#gettr – Odd Stuffing

The Gun Control Dilemma – Common Hunting Rifle or Deadly Sniper Rifle

Whenever a crime involving a firearm occurs, the anti-gun extremists drag out the same old arguments that only MORE gun control can make you safe. But what happens when the firearm doesn’t fall into the proper ‘evil’ category? You’d think this would be a problem, but in gun control fantasy land, this is an opportunity to open a whole new strategy of pointless regulations.

The case in point is the public assassination of Charlie Kirk. The left controlled media attempted to deflect attention away from the motivation of the perpetrator, putting out such preposterous fantasies such as it was a stray bullet from right wing supporters celebratory shooting into the air or a shot of that distance could only have been a military/right wing trained sniper.

True to form, the anti-gun extremists began calling for more gun control even before the deceased’ body was cold and the firearm in question was identified and recovered. They demanded universal background checks, red flag laws, assault weapon bans, and to eliminate campus carry and open carry laws. But then, it turns out the firearm used was just an old hunting rifle.

You would think that would be a problem for Gun Control, Inc., but instead it just presented an opportunity to ban the new evil, sniper (hunting) rifles.

Hunting has always been a target of the anti-gun extremists. While consistently saying they are not trying to ban common hunting rifles, implying they are the only thing protected by the Second Amendment, they simultaneously target everything to do with hunting. This has included ever increasing restrictions on where, when and how you can hunt, bans on lead ammunition, bans on specific calibers or types of ammunition, and steadily increased hunting license fees and ammunition taxes. The goal has always been to make hunting so restricted and expensive that fewer and fewer people would participate in hunting, eventually eliminating wildlife conservation and the tradition of hunting.

From the information available now, it appears the firearm used in this attack was a sporterized Mauser 98, converted to 30-06. This would have been a common post war conversion from a German-made military surplus into a US compatible hunting rifle. It also appears the assassin’s firearm was owned at some point by the perpetrator’s grandfather. The full details have yet to be released.

A couple of notes about hunting rifles. They are usually larger calibers and more powerful than the so-called “high power assault weapons” customarily villainized by the anti-gun extremists and are usually equipped with scopes. They could be semi-automatic, bolt, level or pump action. An accurate 200-yard shot, exclaimed by the liberal press as being an impossible shot over TWO FOOTBALL FIELDS, is fairly common for your average hunter.

So what to do? This wasn’t a handgun, so-called ‘assault weapon’, or a concealed carry firearm. And since the gun control activists have always said they don’t want to take away anyone’s hunting rifle, how do they turn this into a new push for more gun control?

The first strategy is what the Second Amendment community has been warning about for years. They won’t come after hunting rifles. They will reclassify them as high caliber ‘sniper rifles’ and say they are too dangerous for the public to own.

The next is an adaptation of the ghost gun laws. This particular firearm may, or may not have a serial number if it was produced an/or imported before 1968. Without at serial number the ATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives) cannot conduct a “trace” on it.

Is a trace critical to solving the crime committed using the firearm? The vast majority of the time, no. It’s more often used to determine other crimes like firearm trafficking or illegal possession by prohibited persons.

Since old, non-serialized firearms can’t be traced in the normal way, that means they’ll have to be serialized and registered. The mechanism to do this is already there in the ‘ghost gun’ laws where self-made firearms must be assigned a state issued serial number, engraved and registered. Yes, registered. But you knew that already.

That brings up universal background checks so that the ownership and movements of every firearm in the country can be monitored and controlled.

And finally, we have mandatory safe storage laws. Again, the facts of the case have not been released yet, but if in fact the grandfather’s rifle was taken and used without permission, then whomever owned it at the time would be made liable, even if the firearm was stolen from them.

In case you think all this is wild conspiracy theory thinking, all these things have previously been brought up by the gun control extremists. The wording and approach are already being shopped and refined in test markets around the country.

Does it matter if this, or any firearm, is classified as a hunting rifle or sniper rifle? Of course not. There is no dilemma. The anti-gun extremists want to ban them all. They just know they have to properly frame their gun grab scheme so the uneducated masses will think they are doing something in the interest of public safety. They just needed a triggering event to get the gun control ball rolling using the sickening mantra of “Never let a good crisis go to waste”.

What does this mean for hunters, target, competition and recreational shooters and collectors? Up until now you’ve been able to sit on the sidelines and say none of this crazy gun control stuff impacts you. Not any longer! It’s headed your way, and lot sooner than you think.

What should you do? That’s the easy part. STOP ELECTING PEOPLE WHO ARE WILLING TO TAKE AWAY OUR RIGHTS!!

Bob

#Oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #2A, #GunControlFails, #NoNewGunLaws, #FactsMatter, #GunVote, #Hate, #TurningPointUSA, #RIPCharlieKirk, #medium, #mewe, #gab, #gettr, #truthsocial, #threads, #bluesky, #oddstuffing.com

Freedom to Hate

It is said that a crisis brings out the best in people. Unfortunately, as we’ve seen in the past week, it also brings out the worst. Once again, we see the worst among us celebrating another cold-blooded murder of an innocent man in broad daylight. Why? Because hate is used as justification for violence. Hatred of the person, hatred of the ideas, hatred of the words.

On September 10, 2025, Charlie Kirk, CEO and founder of Turning Point USA was assassinated at the Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah. The reaction from the radical and extremist left has been nothing short of disgusting. According to one left wing extremist who celebrated the murder, “You need conservatives to be afraid of getting killed when they go to events.”

