
|
MN: Best Gun Store: Zero Tolerance
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Zero Tolerance stands out as the premier destination for firearms enthusiasts, proudly voted the best gun store in the area. Whether you’re a seasoned shooter or just starting out, Zero Tolerance offers an extensive selection of firearms, ammunition and shooting accessories tailored to your needs.
At Zero Tolerance, customer service is a top priority. Their knowledgeable staff is passionate about helping you find the right firearm for self-defense, hunting, or target practice, while providing expert advice and safety education every step of the way. |
CA: California law requiring background checks for ammunition is unconstitutional, appeals court says
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
A voter-backed California law requiring background checks for people who buy bullets is unconstitutional, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday in a blow to the state’s efforts to combat gun violence.
In upholding a 2024 ruling by a lower court, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found that the state law violates the Second Amendment. Voters passed the law in 2016 and it took effect in 2019.
Many states, including California, make people pass a background check before they can buy a gun. California went a step further by requiring a background check, which costs either $1 or $19 depending on eligibility, every time someone buys buy bullets. |
CA: Homeless Man Stops Shotgun-Wielding Attacker In California Encampment
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The Second Amendment was written for all of “the people,” not just those who have enough money to own a sizable gun collection or the latest concealed carry rig. In fact, Americans living in homeless encampments just might be more likely to need to practice their right to armed self-defense more often than those living in gated neighborhoods with expensive security systems.
Such was the case recently when a homeless man shot another homeless man who was coming at him with a shotgun in a California homeless encampment. |
CA: Requiring Background Checks for Buying Bullets Is Invalid
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
A divided panel of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held yesterday that California’s regulatory scheme that requires residents to undergo background checks and engage in face-to-face transactions with licensed vendors in order to legally purchase ammunition violates the Second Amendment and was properly permanently enjoined.
...Circuit Judge Sandra S. Ikuta declared:
“By subjecting Californians to background checks for all ammunition purchases, California’s ammunition background check regime infringes on the fundamental right to keep and bear arms. Because California’s ammunition background check regime violates the Second Amendment, the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting a permanent injunction.” |
CA: Ninth Circuit Kills California’s Ammo Background Check Law: Here is the Decision – and the Dissent
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in a 2-1 decision Thursday that California’s law requiring firearm owners to undergo background checks when buying ammunition goes against the second amendment and is unconstitutional, the Globe reported.
Because California’s law forced gun owners to pay a fee and face some delays while the state processes their background check, the three-judge panel found the law constrains residents’ right to keep and bear arms in violation of the Second Amendment, Courthouse News reported. |
GA: Georgia Supreme Court Upholds Age-Based Restriction on Public Handgun Carry
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
On May 28, 2025, the Supreme Court of Georgia decided Stephens v. State of Georgia[1], affirming the constitutionality of the state's age-based restriction on the public carry of handguns. The Court held that Georgia’s statutory scheme, which generally prohibits individuals under 21 from carrying handguns in public unless they have military training, does not violate Article I, Section I, Paragraph VIII of the Georgia Constitution.[2] The decision reinforces the legislature’s authority to regulate the manner in which arms may be borne, as established by longstanding Georgia precedent. |
Stefanik, Issa Reintroduce Bill to Ban Handgun Roster Restrictions in States
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Reps. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) and Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) have reintroduced the “Modern Firearm Safety Act,” which aims to prevent states such as California and New York from restricting gun access to citizens, Stefanik’s office said in a July 24 statement.
If passed, states and agencies would be banned from imposing regulations that require a handgun to incorporate a design feature, functionality, safety mechanism, or performance standard not mandated by federal statute, the bill states. |
Key Phrases in Second Amendment Ignored by Conservatives
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Prominent figures like MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell argue that the amendment was meant to ensure regulation of militias rather than an unrestricted right to bear arms, a sentiment echoed by former Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger. He criticized the popular interpretation as “one of the greatest pieces of fraud” on the American public, suggesting that the founders intended for some regulatory measures in gun ownership. This discussion underscores the complexity of the Second Amendment and invites inquiries into how current laws align with its original intent and the ongoing call for commonsense gun regulations. |
One in Five Americans Supports Repealing Second Amendment
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
A national survey indicates that one in five Americans favors repealing the Second Amendment, a significant finding in the ongoing debate over gun control. The poll conducted by the Economist and YouGov reveals that 21 percent of respondents support a repeal, with notable backing at 39 percent among Democrats, contrasting sharply with just 8 percent of Republicans who would agree with such a measure. |
New teen trend could lead to fewer teens
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Florida teens from Hillsborough County have added balaclavas and Airsoft guns to what used to be called doorbell-ditch.
