She Used to HATE Guns, Now She’s Getting Her Rhode Island Concealed Carry Permit.

As you may be aware, this is National Shooting Sports Month. Yes, that means you should get your ass away from your screen and out to a range somewhere and shoot a gun. Or two. Or more. This month is also an ideal time to take someone who’d new to shooting with you. Teach them the four rules. Get them started the right way. Then watch the smile on their face the first time they pull the trigger. The more shooters and gun owners we have, the easier it is to defend and extend our Second Amendment rights.

If you need help in convincing that noob you know to go out to the range with you, this video from YouTuber Gothix is a great tool for doing just that. Gothix — AKA Vanessa Rosa — is relatively new to guns and the whole shooting thing. But over the last couple of years since getting started, she’s come a long way.

And she’s done it in the deep blue gun rights hell that is Rhode Island. In fact, she’s now the Rhode Island state director for Women for Gun Rights. Watch the video and listen to hurdles she has to clear in order to buy a gun, ammo, and then, finally, take the test for her concealed carry permit in her benighted little state. If she can do it where she lives, so can you. And so can the person you’ve been trying to convince to go to the range with you.

“Becoming Mainstream” ?

(The left has always been inherently violent)

Violence Against Political Opponents Is Becoming Mainstream on the Left. Here’s (More) Proof:

The idea of doing violence to one’s political opponents has become mainstream on the left. Don’t believe me? Consider the case of one Iman Abdul, a 27-year-old woman who has worked on the campaigns of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-Swizzle Stick) and New York state Sen. Julia Salazar (D-Of Course). Abdul has just been arrested for calling for an attack on a high school because a large number of Jewish students go to it.

Now, there’s no doubt whatsoever that AOC and Salazar would roundly condemn Abdul’s call. Why, there’s just no question of that at all! And yet Iman Abdul is only the latest of many leftists to call for or justify violence against people they fear and hate. Some of these include the Cultural Revolution’s top leaders in the United States.

“Never before in my life have I called for mass protests, for mobilization, for disruption — but I am now,” said far-left Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker back in April. “These Republicans cannot know a moment of peace.” That was after Rep. Kweisi Mfume (D-Victimhood) said in February: “This will be a congressional fight, a constitutional fight, a legal fight, and on days like this a street fight, yes we will stand.” And that was not long after House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-Hey, I’m a Victim Too) said this of the “extreme MAGA Republican agenda”: “We are going to fight it legislatively. We are going to fight it in the courts. We’re going to fight it in the streets.”

Before them, it was Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, and Kamala Harris inciting leftist violence. And let’s not forget Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-Grillmaster) saying in 2020, when condemning the pro-life leanings of Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh: “I want to tell you, Gorsuch; I want to tell you, Kavanaugh: You have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price.”

Leftists outside of politics joined in the fun as well: remember, to take just a few of many available examples, Kathy Griffin holding Trump’s bloody severed head, or Madonna saying she wanted to blow up the White House, or Robert DeNiro bellowing that he wanted to punch Trump in the face.

In light of all that (and there is much more), Iman Abdul looks positively mainstream. On Thursday, according to the New York Post, she posted on her Instagram account, which has 25,000 followers, a screenshot from Google Maps, pointing out the exact location of Leon M. Goldstein High School for the Sciences in the Manhattan Beach section of Brooklyn.

Abdul added this caption to the map: “If anyone needs a public school in NYC to attack for whatever reason … Lexus driving Israhell [sic] loving Zionisits [sic] all attend here. They’ve all gone on ‘Birthright,’” which is a program that enables Jewish youth to visit Israel.

The Post noted that “the NYPD arrested Abdul at her Brooklyn home on Friday, charging her with making a terroristic threat, acting in a manner injurious to a child, aggravated harassment, and making a threat of mass harm.”

That was good, but Abdul is unrepentant, writing to the watchdog group StopAntisemitism: (grammar as in the original) “i never called for an attack on the school in the sense of mass organization or not even individual people attacking individuals, that’s literally stupid , i called for an attack on the school, the Zionist institution funded by our public dollars in which by design most Zionists attend. We have every right to verbally attack the school, especially regarding our previous experiences as brown/black people in that horrific space.”

