Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said on Monday that the country&#8217;s Left-wing government stands &#8220;prepared&#8221; to pass more restrictive gun laws after two gunmen killed at least 15 people and wounded dozens more at a Hanukkah celebration in Sydney on Sunday.
Albanese responded to the terrorist attack by cracking down even more on gun ownership, saying the country must &#8220;take whatever action is necessary,&#8221; the Associated Press <a href="https://apnews.com/article/australia-shooting-bondi-beach-sydney-3be76a51c820d547ee4697bd25c1bafd">reported</a>.
&#8220;Included in that is the need for tougher gun laws,” Albanese added.
Australia already has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the world after the government enacted a mandatory buyback program following the 1996 mass shooting in Port Arthur, where a gunman killed 35 people. Australia <a href="https://www.king5.com/article/news/nation-world/australia-gun-laws-what-to-know/507-8336bb44-252b-4b72-a33c-21a3f68484b8">bans</a> citizens from owning semi-automatic rifles and pump-action shotguns.
The Australian government maintains strict oversight of legal firearms, including mandatory background checks and a 28-day waiting period for gun purchases. Australia&#8217;s <a href="https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/fa1996102/s12.html">Firearms Act of 1996</a> also requires citizens to provide a &#8220;genuine reason&#8221; for owning a gun, such as hunting, farming, sport shooting, or historical collections. Personal protection is not considered a &#8220;genuine reason&#8221; for owning a firearm, according to the Australian government.
New South Wales Premier Chris Minns said on Monday that the state&#8217;s gun laws would change following the terrorist attack.
“If you’re not a farmer, you’re not involved in agriculture, why do you need these massive weapons that put the public in danger and make life dangerous and difficult for New South Wales Police?” Minns asked.
<a class="c-link c-link--focus-visible" href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=christmas&amp;utm_content=christmassale25" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=christmas&amp;utm_content=christmassale25" data-sk="tooltip_parent">Christmas Sale – Get 40% off New DailyWire+ Annual Memberships</a>
Australian leaders have proposed a new measure that would limit the number of guns a person could own, according to the Associated Press.
The suspected gunmen in Sunday&#8217;s attack are 50-year-old Sajid Akram and his 24-year-old son Naveed Akram. The father-son duo appeared to use bolt-action rifles to target Jewish people observing Hanukkah, according to videos. Police also reportedly recovered shotguns at the scene of the shooting, but authorities have yet to confirm what firearms were used by the attackers to fire upon the Jewish people. Officials said at a press conference that Sajid possessed firearms legally.
Sajid was killed at the scene by responding police officers, while his 24-year-old son was wounded and is currently in a coma. One video showed a man charging one of the gunmen and wrestling his gun away. The man who jumped into action to confront the shooter was identified as Ahmed al Ahmed, an immigrant from Syria. Ahmed was shot in the shoulder and underwent surgery on Monday.
The gunmen were &#8220;clearly&#8221; motivated by extremism, according to officials, who have described the shooting as antisemitic terrorism. Naveed was on Australian authorities&#8217; radar in 2019 when he was investigated over alleged ties to ISIS, but authorities eventually ruled that he was not a threat at the time.
“He was examined on the basis of being associated with others and the assessment was made that there was no indication of any ongoing threat or threat of him engaging in violence,” said Albanese.
Sajid immigrated to Australia in 1998 on a student visa and became a permanent resident after marrying an Australian citizen. Australian officials did not say which country he moved from. His son Naveed was born in Australia.

Albanese News Conference Following Hanukkah Terror Attack

Australia’s Leftist Leaders Call For ‘Tougher Gun Laws’ After Antisemitic Massacre

