Latest News

FLIP FLOP: Fact Checking Kamala’s Gun Confiscation Debate Switch Up

Posted on | by TXGRStaff

September 13th, 2024

The debate between President Donald J. Trump and newly installed Democratic nominee Kamala Harris has sent shockwaves through the internet and political media. With Kamala still having failed to conduct a single one-on-one interview or press conference throughout the duration of her campaign, and only releasing a policy page on her campaign website just the night before, voters were anxious to hear the Vice President’s relatively unknown policy proposals and her positions on key issues.

In terms of reception, the debate is unlikely to move the needle any which way. As per usual, Democrats are claiming their guy won, and Republicans are claiming their guy won. Interestingly enough, surveys of independent and undecided voters are heavily skewing in Trump’s favor, which is the primary goal of presidential candidates on the debate stage. Criticisms of Trump include accusations of apparent hostility and anger, while many perceived Kamala as dodging direct questions that most concerned voters.

Hosted on ABC, a top executive of which is long-time friends with Kamala and has donated to her political campaigns, the debate moderators acted with heavy degrees of bias against President Trump. In what many are describing as a 3-on-1 scenario, the moderators often sparred with Trump and “fact checked” many of his claims live. Undoubtedly, Kamala was not faced with the same degree of scrutiny, despite the fact that she espoused numerous widely debunked claims and complete flip-flops on some of her previous policy positions.

Perhaps most egregiously, Kamala refused to address her previous positions on firearms, which include imposing Australia-style mandatory buybacks, a kinder term for confiscation, on the American people.

During the debate, President Trump, rightly, stated that Kamala “wants to confiscate your guns.” In deflective response, she admonished Trump for “lying” about her position, stating that she herself, along with her running mate, Tim Walz, are “both gun owners, we’re not taking anyone’s guns away.” Now, in a just society with a competent, respectable, and unbiased media apparatus, Kamala would have been immediately challenged on this statement and asked to explain the near-countless instances of her public support for gun confiscation. Unfortunately, our nation, and the legacy media complex therein, are about the furthest thing from such an ideal.

Texas Gun Rights has extensively covered Kamala Harris’ tyrannical positions on gun control, and it will be done here once more with a surplus of examples.

Beginning in the immediate present, Kamala’s newly released policy manifesto expresses support for banning so-called “assault weapons,” an ambiguous and commonly undefined term encompassing essentially all semi-automatic weapons. On the campaign trail, Kamala mentions during each rally that she will enact an assault weapons ban if she assumes power. While the direct term “confiscation,” is not explicitly used, inherent with the action of banning something is its forcible removal from society. Whenever leftists mention banning any type of firearm, be assured that confiscations are an implicit fundamental to such a plan.

Prior to running for president in 2024, Kamala was more comfortably open about her true positions on gun ownership. While discussing her plans for an assault weapons ban with radical anti-2nd Amendment group March for Our Lives on MSNBC, she was asked what she would do about the millions of so-called assault weapons already in circulation. “There are approximately 5 million to your point, Craig, we HAVE to have a buyback program, and I support a mandatory buyback program,” the now-presidential candidate proudly proclaimed. 

In her initial run for the presidency in 2020, Kamala is quoted as saying, “I support buybacks and it’s something that I am so passionate about and so looking forward to being president to address.” When questioned on exactly “how mandatory,” her buyback program would be, she responded with “it is mandatory.”

While appearing on The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon, Kamala doubled down on “dealing with the over 2 million assault weapons that are currently in the streets of America.” She goes on to state that a mandatory gun buyback program is a “good idea.” Furthermore, Kamala has repeatedly praised the country of Australia for their implementation of mandatory gun buybacks, which was implemented in 1996 and entailed the mass confiscation and seizure of hundreds of thousands of firearms from law abiding citizens.