While the vast majority of the United States and the rest of the world condemned this horrific act and offered sympathy to his family, a far too large number engaged in sickening public displays of celebration and praise for the actions. Many of those involved are in positions of trust and authority over the lives of others including teachers, professors, students, administrators, clerks, doctors, nurses, lawyers, judges, politicians, pilots, authors, law enforcement, fire fighters and even the military.

The response to this vitriol from the civilized world has been swift and brutal. One source tracking the publicly available information has collected over 50,000 reports of celebrations and approvals for the killing. To date there have been hundreds of terminations, suspensions, expulsions along with arrests for acts of violence and vandalism. Repercussions have included cancellation of contracts, concerts, events and travel visas, not just in the US but around the world.

Those who are being called out are claiming this is unlawful since their words are protected speech under the First Amendment and that they were simply expressing a different opinion on the assassination. What they are missing is your freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences. The First Amendment protects your right to free speech from government censorship, NOT from any consequences of your hate and hate inspired speech and actions.

Well guess what, it doesn’t matter. Businesses, schools, courts, law enforcement and the military are correct in not wanting to be represented by individuals who believe killing someone because they don’t believe what you do is appropriate. They can justifiably question whether these individuals know basic right from wrong, and seeing their endorsement of homicide is a massive red flag. Are these the people you want making decisions in your business, for your students, for your children, for your patients, for your customers, for your safety?

Of course, no crisis would be complete without the gun control extremists chiming in. As always, before the deceased’ body is even cold, they were calling for more gun control since the ONLY way (in their minds) to prevent this kind of so-called “gun violence” is to implement universal background checks, red flag laws, assault weapon bans, and eliminate campus carry and open carry laws.

Does it matter that even in the most restrictive, draconian implementation of all these laws it still wouldn’t have stopped this crime? No, of course not! But that doesn’t matter in gun control fantasy land. Only that you have THESE laws in place so you can implement the NEXT, even more restrictive set of gun control laws.

Remember, gun control does absolutely nothing to increase public safety and the answer to fix that shortcoming is always to implement more gun control.

This horrific incident has awakened significant interest in Charlie Kirk’s Turning Point USA and the values he argued for. Where many had sat on the sidelines and not gotten involved, they are now stepping up to be heard. Turning Point USA has already received over 32,000 requests for new chapters in colleges and high schools in the United States.

Erika Kirk, Charlie Kirk’s widow, was just named the new Turning Point USA CEO. Among the statements she has made are:

“You have no idea the fire that you have ignited within this wife. The cries of this widow will echo around the world like a battle cry.”

To those who hate I will say only this. You have every right to your hate and to express your hatred, just don’t expect the rest of the world to support you and your views. If you find yourself ostracized from civil society, it is no one’s fault but your own. Your right to free speech does not mean you are free from consequences.

Perhaps it’s time you stopped listening to the rhetoric spewed out by the political ‘leaders’ who call on you to do their dirty work, then sit back and deny any involvement in promoting violence.

Bob

Feeling Safer vs. Being Safer, Part Duex

In a recent article from the noted public safety experts at Rolling Stone magazine, they reported “more Americans feel less safe when it comes to people legally carrying concealed guns in public.” Of course, feeling safe means diddly squat when you aren’t ACTUALLY safe.

The story, a collaboration with anti-gun mouthpiece The Trace, is based on the conclusion-directed research funded by the Gun Control, Inc cabal. Entitled “Multi-Generational Research: Purchases, Perceptions, and Participation for the Firearms Industry”, it describes how non-firearm owners as well as current firearm owners don’t “feel” safe with other people carrying concealed firearms in public. It then launches into attacking the NSSF (National Shooting Sports Foundation) and the proposed Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act currently working its way through Congress.

Have we heard this BS before? Of course. I, along with many others have pointed out the fallacies they present, as well as straight out lies the anti-gun community tells numerous times. But, since they continue to spread this crapola, let’s say it again.

New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, among other things, removed the ability of states to require applicants for a concealed carry permit show “proper cause”. This ended the highly discretionary and discriminatory practice of issuing permits to a very select few or essentially no one. Combine this with the fact there are currently 29 states which have returned to Constitutional Carry status, that is the ability for citizens of that state to carry a concealed firearm for self-defense without a government issued permit, and more people than ever before are carrying a firearm for personal protection EXCEPT in the most gun-controlled states.

Gun Control, Inc. has argued in every state and in federal courts that the result of loosening their highly restrictive concealed carry permit requirements would result in states “becoming the wild, wild west”, “blood running in the streets” and “people settling arguments with guns”. Of course, the result has always been the exact opposite. Violent crime rates fell, and ordinary, everyday people are ACTUALLY safer.

The recent horrific shooting inside an office building in New York highlights the utter failure of gun control. New York, which earns an A rating from the Gun Control, Inc. affiliates, with every gun law on the gun control wish list in place, and New York City, with unquestionably the most restrictive concealed carry restrictions in the nation, did nothing to protect the victims of this crime. With no effective means of self-defense, unarmed civilians became unarmed victims.

But where does New York place the blame? On gun laws in Nevada allowing this type of firearm to be purchased legally. No mention of the New York laws which the perpetrator broke in bringing firearms, so-called “large capacity magazines”, and ammunition into New York or carrying them in public. But then, homicide is illegal too, but once again, that didn’t stop him either.

This is a common tactic for the most gun-controlled areas of the country when someone uses a firearm in a crime. It’s not THEIR fault someone broke THEIR gun control laws, it’s the OTHER state’s loose gun laws that allowed the criminal to obtain them in the first place. Because of THEM, they were able to bring guns into their safe havens and use it on THEIR unarmed victims.

The thing is the areas where they say these firearms come from don’t have the same crime and violence as the heavily gun controlled areas do. Understanding why is easy. Armed people are able to protect themselves and criminals prefer unarmed victims. Go figure.