Yeah, that’s right, she played the racism card and the victim card. Clearly we’re dealing with a highly trained, experienced leftist activist. Yet troubling questions remain. After all, Abdul’s old boss, the winsome and wise AOC herself, wrote this back in May when a man screaming “Free Palestine” murdered two Israeli Embassy workers in Washington: “Absolutely nothing justifies the murder of innocents. I am devastated by the killing of two people outside an @AJCGlobal event here in Washington. Our prayers are with the victims, families, and loved ones of all impacted. As we await more details, we must be clear that hatred has no home here. Antisemitism is a threat to all we hold dear as a society. It must be confronted and rooted out everywhere.”

Even on your own staff, AOC?

Oh, That’s Why Democrats Don’t Want a New Census

On Thursday President Donald Trump directed the U.S. Commerce Department to conduct a new population count without illegal aliens.

“I have instructed our Department of Commerce to immediately begin work on a new and highly accurate CENSUS based on modern day facts and figures and, importantly, using the results and information gained from the Presidential Election of 2024. People who are in our Country illegally WILL NOT BE COUNTED IN THE CENSUS. Thank you for your attention to this

The directive sent Democrats into a meltdown and thanks to White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, we know why.

Without illegal aliens counted in the U.S. Census, which determines congressional representation in Washington D.C., Democrats would be in the minority.

“They stole 20 or 30 House seats by counting illegal aliens in the census, and now you have Democrats talking about, ‘Oh, Republicans can’t change their congressional maps!’ You have literally brought invaders into this country by the tens of millions to RIG the results of the census, and the apportionment of congressional seats!” Miller says. “And then on top of that, of course, you have a situation where even though Republicans won a landslide in the House popular vote, Democrats have so thoroughly rigged and gerrymandered and manipulated their districts beyond all recognition that Republicans only gained a 4-seat majority, despite winning a much smaller majority in the popular vote in 2010 and getting 63 seats.”

Not only did the 2020 census count illegal aliens (like previous counts) – but it was wildly inaccurate – conveniently benefiting Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives.

In a shocking report that has not received the attention it deserves, the U.S. Census Bureau recently admitted that its 2020 Census count of the American population was incorrect in at least 14 states.

And those mistakes were costly to certain states in terms of congressional representation, number of electors, and money those states are likely to receive from the federal government during the next decade. To put the scope of these mistakes into perspective, contrast the errors in the Census Bureau’s latest recount (the 2020 Post-Enumeration Survey, or PES) with the recount from a decade ago (the 2010 Post-Enumeration Survey)—in which there was a net overcount of a mere 0.01 percent (36,000 people), a statistically insignificant error.

As explained below, as a result of these errors, Florida did not receive two additional congressional seats and Texas did not receive one more congressional seat. Meanwhile, two other states, Minnesota and Rhode Island, each retained a congressional seat that they should have lost, and Colorado gained a new seat to which it was rightfully not entitled.

Gun-Free Zones Like Fort Stewart Invite Mass Shootings

On Wednesday, another mass shooting unfolded — this time at Fort Stewart military base in Georgia. A male Army sergeant, who illegally carried a gun on the base, wounded five soldiers before others tackled and disarmed him.

Typically, only authorized designated security forces such as MPs are armed on duty. Any other soldier caught carrying a firearm faces severe consequences, ranging from a rank reduction, court-martial, potential criminal convictions, dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of pay, and even imprisonment.

So why would a soldier risk such harsh penalties? Because if you’re the attacker, planning to murder fellow soldiers, gun control laws won’t stop you. If you expect to die in the assault, as most mass public shooters do, extra years added to your sentence mean nothing. Even if you survive, you already anticipate multiple life sentences or the death penalty.

But for law-abiding soldiers, those same rules carry enormous weight. Carrying a gun for self-defense could turn them into felons and destroy their futures. These gun control policies disarm the innocent while encouraging a determined killer to attack there as they will know that they are the only ones who will be armed.

Yes, military police guard entrances, but like civilian police, they can’t be everywhere. Military bases function like cities, and MPs face the same limitations as police responding to off-base mass shootings.

Consider the attacks at the Navy Yard, both Fort Hood shootings, and the Chattanooga recruiting station. In each case, unarmed JAG officers, Marines, and soldiers had no choice but to hide while the attacker fired shot after shot.