Most horrifically, Kamala has consistently boasted her willingness to supersede Constitutional legislative procedure and take dictatorial executive action to ban and confiscate guns from the American people. She frequently claims that, if elected, she would give congress exactly 100 days to act before taking matters into her own hands and signing an executive order to mandate her totalitarian policy proposals. Even then-presidential nominee Joe Biden called out Kamala for the inherent unconstitutionality of such a plan during the Democratic Primary debates in 2020. “You can’t do it by executive order any more than Trump can do things when he says he can do it by executive order,” Joe Biden stated. In a response that was followed by unmitigated cackling, Kamala said simply to her future boss, “Hey Joe, instead of saying ‘no we can’t’ let’s say ‘yes we can.’”

Compiling a comprehensive list including each example of Kamala Harris publicly espousing her support for mandatory gun confiscation is simply an impossible task due to the overwhelming surplus of cases. Despite the fact that the Vice President essentially built her 2020 presidential campaign on gun confiscation, ABC moderators felt it unnecessary to correct or even challenge her on these outrageously unconstitutional statements. Ideally, the American people will be capable of seeing through Kamala’s many lies and obfuscations and come to the understanding that she would be the most totalitarian, dictatorial, and tyrannical president the United States has ever seen, if elected.

The most important takeaways from the debate are the following: Kamala Harris is more than comfortable lying through her teeth to the American people, and the mainstream media apparatus is more than happy to cover for her every step of the way. If she is elected, she will work to strip the American people of their constitutional liberties starting on day one. There has never been a greater threat to the people’s ability to protect and defend themselves than Kamala Harris and her loyal cronies in the media.

Kamala’s refusal to address her past beliefs and her assurance that she “isn’t coming after anyone’s guns,” is less of a flip-flop and more of an obvious yet pragmatic attempt to appear more moderate and shift to the middle during the general election season. Fellow communist and gun grabber Bernie Sanders even attested to the following, while maintaining that Kamala is just as radical as ever. This is nothing new and a common practice among politicians of all kinds. Make no mistake though, she is still the same Kamala Harris that she’s always been.

Texas Gun Rights is the Lone Star State’s premier NO COMPROMISE gun rights organization. We harbor ZERO TOLERANCE for tyrannical and unconstitutional gun control laws that infringe on the God-given liberties of the American people, and we work diligently to ensure that the state of Texas maintains and defends our rights at every level of government. Subscribe to our newsletter to keep up to date with all gun rights related news and donate below to support us in securing your freedoms.

 

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) Announces National Constitutional Carry Act

Posted on | by TXGRStaff

September 13th, 2024

American gun owners could finally experience significant restitution to their God-given constitutional rights at a national scale, thanks to the introduction of H.R. 9534 by Kentucky Representative Thomas Massie.

As a result of the blood, sweat, and tears of 2nd Amendment advocates, gun owners in 29 states are currently allowed to freely exercise their right to self-defense without fear of persecution, fines, or fees from the government. Unfortunately, 21 states still harbor fiercely unconstitutional and restrictive gun laws that limit open and concealed carry in public, infringing on American liberty. The National Constitutional Carry Act would universalize this wildly popular policy that gun owners across America have worked diligently to enshrine into their respective state’s laws for decades.

By prohibiting state and local governments from imposing criminal or civil penalties on public carrying and invalidating all active state laws that do so, Massie’s new bill would constitute perhaps the greatest leap forward for American gun owners in decades. In what would be a dream come true for all constitutionally minded Americans, the Act fulfills the promises of the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause by federally safeguarding the right to bear arms against tyrannical infringements. 

Major gun rights organizations across the country have endorsed Massie’s new legislation, which is cosponsored by more than twenty other members of Congress. The District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and other United States territories and jurisdictions would also enjoy protection under this bill.

For the many Americans who frequently engage in interstate travel, this bill would prevent any forms of confusion regarding state-to-state gun laws, saving law-abiding gun owners from excessive criminal penalties based on where they decide to exercise their God-given rights. 

Each time a Constitutional Carry law has been passed in individual states, it has been met with fierce opposition from liberal Democrats. They assert that constitutional carry would exacerbate rates of gun violence and crime, painting emotionally jarring pictures of the fulfillment of Constitutional rights. Based on the evidence, reality dictates the exact opposite pattern. More guns in the hands of ordinary, law-abiding individuals prevents the pervasive victimization that criminal entities plan to inflict on the public and dissuade their evil tendencies.

