To prohibit a citizen from wearing or carrying a war arm . . . is an unwarranted restriction upon the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of constitutional privilege.
[Wilson v. State, 33 Ark. 557, at 560, 34 Am. Rep. 52, at 54 (1878)]

Texas NFA Injunction Is Now in Effect—But Major Compliance Questions Remain for FFLs

Executive Summary

On August 5, 2026, U.S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix held that specified National Firearms Act registration and advance-approval requirements exceed Congress’s enumerated powers as applied to suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, and “any other weapons” whose making and transfer taxes Congress reduced to $0.

The court stayed its final judgment for seven days to permit the federal defendants to seek appellate relief. That stay expired at the end of August 12. As of August 13, the publicly available dockets reflect no additional district-court or Fifth Circuit stay, no notice of appeal, and no order otherwise suspending the injunction. The latest publicly indexed district-court filing is an August 12 notice of attorney appearance, which did not alter the injunction or extend the stay. The injunction is therefore presently operative. District-court docket

That does not mean the NFA registration system has disappeared for everyone.

  • The injunction is not universal. It protects the named plaintiffs and, where applicable, their agencies, political subdivisions, actual current and future members, and qualifying current and future customers.
  • An individual is not protected merely because he or she lives in one of the fifteen plaintiff states.
  • Customer protection is transaction-specific. It applies to qualifying transactions with a protected commercial plaintiff or a commercial member of a plaintiff association; it is not a blanket exemption covering everything the customer owns, makes, transfers, or possesses.
  • Supporters, donors, spouses, children, and other household members are not protected unless they independently qualify.
  • A person’s association membership should not automatically be assumed to protect a separate trust, LLC, corporation, or other legal entity.
  • The consolidated Jensen plaintiffs did not obtain relief regarding AOWs, although they received additional relief concerning individual-maker marking requirements.
  • Machineguns, destructive devices, the Gun Control Act, federal licensing requirements, Form 4473 requirements, prohibited-person laws, and state and local laws remain unaffected.

Continue reading “”

CMP Announces M14 Prices, 1897 Trench Guns

Shooting Sports USA got the CMP on record about the new M14 sales program, as well as some updates on other sales opportunities. This episode of the National Matches Update Show has an interview with CMP Chairman and CEO Jerry O’Keefe, where he answers the questions so many of us have had. Keep reading for the details.

We previously covered the announcement that semi-converted M14 rifles would be made available for purchase through the CMP. The initial announcement was light on details other than the general facts that these guns would be converted from full-auto to semi-auto. But the head of the CMP has some more info to share.

Mr. O’Keefe announced in an interview with Shooting Sports USA that the CMP will sell M14s for under $2,000. How far under that price, and whether there will be multiple grades at different price points, was not announced. But the price point being similar to commercial versions is certainly welcome news!

This price point is, at least in part, a reflection of how many guns will be available for purchase. More than 100,000 M14 rifles will be made available through the CMP purchase program. It will be a major process to convert all of those guns!

Public reaction to the M14 sales initiative has been overwhelming. Given that level of excitement, CMP will have purchase limits of 2 M14s per person per year. Initial sales have also been pushed back to the beginning of 2027 so there will be sufficient guns on hand to meet demand.

But the updates were not limited to the M14. We previously covered the announcement that CMP would be selling shotguns. Those will be coming from the various branches of the armed forces. The first batch will be 2,000-3,000 scatterguns from the Army coming in the Fall. About 400 of the legendary Model 1897 Trench Guns are part of that batch. Pricing info was not available, but it is a good guess that those will be put up for auction.

Purchase limits for the 1911 are also changing. The current system caps lifetime purchases at four pistols. Starting January 1st, 2027, the lifetime cap will be gone. Instead, purchasers can get two pistols per person per year.

We will be sure to share more details about the new guns coming from CMP as they become available. Which ones are you planning to pick up? And what military surplus guns would you like to see from CMP in the future?

No one can read our Constitution without concluding that the people who wrote it wanted their government severely limited; the words “no” and “not” employed in restraint of government power occur 24 times in the first seven articles of the Constitution and 22 more times in the Bill of Rights.
— EDMUND A. OPITZ

My cynical side makes me believe that Stunnedtater Sheehy’s bill is just another act of political Kabuki Theater grandstanding.

Why the Senate’s Newest Carry Reciprocity Bill Should Be Rejected

The Second Amendment is the only enumerated right that stops at the border of the state where you live. You don’t have to beg permission from Florida to exercise your First Amendment rights if you’re taking your family to Disney World. You don’t lose your Fourth Amendment protections when you go experience Mardi Gras in New Orleans. But if you want to keep and bear arms once you cross your state line, you need to have pre-approval from the state where you plan on carrying.

National right-to-carry reciprocity is the answer, and there are several bills in Congress that would address this problem, including HR 38, also known as the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act. A new bill introduced in the Senate by Montana Sen. Tim Sheehy, on the other hand, is a step in the wrong direction.

