In a blow to Texas’s bid for firearm independence, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit upheld the dismissal of a lawsuit challenging federal regulations on suppressors made and kept within the state.
This decision confirms that even suppressors manufactured entirely within Texas must comply with federal law, rendering them illegal under the National Firearm Act (NFA).
The lawsuit, driven by several Texas residents and the Texas Office of the Attorney General (OAG), sought to challenge federal oversight on suppressors through the Texas Suppressor Freedom Act (House Bill 957).
This 2021 law, championed by state Rep. Tom Oliverson (R-Cypress), posited that suppressors made and kept in Texas should not be subject to federal regulation.
Under the act, Texas residents could request the OAG to obtain a federal court order to prevent the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) from enforcing federal suppressor regulations within the state.
Federal Judge Mark Pittman originally dismissed the lawsuit, citing lack of standing. Plaintiffs appealed, but the 5th Circuit panel, composed of Judges Edith Brown Clement, Jennifer Walker Elrod, and James C. Ho, affirmed the dismissal.
The 5th Circuit’s 14-page opinion emphasized that the plaintiffs did not demonstrate a concrete plan to violate federal law.
The court noted that while the plaintiffs expressed intent to manufacture suppressors, they did not specify that they would bypass federal requirements, such as registering the suppressors, paying a $200 excise tax, and applying for federal approval. The court underscored that manufacturing a suppressor is not illegal if these procedures are followed.
Chief Judge Edith Brown Clement, writing for the panel, stated, “The declarations do not state any intention to engage in conduct proscribed by law. The plaintiffs must show an invasion of a legally protected interest that is concrete, particularized, and actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical.”
Texas Gun Rights expressed disappointment but remained defiant. President Chris McNutt criticized the ruling, asserting, “This decision is another example of federal overreach infringing on states’ rights and individual freedoms. Using a suppressed firearm is considered polite in other parts of the world, yet here in America they are regulated like a machine gun. It makes no sense. Texans should have the right to manufacture and possess suppressors without federal interference.”
For now, this ruling reaffirms the ATF’s authority to regulate suppressors, even those made and kept within a single state. The court’s decision also highlights the stringent requirements individuals must meet under the NFA, which categorizes suppressors as firearms, subjecting them to extensive regulations.
Texas argued that the federal suppressor regulations hinder residents’ ability to protect their hearing, a health and well-being issue. However, the court found this argument insufficient, stating that Texas’s interest was derivative of its citizens’ individual Second Amendment claims and did not constitute a valid quasi-sovereign interest.
Attorney Tony McDonald, representing the Texas residents, indicated plans to refine the lawsuit and refile with more specific allegations to better establish standing. McDonald stated, “We will go back to the trial court, re-tool our declarations and allegations, re-file the case, and ask the court to take up the rest of the summary judgment questions again.”
Joe Biden launched a new 30-second advertisement emphasizing his commitment to gun control, just days after his son, Hunter Biden, was convicted on felony gun charges.
Biden’s move also follows the Supreme Court’s decision to roll back a national ban on bump stocks.
The Supreme Court recently ruled 6-3 that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) overstepped its authority by classifying bump stocks as illegal machine guns.
This decision overturns the ban implemented during Donald Trump’s presidency, which was a response to the 2017 Las Vegas massacre where a deranged killer allegedly used a bump against to kill people for the first time in recorded history.
In the newly released ad, Biden accuses former President Trump of being influenced by the National Rifle Association (NRA) and failing to take meaningful action on gun control.
“When Trump was president—children gunned down in classrooms, innocent people killed in church, and massacred at a concert. Still, Trump did nothing,” Biden asserts. “He sided with the NRA, but I sided with you. I’ve expanded background checks, created an office of gun violence prevention, and now murder rates are down.”
Biden concludes the ad with a direct message to viewers: “You and your family deserve to be safe and I’m going to fight like hell to see to it that you are.”