New York loves to make people “feel” safer. Last year it began installing new, brighter lights in the subway system. “Riders are going to see a difference, it will be brighter. Your platforms, mezzanines, and staircases will now be lighter and brighter and that will give the sense of comfort that the system is more safe.” As you might expect, it hasn’t helped, and crime has continued along as always. People are not safer, just better illuminated.

So the question becomes, what would you rather have, a false sense of feeling safer or being safer?

Being safer is having the knowledge and capability to protect yourself and your family, in your home or out in public, with the best tools available for the job. But it goes beyond that. Being safer means taking the responsibility of owning, carrying and using firearms seriously. It not only means the right equipment it means training in the use of your firearms as well as situational awareness, de-escalation techniques and non-lethal self-defense tools, because not every situation is a deadly force one. It means knowing the law and knowing what your personal, moral, and ethical limits are. It means having an emergency plan for your home and when you are in public. It means constantly assessing what is going on around you and how you are going to mitigate those risks.

But I’m going to take being safer one step further. It means doing everything you can to ensure a safer environment for the next generation of your family. It means stopping asinine, do-nothing gun control laws that have never made the public safer in their tracks. It means voting out your political representatives at the local, county, state, and federal level when it becomes clear they will not follow their oath of office to support and defend the Constitution, ALL the Constitution. It means finding and electing new representation who will or, maybe standing up yourself.

Feeling safe means nothing if you aren’t actually safe. Reject the gun control lies and propaganda and decide what is right for you and your family.

Bob

#Oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #2A, #GunControlFails, #NoNewGunLaws, #FactsMatter, #GunVote, #BeingSafe, #medium, #mewe, #gab, #gettr, #truthsocial, #threads, #bluesky, #oddstuffing.com

Sig Sauer – It’s Not Over Yet

With the recent death of a United States Air Force Airman in what is being reported as an “uncommanded discharge” of a M18, Sig Sauer is facing even more scrutiny for safety issues with its firearms. Defiant and unapologetic up to now, Sig Sauer is may finally have to publicly address a flaw they’ve denied existed for years. Unfortunately, it appears a service member’s life may be what finally gets their attention.

At issue is Sig Sauer’s civilian P320 and its military counterparts the M17 & M18, known as the Modular Handgun System.

For years the Sig P320 has been the subject of ridicule for being prone to discharge when dropped. More recently reports began coming in from law enforcement agencies and civilians around the country of different pistols in the series going off by themselves in holsters. Numerous officers have been injured as a result. The latest involving the Airman was a discharge from within a holster.

The P320 was first introduced in 2014. Sig Sauer offered a “voluntary upgrade” in 2017 to include an alternate design that reduces the weight of the trigger, among other safety features. There is no word if these upgraded models are still an issue.

In what will likely become a business school case study in how NOT to handle a consumer product issue, Sig Sauer has denied their firearm has any issues and blamed the users.

Sig Sauer’s response to these reports may be most bluntly referred to as denial and deflection. Their May 7, 2025, statement posted on their official website and social media (link below), the company flatly denies the accusations, calling them “baseless allegations” driven by individuals looking to “profit or avoid personal responsibility.” The post, titled The Truth About the SIG P320, asserts that the firearm “CANNOT, under any circumstances, discharge without a trigger pull. It concludes with: “Today, for SIG Sauer, it ends.”

While Sig Sauer has been successful in several lawsuits, they have also lost numerous lawsuits for injuries caused by their P320 line to the tune of multimillion-dollar awards each.

Sig Sauer recently filed suit in Washington asking a judge to reverse the Washington State Criminal Justice Training Commission’s decision to ban police recruits from carrying the P320 model handgun. It also asks the judge to stop the training commission’s executive director from making public statements about the P320.

Sig Sauer also quietly updated their P320 user manual to include: “THE MOST EFFECTIVE SAFETY IS TO CARRY YOUR PISTOL WITHOUT A ROUND IN THE CHAMBER, AND TO LOAD A ROUND IN THE CHAMBER ONLY WHEN READY TO FIRE”.

A report by the FBI’s Ballistic Research Facility recently made public was based on their tests of a Sig Sauer M18 that experienced an “uncommanded discharge” while in the holster of a Michigan State Police officer. While the tests were inconclusive, it’s important to note they only tested this one pistol.

With the denials to date, it’s hard not to think of the Ford Pinto. In 1968, two years before the Pinto hit the streets, Ford’s knew of the danger and their internal analysis considered what it would cost to repair the expected sales of 11 million units at $10/each vs. the anticipated accident rates, including deaths, serious injuries and burned-out cars. They decided the settlement costs would be roughly $50 million or half the cost of repairing all the cars and chose the cheaper option.

I would sincerely hope Sig Sauer is not approaching this from a financial cost analysis point of view. Their statement following the Airman’s death was significantly softer than their actions to date. But then, while the Air Force has only stopped using these pistols in the Global Strike Command, it could impact their prized U.S. Military contract.

While some ranges had already banned the P320/M17/M18 series pistols, the latest fatal incident appears to have caused most ranges to now do the same. Firearm trainers and training sites, local, county and federal law enforcement agencies are also banning use by their sworn members.

In addition, gunsmiths are refusing to work on them, and respectable firearm retailers are no longer willing to sell them. Some retailers are taking them in on trade, at a HIGHLY discounted price, and locking them away in back of the vaults under the belief that someday Sig Sauer will step up to the plate by admitting this is a flaw, issue a mandatory recall to repair them and return them to the expensive and sought after firearms they have always been.