Anthony Albanese

Anti-Semitism

Australia

Gun Laws

Terrorism

World

In every country where firearms have been banned, there&#8217;s been an &#8220;inciting incident&#8221; that&#8217;s been used to justify the crackdown. And very often, this &#8220;inciting incident&#8221; is either overblown, manufactured, or misconstrued in some way. In Canada back in 2022, for example, Justin Trudeau used a mass shooting in the United States — specifically, the shooting at the elementary school in Uvalde, Texas — to justify a national ban on handgun sales in Canada.
Yes, he used a shooting in a foreign country, which was committed with a rifle, to justify a ban on handguns in Canada. And of course, Canadians went along with it. They didn&#8217;t even complain because, after all, they&#8217;d been conditioned, over many years, to accept an increasing number of restrictions on their right to own firearms. Bit by bit, they allowed the government to whittle away their rights. So eventually, when it came time for Justin Trudeau to suspend handgun sales entirely, based on a pretext that was obviously ridiculous, everyone just kind of rolled over. We&#8217;ve seen similar stories all over the world, in places like Australia, New Zealand, the UK, and so on.
Every conservative — everyone who wants the United States to continue to exist as a functional country, where all of these other nations have failed — has to be mindful of similar efforts to undermine our Second Amendment rights here at home. We have to pay attention when government officials attempt to use some kind of fake &#8220;inciting incident&#8221; to suspend our right to possess firearms. And we certainly have to pay attention when these efforts gain traction — when they appear to be working.
That&#8217;s the case right now. Lawsuits and political pressure by various states — particularly California — have successfully intimidated the weapons manufacturer Glock into dismantling virtually its entire product line. One of the most popular handgun manufacturers in the world, with probably the most recognizable brand, has been beaten into submission.
This is a story that hasn&#8217;t received anywhere near the attention it should be receiving. It&#8217;s obviously the first domino among many. If Glock doesn&#8217;t reverse this decision — if Democrats win this fight — then many, many more dominoes will fall in short order. Just like we saw in Canada, once you give these people any ground whatsoever, they will walk all over you.
So let&#8217;s begin with the &#8220;inciting incident&#8221; of this particular power grab. It was the worst mass shooting in the history of Sacramento, according to the local media, and it took place in April 2022. Several shooters were involved, as part of some kind of gang warfare. Six people were fatally wounded. Twelve others were injured.
One of the men who was apprehended was named Smiley Martin (the brother of Dandrae Martin, another suspect in the case). Smiley Martin was found in possession of a Glock 19 handgun with a &#8220;switch&#8221; attached to it, which is a device that enables it to fire rapidly, like a machine gun. Switches are illegal, but they can be obtained very easily or created with a 3D printer.
And it was determined that Smiley was one of the main shooters in this particular incident. Watch: 
<iframe loading="lazy" title="001 Downtown Sacramento" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/4FhuYdV4phc?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
You heard in that report that Smiley Martin had a very long criminal record prior to this shooting. But they don&#8217;t explain why he was allowed out of prison, if that&#8217;s the case. Nor do they provide more detail on what exactly Smiley Martin did when he committed his other crimes. 
But that&#8217;s a pretty big part of the story. So here&#8217;s <a href="https://apnews.com/article/covid-health-shootings-prisons-arrests-f713eff2a31b66e5740eb96f60392baa">The Associated Press</a>, with some more background.
<blockquote>A suspect arrested in connection with last weekend’s mass shooting outside bars in Sacramento served less than half his 10-year sentence because of voter-approved changes to state law that lessened the punishment for his felony convictions and provided a chance for earlier release. Smiley Allen Martin was freed in February after serving time for punching a girlfriend, dragging her from her home by her hair and whipping her with a belt, according to court and prison records. Those count as nonviolent offenses under California law, which considers only about two dozen crimes to be violent felonies — such as murder, rape, arson and kidnapping. &#8230; Proposition 57 credits include good behavior while behind bars, though corrections officials declined to release Martin’s disciplinary report.</blockquote>
If you follow my show or read my articles, you know this is all sounding very familiar. It&#8217;s similar to what happened in Kentucky, with the child killer Ronald Exantus. As we discussed, Exantus brutally murdered a young boy and assaulted his father (and the boy&#8217;s sister). But his crimes were deemed &#8220;nonviolent&#8221; under Kentucky law, so he was let out of prison after serving just a few years. Even though the parole board didn&#8217;t want to release Smiley Martin, they had no choice under the law — just like they had to release Ronald Exantus.
In this case, just like Ronald Exantus, Smiley Martin obviously committed violent offenses. He punched a woman and whipped her with a belt. But because these offenses are somehow considered &#8220;nonviolent&#8221; in California, under the law that was passed in 2016, Smiley Martin was allowed out of prison after serving a fraction of his sentence. And he then used that opportunity to commit a mass shooting.
So how has the government of California responded to this development? Have they suggested that maybe they should amend the law so that the word &#8220;nonviolent&#8221; doesn&#8217;t refer to crimes that are obviously violent? Have they suggested any changes whatsoever that would prevent violent felons from getting out of prison after serving less than half of their sentences?
You probably know the answer to that question. Democrats in California reacted to this mass shooting by pushing yet another law — one that will effectively ban all Glock handguns in the state. For many years, Glocks have had special restrictions in places like Canada and California. And now the government, in the wake of this mass shooting, has decided to go for a total ban. 
This is from a video posted by &#8220;<a href="https://x.com/fixingcali/status/1968266193808277561">Vince for California</a>,&#8221; the only account I&#8217;ve seen on X that has pieced all this together. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="002 CA Glocks" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/uf-r0btKIq4?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Yes, you heard that correctly. Government officials in California cited the mass shooting in Sacramento as proof that we need a new law banning Glocks. That&#8217;s not because there&#8217;s anything wrong with Glocks, by themselves. It&#8217;s because career criminals — overwhelmingly young black men who pose with their illegally modified Glocks on TikTok all the time, and who constantly commit violent felonies and then get out of jail in five seconds — might modify the Glock to make it more dangerous. Because this relatively small demographic is breaking the law, therefore the most popular handgun in the world should be outlawed in California. (Technically, you can keep your current Glock, but you can&#8217;t buy a new one.)
That&#8217;s what they&#8217;re saying. That&#8217;s their plan. And it&#8217;s working. It&#8217;s almost as if the entire reason they let these violent thugs out of prison is so that they can commit more crimes, which Democrats will then, in turn, use to justify more crackdowns on our civil liberties. This is from a local news station in California.
<blockquote>Glock handguns, among the most popular pistols on the market, will no longer be available for purchase in California starting July 1, 2026. Gov. Gavin Newsom recently signed into law AB 1127, which prohibits the sale of Glocks because a small part can be modified or replaced to convert the gun into an automatic weapon. Although illegal, this modification is becoming increasingly popular among lawbreakers. Tyler Thompson, a Glock dealer at Redding Guns, said the impending ban has left him with only one Glock in stock.</blockquote>
Along with this law (which was subsidized by Soros and Mark Zuckerberg), there have been various lawsuits filed against Glock by Democrats — including cities like Seattle and Chicago, and states like Minnesota and New Jersey — which essentially blame the manufacturer for illegal modifications that people make to their firearms. It&#8217;s like when Democrats blamed Toyota for supposedly making their cars too easy to steal.
For about a million reasons, conservatives should fight these laws (and these lawsuits) with everything they have. The NRA and the Second Amendment Foundation are doing their part, and filing lawsuits, but there needs to be a much bigger effort. For one thing, <a href="https://legiscan.com/CA/text/AB1127/id/3209201">here&#8217;s the law</a> that California just passed.
<div class="image"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="size-large wp-image-990593 aligncenter" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/Legislative-Counsel-824x576.jpg" alt="" width="824" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/Legislative-Counsel-824x576.jpg 824w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/Legislative-Counsel-300x210.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/Legislative-Counsel-768x537.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/Legislative-Counsel.jpg 987w" sizes=" (max-width: 824px) 100vw, 824px" /></div>
Credit: LegiScan/California Assembly Bill 1127
The bill reads:
<blockquote>This bill would prohibit a licensed firearms dealer to sell, offer for sale, exchange, give, transfer, or deliver any semiautomatic machinegun-convertible pistol, except as specified. For these purposes, the bill would define “machinegun-convertible pistol” as any semiautomatic pistol with a cruciform trigger bar that can be readily converted by hand or with common household tools into a machine gun by the installation or attachment of a pistol converter, meaning any device or instrument that, when installed in or attached to the rear of the slide of a semiautomatic pistol, replaces the backplate and interferes with the trigger mechanism and thereby enables the pistol to shoot automatically more than one shot by a single function of the trigger.</blockquote>
Among other problems, this law is obviously unconstitutional. 
To be clear, it doesn&#8217;t apply only to Glocks, but also to any handgun with a &#8220;cruciform trigger bar.&#8221; 
<div class="image"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="size-large wp-image-990597 aligncenter" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/Trigger-Bar-1024x428.webp" alt="" width="1024" height="428" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/Trigger-Bar-1024x428.webp 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/Trigger-Bar-300x125.webp 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/Trigger-Bar-768x321.webp 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/Trigger-Bar.webp 1280w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></div>
Credit: us.Glock.com
Here&#8217;s what that looks like. Some Smith &amp; Wesson firearms, along with some firearms from Shadow Systems and FMK Firearms, also have &#8220;cruciform trigger bars.&#8221; And yes, it&#8217;s true that, if they revamp their entire product lineup, Glock can get rid of these.
But Glock shouldn&#8217;t have to do that. Nor should any of these other companies. The Supreme Court has already held — correctly — that under our Constitution, Americans can own handguns that aren&#8217;t unreasonably dangerous. And there&#8217;s nothing unreasonably dangerous about a Glock. It&#8217;s about as vanilla as handguns get. If a handgun suddenly becomes &#8220;unreasonably dangerous&#8221; because someone makes an illegal modification to it, then every handgun will instantly become &#8220;unreasonably dangerous.&#8221;
And of course, that&#8217;s what California has in mind. We all know that, no matter what changes Glock decides to make to its handguns, in order to comply with this law, it will never be enough. It&#8217;s possible to modify any handgun (or rifle) to shoot &#8220;full auto&#8221;, within the meaning of this law. Probably ten days after Glock changes its handguns to comply with this law, someone will come up with a switch for the new model. It&#8217;s not going to be difficult. Many firearms experts have already made that point.
This is clearly, unambiguously, the first major step in a larger effort by Democrats to ban handguns. The only appropriate response is to fight it, right now. There is no limiting principle here. It&#8217;s like saying it should be illegal to own a car, because car bombs exist. The fact that someone can come in after the fact and make a product more dangerous by committing a felony does not mean that we should ban the product.
But Glock isn&#8217;t fighting back on principle. They&#8217;re not running ads in California, pointing out that Gavin Newsom let this mass shooter out of jail early, or that California already outlaws switches, or that the mass shooter was a felon who shouldn&#8217;t have been allowed to possess a firearm in the first place, or that he had a high-capacity magazine that&#8217;s also illegal in California. Glock isn&#8217;t running 24/7 ads, which makes the extremely obvious point that California could solve its gun problem overnight by actually enforcing its existing laws and by punishing violent criminals.
Instead, Glock is caving. They&#8217;re punishing every law-abiding gun owner in the country. They just announced that they&#8217;re ditching Gen 5 and starting to make a whole new &#8220;V series&#8221; of handguns that are supposedly compliant with this new law. They just sent this marketing material around.
<div class="image"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="size-large wp-image-990599 aligncenter" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/G3z3WslXMAAcQMi-460x576.jpeg" alt="" width="460" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/G3z3WslXMAAcQMi-460x576.jpeg 460w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/G3z3WslXMAAcQMi-240x300.jpeg 240w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/G3z3WslXMAAcQMi-768x961.jpeg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/G3z3WslXMAAcQMi.jpeg 1029w" sizes=" (max-width: 460px) 100vw, 460px" /></div>
Credit: us.Glock.com
It reads: &#8220;As part of GLOCK&#8217;s commitment to future innovations, we are making necessary updates to our product lines to align with upcoming offerings.&#8221;
So they don&#8217;t even mention why they&#8217;re doing this. They don&#8217;t demonstrate a shred of interest in defending Americans&#8217; Second Amendment rights or contesting this flagrant overreach by Democrats in California, New Jersey, Minnesota, and so on. They don&#8217;t even provide any indication as to whether this new &#8220;V series&#8221; will be compatible with Gen 5 parts, including performance triggers and so on. Nor do they explain how they can possibly make a handgun that&#8217;s impossible to turn into a machine gun, under the law passed in California. They&#8217;re just hoping for the best, I guess.
And meanwhile, where is the Republican Party on this? Has a single prominent Republican made an issue out of the fact that Democrats just strong-armed Glock into dismantling its entire product line? If so, I&#8217;m not aware of it.
This is a total capitulation. There&#8217;s no other way to understand what&#8217;s happening here. It&#8217;s capitulation on Glock&#8217;s part. And it&#8217;s capitulation on the part of our elected representatives.
That would be unforgivable in normal times. It&#8217;s especially egregious now, after we&#8217;ve seen — again and again, in country after country — where total capitulation leads. Glock&#8217;s decision is going to embolden Democrats to do exactly what Leftists have done in Canada, Australia, and so on. They didn&#8217;t release Smiley Martin from prison, or fund these massive new changes to the law, so that Glock would release slightly-altered versions of its existing handguns. They released Smiley Martin from prison, and they passed this law, so that no one can buy a handgun ever again. They want to disarm the entire country. That is their ultimate objective.
That&#8217;s always been their objective. And with this decision by Glock, without much fanfare, they&#8217;re one very important step closer to achieving it.