Although the bill is unlikely to see a vote in the near future, and certain to be struck down by the sitting president and current Democratic nominee if she assumes power, voters ought to keep a sharp eye on the progression of Massie’s proposal. Even without passing, this bill can serve a pivotal purpose in exposing weak, spineless, and traitorous Republican politicians who may decide to impede its success. Any Republican who hinders the advancement of National Constitutional Carry in any capacity should be called out and primaried. Merely standing as a suggestion, the bill could help root out detractors within Republican ranks.

Any and all individuals who respect and support the Constitution and its principles would be in full support of such a policy. There are no Constitutionally sound or logical arguments against it. Individuals in Democrat-run areas, which are rampant with crime and violence thanks to their disastrous policies, should be able to protect and defend themselves without tyrannical hindrances that leave their very lives at the behest of criminals. Federal protection for Constitutional rights is necessary when such actors at the state level work to disarm their population.

Texas Gun Rights is the Lone Star State’s premier NO COMPROMISE gun rights organization. We worked diligently to secure Constitutional Carry at the state level here in Texas, and we proudly endorse Thomas Massie’s proposal to secure Constitutional liberties nationwide. To support our efforts, donate below!

 

Memphis Gun Control Attempt STRUCK DOWN by Tennessee Secretary of State, City Council SUES Election Commission

Posted on | by TXGRStaff

September 10th, 2024

In July, the Memphis City Council voted to implement a series of ballot measures relating to firearm restrictions and gun control on the November 5th general election ballots. 

The approved referendum allowed city residents to vote on the installation of various gun control measures within city limits, all of which impose far tighter restrictions on gun ownership than Tennessee state law permits. If passed, the measures would become amendments to the Memphis city charter. In this brazen attempt to override the state’s implementation of Constitutional Carry and further infringe on Second Amendment rights, the proposed policies included the following:

  1. No person shall be allowed to carry a handgun in the City of Memphis without possessing a valid handgun carry permit.
  2. No person shall be allowed to carry, store, or travel with a handgun in a vehicle in the City of Memphis without possessing a valid handgun permit.
  3. It shall be unlawful for a person to store a firearm, whether loaded or unloaded, or firearm ammunition, in a motor vehicle or boat while the person is not in the motor vehicle or boat unless the firearm or firearm ammunition is kept from ordinary observation and locked within the trunk, utility or glove box, or a locked container securely affixed to the motor vehicle or boat.
  4. The citizens of Memphis hereby find and declare that the proliferation and use of assault weapons pose a threat to the health, safety, and security of all citizens of Memphis.
  5. Hereafter, it shall be unlawful and prohibited for a person to possess or carry, openly or concealed, any assault rifles in the City of Memphis. Persons with valid handgun permits are exempt from this restriction when possessing or carrying an assault rifle on their privately owned property or at a shooting range.
  6. Hereafter, the commercial sale of assault rifles within the City of Memphis is unlawful and is hereby prohibited.

Within the Memphis City Council’s attempt to erode the Constitutional liberties of American citizens is an inherent violation of Tennessee’s recently implemented preemption law, which bars city ordinances from enacting gun control laws stricter than those at the state level. Should any such amendment pass through by voter consent, they would face almost immediate and disqualifying legal challenges thanks to this preemption law.

Luckily for Tennessee residents, Tre Hargett, the Tennessee Secretary of State, announced that he would not approve ballots for the city of Memphis with the measures present. Additionally, Republican state leadership threatened to withhold funding to the city in response to such egregious attempts at eroding gun rights. The Shelby County Elections Commission removed gun control measures from county ballots in response to these threats.

Now, the Memphis City Council has sued the Commission in an effort to reinstate the ballot measures. JB Smiley Jr., the Council Chairman, announced the lawsuit during a press conference alongside other council members. In the announcement, they attacked state Republicans with accusations of being unpatriotic and anti-democratic, while also asserting that they are compromising on their “pro-life” values by supporting gun rights. 

Memphis is one of the few Democratic Party strongholds in the state of Tennessee, which explains its significant crime and violence rates. The city has experienced record-breaking numbers of murders, assaults, rapes, and robberies in recent years. Because the city is incapable of controlling rampant crime, they now want to control the gun ownership of law-abiding citizens and eliminate their right to self-defense. 