Let’s make no mistake about what is involved. The military M18 Modular Handgun System is simply a government issued variant of the commercial P320. It is not a novel and highly complex weapon program that military members need to become accustomed to. It’s a semi-automatic firearm not dramatically unlike those that have been produced for over 100 years. There is absolutely no acceptable loss of life for service members, law enforcement, or civilians using it.

Yes, this firearm ‘system’ (because the military loves calling things systems) passed the grueling torture testing program before being accepted. Thousands and thousands of rounds were pumped through test firearms to make sure they would survive military level use. However, I’m going to take a wild ass guess that program did not include daily use in and out of security holsters of the type used by the military and law enforcement. Why would they? That’s not something that would ever be considered a wear measure of firearms. Yet inside holsters is exactly where these firearms have been self-firing without human interaction.

The fact that these uncommanded discharges did not begin showing up immediately or at the same time as the drop discharges leads us to believe this is a wear issue. It also does not appear to be every firearm, in every situation, even for firearms of similar age and usage. Is it one in 1,000? One in 10,000? One in 100,000? We just don’t know and even the experts who have examined the ones which have discharged themselves can’t definitively say. But who in their right mind would want to roll the dice every day when they put this firearm into their holster? If you wouldn’t feel comfortable appendix carrying this firearm, then it needs to be stored until definitively fixed.

Let’s hope Sig Sauer is up for the challenge.

Bob

The P320. It ends today. pic.twitter.com/bZZMXGKK1v
— SIG SAUER (@sigsauerinc) March 7, 2025

#Oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #2A, #GunControlFails, #NoNewGunLaws, #FactsMatter, #GunVote, #SigSauer, #P320, #M17, #M18, #EditorOnHoliday, #medium, #mewe, #gab, #gettr, #truthsocial, #threads, #bluesky, #oddstuffing.com

Glock Bans – The Latest Assault Weapons Lie

One of the latest innovative strategies from the extremists at Gun Control, Inc. is the Glock Ban. These new state laws being tested around the country target the ubiquitous Glock and Glock-style handguns because they are convertible to fully automatic by use of a “switch”. Never mind that a “switch” is highly illegal at both the state and federal level, the ban is because someone might take an illegal part and illegally put it into a legal firearm.

Of course, this is on top of numerous states suing Glock for producing firearms that can be illegally converted in the first place for marketing their capabilities to law-abiding civilians for self-defensive purposes which apparently also appeal to criminals. That supposedly makes them liable for unlawful use by criminals.

At issue is a small, add-on device invented by a Venezuelan man in 1986 and issued a U.S. patent in 1998. With it, a standard semi-automatic Glock handgun functions as a fully automatic Glock. As you might expect, a so-called “Glock Switch” is considered a fully automatic firearm part and, like an auto seer for any other firearm, highly regulated and illegal to make, possess or use.

Of course, with the U.S. Patent being filed, the genie was out of the bottle. The patent, intended to control the product and prevent others from making, selling, distributing or using it without your permission and/licensing, in effect gave it to the illegal world. Criminals, which includes other countries, care as much about patents as they do about the legal system. As such, Glock Switches began showing up in the U.S. within a few years. Many came in from China and now with the widespread adoption of 3D printing at the consumer level, they can be printed at home.

So, what of Glock? Is this their fault for designing a firearm that can be converted to fully automatic? Of course not. Only one Glock model, the Glock 18, is fully automatic. It is only sold to the military and law enforcement and the critical parts to make it fully automatic are not compatible with any other Glock firearms by design.

Keep in mind Glock’s striker fired design has also been replicated by many other firearm manufacturers. Note also that many semi-automatic firearms can be converted into fully automatic use by someone who knows how. The fact that these “switches” are currently only available for Glocks is no different than computer viruses targeting the most widely used software and operating systems first. You go after the biggest target first, then go after the rest later. This approach holds true for “switches” and for gun control as well.

Now enter the extremists from Gun Control, Inc. Having been unsuccessful at banning handguns after the United States Supreme Court ruled that unconstitutional, they attempted to slip the “semi-automatic mechanism” into their ever-evolving definition of so-called “assault weapons”, thus far with only limited success. Glock Bans allows them to go after one of the most common and widely owned semi-automatic handguns in the country/world because it can be illegally converted to fully automatic.

I’d like to think our own ATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives) has only been interested in removing these illegal devices from our streets and going after those who make and distribute them, but after seeing some of the ATF bulletins, with scale three dimensional drawings from multiple angles, I’m not sure. Given their association with Gun Control, Inc. who have time and again shown their willingness to sacrifice lives in order to further their anti-gun agenda, I haven’t been able to decide if they were trying to prevent or propagate the use of these “switches”.

One thing is for certain though. While Glock handguns are the current focus of so-called “easily convertible” firearms to be banned, once they gain traction here, they will quickly add more handguns, then rifles, then shotguns to their ever-evolving definition of banned firearms. Just like the never-ending definition of so-called “assault weapons”, this category of too-deadly-for-civilians-to-own firearms will continue to expand and encompass more and more currently legal firearms.

As I’ve mentioned before, all of this is being sponsored, written and supported by the extremist folks at Gun Control, Inc., funded by billionaire money and your very own tax dollars. State, county and municipal politicians don’t even have to understand what they are signing onto, only that it will all be taken care of for them and they will be considered a hero of the fanatical gun control community when the laws get enacted.

If you’re think this will somehow make our streets safer, it won’t. Criminals, terrorists and thugs know the law and break it anyway. It’s what they do. Adding more laws for them to ignore isn’t going to stop them of doing something they think will give them an advantage over a disarmed and vulnerable victim population.