In response to the Supreme Court ruling, Biden urged Congress to take further action, stating, “Congress must ban bump stocks, pass an assault weapon ban, and take additional action to save lives. Send a bill to my desk. I will sign it immediately.”
Of course, Biden’s “assault weapon” ban is far more expansive than AR-15 rifles; the GOSAFE Act being pushed by Biden’s Democrats in D.C. serves as a de facto ban on most semi-automatic firearms, including most commonly owned rifles, shotguns and pistols.
The timing of Biden’s ad is notable, coming just days after a federal jury in Delaware convicted his son, Hunter Biden, on three felony gun charges.
These charges are related to Hunter’s 2018 purchase of a revolver, for which he falsely claimed he was not a drug user. Hunter Biden faces up to 25 years in prison for these charges, further complicating the president’s stance on gun control.
Joe Biden’s ad and his call for more stringent gun control measures come at a critical time, as the ATF continues facing court room losses over its regulatory authority.
With his latest polling numbers in the toilet, Biden is doubling down on his stance as a staunch advocate for more gun control in hopes of resurrecting his fledgling campaign.
Help us fight back against Biden’s anti-gun agenda!
In a contentious ruling, the Supreme Court decided that individuals deemed by a court to pose a credible threat to the safety of another can be temporarily disarmed.
This decision upholds the federal statute 18 U.S.C. §922(g)(8), which prohibits firearm possession for those under domestic violence restraining orders, marking a significant move towards the potential for abuse under “red flag” gun confiscation laws.
Zackey Rahimi challenged the statute after being indicted for possessing a firearm while under a domestic violence restraining order.
Initially, the Fifth Circuit ruled in Rahimi’s favor, questioning whether the statute aligned with historical firearm regulations as required by the Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.
Chief Justice Roberts, writing for the majority, emphasized the historical precedent of disarming individuals who pose a threat to public safety. The Court held that while the Second Amendment secures the right to keep and bear arms, this right is not unlimited and allows for regulations that prevent potential violence.
The ruling clarified that modern laws must align with historical practices of firearm regulation.
Justice Thomas stood alone in dissent, arguing that the majority failed to correctly apply the text, history, and tradition of the Second Amendment. He contended that the historical precedents cited did not justify the broad restrictions imposed by §922(g)(8).
This ruling reaffirms the government’s perceived ability to enforce firearm regulations aimed at preventing violence, but it also raises concerns about overreach and the misuse of restraining orders.
Chris McNutt, President of Texas Gun Rights, voiced strong opposition to the ruling, highlighting its potential misuse:
“Let me be clear, Rahimi is a scumbag. I firmly believe that if someone is dangerous, you should try them, convict them and, if guilty, lock them up and throw away the key. Anything less is a blatant disgrace. But this ruling is an assault on our rights protected by the Fifth and Second Amendment by disarming people who haven’t committed a crime.”
The Supreme Court’s decision sets a precedent for how future challenges to firearm regulations might be handled, particularly in dealing with “red flag” gun confiscation laws, where firearms can be seized without due process of the law, and without a crime being committed.
A bill to prohibit these types of laws in Texas is a legislative priority for Texas Gun Rights and was filed by Rep. Briscoe Cain during 88th legislative session (HB 1894), but the measure died after Republicans Justin Holland and Sam Harless walked out of a critical committee vote, empowering Democrats to kill the bill.
According to a recent article published by The Hill, Senator John Cornyn expressed that he is not averse to the idea of teaming up with Democrats to pass gun control legislation to ban bumpstocks (and other items) following the Supreme Court’s recent ruling striking down the ATF’s overreach in classifying bump stocks as machine guns.
When will he learn!?
The Supreme Court’s decision in Garland v. Cargill was a monumental victory for our Second Amendment rights, reaffirming that the ATF exceeded its statutory authority.
However, Senator Cornyn and some Democrats are now signaling their willingness to undermine this ruling by supporting new legislative measures to ban bump stocks — and any firearm that they believe fires “too fast.”
