release. “Sanctuary policies protect the WORST OF THE WORST criminal illegal aliens. ICE will do everything in our power to remove this serial drunk driver, abuser, and drug user from our country.”
In 2024, Cerillo-Bialva was arrested for the third time for driving under the influence, but Gavin Newsom‘s California released him. As noted above, he subsequently killed half a dozen people in a drunk driving incident.
Cerillo-Bialva has been removed from the United States seven times—a felony—and maintains an extensive criminal history including possession of cocaine, three DUIs, driving without a license, and violating a court ordered restraining order for domestic abuse.
This news about Cerillo-Bialva comes just after the announcement that the illegal alien who killed University of South Carolina Student Nate Baker this year in a hit-and-run drunk driving accident was sentenced to only a year in jail.
McLaughlin emphasized how outrageous is the miscarriage of justice: “21-year-old USC student Nathaniel ‘Nate’ Baker was driving a motorcycle when he was hit by a truck driver who fled the scene. The hit-and-run driver, Rosali Isaac Fernandez-Cruz, was in our country illegally and received just 1 year in prison for taking Nate’s precious life. ICE lodged a detainer to ensure as soon as this killer completes his one-year prison sentence that ICE is notified to arrest him and get him OUT of our country.”
Too much of our so-called justice system is now rigged in favor of the worst criminals and against the victims. McLaughlin deplored the series of terrible decisions by authorities that led up to the deadly crash: “Nate was a 21-year-old college student with his whole life in front of him. This monster should never have been in our country and has had a final order of removal since 2018.”
But in all those years, the illegal alien Rosali I. Fernandez-Cruz was not removed, so he was still present in the United States to kill a wonderful young American man. How many Americans have been robbed, raped, assaulted, or killed by illegal aliens who should never have been allowed here in the first place, and many of whom were even previously ordered deported?
The Democrat Party has left a trail of corpses in its wake.
Wait. You mean all it took was for the president to say he'd send in the national guard if the local and state police didn't do their jobs for the state and local police to do their jobs? https://t.co/d0U0M6iV98
— RBe (@RBPundit) October 10, 2025
Working with high explosives is always hazardous
Prayers for the living and the dead.
Multiple people dead, at least 13 missing after bomb factory explosion in Tennessee.

Multiple people were killed and at least 13 remain unaccounted for following a “devastating blast” at a Tennessee bomb factory Friday morning, according to officials.
The massive explosion was reported around 7:45 a.m. local time at the Accurate Energetic Systems plant at the Hickman-Humphreys County line, west of Nashville.
Humphreys County Sheriff Chris Davis confirmed to reporters there were “some” fatalities and that there are people still missing, but did not provide numbers
At least 13 people are missing after a major explosion at a Tennessee bomb factory Friday morning.
The blast impacted “one whole building” of the property, he said. The factory is located miles away from any residences and businesses.
“We’re trying to take as much time as is needed right now. We’re prioritizing people that are involved, their families and trying to be very compassionate toward them,” he said.
At least 13 people remain unaccounted for, Hickman County Mayor Jim Bates told ABC News.
Nineteen employees were inside the building at the time, and every one remains unaccounted for, Humphreys County EMA Director Odell Poyner told WKRN.
Officials said the main concern at this time is the possibility of a secondary explosion.
Security footage from a residence 21 miles away captured the moment a single deafening “boom” can be heard echoing through the area that was strong enough to shake the ground and the camera, according to News Channel 5.
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives [ATF] has been called to the scene.
Authorities have requested people avoid the area and investigators are expected to be on site for several days, officials said.
NRA-Backed Plaintiffs Seek Full 3rd Circuit Review of New Jersey’s Sweeping Gun Permit Restrictions
Trenton, NJ – The National Rifle Association announced that plaintiffs in Siegel v. Platkin have filed a petition for rehearing en banc before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, asking the full court to overturn a panel decision that upheld large portions of New Jersey’s post-Bruen carry law.
The challenge—brought by the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs and seven individual plaintiffs—targets the state’s near-total list of “sensitive places” and its requirement that applicants for a carry permit produce written references from four “reputable” non-relatives.
Background: From Bruen to Trenton’s Response
After the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in NYSRPA v. Bruen affirmed the right of law-abiding citizens to carry a handgun for self-defense, Governor Phil Murphy condemned the ruling as “dreadful” and promised to take “actions” to limit its impact. The legislature quickly passed Chapter 131, a sweeping law that made it a crime to carry in 26 broad categories and 115 subcategories of locations—ranging from beaches and parks to museums, bars, and even libraries.
The law also imposed new hurdles for permit holders: a $50 “victims-fund” tax, a $150 application fee, a $300,000 mandatory insurance requirement, and the four-reference rule that forces applicants to find non-relatives willing to vouch for their “reputation.”
No charges filed after shooting leaves one dead in Buncombe County
No charges will be filed after a shooting left one person dead in Buncombe County, North Carolina, on Wednesday.
Around 6 p.m., deputies with the Buncombe County Sheriff’s Office responded to a domestic disturbance call at a home on Kreston Drive in the Bear Creek community.
When deputies arrived, they found 55-year-old William Jennings Bryan Clay III dead.
According to authorities, it was determined that deadly force was used in self-defense and in self-defense of others within the home.
“This case highlights how the dedication of BCSO personnel to impartial fact finding empowers those who act lawfully in self-defense,” Captain Chris Stockton said. “This incident has forever changed the lives of several community members. Again, our hearts go out to them as they navigate this complex time.”
No other information has been released.
Second Amendment Foundation Challenges Constitutionality of National Firearms Act
The Second Amendment Foundation has filed a new lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the National Firearms Act.
The groups Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, FPC Action Foundation, Texas Rifle Association, Hot Shots Custom and three people: John Jensen, Jeremy Neusch, and David Lynn Smith filed the lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas.
Since 1934, the NFA required anyone who wished to purchase a silencer, short-barreled rifle, short-barreled shotgun or “Any Other Weapon” to pay a $200 tax and register the firearm with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
The One Big Beautiful Bill removed the tax on these arms but kept the registration requirement.
The newly filed suit seeks to completely remove the affected arms from the NFA, eliminating the remaining registration requirements for gun silencers, short-barreled rifles, or barreled shotguns.
“With the tax now set to $0, the remaining registration requirements for these arms under the NFA have no constitutional basis,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “Completely removing them from the NFA is now a must, and this suit aims to eradicate the barriers to the exercise of the Second Amendment. SAF is already a plaintiff in its own lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of these elements of the NFA, and now our sister organization the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is joining the fight as a plaintiff with our financial backing in this companion case.”

“Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God.” – Thomas Jefferson
October 10, 2025
CZ and Colt Canada taking part in Canadian Gun Confiscations?