Glock bans should be recognized for exactly what they are, another unconstitutional gun grab. None of these new laws target those who are creating and distributing the parts or the ones who use them, only the retailers who legally sell firearms and the law-abiding citizen who want to purchase, carry and use firearms for their own protection and the protection of their families.

Remember, gun control does absolutely nothing to increase public safety and the answer to fix that shortcoming is always to implement more gun control.

Bob

#Oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #2A, #GunControlFails, #NoNewGunLaws, #FactsMatter, #GunVote, #ATF, #Switch, #medium, #mewe, #gab, #gettr, #truthsocial, #threads, #bluesky, #oddstuffing.com

ATF Policy & The Winds of Change

We are seeing a great deal of change within the ATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives). Going the way of the Dodo are many draconian and punitive polices put in place by the extremist left gun control lobby to restrict your Second Amendment protected rights. But be warned, just because the new – in reality the previously abandoned and replaced – polices are steering the agency back on a course of partnering with the firearm industry today, doesn’t mean it’s going to stay that way.

For those of us who were used to the ATF working with the firearm industry instead of against it, these changes are most certainly welcome. Among the changes:

Cancellation of the so-called “Zero Tolerance” policy which automatically revoked Federal Firearm Licensees (FFLs) license for minor and inconsequential paperwork errors.

The Demand 2 Program is ending. Otherwise known as “name and shame”, required FFLs with 25 or more firearms traced back to them following the recovery at a crime scene, and the time from retail sale to trace is three years or less, be automatically flagged for additional scrutiny, regardless of whether or not they had complied with all applicable laws and regulations. Initiated in February of 2000 during the anti-gun Clinton administration, the program implied the retailers had done something wrong, even if they followed the exact letter of the law. These confidential results from ATF firearm traces were often released to anti-gun groups for publication.

The restrictions on non-lethal training rounds used by military, law enforcement and civilian force-on-force training scenarios and fired from “specific-use guns that can’t fire standard ammunition” have been removed. These rounds are now not considered ammunition because they are not designed for offensive combat and are not designed or for use in any firearm.

The ban on so-called “dual use” barrels has been reversed. Dual-use barrels were banned for import in 2005, if those barrels could be used in a firearm determined to be “non-sporting.” Now, the ATF views those barrels as importable, as long as they can be used with sporting purpose guns.

We also see the U.S. Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has sent staff to the Agency with the goal of revising or eliminating more than 50 rules and gun restrictions by July 4. While a momentous task with the potential to reduce or eliminate many administrative roadblocks within the ATF, we have no indication if these will be internal operations or external Second Amendment impacting policies.

Among the changes being considered is a reduction in the number of Industry Operations Investigator (IOIs) by two thirds, 541 of the estimated 800 currently on staff. The workforce reductions are part of the DOJ’s plan to merge the ATF and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) into one agency.

This proposed merger however is a real head scratcher. It’s unlikely you could find two more oppositely focused agencies. One primarily deals with lawful, Second Amendment protected firearms rights, the other primarily deals with unlawful, trafficking and use of illegal substances. Like many, I am dubious of this plan.

Meanwhile, let’s consider the policy changes at the ATF. Supposedly new management and oversight brought in with the new administration is returning the agency to its role as an industry partner and investigator and enforcer of the illegal firearms market. For those of us involved in the firearms industry, this is obviously a very good thing when compared to the previous administration who fundamentally turned policy and direction of the ATF over to the gun control lobby.

But therein lies the rub. The previous anti-gun administration turned the ATF into a gun control organization. This more pro-Second Amendment administration is returning the ATF to an industry partner/investigator of illegal activities agency. What will happen when the next anti-gun administration comes into power?

We’ve already seen federal agencies roles mutated across the board. The FBI went from being the nation’s premier law enforcement agency to a domestic political spy agency more concerned with parents’ free speech at school board meetings than threats to national security or crime. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and Air Marshals were concentrating on covertly transporting unvetted illegal aliens and monitoring anyone who spoke out against the program. Customs and Border Protection became the illegals and smugglers welcome wagon and valet service. While these agencies are supposedly being refocused to their actual roles, I don’t believe anyone is going to fully trust this will be a permanent change.

I suppose the good news is with the United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS) overturning the 1984 Chevron case, it will make it more difficult for federal agencies to create and interpret the law themselves. This of course assumes future administrations will follow the law and SCOTUS will uphold the eventual challenges to violations.

Where does this leave us peasants? Skeptical at best. We need to embrace and celebrate the changes BACK to where we were before but to also prepare for the eventuality of when the wind blows in the other direction.

Perhaps now is a good time to consider who we vote for in the 2026 midterms and STOP SENDING PEOPLE WHO WILL TAKE AWAY OUR RIGHTS TO REPRESENT US!

Bob

#Oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #2A, #GunControlFails, #NoNewGunLaws, #FactsMatter, #GunVote, #ATF, #medium, #mewe, #gab, #gettr, #truthsocial, #threads, #bluesky, #oddstuffing.com

Mexico and Unites States Gun Control, Part Deux

The United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS) ruled the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) bars the lawsuit in the case of Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos. The unanimous 9-0 decision, authored by one of the most liberal left Associate Justices, should send a clear signal to end these nuisance lawsuits. But of course, that isn’t going to happen.

Mexico’s President announced they will be continuing with a separate lawsuit against the distributors and retailers excluded from the case just dismissed by SCOTUS. This case, Estados Unidos Mexicanos v. Diamondback Shooting Sports, Inc makes identical claims against the distributors and five firearm retailers, all Federal Firearm Retailers (FFLs) as the previous case.