Considering many anti-gun Democrats keep trying to ban most semi-automatic firearms with the GOSAFE Act, we must send a clear message to Senator Cornyn: No Gun Control Deals!
Please take a moment to call Senator Cornyn’s office at (202) 224-2934 and tell him to respect the Supreme Court’s decision and stand firm against any new gun control measures.
Here’s what you can say:
“Senator Cornyn, as a supporter of Texas Gun Rights, I urge you to respect the Supreme Court’s ruling in Garland v. Cargill. Do not support any new legislation to ban bump stocks or any other firearm that Democrats believe fires ‘too fast.’ No Gun Control Deals!”
Your voice is crucial in this fight.
Joe Biden and his lackeys believe that if they can pass radical gun control through Congress before November, it will save his hide amid horrendous polling numbers.
Given that weak Republicans like U.S. Senator John Cornyn always cave to the gun grabbers when they turn up the heat, I’m afraid that anything is possible in D.C. right now.
That’s why it is critical you call Cornyn and tell him to not give Joe Biden this win.
And once you call Cornyn, I hope you will consider chipping in $25, 50 or even $150 to help Texas Gun Rights continue mobilizing pro-gun Texans across the state.
Thank you for your continued support and vigilance.
Joe Biden and his pals in Congress aren’t stopping.
With Sleepy Joe’s poll numbers continually tanking, he and his radical allies are banking on gun control to revive his fledgling campaign.
H.R. 8600, filed by Rep. Lucy McBath (D-GA), was recently filed and it is a renewed push for Biden’s “GOSAFE Act” filed by Sen. Heinrich (D-NM) in 2023.
This draconian measure would serve as a de facto ban on all Semi-Auto firearms!
That’s why it is critical you sign your petition instructing your elected officials to VOTE NO on H.R.8600 / S.3369 and STOP Biden’s Gun Ban.
If passed, the “GOSAFE Act” would:
Ban Most Modern Firearms in America
The anti-gun left wants to end private firearms ownership because it stands in the way of their agenda. But this bill would ban most semi-automatic firearms, including most commonly owned rifles, shotguns, and handguns in America.
Ban magazines that hold more than a handful of rounds
To make sure most American firearms are included in this gun grab, they are proposing to ban standard capacity magazines that hold more than ten rounds — including many 9mm handguns! But if that wasn’t far enough, they’re proposing any firearm that accepts a detachable magazine should be a prohibited weapon!
Mandate Federal Approval for All Future Firearm Designs
This means the ATF would have unprecedented control over gun manufacturing, requiring gun owners and manufacturers to seek approval for new designs. The ATF, under the “leadership” of Steve Dettelbach, has shown its incompetence and bias against lawful individuals in their war on gun owners.
Outlaw Private Gunsmithing
Just as our forefathers armed themselves to win America’s independence, modern-day tyrants like Joe Biden and congressional Democrats want to strip away our right to self-manufacture firearms.
Incentivize Federal Gun “Buy Backs”
The government cannot “buy back” anything it never owned! This scheme only sets the table for outright confiscation and is the precursor to not allowing any type of “grandfather clause.”
The GOSAFE Act would prohibit most Semi-automatic firearms — which are among the most used handguns, rifles and shotguns in America.
It’s Dianne Feinstein’s notorious “Assault Weapons” ban wrapped up in a new, more expansive package.
Such a ban would turn many gun owners into felons and set America on the path toward outright confiscation — especially when combined with the Biden-ATF’s recent Universal Gun Registration efforts.
Nancy Pelosi would call it “a slippery slope.”
These types of bills are often sold as ways to reduce crime and “save lives”, yet evidence shows that they only limit the ability of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves effectively.
That’s why your voice is so important…but mobilizing gun owners takes a tremendous amount of resources.
Weatherford, TX – In a pivotal decision underscoring the inviolability of the Second Amendment, the Supreme Court has rightly ruled against the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) in Garland v. Cargill.
