Dad has been on Hospice care at home for two weeks now. He’s still with us here, but his vital signs are slowly diminishing. The nursing staff visits everyday now

I appreciate all the thoughts and prayers and I figure Dad does as well.

 

Well, he’s nothing but a stooge, grandstanding again.

Murphy Tries to Re-Impose (and Hike) NFA Taxes After Congress Zeroed Them Out

We’ve been reporting on a rider inserted in the House Financial Services and General Government appropriations bill that would force Washington, D.C. to recognize valid concealed carry permits from all U.S. states and territories (as well as end the District’s “no guns allowed” policy for public transportation, but pro-gun Republicans aren’t the only ones trying to use the appropriations process to change gun laws.

Murphy’s trying to insert a rider into the Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies appropriations bill with language to undo the NFA reform included in the OBBB and instead raise the transfer tax on NFA items from $200 to $4,709 for each transfer.

As Brady indicates, the nearly $5,000 that Murphy wants to impose essentially indexes the original $200 transfer tax imposed in 1934 to the rate of inflation over the past 90 years. Still, that’s much higher than what we’ve heard proposed from other anti-gun Democrats in Congress, who’ve talked about tripling the $200 tax once they have hte numbers to do so.

And therein lies the problem for Murphy. He can propose any kind of tax increase he wants, but he basically has zero chance of seeing his proposal included in the MCVARA appropriations bill (which has already passed the House). The Republican majority that voted to zero out transfer taxes on suppressors, short-barreled firearms, and “any other weapons” a couple of weeks ago isn’t going to turn around and vote in favor of dramatically hiking the taxes instead.

Murphy’s offered a couple of other amendments to the appropriations bill as well.

Amendment 2972 would require the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to issue a quarterly report on “the number of veterans who should have been reported to the national instant criminal background check system… if such reporting by the Secretary was permitted, and of those veterans, the number of suicides by firearm that occurred in the previous quarter”.

That amendment is a response to another rider that would extend the VA’s prohibition on submitting the names of those veterans who’ve had a fiduciary appointed to handle their affairs to NICS.

A temporary provision in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2024 and its extensions (including the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act of 2025) prohibited the VA from making these NICS reports without a judicial finding. That provision, though, is set to expire on September 30 unless Congress includes similar language in this year’s appropriations bill.

And Congress has included that language. Section 412 of the MCVARA bill states:

None of the funds made available by this Act may be used by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs under section 5502 of title 38, United States Code, in any case arising out of the administration by the Secretary of laws and benefits under such title, to report a person who is deemed mentally incapacitated, mentally incompetent, or to be experiencing an extended loss of consciousness as a person who has been adjudicated as a mental defective under subsection (d)(4) or (g)(4) of section 922 of title 18, United States Code, without the order or finding of a judge, magistrate, or other judicial authority of competent jurisdiction that such person is a danger to himself or herself or others.

Murphy’s also offered an amendment that would simply strike that language from the appropriations bill so that veterans who’ve had a fiduciary appointed to help manage their financial affairs to be deemed a prohibited person without a judicial finding of dangerousness.

I doubt those amendments are going to fare any better than Murphy’s attempt to jack up NFA taxes by more than 2,000 percent, but gun owners should still be in contact with their Senators to encourage their opposition; both to these amendments and any others that would negatively impact our Second Amendment rights that might be introduced by anti-2A senators.

Missouri Sheriffs’ Constitutional Firearms Alliance

Dozens of Missouri Sheriffs have united to form the Missouri Sheriffs’ Constitutional Firearms Alliance (MSCFA), a group dedicated to safeguarding Second Amendment rights for law-abiding citizens while promoting gun safety throughout communities across the state.

Douglass County Sheriff and president of the MSCFA, Chris Degase, believes there is an agenda at the federal level to control and restrict access to firearms, a sentiment not unfamiliar to gun owners or any person paying attention, for that matter.

“This alliance brings together sheriffs from across our great state who are committed to protecting not just public safety, but constitutional liberty. We believe these two goals go hand in hand. In fact, public safety cannot truly exist where the rights of the people are ignored… With the Missouri Sheriffs Constitutional Firearms Alliance, we are not only standing up for your rights—we are standing in the gap between the federal government and you,” Sheriff DeGase said in a recent press conference.

I was fortunate enough to speak with the good Sheriff, getting to know him better and gaining an understanding of his perspective, particularly his approach to public safety while embracing liberty. In fact, Sheriff DeGase spoke candidly with me about balancing his duty to protect and serve the community without infringing on Constitutional rights, an agenda he takes pride in as an elected official who recognizes and respects the plain text of both his oath and the Second Amendment.

“As sheriffs, we are the only elected law enforcement officers in the nation, directly accountable to the people we serve. And with that responsibility comes an unwavering oath—to uphold and defend the Constitution, not just when it’s easy, but especially when it’s under pressure,” Sheriff DeGase continued.

Along these lines, Sheriff DeGase is not a fan of shutting down inter-agency communication and cooperation, understanding that such resources benefit the community. However, he also recognizes the very real threat to some of America’s foundational freedoms, a bedrock of principles in which he is unwilling to compromise.

Florida: Armed Citizen Saves Woman From Knife-Wielding Attacker In Mall Parking Lot

Anti-gun advocates just can’t bring themselves to admit that armed citizens use their firearms to save themselves from attackers millions of times a year. That fact runs directly against their philosophy and beliefs.

Another thing they’ll never admit is that armed citizens frequently save other people from attackers, using their firearms to protect their unarmed neighbors from bad guys intent on harming them. Good guys with guns are called “good guys” for a reason—they know that helping others who are under attack is a noble endeavor and are often willing to take the risk to do so.

Such was the case recently in a mall parking lot in Orlando, Florida. According to a report from Clickorlando.com, on July 14, an armed man drew his gun and forced another man, who was stabbing a woman with a knife, to stop the attack and flee the scene.

According to local police, security cameras showed that 41-year-old Alinton John and the woman arrived in the parking lot just before 10 p.m., talking for about half an hour, and then got into John’s vehicle. About 10 minutes later, the woman can be seen running toward the mall’s front entrance.

According to the police report, a witness told investigators that he and some family members were standing in the parking lot “when they saw a female ‘all stabbed up’ exit a red Tesla and heard her screaming.” The witness said that he then drew his concealed pistol, racked a round into the chamber, and pointed it at John.

In  Re the preceeding:

From the dissent:

“By the majority’s reasoning, any regulation of sales of ammunition is presumptively unlawful, unless the state can produce an identical historical twin,” – Judge Bybee

Yes you moron, they’re literally following Bruen: A law must have an analogue to the Founding Era. Does he think that the Founders were too stupid to have thought of restricting ammunition? That they couldn’t conceive of erecting barriers around it?
There’s no way that judge is that stupid. He’s trying to legislate from the bench and carry water for the demoncraps. No other explanation is possible, and that’s reprehensible.