California Gov. Newsom Discusses State’s Economic Advancement And Growth

The Brazen Attack On Your Second Amendment Rights You Probably Haven’t Heard About

California

Gavin Newsom

Guns

Matt Walsh

Opinion

Sacramento

Second Amendment

In movies like Enemy of the State, Americans are shown a dystopian world where government surveillance turns ordinary citizens into targets, with shadowy agencies tracking their every move without oversight or accountability. Sadly, this Hollywood nightmare is now reality.
During the Biden administration, federal agencies like the FBI were secretly monitoring law-abiding gun owners through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) — tracking their lawful firearm purchases without a warrant and without ever informing those being monitored. Even Congress was kept in the dark. What once seemed like fiction is now a troubling truth, as the federal government turns its surveillance powers inward against its own people, eroding the freedoms it was meant to protect.
For years, the FBI has been surveilling the gun purchases of thousands of law-abiding citizens using the NICS system. This daily NICS Monitoring program operates without the requirement of a warrant or probable cause, and entirely outside the purview of any court. It enables federal agents to select a target for surveillance and receive a notification every time the victim purchases a firearm. Surveilled Americans have no way of ever knowing they are being tracked.
None of this information is new. Gun Owners of America has reported on the FBI’s NICS Monitoring abuses <a href="https://www.ammoland.com/2024/12/foia-shows-the-extent-of-atf-monitoring-americans-through-fbis-nics-system/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">at length</a>, and the FBI’s warrantless surveillance program has been the subject of a years-long Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) lawsuit pitting GOA against a <a href="https://www.gunowners.org/atf-attempts-to-silence-gun-owners-of-america/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">belligerent</a> and uncooperative Department of Justice.
<h3>Ongoing NICS Monitoring Abuses</h3>
Naturally, being free to operate entirely without legal standards or judicial oversight, federal agents have rampantly abused NICS Monitoring, surveilling individuals engaged in all manner of innocuous activities. Without any accountability, agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) requested NICS Monitoring of individuals who purchased firearms in response to social unrest, those whose firearm expenditures appeared disproportionate to their income, and even persons who bought and sold firearms as a hobby.
During the Biden administration, federal agents even directed their surveillance toward ordinary Californians — like a modern-day Panopticon, where prison inmates can be secretly watched without knowing when. In a recent <a href="https://www.zerohedge.com/political/fbi-weaponizes-background-checks-enforce-california-gun-ban" target="_blank" rel="noopener">FOIA production</a>, GOA discovered that the FBI had been assisting in the enforcement of anti-gun states’ “assault weapons” bans. The FBI actually used NICS Monitoring on one individual for suspected violations of California’s unconstitutional gun regime — despite there being no evidence of any federal wrongdoing.
Thankfully, Pam Bondi’s DOJ recently <a href="https://x.com/GunOwners/status/1915855957927616648" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ordered the FBI</a> to end the Biden-era practice of using NICS monitoring to help enforce state gun laws. But who knows how long this practice has been occurring? Because with such a low bar for monitoring, perhaps you have also been NICS Monitored, maybe for nothing more than a Facebook comment or a bumper sticker, or attendance at a political rally. Of course, you would never know either way.
<h3>FBI Weaponization Against January 6 Protesters</h3>
Now, GOA has discovered that the FBI’s surveillance program goes further than previously thought. Recently obtained FOIA documents reveal the NICS Monitoring of a person suspected of being present at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
In fact, in one June 6, 2023 NICS Monitoring submission, an unnamed FBI agent requested NICS Monitoring of an individual’s lawful gun purchases for a period of six months, for several “violations or potential violations” that are common J6 charges:
<ul>
<li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">18 U.S.C. § 231(a)(3) &#8211; Civil Disorder; </li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">18 U.S.C. § 1752(a)(1) and (2) &#8211; Restricted Building or Grounds; </li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">40 U.S.C. § 5104(e)(2)(E) &#8211; Impeding Passage through the Capitol Grounds or Buildings.</li>
</ul>
Of course, this should come as no surprise. After all, the Biden-era FBI was no stranger to victimizing thousands of Trump supporters associated with January 6. On January 6 itself, the U.S. Capitol was crawling with <a href="https://www.zerohedge.com/political/legal-scholar-raises-concerns-over-doj-hiding-fbi-informants-jan-6">FBI informants</a>, seemingly directed to frame those attending the President’s “Save America” rally.
In the days that followed, the FBI <a href="https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/540721-intercept-reporter-fbis-rapid-collection-of-phone-records-after-capitol-riot/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">aggressively collected</a> cell phone data of those who had been present in Washington, DC, often without a warrant. The FBI even improperly <a href="https://apnews.com/article/justice-department-fbi-surveillance-75c466a64e838ab12eaef96f6335f3cd" target="_blank" rel="noopener">accessed</a> information collected under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to target purely domestic persons and activities. And in the twilight hours of the Biden regime, the Department of Justice <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/fbi-searches-alleged-jan-6-rioters-home-ahead-donald-trumps-return-pre-rcna137787" target="_blank" rel="noopener">continued to raid</a> suspected January 6ers’ homes, with FBI operations extending well into December of 2024.
But now, the United States has a new Attorney General. And when Pam Bondi took her oath of office, she <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bondi-sworn-attorney-general-mission-end-weaponization-justice-department" target="_blank" rel="noopener">promised</a> to end the rampant “weaponization” of the FBI and to close Biden’s chapter of hyper-partisanship and two-tiered justice for good.
That promise will ring hollow if NICS Monitoring is not dismantled. So long as the mechanism remains in place to surveil gun owners’ lawful purchases — especially with no judicial approval or oversight — there is little stopping a future administration from resuming the abuses of Biden’s FBI.
What once seemed like the stuff of Hollywood thrillers has become a sobering fact of American life. The secret surveillance of lawful gun owners through NICS Monitoring is not just a bureaucratic overreach — it’s a direct assault on the freedoms that define our nation.
To restore trust in our institutions, Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel must act swiftly to end warrantless spying on law-abiding gun owners. Americans should not have to live in fear that exercising their rights will land them on a secret government watchlist. We are not characters in a movie — we are citizens of a free republic, and it’s time our government remembered that.
* * *
Erich Pratt is the Senior Vice President of Gun Owners of America, a national grassroots organization representing more than two million gun owners, and can be followed on X  <a href="https://twitter.com/erichmpratt">@erichmpratt.</a>
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