This ruling decisively ends the ATF’s attempt to classify bump stocks as machine guns under the National Firearms Act, marking a significant triumph for gun rights advocates and a rebuke of federal overreach.
Justice Gorsuch, writing for the majority, asserted “It is not the role of bureaucrats to rewrite the law. The ATF’s unilateral reclassification of bump stocks as machine guns was an overreach that cannot stand.”
“Today’s ruling is a monumental victory for the Second Amendment and a stern rebuke to the ATF’s reckless overreach” said Chris McNutt, President of Texas Gun Rights. “Although we won this battle, we know the ATF’s war on gun owners is far from over. TXGR will continue fighting to rein in and ultimately abolish this tyrannical agency.”
The ruling should have positive ramifications for TXGR’s ongoing lawsuit against the ATF over their forced reset trigger ban, and serves as a resounding blow to the ongoing efforts by anti-gun factions to incrementally erode Second Amendment protections through regulatory subterfuge.
Texas Gun Rights (TXGR) was established to defend and promote the Second Amendment rights of Texans. Over the years, TXGR has mobilized over 500,000 Texans in defense of the Second Amendment and has been instrumental in passing pro-gun legislation in the state. Our mission is to make Texas a place where gun owners can thrive without burdensome regulations and to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is preserved for future generations.
Once the smoke cleared after the Republican primary in Texas’ 23rd Congressional District on March 5, 2024, incumbent Congressman Tony Gonzales (R-TX) and his challenger Brandon Herreraended up as the top two finishers, picking up 45.4% and 24.2% of the vote respectively. Since neither obtained over 50% of the vote, Gonzales and Herrera are headed to a runoff on May 28, 2024.
This runoff is no random political development. It’s the result of Gonzales’s sketchy legislative track record on gun rights over the past two years of his congressional term.
Since being elected to Congress in 2020 to represent Texas’ 23rd district, Gonzales has proven himself to be a loyal minion of the DC ruling class. The Uvalde shooting of May 24, 2022, was when Gonzales demonstrated his true colors on the right to bear arms.
The shooting took place in Gonzales’s district, which naturally had a major impact on him. Instead of soberly processing the situation and focusing on the Uvalde Police Department’s cowardly decision to stand down and not deal with the mass murderer who slaughtered 21 people in a timely manner, Gonzales succumbed to the corporate media’s immediate push for gun control by playing an instrumental role in the passage of the “Bipartisan Safer Communities Act.”
This gun control package was championed by Republican Senator John Cornyn and Democrat Senator Chris Murphy in the United States Senate, and was ultimately passed with bipartisan support after weak-kneed Republicans like Gonzales got on board.
Joe Biden described the BSCA as “the most significant gun [control] legislation to pass Congress in 30 years.”
This bill secured $750 million in federal funding for state “red flag” gun confiscation order programs that offer no due process protections. Essentially, an individual who is suspected of posing a threat to themselves or others could have their firearms confiscated without even a judicial hearing. Additionally, this bill allocated $300 million to facilitate the entry of millions of juvenile records into NICS and the reporting on them without any regard for due process.
$200 million would also go towards the states to handle their new juvenile records reporting requirement, while $100 million would be allocated towards meeting the “additional resource needs” of the NICS system. Such a move represents a significant expansion of the NICS database, which many gun owners perceive as a step towards establishing a de facto gun registry.
To make matters worse, the BSCA could potentially subject countless lawful gun dealers to criminal penalties. This law establishes new language for a “dealer”, thereby making numerous Federal Firearms License (FFL) holders criminally liable for “dealing without a license” for selling firearms that are later used in criminal acts. The definition of an FFL is broadened to encompass any individual who sells firearms to “predominantly earn a profit” as opposed to anyone who engages in such activity to make a living. In effect, many private gun sales could be subject to criminal penalties.
These among other provisions make the BSCA a gun control abomination that no self-respecting conservative should ever support. Gonzales portrays himself as a staunch conservative, but in a moment of great political tension, he folded like a lawn chair.