Army Chief of Staff General Mark Milley, then commander of Third Corps stationed at Fort Hood, testified to Congress about the second attack there: “We have adequate law enforcement on those bases to respond … those police responded within eight minutes and that guy was dead.” But eight minutes was simply too long for the three soldiers who were murdered and the 12 others who were wounded.

Time after time, murderers exploit regulations that guarantee they’ll face no armed resistance. Diaries and manifestos of mass public shooters show a chilling trend: They deliberately choose gun-free zones, knowing their victims can’t fight back. While we don’t yet know if the Fort Stewart shooter made that same calculation, his actions fit a pattern seen in dozens of other cases. It’s no coincidence that 94 percent of mass public shootings happen in places where guns are banned.

Ironically, soldiers with a concealed handgun permit can carry a concealed handgun whenever they are off base so that they can protect themselves and others. But on the base, they and their fellow soldiers are defenseless.

These are soldiers trained to handle firearms. We trust them with weapons in combat, yet we deny them that same trust on their own bases.

In 1992, the George H.W. Bush administration started reshaping the military into a more “professional, business-like environment.” That shift led to tighter restrictions on firearms. In 1993, President Clinton rewrote and implemented those restrictions, effectively banning soldiers from carrying personal firearms on base.

After the 2015 Chattanooga recruiting station attack, the military slightly loosened the rules. Commanders gained the authority to approve individual service members to carry privately owned firearms. But in practice, commanders rarely grant that permission.

Importantly, U.S. soldiers stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan were required to keep their weapons on them at all times — even on base. These soldiers needed to protect themselves against threats, and there are no known cases of them turning those weapons on each other. The policy worked.

So why do we make it easy for killers to target our own troops at home? Why do we force soldiers, like those at Fort Stewart, to tackle armed attackers with bare hands?

Let’s stop pretending that gun-free zones protect anyone. They only protect killers.

Lawsuit: The Regulation Of Untaxed Firearms Under Federal Law Is Unconstitutional

Several Second Amendment advocacy groups, including the National Rifle Association (NRA), have filed a lawsuit to challenge the constitutionality of the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA).

President Trump’s One Big, Beautiful Bill erased the NFA’s $200 stamp tax on short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, any firearm classified by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) as “other,” and suppressors starting Jan. 1, 2026. However, “the firearms are still required to be registered and are subject to” regulations designed to enforce the “now-extinct” tax, the lawsuit says. This “regulatory regime” no longer comports with Congress’ constitutional authority, plaintiffs claim. The lawsuit also argues that “the NFA’s regulation of suppressors and short-barreled rifles violates the Second Amendment.”

The National Firearms Act’s registration scheme only exists to ensure that the tax on NFA firearms was paid,” Adam Kraut, the Second Amendment Foundation’s (SAF) executive director, said in a press release. “With Congress removing the tax on silencers, short-barreled firearms, and ‘any other weapons,’ the continued inclusion of these items in the NFA serves no purpose, except continuing to retain an impermissible hurdle to the exercise of one’s constitutional right to keep and bear arms.”

The lawsuit, Brown v. ATF, was filed on August 1 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The plaintiffs are the NRA, the American Suppressor Association (ASA), SAF, the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC), Prime Protection STL Tactical Boutique, and two individual members of these organizations. They are suing both the ATF and the DOJ. The lawsuit asks the court to declare NFA regulations “relating to making, transferring, receiving, possessing, or otherwise using” the untaxed firearms and suppressors unlawful and to block anyone from enforcing the challenged portions of the law.

Continue reading “”

Fiocchi America Moved into TKG’s Brands, Hevi Shifting from Oregon to Missouri

News came this week that Fiocchi’s U.S. arm will be moving under the same umbrella of ammo brands maintained by the Kinetic Group.

Formerly part of Vista Outdoor, last year’s purchase of several classic American ammunition brands, including CCI, Federal, Hevi, Remington, and Speer by the Czechoslovak Group, became TKG. As the Czechoslovak Group – which has held a majority stake in Fiocchi since 2022 and quietly became the 100-percent owner of that ammo company in April – the writing was on the wall that its U.S. operations would be consolidated with TKG.