A retired Army special operations veteran is urging Congress to give qualified former special operators nationwide concealed carry privileges enjoyed by retired U.S. law enforcement officers, arguing the elite troops are uniquely trained to protect themselves and Americans.

“It needs to happen,” Gavin Glasenapp, who served 20 years and 12 combat deployments in the Army, told Fox News Digital on Monday.

The Special Operations Forces Concealed Carry Act was put forward last week by Sen. Tim Sheehy, R-Mont., months after a companion bill by the same name in the House was introduced in April by Rep. Pat Harrigan, R-N.C.

“These are proven men and women,” Glasenapp, the training operations manager at Delta Defense for the U.S. Concealed Carry Association (USCCA) said, adding “they’re specially selected, uniquely trained.”

“I can think of no better group of people to be equipped to defend themselves and others around them. In fact, that’s part of our core values here at Delta Defense.

“We believe every American has the inalienable right to self-defense, and I can think of no better group that to really emulate that and really show you what that looks like.”

I appreciate Glasenapp’s service and I’ll take him at his word when he says that he believes every American has the inalienable right to self-defense, but if that is the case then I don’t see how he can square that position with support for a bill that would allow only a chosen few to exercise their right to carry in all 50 states.

Glasenapp says he can’t think of a better group of people to be equipped to defend themselves and others around them than special forces. I can. It’s a group called “the people,” and they’re the ones whose right to bear arms is explicitly protected by the Constitution. The Second Amendment doesn’t exist for the “specially selected” or “uniquely trained.” It exists for the ordinary American citizen.

My objections to Sheehy’s bill are no different than the ones I raised when Rep. Harrigan introduced his version of the legislation back in April.

The right to keep and bear arms is a right of “the people,” and whether he realizes it or not, Harrigan’s bill (like the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act that’s already in place) turns that right into a privilege reserved for a chosen few. In the case of LEOSA, it’s current and former police officers. Harrigan’s bill would apply that same selective standard to special operators. In both cases, the framework elevates certain members of our society above we the people, and that’s not how our Constitution works. I’d argue that to say that police officers and/or special operators have “earned” the ability to carry a concealed firearm in all 50 states actually undercuts the basic premise of the Second Amendment.

Does it make sense to “trust retired police officers to carry concealed nationwide”? Sure, and it makes sense to allow current and retired special operators to do the same. It also makes sense to allow every lawful gun owner to carry concealed in all 50 states, because that’s what a right of the people looks like; it applies equally across the land, and not just to select individuals or groups.

I don’t have a problem with law enforcement or special ops warriors carrying nationwide. My problem is a system where only law enforcement and operators have the ability to do so.

The counter argument is that this bill, like LEOSA, still moves the ball forward. Once lawmakers see that national right-to-carry reciprocity for these groups hasn’t led to mayhem, the theory goes, they’ll be more likely to support national right-to-carry reciprocity for the rest of us.

The problem with that argument is that we heard the same thing when LEOSA was making its way through Congress 22 years ago, and it doesn’t appear to have made a lick of difference in the years since.

Like Harrigan, Sheehy is also a co-sponsor of the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act. I would encourage the senator, just as I encouraged the congressman in April, to stick with the legislation that recognizes the Second Amendment rights of we the people and forget about the bill that (intentionally or not) treats this right as a privilege reserved for a chosen few.

So far, most Republicans in Congress are sticking with reciprocity for all. Harrigan’s bill has just six co-sponsors, compared to 189 for H.R. 38. Sheehy’s companion bill will hopefully receive the same cool reception on Capitol Hill, and we can continue pushing forward for a true national right-to-carry reciprocity law.

GOP Coalition Urges DOJ to Use Rulemaking to Adopt Jensen v. ATF Ruling Nationwide

A letter currently in the possession of Breitbart News shows Rep. Andrew Clyde (R) and a GOP coalition urging the Department of Justice (DOJ) to apply the Jensen v. ATF [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives] ruling nationwide, broadening its application via rulemaking to include all law-abiding Americans.

On August 5, 2026, Breitbart News reported that plaintiffs in Jensen v. ATF secured a ruling freeing them from the National Firearms Act’s (NFA’s) registration requirements for suppressors and short barrel rifles and shotguns.

Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF is consolidated with Jensen v. ATF, which means numerous plaintiffs — including Silencer Shop customers and members of certain gun rights groups — are free from the burdensome registration requirements if the ruling stands.

The DOJ was given a 7-day window in which to appeal the decision, and the letter from Clyde and 46 other GOP Senators and House members urges the department not to do so.

The letter says:

The court’s opinion tracks precisely the position this Congress articulated when we passed Section 70436 of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The court correctly recognized that the NFA’s registration, application, and reporting requirements for short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, silencers, and AOWs have rested only on the taxing power, and that a tax set to zero can no longer support the regulatory machinery built to collect it.