Thankfully grassroots conservatives in the Lone Star State did not ignore Gonzales’s Second Amendment treachery.
Gonzales’s challenger, Brandon Herrera, made his name as a firearms manufacturer and host of a YouTube channel that has over 3 million subscribers.
Herrera felt compelled to throw his hat in the political ring because Gonzales had not lived up to his constituents’ pro-gun values during his time in office. Undoubtedly, Herrera is the candidate of the grassroots in this runoff election as he runs on a platform to fully restore the Second Amendment.
Primaries continue serving a useful purpose as a way to expose the lackluster track record of establishment politicians and punish them for their misbehavior at the ballot box. Primary elections are one of the democratic mechanisms that pro-gun activists can still use to keep the political class in line and even knock some of their minions if the right political stars align. These elections should not be overlooked.
The undeniable reality of politics is that when politicians are allowed to legislate in an anti-liberty manner, they will only escalate their efforts to destroy our liberties. Only dedicated grassroots activists who are willing to inflict political pain on bad politicians will restore the sacred liberties that have been stripped from us over the past century.
Brandon Herrera represents the will of Texas grassroots voters who have yearned for no compromise, pro-Second Amendment leadership. The pro-gun YouTuber upsetting Gonzales on March 28 will send a strong message to Texas’ political class that Second Amendment betrayals will no longer be tolerated.
This is one race that pro-gun observers should observe with great interest.
Call Tony Gonzales at (210) 806-9920. Tell him to reverse course and start standing up for the Second Amendment!
Exposing politicians through mail, digital ads and text messages isn’t cheap! Help fund Texas Gun Rights’ efforts to mobilize pro-gun Texans to defend the Second Amendment today:
2024 Republican Primary Runoff: May 28th (early voting: May 20-24)
The candidates listed below have returned a PRO-GUN Texas Gun Rights Candidate Survey and pledged to fight for your gun rights without compromise.
Don’t see your candidate? Tell them to fill out their TXGR Candidate Survey today! Print/Download candidate survey here.
**Last updated 5/13/24**
U.S. Congress
CD 7: Caroline Kane (pro-gun survey)
CD 12: John O’Shea (pro-gun survey)
CD 23: Brandon Herrera (TXGR PAC-endorsed)
CD 29:…awaiting survey return
CD 32:…awaiting survey return
CD 35:…awaiting survey return
Texas Senate
SD 30: Jace Yarbrough (TXGR PAC-endorsed)
Texas House
HD 1: …awaiting survey return
HD 12: Trey Wharton ((pro-gun survey)
HD 12: Ben Bius (pro-gun survey)
HD 21: David Covey (TXGR PAC-endorsed)
HD 29: …awaiting survey return
HD 30: AJ Louderback (TXGR PAC-endorsed)
HD 33: Katrina Pierson (TXGR PAC-endorsed)
HD 44: Alan Schoolcraft (pro-gun survey)
HD 58: Helen Kerwin (TXGR PAC-endorsed)
HD 61: Keresa Richardson (TXGR PAC-endorsed)
HD 64: Andy Hopper (TXGR PAC-endorsed)
HD 91: David Lowe (TXGR PAC-endorsed)
HD 97: Cheryl Bean (TXGR PAC-endorsed)
County Chair
Collin County: Ellen Loveless (TXGR PAC-endorsed)
Disclaimer:
Returning a pro-gun survey does NOT constitute an endorsement of any candidate for office. The list of pro-gun survey respondents is for informational purposes so gun owners know EXACTLY which candidates for public office have pledged their commitment to protecting gun rights.
Texas Gun Rights is the Texas affiliate of the National Association for Gun Rights, a tax exempt non-profit organization under IRC 501(c)(4) which does not endorse, support, or oppose candidates for election. Candidate endorsements are reserved for our political action committee, Texas Gun Rights PAC.
Need more context on the survey questions? Read background information here.