“We’re excited to have Fiocchi of America officially join of our group of world-leading ammunition brands,” said Jason Vanderbrink, Chairman and CEO of TKG.

As part of the shift, Fiocchi America’s Ozark, Missouri, shotshell plant will become “a center of excellence for shotshell products,” and Hevi will move its operations from Oregon to Missouri. Fiocchi is also building a $42 million lead-free primer plant in Arkansas.

“Ozark is just outside of Springfield, Missouri, a fantastic location for ammunition manufacturing, the outdoors, conservation, and support of the Second Amendment. HEVI-Shot will have a great new home here and will continue its 25-year legacy of loading the best steel, tungsten, and bismuth shot for waterfowl and upland hunters,” said Vanderbrink.

Hevi was formed in Oregon in 2000 by a group of hunters frustrated by the performance of steel shot and eager to create better non-toxic loads.

Jankovich: Walmart stabbings show flaw in gun control logic

Last weekend, a man walked into a Walmart in Traverse City and stabbed 11 innocent people in a random, brutal act of violence. The scene was horrifying—but thankfully, everyone survived.

The media covered the initial shock. The politicians issued generic statements. But something’s missing — something that always seems to go missing when the narrative doesn’t fit: no one is talking about “knife control.” Why is that?

A knife was used to commit mass violence — just as we’ve seen before with hammers, axes and even cars. These are real tragedies, carried out without a single bullet fired. And yet, no one is proposing sweeping legislation to regulate or ban knives or to require background checks before buying a truck.

Because deep down, we all know the glaring truth: it’s not the object that commits the violence; it’s the person. But the moment a firearm is involved, the story changes. The headlines explode. Politicians scramble to propose more restrictions. And the blame shifts from the criminal to the tool they used.

Police respond to multiple people being stabbed inside a Walmart Supercenter store near Traverse City, Mich. on Saturday, July 26, 2025.
This double standard isn’t just frustrating, it’s dangerous. It distracts from real solutions, and it deliberately ignores the fact that, in Traverse City, a law-abiding citizen with a firearm stopped the attack before more people were stabbed.

When police arrived at the scene, the alleged attacker had already been restrained, held at gunpoint by a shopper.

That’s right: a proverbial “good guy” with a gun stopped a “bad guy” with a knife. It’s textbook self-defense and the outcome we hope for in moments of crisis.

This is the very reason Women for Gun Rights exists. We believe the Second Amendment protects not just the right to “bear arms” — but the right to defend yourself and others when no one else can. At the end of the day, despite the best efforts of law enforcement, you are your own first responder. Your life, and the lives of others, is your responsibility.

This incident also highlights another uncomfortable pattern that truly undermines the efficacy of gun control. Authorities said the suspect had a history of “assaultive incidents.” In other words, they knew he was dangerous and capable of violence. While shocking to hear, this isn’t an isolated occurrence. Over and over, we’ve seen mass casualty events carried out by individuals who were already on law enforcement’s radar. The signs were there. The threats had been made. Reports were filed. But the system didn’t act.

And yet, every time a tragedy occurs, the focus shifts — not to the failures of intervention, but to restricting the rights of law-abiding citizens. Groups like Moms Demand Action and anti-gun politicians push for Red Flag laws, assault weapon bans and magazine limits, as if taking tools away from the responsible will somehow stop the reckless and violent.

But Traverse City shows the flaw in that logic.

The attacker didn’t use a gun. He used a knife. Would a Red Flag law have prevented it? Would a gun ban have saved those people? Of course not. The answer isn’t to criminalize gun ownership — it’s to crack down on actual criminals, take real threats seriously and enforce the laws we already have against people who have proven themselves violent and dangerous.

This is an important moment in Michigan and across the United States. It’s time to stop pretending the tool is the problem and start focusing on the truth: dangerous people are the threat. And guns, in the hands of the right people, save lives.

Marcy Jankovich is the Michigan State Director for Women for Gun Rights.

“Our Founding Fathers were proud that Americans were trusted with arms because they knew that only when people are armed could they truly be thought of as free citizens.
And that’s where the circle closes.
Those who want to deprive you of your right to keep and bear arms are intending to deprive you of your freedom, period.
Like the criminals their policies encourage, these elitists know that it is always best to disarm victims before you enslave them.”
— Charley Reese