Instead of appealing, the signatories of the letter urge the DOJ to use rulemaking to adopt the various aspects of the ruling nationwide so the benefits it secured are not only applicable to customers of Silencer Shop, members of certain gun rights groups, etc.

The letter says:

The DOJ should apply the court’s constitutional holding as its nationwide operating position. The court held that the challenged NFA provisions — governing registration, application, and transfer of untaxed firearms — are unconstitutional because they no longer rest on any valid exercise of an enumerated power.

That holding does not turn on any fact particular to the named plaintiffs; it applies with equal force to every person subject to these same regulations. Therefore, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) should be directed to apply this ruling as its governing position to all transfers and makings involving untaxed firearms, regardless of whether the applicant is a party to this litigation, again effective immediately.

The signatories explained, “Immediate application of the ruling nationwide is necessary to avoid the untenable alternative in the interim: a split enforcement regime in which the DOJ applies these requirements to one gun owner while declining to apply them to his neighbor, solely because one person happens to be a customer of Silencer Shop or a member of Gun Owners of America.”

The letter continues:

The DOJ should initiate rulemaking to formally rescind or amend the challenged regulations as they apply to untaxed firearms. Rulemaking is necessary to make this outcome permanent.

We urge you to begin that rulemaking process without delay, so that the immediate, nationwide application of the court’s ruling is followed as promptly as the APA allows by a durable regulatory fix that does not depend on the discretion of any particular administration.

The letter concludes by focusing on the important role the Second Amendment has played, and continues to play, in protecting and preserving freedom:

The Second Amendment is the practical guardian of those God-given rights, ensuring that free citizens retain the ultimate means to defend their lives, their liberty, and their families.

When the DOJ defends unconstitutional gun regulations then the ATF becomes weaponized against law-abiding Americans and the government betrays its founding purpose. Restoring the Second Amendment is not merely a policy matter — it is a fulfillment of this nation’s oldest and most sacred promise to its people.

We stand ready to work with you and the Department of Justice to see these priorities enacted, and we are grateful for your continued commitment to our sacred Liberties and the Second Amendment that protects them.

The letter is addressed to Attorney General Todd Blanche and cc’d ATF Director Robert Cekada and will be released to both of them at some point today.

The GOP signatories in addition to Rep. Clyde are Sens. Steve Daines, Roger Marshall, Bill Cassidy, Cynthia Lummis, Mike Lee, John Cornyn, John Barrasso, and Mike Crapo, as well as House members Mary Miller, Keith Self, Diana Harshbarger, Eric Burlison, Eli Crane, John Brecheen, H. Morgan Griffith, Ben Cline, Clay Higgins, Michael Cloud, Ralph Norman, Scott Perry, Warren Davidson, Shari Biggs, Kat Cammack, Bruce Westerman, Derrick Van Orden, Tom McClintock, Mike Collins, Scott DesJarlais, Jimmy Patronis, Morgan Luttrell, Austin Scott, Richard Hudson, Randy Weber, Claudia Tenney, Pete Sessions, Andy Biggs, Riley Moore, Derek Schmidt, Wesley Hunt, Mark Harris, Tim Burchett, Brian Babin, Lauren Boebert, Victoria Spartz, Chip Roy, and Earl L. “Buddy” Carter.

War is an ugly thing but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feelings which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. — John Stuart Mills

Man killed after entering Riverton gas station with shotgun identified

RIVERTON — One man who entered a Riverton Chevron Holiday gas station with a shotgun is dead after officials said an armed, unaffiliated person engaged with him.

Riverton public information officer Nate Slack said the man, Ofa’tangikivaha Angilau, 23, was shot and killed by the other individual who had a weapon.

He said no police were involved and no others at the gas station were injured.

In a statement on Monday with the name of the deceased man, Slack said initial reports that the man had fired the shotgun were incorrect.

“We want to reiterate that the investigation has determined initial reports of the man firing shots inside the Holiday Oil were incorrect,” Slack said.

The incident occurred on Friday at the gas station at 12600 S. 4185 West.

According to Slack, the man had entered the gas station to purchase alcohol, but did not have ID, so the clerk refused to sell him alcohol and he became “belligerent” and “argumentative.” At that point, another person tried to de-escalate the situation, and the man left and got into his car.

Slack said the man drove around, but soon came back with a shotgun, and an individual inside the gas station chose to fire and killed Angilau. After being shot, Angilau exited the store and collapsed outside, where he died from his injuries.

He said the person who shot the man has been very cooperative with officers.

“I think this is why a lot of people do conceal carry just to protect themselves in situations like this. Obviously a very unfortunate situation, but they do occur; they are rare, however, especially here in Riverton,” Slack said.

Well, the CT scans show that the ‘lesion’ or whatever it is, in my right lung hasn’t changed in the past 6 months. The thoracic/vascular surgeon says that as far as been his experience, if it was cancer, some sort of change would have been seen by now. So, I get  1 more CT scan in 6 months and if there’s no change………see ya. 

“The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the former cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles.”
– Col. Jeff Cooper