In a recent CBS “Face the Nation” segment that’s now making rounds across social media for all the wrong reasons, ATF’s Firearms Ammunition Technology Division acting chief, Chris Bort, found himself under fire. Billed as a “firearms expert,” Bort’s struggle with a task as basic as disassembling a Glock pistol—a procedure often regarded as straightforward within gun enthusiast circles—has ignited a flurry of criticism and ridicule.
WATCH: Chris Bort—the acting chief of the ATF’s Firearms Ammunition Technology Division—struggled at disassembling a Glock style handgun during a made-for-tv scaremongering interview with Steven Dettelbach, the director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms on CBS News. pic.twitter.com/rzcZ0lFGmB
The Glock, known for its widespread use and simple maintenance, has been a staple in the firearms community for its ease of disassembly. This routine process, achievable by individuals with minimal instruction, seemed to puzzle Bort, an official whose role significantly impacts the enforcement of Second Amendment rights in the United States. The episode has raised eyebrows and questions about the competency of those tasked with regulating firearms.
This incident caught the attention of popular YouTuber Garand Thumb, a well-known figure in the Second Amendment community for his engaging and informative firearms content. A former Air Force member, Garand Thumb, took a break from his regular postings to highlight Bort’s gaffe, further amplifying the criticism and adding a layer of embarrassment to the ATF official’s televised misstep.
The episode adds to the ongoing narrative questioning the expertise of individuals in significant positions of authority over gun laws and regulations.
Similar instances, such as Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s misinterpretation of a bump stock’s function, fuel concerns over the knowledge base of those shaping firearms policy. Such misconceptions, particularly when voiced by individuals with the power to influence gun laws, underscore a worrying disconnect between regulators and the technical realities of firearms.
Critics argue that this lack of basic firearms knowledge among key figures could undermine the credibility of institutions like the ATF, tasked with enforcing gun laws. The call for more educated and proficient authorities in matters concerning firearms rights and safety is growing louder, particularly among gun owners and Second Amendment advocates.
The incident not only serves as a moment of embarrassment for the ATF but also as a stark reminder of the importance of firearms education among those in positions to regulate and influence gun policy. As debates over gun control intensify, the competency and expertise of those at the helm of regulation become increasingly crucial.
For many within the pro-gun community, this episode is a vivid illustration of the challenges facing effective firearms regulation and enforcement. It underscores the need for a better-informed approach to gun policy, one that respects the technical nuances of firearms and the rights of law-abiding citizens under the Second Amendment.
In the ongoing debate over Second Amendment rights in the United States, prominent gun control organizations like Giffords and Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Control have positioned themselves at the forefront of the movement as leaders for restricting the right to keep and bear arms.
These groups have taken a particular interest in states they perceive as having lax gun laws, advocating for comprehensive legislative changes that, from a pro-gun perspective, threaten the foundational principles of American liberty and self-defense.
Giffords’ recent assessment identifies states such as Wyoming, Arkansas, Missouri, Kentucky, and Idaho, along with Texas — ranked 20th by Giffords —as having the “worst” gun laws due to their strong protections for gun rights (Texas was ranked 19th “worst” by Everytown, respectively.)
For pro-gun advocates, however, these states represent beacons of freedom and firearms liberty, exemplifying a commitment to upholding the freedoms enshrined in the Second Amendment.
And in the case of Texas, many pro-gun advocates believe Texas should be first when it comes to firearms freedom — not 19th or 20th.
But the legislative priorities proposed by Giffords in Texas, echoed by Bloomberg’s Everytown, underscore a broad agenda to reshape the landscape of gun ownership in the Lone Star State.
These priorities include the implementation of universal gun registration, under the guise of “universal” or “expanded” background checks. Such a system not only raises concerns about privacy and governmental overreach but also lays the groundwork for potential future confiscations, undermining the very essence of the right to keep and bear arms.
