The Future of Handguns: Did We Peak?

Tamara Keel

futureside.jpg

Though not definitive, this timeline gives you the approximate years patented and/or successful handguns of the type shown gained market share. The span of time since the Glock G17 was introduced is not unprecedented.

In the early 1990s, following the fall of the Soviet Union, Francis Fukuyama wrote the book “The End of History and the Last Man,” speculating that human society had reached its ultimate political form in liberal Western democracies. As we have seen in the decades since, that may not be true.

What does this have to do with handguns? Well, I’m not really an old-timer, but I can remember when I was a teenager, most police officers still carried revolvers (the old-timers among the gunwriting ranks remember being issued wheelguns). In the years since then, we’ve seen the rise and fall of the traditional double-action pistol as an issue sidearm, as well as a roughly decade-long flirtation with alternate calibers like .40 S&W and .357 SIG.

For the last 10 years or so, though, the standard answer to the “What pistol?” question has been a polymer-frame, striker-fired, double-stack pistol chambered in 9 mm. The temptation is definitely there to think of writing “The End of History and the Last Pistol.” But how did we get here, and what could be next?

For the reasons behind the pistol type itself, it comes down to simple cost. There’s nothing more modern about a striker over a hammer. John Moses Browning’s first semi-automatic pistol, the FN Model 1899, was striker-fired. It’s not intrinsically superior mechanically, either. In fact, it has a few downsides. A hammer generally gets better ignition reliability, and a hammer allows the use of lighter recoil springs since the force required to override the hammer provides much of the initial braking force to the recoiling slide.

The striker’s big advantage is simplicity, which translates to a less-expensive gun. There’s just no way to produce a hammer-fired ignition system as cheaply as a striker-fired one. Similarly, there’s just no way to chisel a frame out of steel or aluminum as cheaply as one can injection-mold one out of polymer. When it comes to the real world of accountants and budgets, the cheap gun that works just fine is going to displace the more-expensive gun that also works just fine.

With ammunition, a similar effect has taken place. With the current school of thought in terminal ballistics, the goal is a bullet that will penetrate 12 to 16 inches, but preferably no more. With most all service calibers delivering this level of performance, it’s probably not a surprise that the cheapest, easiest to shoot one—the one that’s easiest on the gun and which you can cram the most of into a magazine—has emerged as the near-universal choice.

So, what does this mean for the future of duty-type pistols? Is it just an unbroken vista of striker-fired, flat- black plastic and 9 mm bullets? An horizon of Glock G19s, Smith M&P9s and SIG P320s forevermore, at least until someone invents the laser pistol?

It’s hard to imagine something causing a trend back to more-expensive handguns, at least for duty-type use. These days people are just as often “churching up” Glocks or other polymer, striker guns with Zev or Grayguns or Boresight Solutions aftermarket work. Unless there’s a high-profile development that causes a turning away from the easy-to-shoot striker trigger, it seems rather unlikely to be replaced.

The same with the 9 mm cartridge. Ballistically, you could probably get the same results with a 100- to 115-grain bullet of about .312 inch, loaded hot. It’d basically be a rimless .327 Fed. Mag., with no more recoil in a full-size, semi-automatic pistol. You’d get even more rounds in the magazine than with 9 mm, albeit at the expense of increased muzzle blast. But there’s no real incentive to do so when so much of the attractiveness of 9 mm is its ubiquity and low cost.

For the near future though, it looks like the advances will be in peripherals: Better integration of red-dot optics, lights and lasers. There will also be applications for the serialized interchangeable chassis-type lockwork such as that found in the P320 that we haven’t yet explored. So, while we haven’t reached the “end of history” with the current crop of service-style autos, we’ve certainly hit a good, long pause.

The Perversity of Citing The Black Codes To Defend Gun-Control Laws.

Neal Katyal and Justice Jackson were placed in the uncomfortable spot of having to explain why racist legislation to disarm the freedman was actually relevant.

One of the most bizarre aspects of modern Second Amendment litigation is how supporters of gun control are forced to favorably cite Jim Crow laws. In all other contexts, these sort of anti-canonical statutes would be untouchable. Yet, when it comes to guns, all the usual rules go out the window. In Wolford v. Lopez, one of the leading authorities for Hawaii’s law is an 1865 Louisiana statute. Neal Katyal described it as a “dead ringer” for the Hawaii statute.

During the oral argument, Justice Gorsuch was incredulous that Hawaii was relying on this shameful precedent. He asked Wolford’s counsel if it was appropriate to rely on such a law to inform the nation’s traditions.

Continue reading “”

Bradenton man shoots kidnapper dead for trying to abduct his wife, detectives say

BRADENTON, Fla. (WFLA) — A Bradenton man fended off a kidnapper who tried to abduct his wife on New Year’s Day, deputies said.

According to the Manatee County Sheriff’s Office, Nicholas Palomo, a 36-year-old felon who had previously gone to prison for kidnapping and other crimes, attempted to abduct a woman who was walking her dog in the area of 18th Place East in Bradenton.

The woman managed to escape Palomo by running from his car and made it to her home and warned her husband about what happened.