Similarly to Tennessee, Texas also has preemption law relating to gun rights. Local governments and municipalities are not allowed to enact laws that restrict any Texan’s ability to own, use, or carry a firearm to a greater degree than dictated by the state legislature. Whether you’re in Celeste or Houston, your Second Amendment right to self-defense is protected.

Texas Gun Rights is the Lone Star State’s premier NO COMPROMISE gun rights organization. We’ve worked to secure your right to bear arms and have fought against every infringement the Radical Left has tried to impose. There’s still much more work to be done, so consider supporting our work by donating below!

 

Nashville Transgender Shooter’s Manifesto Reveals Radical Leftist Ramblings

Posted on | by TXGRStaff
September 9th, 2024

The manifesto of Audrey Hale, the transgender shooter who killed six Christians at The Covenant School in Nashville, has finally been released, shedding light on the deep mental health issues that drove her March 2023 attack.

The 90-page journal reveals Hale’s struggles with identity, her resentment toward Christianity, and her obsession with racial politics.

Hale, a 28-year-old female who identified as male, meticulously planned the deadly assault, leaving behind disturbing insights into her state of mind.

In one chilling entry, Hale wrote, “If God won’t give me a boy body in heaven, then Jesus is a f—ggot,” showcasing her disdain for religious teachings and the confusion she felt about her gender identity.

The manifesto is filled with evidence of mental illness, including suicidal thoughts, and shows how her internal turmoil was left untreated. These revelations come at a time when radical leftists continue to promote gender-affirming care for minors, despite the growing evidence that such care could exacerbate underlying mental health issues.

While Hale’s writings reveal the tragic consequences of unchecked mental illness, the radical left is pushing for policies that promote these very struggles.

Gender-affirming care, including puberty blockers and irreversible surgeries, has been hailed by left-leaning individuals as a solution to gender identity issues. Yet, as Hale’s manifesto shows, these ideologies can deepen mental health problems and lead to devastating outcomes.

The mental health struggles seen in Hale’s case align with a broader pattern among left-leaning individuals.

A study conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic revealed that individuals who align with leftist ideologies experienced higher levels of mental distress compared to those on the right.

This divide, which existed even before the pandemic, worsened as lockdowns and public health measures took a toll. Republicans, on the other hand, reported better mental well-being throughout the pandemic, highlighting the significant mental health disparity between political groups.

This is not surprising, given the left’s embrace of ideologies that often celebrate mental illness under the guise of social progress. By encouraging youth to question their gender and undergo life-altering medical procedures, left-leaning individuals are contributing to a growing mental health crisis. Hale’s case is a tragic example of what happens when mental illness goes untreated, and the results are nothing short of catastrophic.

At the same time, radical leftists continue to push for gun control in the wake of tragedies like the Covenant School shooting.

Their calls to disarm law-abiding citizens come as their own policies, such as endorsing gender-affirming care for minors, make the mental health crisis worse.

Instead of addressing the root causes of these tragedies, leftists focus on restricting the rights of responsible gun owners, ignoring the very real mental health crisis at play.

Hale’s journal also reveals an obsession with race and privilege, another hallmark of radical leftist ideology. She expressed hatred for children from privileged backgrounds, writing about her disdain for “fancy private schools” and kids with “white privileges.”

This fixation on racial politics, combined with her gender confusion, created a volatile mix of emotions that ultimately led to her horrific actions.

As radical leftists continue to advocate for gun control and push dangerous ideologies, it’s clear that their policies are making things worse: America’s mental health crisis is being fueled by these harmful ideas, leaving individuals like Hale without the help they desperately need.

Texas Gun Rights will continue fighting against these failed policies and defend the rights of law-abiding citizens. Rather than disarming those who seek to protect themselves, we must confront the mental health crisis that is being fueled by radical ideologies and ensure that individuals receive the care they need before it’s too late.

Support the fight to protect your Second Amendment rights by donating to Texas Gun Rights today.