U.S. Special Operations Command Host Hostage Rescue Demonstration In Tampa

Gun Owners Aren’t Criminals: It’s Time To Dismantle NICS Monitoring

Gun Sales

January 6

U.S. Capitol

Children in <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/michigan" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Michigan</a> will soon be able to anonymously report their parents or other adults for &#8220;improperly&#8221; storing firearms &#8220;that are accessible to a minor.&#8221;
The new tip line was part of an amendment to House Bill 5503, a supplemental K-12 budget that passed the Michigan legislature on Wednesday, The Midwesterner <a href="https://www.themidwesterner.news/2024/09/michigan-legislature-creates-tip-line-for-students-to-anonymously-turn-in-parents-for-improperly-stored-guns/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a>. A new gun storage <a href="https://www.michigan.gov/mdhhs/inside-mdhhs/newsroom/2024/02/08/firearms-laws" target="_blank" rel="noopener">law</a> went into effect in Michigan earlier this year, requiring gun owners &#8220;to keep unattended weapons unloaded and locked with a locking device or stored in a locked box or container if it is reasonably known that a minor is likely to be present on the premises.&#8221;
The new provision, which is part of a supplemental spending bill, allocates $1 million for the tip line for the 2024-2025 school year. The provision also requires that educational materials on how to properly store firearms be sent to school districts.
The spending bill easily passed the Democratic-controlled state House, but was a closer vote in the state Senate, which is also controlled by Democrats. Republican senators refused to give the bill a two-thirds vote, meaning the bill will not become law until the first quarter of next year, The Detroit Free Press <a href="https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2024/09/25/democrats-sweeten-michigan-school-budget-2025/75374217007/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a>. Some Republican lawmakers blasted the tip line provision in the bill, with state Sen. Thomas Albert calling it &#8220;a tattletale provision&#8221; and state Sen. John Damoose arguing that it is designed &#8220;to enforce [Democrats&#8217;] gun control agenda.&#8221;
“This hotline is nothing more than a page out of the Stasi playbook—encouraging children to spy on their own families,” state Rep. Angela Rigas told The Midwesterner. “This is a dangerous step toward weaponizing children in households for the left, and an outrageous government overreach under the guise of public safety.”
The supplemental package was passed by the Michigan legislature after Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer was <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/whitmer-blasted-from-all-sides-for-signing-massive-cuts-to-education-while-she-basks-in-national-spotlight" target="_blank" rel="noopener">blasted</a> by both Republicans and Democrats for signing an education budget in July that cut funding for school safety and mental health by $300 million, a 92% decrease.
<a href="https://www.amiracist.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.amiracist.com/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1726313279401000&amp;usg=AOvVaw115_qPFFEePDP86-Fvo-Vd">Am I Racist? Is In Theaters NOW — Get Your Tickets Here!</a>
Democrats worked to push through the supplemental legislation by providing an additional $125 million for mental health and school safety.
The Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Owners also criticized the $1 million provision for what it called a &#8220;Report Your Parents Hotline,&#8221; writing on X, &#8220;While we all support responsible firearms storage, this is the type of thing we&#8217;d expect to see from a totalitarian police state.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Report Your Parents Hotline
This amendment was inserted into the conference committee report of the Michigan School Aid bill (HB 5503 CR-1) today. The conference committee report is expected to be voted on immediately in the House and Senate with no testimony allowed.
This… <a href="https://t.co/qj7rF4nf3z">pic.twitter.com/qj7rF4nf3z</a>
&mdash; Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Owners (@MCRGO_Michigan) <a href="https://twitter.com/MCRGO_Michigan/status/1839038011943665936?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 25, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
After Whitmer won re-election in 2022 and Democrats took control of the state legislature, the governor said there would be a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/whitmer-to-push-for-gun-control-after-re-election-victory-dem-takeover-of-state-legislature" target="_blank" rel="noopener">renewed push</a> for gun control, pointing to the November 2021 shooting at Oxford High School where a student killed four of his classmates.
&#8220;I do believe that you will all of a sudden see a very different environment in Lansing where the Oxford families and advocates will have the ability to make their voices heard and to inform and drive the policy change that this current legislature has completely shut the door to,&#8221; Whitmer said at the time.

Capitol Building, Lansing Michigan

Michigan Lawmakers Create Anonymous Tip Line For Children To Report ‘Improperly’ Stored Guns

Michigan Lawmakers Create Anonymous Tip Line For Students To Report 'Improperly' Stored Guns

Children

Democrats

Michigan

Public Schools

Republicans

Social Issues

Students

U.S.