Mexico claims these distributors and retailers are aiding and abetting Mexican cartels use of firearms against the Mexican people. In this lawsuit, Mexico is not alleging any U.S. crimes were committed by the distributors and retailers. In fact, there is no allegation of any sales not fully compliant with all state and federal laws, including completing ATF Form 4473 and background checks on the purchasers. Multiple sales of handguns and, as is required in border states, multiple sales of centerfire rifles have all be reported to the ATF and local law enforcement as required by law.

What Mexico is alleging is these distributors and retailers had an “opportunity and obligation” to stop the sales of firearms likely to be illegally trafficked to Mexico. They continue to allege “design and marketing decisions” that could “stimulate cartel members’ demand for their products”, as a ploy to worm their way into an exception to the PLCAA. Allegedly, sales of the very same products popular in the United States should be a “red flag” these firearms may somehow unlawfully find their way into Mexico and into the hands of the cartels and used criminally be cartel members. Yet, the Mexico lawsuit does not identify any specific firearms sold by these retailers and later recovered at Mexican crime scenes.

It is worth repeating the PLCAA is a federal law which protects gun manufacturers and licensed dealers from being held liable for any ‘harm caused by those who criminally or unlawfully misuse firearm products or ammunition products that function as designed and intended.’ The law was designed to prevent nuisance lawsuits from being filed for actions clearly beyond the control of the firearm industry.

The fact that Mexico’s lawsuits were allowed to proceed in the first place is a problem. While joining with the majority, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas also authored a significant concurring opinion in the case and advised, “In future cases, courts should more fully examine the meaning of ‘violation’ under the PLCAA.”

“It seems to me that the PLCAA at least arguably requires not only a plausible allegation that a defendant has committed a predicate violation, but also an earlier finding of guilt or liability in an adjudication regarding the ‘violation.’ Allowing plaintiffs to proffer mere allegations of a predicate violation would force many defendants in PLCAA litigation to litigate their criminal guilt in a civil proceeding, without the full panoply of protections that we otherwise afford to criminal defendants,” Thomas wrote. “And, these defendants might even include ones who were cleared in an earlier proceeding, such as through a noncharging decision or a not-guilty or not -liable verdict. Such collateral adjudication would be at best highly unusual and would likely raise serious constitutional questions that would counsel in favor of a narrower interpretation.” “Particularly given the PLCAA’s aim of protecting gun manufacturers from litigation … this issue warrants careful consideration,”

What is really going on? As I pointed out in my original post – Mexico and Unites States Gun Control – this is all being driven by the very same billionaire/millionaire and taxpayer funded anti-gun/anti-Second Amendment lobbyists and lawyers who are writing laws for cities, states and the federal government in the United States and the rest of the world. These rabid anti-gun groups have been and are continuing to fund Mexico’s legal actions against Unites States firearm manufacturers, distributors, retailers, transportation companies and individuals.

They are going after the firearm industry from the manufacturers down to the smallest retailer with lawsuits designed to cripple their business and force them out of the civilian firearm market. Failing this, they would be content to have the courts impose such severe and limiting conditions that very few would be willing to risk the liability of selling firearms not specifically approved by the gun control community to civilians.

Mexico’s lawsuits are really about gun control in the United States and restricting what you and I can purchase, carry and use to protect ourselves and our families. With failures in the courts from District of Columbia v. Heller, McDonald v. Chicago, Caetano v. Massachusetts, Garland v. Cargill, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, the gun control community has been searching for new and innovative ways to restrict firearm rights.

As intended by the gun control community, lawsuits like these will continue as long as they can find willing dupes to allow their names to be used as plaintiffs and ideology driven judges willing to twist and bend federal law and Supreme Court rulings. Meanwhile, millions of dollars will be spent by those caught up in these nuisance lawsuits to defend themselves and our Second Amendment protected rights.

Bob

Oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #2A, #GunControlFails, #NoNewGunLaws, #FactsMatter, #GunVote, #Mexico, #medium, #mewe, #gab, #gettr, #truthsocial, #threads, #bluesky, #oddstuffing.com

Forced Reset Triggers & the Lies Extremists Spread

In what can only be described as a triumph of logic and legal responsibility, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) reached a settlement in its case against Rare Breed Triggers over their forced reset trigger (FRT). As you might expect, the gun control community was positively apoplectic and immediately began spreading even more lies.

According to the extremist gun control community.

“The Trump administration has just effectively legalized machine guns. Lives will be lost because of his actions.”
“FRTs automatically return forward, or reset, after being pulled. Thus, if a shooter pulls an FRT and holds it to the rear, the gun will continue firing like a machine gun.”
“These modifications pose a danger to the public because they could lead to significantly more victims in mass shootings, yet they serve no legitimate purpose for, say, hunting or home defense.”

Back in the world of reality…

In announcing the settlement with Rare Breed Triggers, the Attorney General said, “This Department of Justice believes that the [Second] Amendment is not a second-class right. And we are glad to end a needless cycle of litigation with a settlement that will enhance public safety.”

The settlement includes the DOJ dismissing three lawsuits involving Rare Breed Triggers, including a stop to erroneously enforcing federal machine gun regulations against the company and its patented FRTs for AR-style firearms, and returning confiscated FRTs to customers. Nothing in the agreement stops Rare Breed Triggers from developing FRTs for other semi-automatic rifles, including AKs, and other manufacturers may also see this as a green light to produce their own designs.

In exchange, Rare Breed Triggers has agreed not to produce or market FRTs for any handgun where the magazine loads into the trigger-hand grip. The settlement also requires Rare Breed Triggers to make “reasonable efforts” to protect its patent by seeking prohibitory injunctions against any person or entity that manufacture[s], sells, or distributes any FRT.

The WHY behind this settlement is just as important as the WHAT. Aside from the new administration’s promise to not treat the Second Amendment as a second-class right like the previous administration did, there is the whole Cargill case involving bump stocks.