Gun Control Empowering Venezuelan Gangs in Colorado

Posted on | by Chris M

September 6, 2024

A brutal wave of gang violence has descended on Colorado, as Venezuelan prison gangs, led by the infamous Tren de Aragua, have overtaken apartment complexes and unleashed terror in Aurora, a suburb of Denver. This alarming development is the direct result of President Joe Biden’s open border policies, Denver’s sanctuary city stance, and Colorado’s relentless push for gun control—creating a perfect storm where criminals are armed and law-abiding citizens are left defenseless.

Aurora, a peaceful bedroom community east of Denver, has become ground zero for the violent operations of Tren de Aragua, a gang born in the lawless Venezuelan prison system. The gang has seized multiple apartment complexes, turning them into strongholds for their illicit activities and leaving residents in fear. These developments come despite Aurora’s efforts to resist Denver’s sanctuary city policies, which have made the Mile-High City one of the largest destinations for illegal immigration in the nation.

Denver’s open arms for illegal immigrants have resulted in over 40,000 migrants flooding the city since December 2022, straining public services and creating a breeding ground for criminal elements like Tren de Aragua. The gang, which has been recruiting within the U.S. among migrant communities, has spread its violent influence across multiple states, but it’s in Colorado where the impact is being felt most acutely.

President Biden’s open border policies have only exacerbated the situation. Gang leaders like Jhonardy Jose Pacheco-Chirino, known as “Galleta” or “Cookie,” were able to cross the southern border without any resistance. Despite his criminal past, Pacheco-Chirino was released into the U.S. and quickly set up shop in Aurora, where he and his gang members have been linked to violent assaults and shootings. Thanks to weak immigration enforcement, gang members like Pacheco-Chirino are free to terrorize American communities.

But Biden’s border policies are only one part of the problem. Colorado’s left-wing gun control laws have ensured that the only people with guns in the state are criminals, while law-abiding citizens are stripped of their Second Amendment rights. In 2024 alone, Colorado passed a slew of gun control measures, including:

  • HB24-1353, which requires gun dealers to obtain a state permit, undergo background checks, and implement stringent security measures.
  • HB24-1174, which forces concealed carry permit holders to undergo expanded training, including live-fire exercises, before exercising their right to self-defense.
  • SB24-131, which bans firearms in “sensitive spaces” like government buildings, polling places, and schools, further limiting where law-abiding citizens can protect themselves.

These laws, hailed as “gun safety” measures by the left, have effectively disarmed law-abiding Coloradans, while criminals like the members of Tren de Aragua face no such restrictions. The gang has taken over apartment complexes in Aurora, using them as bases of operation for violent crime, while residents and property owners are left vulnerable and unable to defend themselves.

The tragic irony is that Denver’s sanctuary city policies and the Colorado legislature’s gun control laws have made it easier for gangs to operate while making it harder for law-abiding citizens to fight back. What’s happening in Aurora is just a glimpse of what’s to come if these policies are allowed to continue unchecked.

Colorado, once known for its rugged individualism and respect for personal freedoms, has now become a haven for criminal gangs and a nightmare for residents who are unable to protect their families. The state’s gun control laws have done nothing to stop the criminals, who continue to acquire firearms illegally while Coloradans are forced to jump through hoops to exercise their constitutional rights.

The rise of Venezuelan prison gangs in Colorado is a direct consequence of the failed policies of the Biden administration, Denver’s sanctuary city status, and the Colorado legislature’s misguided gun control efforts. While criminals run rampant, residents are left defenseless—stripped of their rights by the very politicians who claim to be protecting them.

Texas Gun Rights is working tirelessly to ensure that the rights of law-abiding Texans are restored and that we can defend ourselves in the face of rising crime. It’s critical the policies that have turned Colorado into a haven for gangs never make their way to the Lone Star State.

Stay vigilant and support Texas Gun Rights as we fight to protect your right to bear arms and defend yourself against the lawlessness enabled by open borders and gun control.

YouTube’s New Policy on Gun and Ammo Links Raises First Amendment Concerns

Posted on | by Chris M

September 5, 2024

YouTube’s recent announcement that channels posting links to gun and ammunition dealers will face bans has sparked significant controversy, with many critics arguing that the policy infringes upon First Amendment rights.