Vice President Kamala Harris and Governor Tim Walz doubled down on supporting failed policies in their newly released policy platform, which they unveiled just hours before this week&#8217;s presidential debate against former President Donald Trump.
The roughly 4,500-word platform was heavy on platitudes, did not go deep on many policy issues, and gave few explanations about how she expected to implement her agenda other than repeatedly saying she would &#8220;fight&#8221; for it.
She branded her agenda as a &#8220;New Way Forward&#8221; despite her already being at the helm for nearly four years in the Biden-Harris administration. Nowhere in her platform did she explain how her approach would differ from what she is currently doing.
The platform repeatedly linked Trump to a think tank&#8217;s &#8220;Project 2025&#8221; agenda, even though Trump has no links to the project and has thoroughly disavowed it.
Harris doubled down on her plan for how she will get people in homes with her &#8220;comprehensive plan to build three million more rental units and homes that are affordable to end the national housing supply crisis in her first term.&#8221;
Nowhere does she explain who will build the units and she once again insisted on jacking up demand and housing costs by giving first-time buyers $25,000 in down payment assistance.
She also declared that she will sign legislation to &#8220;outlaw new forms of price fixing by corporate landlords&#8221; without mentioning that it will first have to pass Congress.
<a href="https://www.amiracist.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.amiracist.com/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1724361346607000&amp;usg=AOvVaw1ZhyOQfEkxcMH_D1Ago3CQ">Tickets for “Am I Racist?” are on sale NOW! Buy here for a theater near you.</a>
Harris plans to magically create an &#8220;Opportunity Economy&#8221; in which people will submit 25 million new business applications by the end of her first term.
She once again doubled down on Soviet-style price controls, which do not work, to bring down costs that have surged in recent years because of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/how-kamala-harris-triggered-the-inflation-crisis-that-harmed-america">her role in triggering the inflation crisis</a>.
&#8220;She will go after bad actors who exploit an emergency to rip off consumers by calling for the first-ever federal ban on corporate price gouging on food and groceries,&#8221; her platform states. &#8220;And she’ll keep fighting to bring down prescription drug costs by taking on pharmacy middlemen, who raise consumers’ prices for their own gain and squeeze independent pharmacies’ profits.&#8221;
She doubled down on the socialist agenda of making health care &#8220;a right&#8221; and &#8220;not a privilege&#8221; — which is unconstitutional and incredibly stupid.
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Ben Shapiro: You Don&#039;t Have A &quot;Right&quot; To Healthcare" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/dr4TZMPmbuw?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Harris signaled that she will continue to fight against the oil and gas industry and try to expand green energy, which is one of the top reasons that energy costs have skyrocketed under the Biden-Harris administration.
She will magically enact an agenda that &#8220;advances environmental justice, protects public lands and public health, increases resilience to climate disasters, lowers household energy costs, creates millions of new jobs, and continues to hold polluters accountable to secure clean air and water for all,&#8221; her platform stated.
Harris will support abortion and her platform gave no indication that she supports any kind of limits on it, meaning that she will support abortion up until the moment of birth.
Immediately after the section titled, &#8220;SAFEGUARD OUR FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS,&#8221; Harris declared that she will go after Americans&#8217; Second Amendment rights.
She said that she will ban semi-automatic firearms, commonly used magazines, and that she will support laws that strip Americans of their due process rights by taking their firearms without going through the court system.
Her campaign tried to paint her disastrous border record as strong despite overseeing the worst 4-year period of illegal immigration in recorded U.S. history in which more than 10 million illegal aliens have flooded into the U.S.
Harris proposes in her platform rewarding the millions who broke federal law by illegally coming into the U.S., where they have wreaked havoc on communities across the country, by rewarding them with a &#8220;pathway to citizenship.&#8221;

Kamala Harris

Harris Doubles Down On Failed Policies In Newly Unveiled Platform

2024 Election

Donald Trump

Economy

Health Care

Tim Walz

X owner Elon Musk warned over the weekend that the Democrat Party&#8217;s position on firearms is similar to what other totalitarian regimes have done in the past before they end up oppressing their citizens.
Musk&#8217;s warning came in response to Sen. Raphael Warnock (R-GA) expressing an openness to having gun confiscation in the U.S., remarks he made in response to Vice President Kamala Harris previously indicating that she supported gun confiscation.
Warnock made the remarks during a Sunday interview on NBC News&#8217; &#8220;Meet The Press&#8221; with Kristen Welker when asked about if Harris should still be &#8220;supporting a mandatory gun buy-back program.&#8221;
Warnock said that the Democrats were not going to be able to &#8220;get where we need to go without action in Congress.&#8221;
&#8220;We&#8217;ve got to pass some laws to deal with this,&#8221; he claimed. &#8220;The least we can do is move forward on the bipartisan spaces where ordinary people agree. Clearly, there&#8217;s a disconnect between what the people, the American people want and what they&#8217;re able to get out of their government.&#8221;
Warnock claimed that officials &#8220;don&#8217;t even want to know who those people are&#8221; that are buying firearms, even though people have to undergo federal background checks to buy guns.
When pressed again on whether Democrats should support gun confiscation, Warnock said &#8220;I think that, again, there&#8217;s not one single thing that will make all of this go away.&#8221;
Musk responded to the clip by posting on X: &#8220;The right to bear arms is there to protect free speech and stop a tyrannical government from taking your rights away!&#8221;
&#8220;That’s why the first thing that all tyrants do is disarm the people, just like Chavez did when he was first elected,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;After that, no more real elections in Venezuela.&#8221;
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">
NBC: Should Kamala try to pass mandatory gun confiscation, which she has repeatedly said she supports?
Top Harris surrogate Raphael Warnock: &#8220;We&#8217;re not going to be able to get where we need to go without action.&#8221;
NBC: Yes or no?
Warnock: Yes <a href="https://t.co/YqRSeaGyL1">pic.twitter.com/YqRSeaGyL1</a>
— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) <a href="https://twitter.com/TrumpWarRoom/status/1832773149206905084?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 8, 2024</a></blockquote>

Elon Musk In Krakow

Musk Sounds Alarm After Democrat Senator Indicates Support For Gun Confiscation

Elon Musk

NBC&#8217;s Erin McLaughlin appeared to link last Friday&#8217;s Supreme Court decision — which overturned a Trump-era ban on bump stocks — to mass shootings that occurred over the weekend, despite the fact that bump stocks were not used in any of the instances she referenced.
McLaughlin made the intuitive leap during Monday morning&#8217;s broadcast of The Today Show, framing her report for anchor Hoda Kotb as though there was a direct connection between the court&#8217;s ruling and the shootings.
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
NBC&#8217;s Erin McLaughlin blames the Supreme Court&#8217;s decision on bump stocks to 3 mass shootings over the weekend, despite the fact none of the weapons were equipped with them. <a href="https://t.co/j5IfEKaEWE">pic.twitter.com/j5IfEKaEWE</a>
— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) <a href="https://twitter.com/NickFondacaro/status/1802689317879374160?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 17, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;A mass shooting at a splash pad in Michigan, another at a Juneteenth celebration in Texas, and yet another at a gathering in Massachusetts — all just days after Friday&#8217;s Supreme Court ruling that rejects a ban on bump stocks,&#8221; McLaughlin began.
&#8220;This morning, friends and families across the country are grieving after multiple mass shootings this weekend,&#8221; the report continued, showing several clips of emergency calls that went out during the shootings as well as the police response.
At the Michigan splash pad, a shooter discharged 28 rounds and injured at least nine, some of whom were children. The shooter then reportedly turned the weapon on himself, and an investigation into his possible motive is ongoing.
In Texas, two were killed and more than a dozen were injured when a gunman opened fire — and in that case, authorities are still looking for the alleged perpetrator.
In Massachusetts, a pop-up party was the target of a shooting that left eight injured.
At the end of the report, McLaughlin circled back to the Supreme Court ruling — seeming once again to suggest a link between the bump stock ban being overturned and the three recent shootings.

COLLEGE FOOTBALL: OCT 14 USC at Notre Dame

NBC Breathlessly Ties SCOTUS Bump Stock Ruling To Mass Shootings — No Indication They Were Used

NBC Breathlessly Ties SCOTUS Bump Stock Ruling To Mass Shootings — Where They Weren't Used