While Cargill wasn’t a Second Amendment case per se, it did find the ATF exceeded its authority by independently reinterpreting the definition of a machine gun. The United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS) also found since the shooter must pull the trigger between each round; a bump stock is NOT a machine gun.

So, a quick debunk of the gun control lies. FRTs are do not turn semi-automatic firearms into machine guns. Just because you changed the definition of machine gun to include FRTs (like you changed the definition of child to include 18- and 19-year-olds) does not make it a fact. A FRT trigger must RESET before the next shot, hence the name, forced reset trigger. If you hold the trigger to the rear, it will NOT reset and hence, not fire again until it is released to reset.

Then there is the, “they serve no legitimate purpose”. This goes back to one of the oldest, and least constitutional arguments of “need”. Firearm purchases, concealed carry permits, and even firearm designs had previously been denied because there was no evidence of a “special need” presented. The government, or more accurately here the gun control community controlling the ATF, is attempting to deny something they don’t like because THEY don’t believe it has a “legitimate purpose”, or “need”. Or, in other words, a privilege to be granted or denied by the government at will. Fortunately, SCOTUS has eliminated this as a regulatory policy in Bruen, but the lies continue.

Oh yea, and the Second Amendment isn’t about hunting. It is self-defense, it is sport shooting, it is collecting, it is herd management and protection, it is marksmanship, it is shooting for no other reason than you want to. It doesn’t have to have a “legitimate purpose”.

While this is a victory, it is a conditional and possibly temporary one. The DOJ agreement includes a provision preventing Rare Breed Triggers from developing products for certain style pistols. While there is nothing preventing other companies from doing this, as some already have, it is a limitation which might be invoked on other companies.

The settlement also doesn’t seem to preclude a future administration from coming in and reversing the decision. While I abhor the gamble and cost involved in getting a case to the Supreme Court, a decision there, or a denial of the DOJ’s appeal based on Cargill, would have provided a more permanent ruling to protect us from going through this in the future.

I’ll say it again. The only way to prevent this from happening is to stop electing people who are willing to take away our rights.

Bob

#Oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #2A, #GunControlFails, #NoNewGunLaws, #FactsMatter, #GunVote, #FRT, #medium, #mewe, #gab, #gettr, #truthsocial, #threads, #bluesky, #oddstuffing.com

Gun Control: Twisting Truth and Faking Fact

After reading a recent post from the gun control community, I find it fascinating how facts from the real world can be twisted to form a new, twisted reality. But I suppose when you are trying to convince people that anyone or anything associated with firearms is threat to public safety, you have to take some liberties with the truth.

I’ve linked to a copy of the article below for your entertainment. NSSF REPORT: AR-15 OWNERS STOCKPILE WEAPONS, SEEK SILENCERS. The article quotes the NSSF (National Shooting Sports Foundation – the industry trade organization) then picks apart pieces to make wild speculations about it.

One of the things which immediately pops out is the “AR-15 owners stockpile weapons”. This is based on a single NSSF survey showing a of percentage AR- and AK-style rifles owners own 3.8 on average.

So apparently 3.8 firearms are now considered a stockpile. I think it’s a bit of an exaggeration to call 3.8 a stockpile, but we should be used to the gun control community twisting the truth. How many times have you seen an article on an arrest where the person had a “weapons cache” or “arms stockpile” or “ammunition cache” when there were two firearms and 50 or 100 rounds of ammo?

Let’s keep in mind one of the gun control extremists’ goals is to limit the number of firearms and the amount of ammunition you can own, just like they have already done in other countries. They are pushing this narrative here by showing a small number of personally owned firearms and exclaiming how this is a “massive arsenal” far above mainstream users which can only be used by terrorists and mass shooters.

Remember, redefining common terms to meet their definition is their specialty. These are the folks who falsely claim guns are the leading cause of death for children in this country because they define children up to the age of 20. So, redefining a “stockpile”, something most of us would envision as being a pretty big number – like actual military armory type quantities – down to a tiny number of firearms and ammunition is no big deal.

They also go after the term Modern Sporting Rifle (MSR) as something created in 2009 to rebrand AR-15, AK-47 and other such firearms to invent a sporting purpose “… instead of weapons of war designed for maximum lethality.” Here they continue to pursue the lie that semi-automatic AR-15 and the like are “weapons of war”. They are not and never have been. But they’ve never let the truth get in their way.

Let’s not forget it was the gun control community that coined the term “assault weapons” in 1988 to refer to semi-automatic firearms with similar cosmetic features to military firearms, but without the capability to be used as fully automatic assault rifles, a term already in common use. Assault weapons sound scary, semi-automatic firearms do not.

Of course, there is no consensus in the gun control community on what exactly a so-called “assault weapon” is. Is it the cosmetic features? Is it the removable magazine? Is it the semi-automatic mechanism? This constantly progressing definition is used to encapsulate as many firearms as possible so they can all be banned as being too dangerous for civilian ownership.

They also massively misquote how many MSR/AR/AK/etc pattern firearms are in circulation to make them look like outliers, not in common use by the general public – an argument used to get around United States Supreme Court decisions. The generally accepted estimate is now between 25 to 45 million, making it the most popular type of firearm in the country, aka common use.

Silencers? Really, this again?? One more time – suppressors do not SILENCE a gunshot like they do in the movies. Hollywood says you can snap a tiny two-inch silencer on a revolver and all you get is a pfft noise. In reality, a suppressor just lowers the volume to a safer level.

Once again, the gun control extremists stretch the truth by citing the example of a cold-blooded daylight, street murder of a health care CEO by an entitled and disturbed individual using what by all accounts was an illegal, home built suppressor to insinuate suppressors have no use other than for killing people.