Detectives said the husband went outside and confronted Palomo who behaved “in a threatening manner” toward the couple. When Palomo began approaching the victim’s husband, the husband shot him a single time in the driveway.

The sheriff’s office said the whole ordeal occurred within a matter of minutes.

A booking photo of Nicholas Palomo from 2023 (Photo provided by Manatee County Sheriff’s Office)

Deputies responded to the shooting at 12:27 a.m., and despite efforts to save him, Palomo died at the scene.

After collecting further evidence in the shooting, investigators determined that Palomo did not know the couple, classifying the shooting as a “random incident.”

Detectives also found that Palomo previously caused a disturbance at a Circle K before the shooting. It is believed he may have been under the influence of narcotics.

An autopsy found Palomo died of a single gunshot to the chest, and toxicology testing is being done to determine what drugs were in his system at the time.

As such, the State Attorney’s Office classified the shooting as self-defense, justifying the homeowner’s actions.

RESPONSE BRIEF FILED IN SAF’S SECOND NFA CHALLENGE

BELLEVUE, Wash. — Jan. 21, 2026 — The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and its partners have filed a response brief in the second of the organization’s two lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the National Firearms Act (NFA) registration scheme.

Filed with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, the brief voices the organization’s opposition to the Government’s motion for summary judgment in Brown v. ATF.

Until President Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the NFA established a $200 tax and registration regime on certain classes of firearms including silencers, short-barreled firearms and “any other weapons” (AOWs), drawing from Congressional authority to levy taxes. SAF and its partners filed lawsuits challenging the remaining registration requirements because without the tax, Congress’ reliance on their taxing authority is no longer justifiable.

“The passage of the Big Beautiful Bill kicked the already questionable constitutional authority for the NFA right out from under the ATF,” said SAF Director of Legal Operations Bill Sack. “With its actual purported authority now eliminated, the government has resorted to borrowing taxation authority from elsewhere in the statute, or entirely different constitutional authority rarely asserted to justify the NFA. Today’s brief explains exactly why neither tactic is persuasive.”

SAF is joined in Brown v. ATF by the American Suppressor Association, National Rifle Association, Firearms Policy Coalition, Prime Protection STL Tactical Boutique and two private citizens.

“For the second time this week SAF and its partners have filed opposition briefs in response to the government’s insistence on defending the NFA,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “We’re better situated now than we have been in almost 90 years to relegate significant chunks of the unconstitutional NFA to the dustbin of history. Today’s brief is a major step toward that goal.”

If you look at every issue in this country, every issue I believe traces back to this fact: On the one hand, the elites in the ruling class in this country are robbing us blind, and on the other, if you dare complain about it, you are a bad person.
– J.D. VANCE

Glenn Beck

I said I would give Pam Bondi a year to prove herself as an Attorney General who would dismantle the Deep State, let Americans see the truth, and finally bring to justice the criminal elites who have been “too big to jail.”

Today, that year is up, and I haven’t seen evidence that she has done ANY of that.

Bondi’s handling of the Epstein case was one of the worst fumbles I have ever seen. But we all remember that.

What about the lack of prosecution against anyone who tried to weaponize the justice system against political opponents like Trump?

Or the failure to prosecute the perpetrators of the Russiagate hoax like Clapper and Comey? That’s not weaponization. We’ve had the EVIDENCE for years that they lied and colluded with the press!

Where are the prosecutions related to the Mar-a-Lago raid? We keep finding out that it was even WORSE than we were told, but NOTHING has happened yet?

Can we get an update on any George Soros investigations? Why has it taken so long to go after him?

Or how about investigating the Clintons for NON-Epstein related scandals: Gazprom? Uranium One? Benghazi? Hillary’s email server? Claims of fraud in Haiti? Anything the Clinton Foundation has touched?!

How about the failure to drain the Swamp of Deep State actors working against the American people and their elected officials?

Or the PROVEN lies from Capitol Police about Jan. 6?
Or the FBI’s lies about the number of agents in the crowd?
Or investigations into possible 2020 election fraud?
Or follow-up on DOGE’s fraud findings?

Sure, the DOJ is looking into the Somali fraudsters. But what about everyone in the banks, state government, and federal offices that HAD TO have known about the fraud?!

What about Biden’s autopen scandal? Who signed off on everything if it wasn’t Biden?

And the Biden administration was FULL of government weaponization worth prosecuting: the COVID lockdowns and vaccine mandates, the unjust FACE Act arrests, everything the Twitter Files exposed. Where is a SINGLE arrest?

And speaking of COVID, what about investigations into AMERICA’S role in creating the virus and covering up its true origins? And dare I mention Fauci?

To be fair, I understand that you can’t just rush to prosecute cases as massive as Epstein, Russiagate and COVID. It takes years if you want to do that right. We’re not looking for show trials. But all I’ve seen so far is hearing after hearing with NO results.

Maybe there’s a reason for that. But – and I believe this alone is enough to FIRE her – Bondi has failed to communicate any of this to the American people. We want results. But even more so, we want the HONEST TRUTH.