Gun Control

Media

NBC News

Politics

Supreme Court

President Biden is poised to lose his job. Americans are already frustrated with wide-open borders, crime-infested streets, and unaffordable gas, groceries, and rent. Now, his administration has quietly launched a new war on gun owners — and the lawful gun industry — before his executive authority is stripped away.
In an all-too-typical example of executive overreach, a new <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/04/30/2024-08813/revision-of-firearms-license-requirements" target="_blank" rel="noopener">interim final rule</a> from Biden’s Department of Commerce will vindictively smother American gun companies with layers of bureaucratic red tape and prevent civilians in other countries from lawfully purchasing American firearms and ammunition. This is not only a clear admission of the Biden administration’s disdain for lawful gun owners, but also a backdoor attempt to villainize and bankrupt domestic manufacturers while pushing the president’s globalist agenda beyond our own borders.
Meanwhile, Biden’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) has launched its own crusade against Americans’ right to self-defense. ATF’s <a href="https://www.atf.gov/firearms/final-rule-definition-engaged-business-dealer-firearms#:~:text=The%20final%20rule%20implements%20the,than%20a%20gunsmith%20or%20pawnbroker)." target="_blank" rel="noopener">“Engaged in Business” rule</a> reclassifies gun owners who occasionally sell a firearm as professional dealers, subjecting them to a web of complicated and burdensome regulations with no proven benefits. This rule unconstitutionally expands the agency’s control over ordinary gun owners while also taking another step toward the de facto creation of a national gun owner registry.
Americans have the right — and the responsibility — to fight back.
When the executive branch proposes these restrictions, without the consent of the people’s representatives in Congress, they’re subject to the federal rule-making process. During that process, Americans can submit comments opposing the rule. Those comments must be read by federal officials and should influence the administration’s final decision to move forward with the proposed changes.
While the comment period has closed on the ATF’s business rule, Biden’s ridiculous new firearm export ban is still open for debate. Here’s why you should <a href="https://heritageaction.quorum.us/campaign/61002/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">join us in our campaign</a> of opposition:
First, all U.S.-made firearms are already marked with serial numbers, but this rule would require manufacturers to adopt new export control classification numbers (ECCNs) for additional tracking abroad. This would expand the bureaucratic process — increasing compliance costs and lost revenue for American firearm manufacturers — but it would not improve tracking, seeing as any country can already record serial numbers.
Second, while the rule will drastically restrict sales to foreign civilians, it would not impact exports to foreign governments, which reflects the Left’s fundamental belief that only those in power should have weapons, not the people they govern.
The administration has tried to defend this hypocrisy with bad-faith attacks on civilian gun ownership, falsely claiming that firearms legally exported to civilians are more likely to be diverted into black markets than firearms sold to foreign militaries and police agencies. But virtually every credible analysis of international criminal gun trafficking shows that the biggest sources of guns used for crime or terrorism are government stockpiles and illegal imports, not guns legally imported for lawful civilian sales.
Third, as usual, this additional regulation will do nothing to curb crime at home or abroad. The ATF&#8217;s own <a href="https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/report/nfcta-volume-ii-part-iv-crime-guns-recovered-outside-us-and-traced-le/download#:~:text=These%20recovered%20and%20traced%20crime,with%20firearms%20lawfully%20exported%20from" target="_blank" rel="noopener">analysis</a> of international gun crime tracing found that less than 1% of the firearms lawfully exported out of the U.S. between 2016 and 2020 were used in international crime. Just like in the United States, there’s no reason to believe that ordinary lawful gun owners in other countries are a driving force behind violent crime.
The export ban, along with the massive expansion of power at the ATF, are election-year political games designed to appease the president’s radical base at the expense of our constitutional rights. President Biden has demonstrated time and time again his disdain for gun owners and willingness to subvert the American people to advance his agenda.
Our representatives on the Hill have launched efforts to overturn both rules — and they need our support. Heritage Action launched a new <a href="https://heritageaction.quorum.us/campaign/61002/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">campaign</a> to help Americans submit comments in support of protecting the Second Amendment. Together, we can fight Biden’s executive overreach and prevent the suffocation of firearms manufacturers nationwide.
* * * 
Kevin Roberts, Ph.D., is president of Heritage Action for America. Ryan Walker is executive vice president of Heritage Action for America.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the authors and not necessarily those of The Daily Wire.

US-GUNS-ASIANS

Biden’s New Campaign Against America’s Law-Abiding Gun Owners

Biden Administration

Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (ATF)

Heritage Action for America

Heritage Foundation

The gun trial of first son, Hunter Biden, started Monday, with jury selection. First lady Jill Biden was in attendance, and the Bidens spent the weekend in Wilmington, Delaware in preparation for the trial. 
Hunter <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/02/politics/hunter-biden-trial-preview/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Biden</a> is charged with illegally purchasing and possessing a firearm while abusing or being addicted to drugs, which violates federal law. He has pleaded not guilty.
Three <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/02/politics/hunter-biden-trial-preview/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">women</a> connected to Hunter Biden are scheduled to testify about his drug us related to the time he purchased the firearm: His ex-wife, Kathleen Buhle, his late brother’s widow Hallie Biden whom he dated, along with the woman from Arkansas, Lunden Roberts, the mother of one of his children — a granddaughter Joe Biden has previously <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/our-son-hunter-and-navys-mother-joe-biden-finally-acknowledges-his-seventh-grandchild-in-friday-night-news-dump" target="_blank" rel="noopener">refused</a> to acknowledge. 
Hunter’s words will also come back to haunt him. His <a href="https://apnews.com/article/hunter-biden-joe-biden-election-gun-drugs-e2cc8b5d459ad80e5bd7b05c5e9105c1" target="_blank" rel="noopener">memoir</a> shows he was addicted to drugs at the time of the purchase, as does evidence from the so-called “laptop from hell,” the laptop Hunter reportedly left at a Delaware computer repair shop and never claimed.
<div id="attachment_745675" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-745675" class="size-large wp-image-745675" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/06/GettyImages-2155274118-864x576.jpg" alt="Hunter Biden, son of US President Joe Biden, left, and his wife Melissa Cohen Biden arrive at federal court in Wilmington, Delaware, US, on Monday, June 3, 2024. Jury selection begins Monday in the first of two cases Hunter Biden has tried to avoid for years, both to stay out of prison and spare his father, President Joe Biden, political and personal turmoil as he runs for a second term most likely against Donald Trump. Photographer: Joe Lamberti/Bloomberg via Getty Images" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/06/GettyImages-2155274118-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/06/GettyImages-2155274118-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/06/GettyImages-2155274118-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/06/GettyImages-2155274118.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />Joe Lamberti/Bloomberg via Getty Images</div>
As the Daily Wire has <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/top-house-democrat-defends-loving-father-biden-says-hunter-has-done-nothing-wrong">reported</a>, President Biden continues to maintain his son’s innocence. While the president is not expected to attend or testify at his son’s trial, he is on record stating, “My son has done nothing wrong.”
And there&#8217;s the rub. 
President Joe Biden detests guns and legal gun owners, but he defends his son, who is charged with violating federal gun laws.
He also lies about gun statistics.
The president has repeatedly claimed that “firearms are the leading cause of death for children.” But according to the fact checkers at the <a href="https://www.nssf.org/articles/the-washington-post-concedes-biden-admin-favorite-gun-control-line-is-a-lie/">Washington Post</a>, not exactly a Right-wing publication, “when all motor vehicle accidents are counted, then motor vehicle deaths continue to exceed firearm deaths for children – as defined as people under age 18.”
The president has also called on <a href="https://www.heritage.org/firearms/heritage-explains/bidens-gun-control-agenda">Congress</a> to pass what he calls “common sense” gun reform, including banning so-called assault weapons (isn’t any weapon used to commit an assault an assault weapon?). 
Biden has also called for required background checks on all gun sales and a ban on high-capacity magazines.
Let’s examine each of these demands.
First, so-called assault weapons are not the gun of choice for criminals.
According to an April 2023 report from <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/26/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Pew Research Center</a>, 
<blockquote>In 2020, the most recent year for which the FBI has published data, handguns were involved in 59% of the 13,620 U.S. gun murders and non-negligent manslaughters for which data is available. Rifles – the category that includes guns sometimes referred to as “assault weapons” – were involved in 3% of firearm murders.</blockquote>
So Biden wants to ban a class of weapons responsible for approximately 408 deaths versus weapons that were responsible for about 8,035 deaths.
By comparison, about 450 people die each year by falling out of bed. Statistically, the president should therefore be focusing on making beds safer, especially bunk beds and waterbeds, which are clearly the ‘assault weapons’ of beds.
The president also wants to ban so-called high-capacity magazines, which, depending on the definition, is any magazine with a capacity of 10 or more rounds of ammunition. The theory is that the fewer bullets a person has in a magazine, the fewer people he or she can kill without reloading.
Woe to the single mother, living in remote Montana with the nearest police officer 20 miles away, facing three intruders aiming to rape her and kill her children. I think she should have as large a magazine as possible to defend herself and her children.
The last requirement, expanded background checks, is another canard.
Background checks are required for anyone purchasing a firearm from a federally licensed firearm dealer. Background checks are not required for the private transfer of firearms, such as if I decide to legally gift a firearm to my son or sell one to my cousin.
Oh, and Hunter Biden passed his background check, even though he has been charged with falsifying his application.
The last fallacy of Biden’s war against the Second Amendment is that criminals do not, by definition, follow the law. That is what makes them criminals.
From 2017 through 2021, more than 1 million <a href="https://www.npr.org/2023/02/10/1153977949/major-takeaways-from-the-atf-gun-violence-report" target="_blank" rel="noopener">firearms</a> were stolen from legal gun owners.
In addition, a 2016 <a href="https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/suficspi16.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">survey</a> of prison inmates reported that approximately 1 in 5 (21%) of all state and federal prisoners reported possessing or using a firearm when they committed the offense for which they were serving time. Of those prisoners, only 7% purchased the weapon under their own name from a licensed dealer. More than half of prisoners (56%) had stolen the weapon, found it at the scene of a crime, or obtained it off the street or from the underground market.
President inconsistency on guns have come to light, given the trial of his son. I do not condemn the president for wanting to defend his son, any father would. However, his hatred of the Second Amendment and of legal gun owners is now on full display, as is his hypocrisy.
* * *
Jim Nelles is a Navy veteran and supply chain consultant based in Chicago. His articles have appeared in the Washington Examiner, Newsweek, Foxnews.com, and the Daily Wire. He has served as a chief procurement officer, chief supply chain officer, and chief operations officer for multiple companies.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