Now contrast this with a recent ATF announcement of new suppressors issued to their agents for “health and safety”, the exact same rational used by law enforcement agencies and military around the world. But when a regular law-abiding citizen wants one, they must be planning a murder. Your health and safety do not matter.

Suppressors are legal in 42 states and hunting with a suppressor is legal in 41. As of June 2024, there are more than 4.8 million legally owned suppressors in the United States. And yes, more and more firearm owners are buying them thanks to the NFA (National Firearms Act) processing times going from 18-24 months down to days or weeks. This has dramatically increased demand as buyers no longer have to pay for the suppressor and tax stamp then wait two years to take possession. The anti-gun extremists call this a “troubling surge in silencer sales”.

For those of you who live in the real world, it’s okay to have more than one nanny state approved firearm, more than a box or two of ammunition and even have a suppressor. Of the estimated 400-500 million firearms in the United States, only a teeny-tiny fraction is used for illegal purposes. The rest are lawfully owned for hunting, sport and for the protection of self and family. Don’t let the extremists in the gun control community reset the narrative to make you look like the bad guy.

Remember, gun control does absolutely nothing to increase public safety and the answer to fix that shortcoming is always to implement more gun control.

Bob

http://oddstuffing.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/SmokingGunFable.pdf

#Oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #2A, #GunControlFails, #NoNewGunLaws, #FactsMatter, #GunVote, #medium, #mewe, #gab, #gettr, #truthsocial, #threads, #bluesky, #oddstuffing.com

Gun Control – Everything Old Is New Again

Many think the current generation of gun control extremists are creating their novel approaches to eliminate our Second Amendment protected rights from scratch. In reality, they are merely copying the tried and tested methods of old and adapting them for modern times.

Here’s a short quote for you.

“Are the authorities justified to call the carrying of a weapon a “misuse” that is subject to punishment if the person carries the weapon exclusively for the purpose of self-defense, a right that every citizen has by law? May a state, which is unable to protect life and liberty of its citizens from unlawful attacks, keep these citizens from exercising their right to self-defense? It is clear that even a strong, but unarmed man will be helpless when confronted by an armed attacker. The fact is that peaceful citizens who respect the law are forced to forego weapons because of the penalties contained in the weapons laws. On the other hand, peace breakers who intentionally violate the law and order are not deterred by a prison term. “ “Allow the orderly citizen to carry the weapon he needs for his self-defense but severely punish the person who actually misuses a weapon”.

This argument was made by Dr. Flegel, Senior Court-Marshal Judge for the Navy (Obermarinekriegsgerichstrat) in Germany in August 1931.

You see the Weirmar Republic, the predecessor government of Nazi Third Reich, had already gone down the path of restricting the purchasing, possessing and carrying firearms by civilians. The registration records would later be of great use to Nazi officials to disarm individuals and undesirable groups and keep them from obtaining any more.

Sadly, Germany is using its firearm registry again to deny citizens of firearms. The current left-wing administration has declared the right-leaning political party Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) a “right-wing extremist” group. As such, members of this party have been deemed “unreliable” under Germany’s gun laws and is revoking their gun licenses. Without any charges of crimes by the individual members of the party, firearms must be surrendered or destroyed, just for being a member of an opposition political party. This comes just after AfD became the biggest political party in Germany.

Do any of these strategies sound familiar?

Licenses for individuals to purchase, own and carry a firearm.
Creating bureaucratic and economic barriers to obtain a firearm license or license to carry.
Declaring opposition political groups “extremists” to restrict their firearm rights.
Requiring a “need” and other subjective criteria to carry a firearm.
Limiting the availability and quantity of ammunition.
Eliminating civilian ownership of so-called ‘military’ type firearms.
Expanding regulations on firearm manufacturers, distributors retailers and gunsmiths.
Using ownership registries to confiscate personally owned firearms.

All of these strategies are being used TODAY in our country but were conceived and utilized by the Nazi government to disarm and oppress their own citizens years ago.

Here’s a fun fact. One of the current propaganda tactics is to label anyone even slightly right-of-center a Nazi. Of course, history clearly shows us the ones who are trying to deny access to firearms and individual rights were the Nazis, NOT the ones defending those rights.

There is a controversial post from a few years ago with the quote: “Why gun control? Because armed people will NOT willingly load themselves into railroad boxcars.” While it’s impossible to say with certainty if an armed civilian population in Germany would have been able to stop the atrocities committed there, history does show us what happens to disarmed civilians over and over again.

The Second Amendment

The United States of America’s Second Amendment is a unique protection of natural rights in the world. No other country has this. While a few started out with similar protections for a while, decades of whittling away have rendered them null and void. It’s interesting to note for all the countries our nation has ‘assisted’ with regime change, none of the new and improved constitutions have included Second Amendment like protections. The reason is easy to understand. Governing armed constituents who can force you out of office like you just did to the previous regime is so much harder.

Despite years of creative reinterpretation by gun control extremists, the Second Amendment does in fact protect an individual’s natural right to keep and bear arms. It always has. But it is under constant attack at the local, state and federal levels. Each little so-called “common sense gun safety” law whittles away at that right. Individually, they might not be considered a serious threat, and that’s the idea. Small, incremental infringements that only the most radical gun nuts would ever oppose are easier to pass. Everyone wants to be safe, right?

Except gun control laws have never succeeded at reducing violence or crime since they only target law-abiding citizens, not the criminals who by their very definition, disobey the law. Yet we are constantly told just one more law, one more regulation, closing one more loophole will make us all safe. It simply isn’t true. It wasn’t then, and it isn’t now.

Bob