Despite YouTube’s status as a private company with its own terms of service, the policy has been criticized as an overreach that limits free expression and access to information.

The policy, outlined in a recent update, prohibits users from including links to websites that sell firearms or ammunition. YouTube justifies this move as part of its efforts to enhance community safety and comply with regulatory standards. However, this decision has raised concerns about its potential impact on constitutional freedoms, particularly the First Amendment.

The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees freedom of speech and the press, which encompasses the right to share and access a broad spectrum of information. Critics argue that by banning channels for linking to gun and ammo dealers, YouTube is effectively censoring discussions related to firearms, a topic of considerable public interest and debate. This restriction, they argue, stifles open dialogue and limits the ability of individuals to freely share information.

While YouTube, as a private platform, is not legally bound by the First Amendment in the same way that government entities are, its policies still have substantial implications for free speech. The platform’s widespread influence means that its content moderation practices can significantly shape public discourse.

By imposing such restrictions, critics contend that YouTube is setting a troubling precedent for how digital platforms handle sensitive subjects and potentially undermining the spirit of free expression.

Moreover, this policy highlights a growing tension between digital platforms’ content control and users’ rights to freely share and access information.

As this debate unfolds, it underscores the broader conversation about the role of private companies in managing public discourse and the balance between platform policies and constitutional protections. While YouTube’s intent may be to promote safety and adhere to legal standards, the broader implications of such policies warrant careful consideration of their impact on free speech and access to information.

Fourth Circuit Defies Bruen by Upholding Registration Scheme

Posted on | by Chris M

September 4, 2024

In a blatant defiance of the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision, the Fourth Circuit Court has upheld Maryland’s Handgun Qualification License (HQL) law, which requires citizens to obtain a permit simply to purchase a firearm.

This ruling, handed down by a more liberal-leaning court, goes far beyond the original scope of Bruen, which struck down laws requiring permits to carry handguns, and instead imposes a government-controlled registry of every gun and gun owner in the state.

The Bruen decision, authored by Justice Clarence Thomas in 2022, was a monumental victory for gun rights advocates, establishing that any law restricting gun ownership must align with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.

The ruling struck down “may-issue” laws, which required individuals to prove a specific need to carry a handgun in public, affirming that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to carry firearms without excessive government interference.

However, Maryland’s HQL law takes this a step further by requiring law-abiding citizens to jump through numerous bureaucratic hoops—four hours of training, live-fire testing, fingerprinting, and a waiting period—just to purchase a handgun. In essence, this law functions as a de facto registry, tracking every gun owner and their firearms through state control, an undeniable infringement on the Second Amendment.

The Fourth Circuit’s ruling is not only a defiance of Bruen, but it also sets a dangerous precedent. By allowing states to require permits simply to purchase a firearm, it opens the door for widespread gun registries—an outcome that is not only unconstitutional but also unthinkable to the Founding Fathers, who fought against government overreach.

“The Fourth Circuit is clearly disregarding the Bruen decision and the Second Amendment,” said Texas Gun Rights President Chris McNutt. “This permit-to-purchase law serves as nothing more than a state-controlled gun registry, and it’s an affront to the freedoms our Founding Fathers intended for us. Texas Gun Rights will continue to fight these rulings and ensure that the rights of gun owners are fully restored.”

Maryland’s HQL law is a prime example of how the left continues to undermine Bruen and chip away at the Second Amendment. For anti-gun politicians, permit systems like this are a dream—allowing them to collect data on every gun and gun owner, while imposing lengthy delays and barriers that could discourage law-abiding citizens from exercising their constitutional rights.

The Fourth Circuit’s decision is a reminder that the fight for gun rights is far from over. With liberal courts determined to undo the progress made by Bruen, gun rights organizations like Texas Gun Rights are more important than ever in defending the freedoms guaranteed by the Second Amendment.

Support Texas Gun Rights as we continue to fight for your freedoms and ensure the Second Amendment is restored to its full strength.

Federal Judge: Machine Guns are Protected Under the Second Amendment

Posted on | by Chris M

September 4, 2024

A federal judge in Kansas has ruled that machine guns are protected under the Second Amendment, marking a significant victory for gun rights advocates.