Furthermore, the advocacy for extreme risk protection orders, or red flag gun confiscation laws, has been met with significant resistance from pro-gun factions. These laws, which allow for the confiscation of firearms based on unverified allegations, are viewed as a direct violation of due process rights, stripping individuals of their constitutional protections based on mere suspicion.
The call for a ban on so-called “assault weapons” and “large-capacity” magazines represents another contentious issue. Proponents of gun control mischaracterize these firearms and accessories, branding them as inherently dangerous and without legitimate civilian use.
In reality, the term “assault weapon” is a nebulous and politically charged label often applied to a wide range of semi-automatic firearms, including many that are popular among law-abiding gun owners for sport, self-defense, and recreational shooting.
The push to ban these firearms and their standard-capacity magazines, which often hold more than ten rounds, include most 9mm handguns and threaten to encompass the majority of modern handguns and rifles, disregarding their prevalent and lawful use across the country.
Additional legislative goals outlined by Giffords and Everytown include the implementation of waiting periods for firearm purchases, the repeal of Constitutional Carry, and requiring a permit to purchase or possess a firearm.
Each of these measures introduces significant barriers to exercising Second Amendment rights, treating law-abiding citizens as potential criminals and impeding their ability to protect themselves and their families in a timely manner.
Bloomberg’s Everytown takes an even more aggressive stance, advocating for the same priorities as Giffords, but also includes the repeal of Texas’ “Stand Your Ground” and Campus Carry laws.
Everytown is also seeking to undermine recent school security bills that passed in the Texas legislature by disarming teachers in public schools. Worse, they are calling for legislation that would penalize individuals for firearms stolen from them, coupled with a proposal for mandatory firearms storage laws that demand gun owners store their firearms locked, unloaded, and separate from ammunition — a requirement that could prove fatal in many home invasion and self-defense scenarios.
This overarching strategy seeks not only to regulate the tools of self-defense but to reshape the culture of gun ownership in America, casting it in a negative and dangerous light.
The narrative pushed by these gun control groups, particularly in the wake of mass shootings that often take place in “gun free” zones, overlooks critical data and the complex nature of crime in America.
For instance, FBI crime statistics reveal that rifles, including those vilified by the left like the AR-15, are used in a fraction of homicides compared to other means such as handguns, knives, or even hands and fists.
This statistical reality underscores the fallacy of targeting specific firearm types as a solution to violence, ignoring the broader societal issues that contribute to criminal behavior.
Joe Biden’s recent directive to the ATF, aimed at expanding the definition of a dealer in firearms to include private sellers, represents a significant escalation in the push for universal gun registration.
By attempting to regulate all firearm transactions through governmental approval, the administration sets the stage for a comprehensive database of gun owners, a precursor to potential confiscation efforts, especially in the context of any future semi-automatic firearm bans.
Of course, Everytown and Giffords isn’t holding their breath waiting for the Federal Government to pass extreme gun control.
Giffords is backing four candidates running for public office in Texas, including Colin Allred who is challenging the pro-gun U.S. Senator from Texas, Ted Cruz.
Everytown is going further by backing 11 candidates for Texas offices, targeting mostly state legislative races. In Texas, Democrats only need to maintain their current seats and pick up 10 seats to take majority control of the State House.
By diligently working to ensure that the anti-gun actions of politicians are exposed, TXGR aims to maintain the momentum of the pro-gun agenda heading into the November elections. This strategic focus is critical in positioning Texans to effectively counteract Biden and the gun control machine’s relentless anti-gun measures.
As the political landscape heats up, TXGR’s efforts are vital in safeguarding Texans’ right to bear arms and standing firm against any encroachments on their constitutional freedoms.
But as the debate over gun control continues to unfold, the fundamental question remains: will America uphold the Second Amendment rights of its citizens, or will it succumb to a narrative that seeks to disarm the populace under the guise of safety?
For pro-gun Americans, the answer is clear: the right to keep and bear arms is non-negotiable, and they stand ready to defend it against any and all encroachments.