Now, rather than just ringing the doorbell, the masked teens kick the front door and fire several Airsoft rounds at the homes before running away, a video shows. |
MO: Judge Strikes Down St. Louis Gun Storage Law in Major Win for Missouri Gun Owners
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
A Missouri judge has struck down a St. Louis ordinance that tried to force gun owners to lock up firearms left in vehicles, dealing a sharp blow to local gun control efforts and delivering a clear win for Second Amendment supporters across the state.
On July 15, Circuit Judge Joseph P. Whyte ruled that the city’s 2017 “unattended vehicle” gun storage law violated Missouri’s state firearm preemption law—a law that reserves all authority to regulate firearms to the state legislature, not local governments. |
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton to Speak at GOALS 2025
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Gun Owners of America (GOA) is proud to announce that Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton will be speaking at the 2025 Gun Owners Advocacy and Leadership Summit (GOALS), taking place August 9–10 in Knoxville, Tennessee.
A relentless defender of constitutional liberties, Paxton has spent his career standing up to federal overreach and championing the Second Amendment. From filing lawsuits to blocking unconstitutional gun control to partnering with grassroots allies like GOA, he has remained on the front lines in the fight to protect the right to keep and bear arms. |
OH: 'I feel like everybody has one' | Cincinnati teens speak out about how easy it is to access guns
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
A new Urban League study reveals alarming statistics about teen gun violence in Cincinnati, with 61% of surveyed Black youth ages 12-20 reporting they have held a gun and 48% saying they've witnessed a shooting.
While city leaders and law enforcement have been vocal about solutions, WCPO 9 wanted to hear directly from those most affected: the teenagers living this reality every day.
"I feel like there needs to be something done more than what's going on," said Khara Hawkins, one of three teens who participated in a roundtable discussion. |
CA: Federal Appeals Court Declares California Background Checks for Ammo Unconstitutional
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
In a 79-page ruling yesterday, a three-panel 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Pasadena, California, declared by a 2-1 vote that the state’s law requiring background checks for ammo purchases is unconstitutional.
The majority opinion was penned by Judge Sandra S. Ikuta, a George W. Bush nominee who only took her seat following a filibuster by Senate Democrats to block the president’s earlier selection. Her majority opinion concluded that California’s ammunition background check regime violates the Second Amendment “because the regime meaningfully constrains the right to keep operable arms.” |
CA: Federal Court Overturns California Ammo Background Check Law
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
In a major Second Amendment ruling, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has declared California’s ammunition background check law unconstitutional. The 2-1 decision affirms a lower court’s permanent injunction, which blocks the state from enforcing its unique requirement that gun owners undergo background checks each time they purchase ammunition. |
CA: Second Amendment Expires in California: Court Strikes Down Ammunition Control Law
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that California's law requiring background checks for ammunition purchases violates the Second Amendment. This decision is a setback for the state's strict gun control laws and a victory for gun rights advocates. Judge Sandra Segal Ikuta, in the majority opinion, argued that the fees and delays associated with California's ammunition background check regime significantly restrict the right of Californians to keep and bear arms. |
Senator Murphy Proposes Raising Tax Stamp Fees to $4709
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) has entered an amendment to the Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act (H.R.3944) to raise the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA) tax stamp fee on all regulated items to $4709.
The move comes after Republicans lowered the tax stamp fee to $0 for suppressors, short-barreled rifles (SBRs), short-barreled shotguns (SBSs), and any other weapons (AOWs) during the reconciliation process. During negotiations over the so-called “one big, beautiful bill,” Sen Murphy proposed a $1 tax stamp fee instead of a $0 charge. The likely reason for the pushing of the $1 fee was to try to head off lawsuits. |
|
|