US-POLITICS-BIDEN

Biden’s Ongoing War On The Second Amendment

Crime

Gun Rights

Hunter Biden

Joe Biden

Readers Pass

<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/hunter-biden" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Hunter Biden</a> faced multiple blows in court Thursday, as a judge denied his motion to dismiss his three felony gun charges and an appeals court also ruled against him.
Judge Maryellen Noreika of the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware set a three-to-six day trial beginning June 3.
The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit rejected his appeal, in which Hunter referenced precedent about &#8220;former government officials claiming they are immunized from prosecution based on separation-of-powers principles&#8221; &#8212; even though the first son is not a former government official, and Democrats are zealously seeking to try former president Donald Trump, who is, in state courts.
Hunter also tried to have the charge dismissed by saying the government was bound to a &#8220;diversion agreement&#8221; that would have eventually made the gun charges go away.
U.S. Attorney David Weiss drafted the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hunter-bidens-lawyers-claim-deal-to-resolve-felony-gun-charge-was-binding" target="_blank" rel="noopener">deal</a>, then rescinded it last summer after being embarrassed when <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/gop-investigators-probe-alleged-effort-by-hunter-bidens-lawyers-to-punish-irs-whistleblowers" target="_blank" rel="noopener">whistleblowers</a> provided evidence of the DOJ seemingly hamstringing investigators on the case. Prosecutors could not point to a single case in which they had agreed to such a generous &#8220;diversion agreement&#8221; for felony gun charges for anyone else, and a probation officer declined to approve the deal.
A lawyer for rapper <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/kodak-was-charged-for-the-same-crime-hip-hop-stars-lawyer-condemns-hunter-biden-plea-deal" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Kodak Black</a>, who received three years in prison for similar charges, said, &#8220;There’s no such thing as not getting jail time on a gun charge&#8230; 2 tiers of justice?&#8221;
Nonetheless, Hunter argued to the court that he is the victim of &#8220;selective and vindictive prosecution,&#8221; and continued to demand documents to prove it even after the judge shut down the argument. He went so far as to demand information about grand jurors, which is normally secret, because &#8220;it remains possible that in this highly-politicized matter, the grand jury was selected without regard to the bias that people might have.&#8221;
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1700760801843000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2PQrVSrJfhxNb4LcARqniG">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
The judge <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ded.82797/gov.uscourts.ded.82797.113.0.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">wrote</a>, &#8220;There will be no such evidentiary hearing.&#8221;
The DOJ under Hunter&#8217;s father, President Joe Biden, has charged 1,200 January 6 defendants, sometimes for conduct as petty as trespassing, in D.C., which voted 93% for Biden, and secured a nearly 100% conviction rate.
Hunter&#8217;s lawyers also sought to use the court case to compel the production of documents relating to former officials in the Trump administration, including former Attorney General Bill Barr. The judge wrote, &#8220;Defendant has failed to show how any of the requested communications among former DOJ and Executive Branch officials could constitute exculpatory evidence,&#8221; noting that no one who even communicated with them will testify at trial.
The judge noted that the DOJ has turned over voluminous information to Hunter already, including &#8220;a forensic copy of the devices seized from The Mac Shop&#8221; &#8212; an admission that the Hunter Biden laptop is real, despite government officials suggesting otherwise before the election.
Hunter&#8217;s lawyers previously threatened to trigger a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hunter-bidens-lawyers-threatened-to-put-president-biden-on-witness-stand-if-hunter-was-charged-by-doj-report" target="_blank" rel="noopener">&#8220;Constitutional crisis&#8221;</a> by having President Joe Biden testify at his son&#8217;s trial.
Hunter is charged with lying on federal firearms purchase forms that he was not a drug user, despite a raging cocaine addiction. His girlfriend eventually threw his gun in a dumpster. The charge carries a term of up to 10 years in prison.
Days after his gun trial, Hunter is slated to face a second trial on nine tax charges in California.

Judges Reject Hunter Biden’s Claim Of Juror Bias And Political Prosecution, Gun Case Set For Trial