U.S. District Judge John Broomes, a Trump appointee, handed down the ruling in United States v. Morgan, where Tamori Morgan was charged with two counts of illegal machine gun possession. Broomes dismissed the charges, using the Supreme Court’s landmark Bruen decision to argue that the government failed to demonstrate that machine gun regulations align with the nation’s historical firearm traditions.

Morgan’s defense invoked the Bruen ruling, which came down in 2022, establishing that any firearm regulation must be consistent with “this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.” The decision, written by Justice Clarence Thomas for the Republican-appointed majority, created a new standard for judging gun laws, one that Judge Broomes used to determine that federal machine gun restrictions are unconstitutional. Broomes emphasized that the government could not provide historical precedents supporting such regulations, leading to his conclusion that the Second Amendment protects even fully automatic firearms.

This ruling has the potential to be a game-changer in the fight for gun rights. For years, gun control advocates have pushed the narrative that certain firearms — particularly so-called “weapons of war” — should be banned or heavily restricted. But as Judge Broomes’ decision demonstrates, those same weapons are precisely the kinds of arms the Second Amendment was intended to protect. After all, the founders wrote the amendment to ensure citizens could defend themselves and the security of a free state, which necessarily includes access to the same kinds of weapons the military uses.

The Bruen decision has been instrumental in undoing decades of unconstitutional gun control. Its insistence on historical precedent has thrown gun laws across the country into question, providing the legal foundation for overturning restrictions that infringe on Americans’ Second Amendment rights. The decision is already having a ripple effect, with rulings like Broomes’ sending a clear message: all gun laws — including those targeting so-called “dangerous and unusual” weapons — are forms of gun control and are unconstitutional.

Texas Gun Rights President Chris McNutt expressed his strong support for this ruling, calling it a major victory for gun owners across America:

“This ruling reaffirms what we’ve been saying all along: all gun laws are unconstitutional. The Second Amendment was written to protect ‘weapons of war’ because the people must be armed to stand against tyranny. We hope this decision sets the stage for dismantling every anti-gun law in America, and Texas Gun Rights will continue supporting these efforts until the Second Amendment is fully restored.”

For pro-gun advocates, this is exactly the kind of ruling needed to roll back federal overreach. Weapons like machine guns, AR-15s, and other firearms routinely targeted by gun control advocates are no different from muskets and rifles of the 18th century. The Second Amendment protects the right to bear arms, without any distinction between types of weapons.

As the Bruen decision continues to reshape the judicial landscape, it becomes clearer that all gun control laws — from federal bans on automatic weapons to local restrictions on magazine capacities — are unconstitutional restrictions on our God-given rights.

Organizations like Texas Gun Rights have been at the forefront of this battle, supporting legal efforts to restore the Second Amendment and undo the damage done by decades of anti-gun legislation. The Morgan case is just one example of how Bruen is helping to overturn these infringements, and Texas Gun Rights will continue to support similar efforts.

Stay vigilant and support Texas Gun Rights as we fight to restore your Second Amendment rights nationwide.

Poll Reveals Overwhelming Support for Right to Bear Arms

Posted on | by Chris M

September 2, 2024

A recent poll has highlighted a strong and widespread public endorsement of the right to bear arms, reflecting enduring support for Second Amendment protections in the United States. According to the survey, a significant majority of Americans continue to advocate for the right to own and carry firearms, underscoring the deeply rooted nature of this constitutional right in American society.

The poll, conducted in August 2024, reveals that a substantial 78% of respondents support the right to bear arms, a figure that remains consistent with previous surveys. This broad approval crosses demographic and political lines, indicating a high level of agreement on the importance of firearm ownership rights.

Supporters of gun rights argue that this widespread endorsement is a testament to the Second Amendment’s role in ensuring personal security and upholding individual freedoms. They point out that the right to bear arms is not only a constitutional guarantee but also a fundamental aspect of American heritage and identity.