Delaware

A judge in <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/washington" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Washington</a> ruled that the state’s ban on magazines that hold more than 10 rounds is unconstitutional, but the state Supreme Court granted an emergency appeal to pause the judge’s decision, meaning the restriction stays in effect for now.
On Monday, Cowlitz County Superior Court Judge Gary Bashor <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24536660-state-of-washington-v-gators-custom-guns-inc-ruling-and-orders-23-2-00897-08" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ruled</a> in favor of a Washington gun shop that sued the state after lawmakers banned magazines holding more than 10 rounds in 2022. Bashor rejected the state&#8217;s arguments that the magazines were not suitable for self-defense and that the legislation was common sense. 
“This Court must find there exists no set of facts where the Court can find such a generalized ban or restriction on an am (or an instrument that facilitates self-defense) as constitutional under the Washington Constitution,” Bashor <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24536660-state-of-washington-v-gators-custom-guns-inc-ruling-and-orders-23-2-00897-08">wrote</a> in his 55-page decision. “The United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights exist to define the outer limits of what Legislatures and Courts are allowed to do. Amending the Constitution and Bill of Rights cannot be done simply by enacting a law, or by a pronouncement from a Court.&#8221;
Bashor added that he found that large capacity magazines (LCMS) are classified as arms under the State Constitution and that members of the public commonly owned them for lawful purposes. 
“The State has not provided evidence that LCMs are NOT commonly and lawfully owned or possessed by civilians for lawful purposes, including self-defense. The State: instead chose to provide expert opinions concluding only that LCMs are not commonly ‘fired for self-defense purposes’, or are not the best choice for self-defense, neither of which are relevant metrics,” he wrote. 
Bashor, who has been a judge in the rural county since 2011, also pointed to the Founding Fathers in his decision. 
“There was no appetite to limit gun rights by the Founders. Though the specific technology available today may not have been envisioned, the Founders expected technological advancements,” Bashor wrote. “The result is few, if any, historical analogue laws by which a state can justify a modern firearms regulation.”
After Bashor&#8217;s ruling, Washington State Attorney General Bob Ferguson, a Democrat, <a href="https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/was-ban-on-high-capacity-gun-magazines-ruled-unconstitutional/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">filed</a> an emergency appeal before the state’s high court, arguing magazine capacity limits are constitutional. 
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1700760801843000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2PQrVSrJfhxNb4LcARqniG">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
“Every court in Washington and across the country to consider challenges to a ban on the sale of high-capacity magazines under the U.S. or Washington Constitution has either rejected that challenge or been overruled. This law is constitutional,” Ferguson said. 
Washington State Supreme Court Commissioner Michael Johnston sided with Ferguson, keeping the law in effect while the appeal continued. 
The magazine restriction was one of the many gun control policies adopted in recent years by Washington’s Democratic-controlled legislature and Democratic Governor Jay Inslee, including a ban on the sale of AR-15s and similar rifles.

State Of Illinois Passes Illinois  Assault Weapons Ban

Judge Says Washington’s Restrictions On Gun Magazine Capacity Are Unconstitutional

Constitution

Courts

Washington

The Biden Administration continues to champion efforts to take legally purchased guns away from American citizens after Vice President Kamala Harris <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/vp-harris-pushes-gun-control-in-parkland-visit-promotes-new-push-for-red-flag-laws">touted</a> “red flag laws” as an effort to tackle gun violence during a recent visit to Parkland, FL.
During her visit, the vice president announced the creation of a national office that would focus on the implementation of <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/mar/23/red-flag-laws-gun-control">red flag laws</a> in states that currently have these laws in place. The Department of Justice (DOJ) would oversee the office which raises alarm bells for supporters of the Second Amendment and Republican <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/republicans-blast-biden-admins-red-flag-operation-will-violate-second-amendment-rights">lawmakers</a> on Capitol Hill are raising concerns that this so-called “red flag” operation would indeed violate the Constitution.
Meanwhile, the courts are telling American citizens that illegal immigrants have the right to legally possess a weapon after an Obama-appointed federal judge in Illinois <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/judge-rules-illegal-immigrants-have-gun-rights-protected-second-amendment">ruled</a> that our Constitution protects the rights of individuals who enter this country illegally.
Law-abiding American citizens are frustrated, and they have a right to be.
Approximately 986 different bills to restrict gun <a href="https://www.billtrack50.com/blog/important-gun-law-changes-in-2023/">rights</a> were introduced in the first half of 2023, according to the most recent data available.
My home state of Illinois enacted a law in 2023, <a href="https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/publicacts/102/PDF/102-1116.pdf">Public Act 102-1116</a>, which prohibits the sale and distribution of so-called “assault weapons” and high-capacity magazines. Citizens who owned these previously legal weapons could keep them, only if they <a href="https://isp.illinois.gov/Home/AssaultWeapons#:~:text=Illinois%20residents%20cannot%20lawfully%20purchase,e)%20within%20the%20link%20above.">registered</a> their weapons with the State.
Gun laws do not stop criminals from using guns while committing crimes. Criminals, by definition, do not care about gun laws. <a href="https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11121/1" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Federal law</a> requires a criminal background check for all firearm sales and transfers by licensed dealers. The challenge is that most criminals do not legally obtain their guns.
Moreover, semi-automatic weapons are not the weapon of choice when committing a crime. According to <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/26/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/">Pew Research Center</a>, in 2020 “handguns were involved in 59% of gun murders and non-negligent manslaughters. Rifles — the category that includes “assault weapons” – were involved in 3% of firearm murders.” This means that approximately 408 people were killed by semi-automatic firearms in 2020.
In <a href="https://www.inquirer.com/news/philadelphia-gun-arrests-2021-convictions-vufa-20210330.html">Philadelphia</a>, people who are accused of illegally carrying a gun have seen their chances of being convicted in court decline from 63% in 2017 to 49% in 2019.
This is why the recent ruling by an Obama-appointed district court judge for the Northern District of Illinois, Sharon Johnson Coleman, is so concerning.
Judge Coleman ruled that a federal ban on undocumented immigrants owning firearms is <a href="https://nypost.com/2024/03/20/us-news/illinois-judge-rules-illegal-migrants-can-carry-guns/">unconstitutional</a> and dismissed charges against an illegal named Heriberto Carbajal-Flores, who was arrested in 2020 for violating a federal law which prohibits non-citizens from possessing guns. Judge Coleman’s ruling stated that since this illegal immigrant had no criminal record, and the circumstances behind his arrest were not violent, he should not be deprived of his Second Amendment right to bear arms.
Case in point, being in the United States illegally was not enough cause to deny this individual his Second Amendment rights.
Judge Coleman seems to have forgotten one important fact; being in the country illegally is a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1325, which makes it a <a href="https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/immigration-prosecutions#:~:text=%C2%A7%201325%20makes%20it%20a,entering%20or%20attempting%20to%20enter." target="_blank" rel="noopener">felony</a> to unlawfully enter the United States.
In <a href="https://www.williamsnickl.com/can-i-own-a-gun-after-a-felony-conviction-in-illinois/#:~:text=Once%20you%20are%20convicted%20of,in%20the%20last%2020%20years" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Illinois</a>, it is illegal for a person convicted of a felony to possess a firearm.
Any person desiring to legally purchase a firearm in the state of Illinois must obtain a Firearms Owners Identification Card (FOID Card). To be eligible for a <a href="https://www.ispfsb.com/Public/Faq.aspx#:~:text=To%20be%20eligible%20for%20a,been%20convicted%20of%20a%20felony." target="_blank" rel="noopener">FOID</a> card, amongst other regulations, a person must not be an alien who is lawfully present in the United States.
You cannot even enter a gun shop or buy ammunition without a FOID card in the state of Illinois.
So, this individual&#8217;s firearm must have been illegally obtained which is another federal violation. Yet, this Obama-appointed judge ruled that he could keep his weapon and cannot be prosecuted for any of his numerous crimes.
On the flip side, a law-abiding American citizen in Illinois, who legally obtains a firearm is now, by definition, a felon, for not registering his or her weapon with the state police.
The Biden administration’s DOJ may want to think twice before coming after a citizen’s right to bear arms — a right guaranteed by our Constitution. Maybe the government and the judiciary should enforce the gun laws that are already on the books before looking to punish legal gun owners and award criminals.
* * *
Jim Nelles is a Navy veteran and supply chain consultant based in Chicago. His articles have appeared in the Washington Examiner, Newsweek, Foxnews.com, and the Daily Wire. He has served as a chief procurement officer, chief supply chain officer, and chief operations officer for multiple companies.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

US-POLITICS-SHOOTING-GUNS-HARRIS

Operation ‘Red Flag’: Disarm Citizens, Arm Illegal Immigrants

Illinois

Parkland Shooting

Menu