The poll also highlights a notable trend in public opinion regarding firearm regulations. While the majority supports the right to bear arms, there is also significant support for reasonable regulations aimed at enhancing public safety. About 65% of respondents believe that while the right to own guns should be protected, there should be sensible measures in place to prevent misuse and ensure responsible ownership.

This nuanced perspective reflects a balanced approach to gun rights, where individuals can support the Second Amendment while also endorsing measures designed to reduce gun violence and improve safety. This viewpoint suggests that while Americans are committed to preserving their right to bear arms, they also recognize the need for effective policies that address safety concerns without undermining fundamental rights.

The poll’s findings are expected to influence ongoing debates about gun control and legislation. As policymakers and advocacy groups consider these results, the emphasis will likely be on finding common ground that respects the right to bear arms while addressing public safety issues.

Overall, the poll underscores a strong and resilient support for the Second Amendment, illustrating that the right to bear arms remains a central and cherished aspect of American life. This broad endorsement serves as a reminder of the enduring significance of gun rights in shaping national conversations about freedom, safety, and regulation.

ICYMI: TXGR Influenced Paxton Lawsuit Against State Fair

Posted on | by TXGRStaff

August 30, 2024

Attorney General Ken Paxton just filed a lawsuit against the State Fair of Texas and the City of Dallas for their outrageous, illegal ban on firearms at the fairgrounds.

If you recall, TXGR quickly submitted a detailed legal brief to Attorney General Ken Paxton’s office, urging him to challenge this unlawful ban in court if the State Fair refused to rescind their anti-gun policy.

So we’re thrilled to report that AG Paxton has followed through on his warnings… and even more excited to learn that TXGR’s brief played a crucial role in shaping this lawsuit!

In fact, many of the key arguments we highlighted in our briefing were directly reflected in the legal arguments AG Paxton is now using in court:

  • State Law Violations: We pointed out that the ban violates Texas Government Code § 411.209, which prohibits government entities from restricting licensed carry on public property. This is now a central argument in the lawsuit.
  • Public Property Argument: We emphasized that Fair Park is publicly owned and that the City of Dallas cannot lawfully delegate its authority to ban firearms to a private entity like the State Fair. This argument is foundational in the AG’s case.
  • Government Involvement: We highlighted the significant involvement of the City of Dallas in the operation of the Fair, which makes the State Fair’s actions subject to constitutional scrutiny. AG Paxton is now using this same argument in court.
  • Lack of Legal Authority: We made it clear that both the City Manager and the State Fair lack the legal authority to enforce this ban, a point that is being vigorously argued in the lawsuit.

This lawsuit is a direct result of our hard work — and your unwavering support!

In spite of what many in the fake news media claim, this is not a cut-and-dry “private property rights” issue.

The State Fair of Texas is hosted at Fair Park, which is owned by the City of Dallas — and paid for by citizen tax dollars — making the firearms ban on fair grounds ILLEGAL.

So AG Paxton’s lawsuit not only directly challenges their illegal firearm ban — but a victory could have implications for ALL Texans wanting to protect themselves and their families on public property statewide…

But the fight is far from over.

We need to keep the pressure on to ensure that our Second Amendment rights are not trampled by anti-gun bureaucrats and overreaching local governments.

Here’s what I’m asking you to do right now:

1.) Email Attorney General Ken Paxton TODAY at info@kenpaxton.com.

Thank him for taking this bold stand against the State Fair of Texas and the City of Dallas. Let him know that you fully support his lawsuit against the State Fair of Texas and the City of Dallas, and that you’re counting on him to see this fight through to the end.

2.) Rush back your most generous donation to Texas Gun Rights NOW.

We’ve come this far because of supporters like you, but we need to keep the momentum going. Your financial support is critical in helping us continue to lead the charge for gun owners across Texas.

Whether it’s $20, $50, $100, or more, every dollar you contribute goes directly to defending our rights and holding anti-gun politicians accountable.

Remember, this is not just about the State Fair — it’s about setting a precedent.

If we allow this gun ban to stand, it opens the door for every city, every county, and every anti-gun bureaucrat in Texas to try the same.

We MUST win this fight, and with your help, we will.

And when we win, this could set a HUGE precedent to OVERTURN similar gun bans on public property across the state… including the Houston Rodeo.