Buckeye Firearms Association

Everytown using AI to strip away our Second Amendment rights

SHummel — Fri, 22 May 2026 10:00:00 +0000

by Lee Williams

Last year, the parents of a 16-year-old boy alleged in a lawsuit that ChatGPT encouraged their son to kill himself.

In October 2004, a New York AI system falsely told business owners they could steal tips, fire anyone who complained about sexual harassment, and serve food even after it was chewed by rats.

In August 2005, a 56-year-old man killed his 83-year-old mother in her home and then committed suicide. He believed his mother was a secret agent who was poisoning him with psychedelic drugs, and his chatbot agreed and supported his delusions.

In July 2005, an AI system told a user how to break into an attorney’s home and to bring “lock picks, gloves, a flashlight and lube.”

Now Everytown for Gun Safety is using AI in an attempt to further erode our Second Amendment rights.

What could possibly go wrong?

Election results: 90% of BFA PAC-endorsed candidates win in 2026 primary

Last month, Everytown announced it had created the Everytown Evidence Engine, or E³, an AI system they claimed would help them “harness AI policy to identify gun safety solutions.”

They made the move to AI because “efficient systems for analysis can lead to new questions and new answers in the field of gun violence prevention research.”

How reliable is Everytown’s new AI?

You can judge for yourself.

Claude

Everytown admitted its new E³ AI system was built using Claude, an AI system designed by the firm Anthropic. Both Claude and Anthropic have had significant problems.

In a recent story titled “Anthropic Admitted Claude Code Broke. We Were Right,” a reporter at Medium announced he had found issues with the system.

The reporter’s hard work forced Anthropic to admit that Claude had major problems.

In a story titled “An update on recent Claude Code quality reports,” Anthropic claimed they had fixed everything.

“Over the past month, we’ve been looking into reports that Claude’s responses have worsened for some users. We’ve traced these reports to three separate changes that affected Claude Code, the Claude Agent SDK, and Claude Cowork. The API was not impacted,” Anthropic claimed.

The firm also promised it would “do things differently to avoid these issues,” and that more of their staff would use the public version of the software.

Sky News recently released a damning YouTube video about public interactions with Claude.

The British report discusses how the chatbot tells users what they want to hear.

“What happens when AI starts pulling people away from reality and even encourages them to act on distorted beliefs?” the reporter asked.

The video discusses a recent Canadian research paper that found one of every 1,000 conversations with Claude has the “potential for severe reality distortions.”

“We don’t know why Claude responds as it does consistently,” an expert said.

The researchers also discovered that the number of potentially harmful discussions with Claude was actually growing over time. An Anthropic spokesman admitted they knew that Claude had problems, but they didn’t know why.

'Limitations'

When Everytown addresses everything that its new E³ tool cannot do, you have to wonder why anyone would use it.

Even Everytown admits E³'s limitations are simply breathtaking.

“For example, at this time, E³ does not currently weigh all of the factors that could be influencing gun violence such as gun ownership, employment and earnings, strength of policy implementation and enforcement, law-enforcement practices, and many other relevant and granular socioeconomic and demographic characteristics particularly at the county and/or neighborhood-levels,” Everytown wrote.

So despite its long list of limitations, how does Everytown intend to use its new E³ tool?

They don’t really say.

“[T]his new tool can provide users with important directions regarding policy effectiveness that can be used for critical decision-making. And it is the hope that future iterations of the E³ will incorporate these kinds of variables and, ultimately, increase its ability to conduct additional types of analyses,” Everytown wrote.

Takeaways

Thus far, all of Everytown’s critical decision-making has involved how to strip guns from the hands of gun owners. They spend millions annually trying to create more local, state and federal anti-gun laws. Whether their new E³ system will help them remains to be seen.

Alan Gottlieb founded the Second Amendment Foundation more than 50 years ago and serves as its executive vice president. He was struck but not surprised by the problems with Everytown’s new AI system.

“When you are unintelligent, you think any AI system will be better than your own brain," Gottlieb said. "But being unintelligent, odds are you will pick the wrong one. Everytown sure did.”

Lee Williams is chief editor of the Second Amendment Foundation's Investigative Journalism Project. Republished with permission.

NRA sues Virginia over 'assault firearms' and magazine bans

SHummel — Thu, 21 May 2026 10:00:00 +0000

The National Rifle Association on May 14 announced the filing of a state lawsuit challenging Virginia’s newly enacted bans on “assault firearms” and magazines capable of holding more than 15 rounds.

The bans were signed into law earlier by Gov. Spanberger. The “assault firearms” ban criminalizes the purchase, sale, transfer, manufacture, and importation of a wide range of commonly owned semiautomatic handguns, shotguns, and rifles—including the AR-15, the most popular rifle in America. The law also prohibits the purchase, barter, transfer, and importation of “large capacity magazines,” defined as magazines capable of holding over 15 rounds of ammunition.

Related article: Virginia demonstrates importance of electing pro-gun governor

The complaint argues that the bans violate the arms guarantee in Article 1, Section 13 of the Virginia Constitution. It further contends that, because the Virginia Supreme Court has interpreted that provision as coextensive with the Second Amendment, it bars prohibitions on commonly owned arms.

The plaintiffs include the Virginia Shooting Sports Association, Middletown Firearms, Middletown Training, Virginia Pride Ltd., and VSSA members Joseph Santolla, Reagan Adams, James Rowe, Robert Pride, and Stephen Bokmiller.

The case, Santolla v. Katz, will be heard by the Washington Circuit Court.

Sign up for BFA-sponsored Houses of Worship Defensive Firearms Training

SHummel — Wed, 20 May 2026 10:00:00 +0000

By now, you've likely heard of the Protecting Houses of Worship training classes designed as an intro to help identify security needs, as well as organizational and team training standards. Now it's time to step it up a notch with another Buckeye Firearms Association-sponsored event.

Houses of Worship Defensive Firearms Training, scheduled for 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Saturday, Aug. 1, is a faith-based safety team training focused on responsible firearms use, threat recognition, immediate life-saving casualty care, and coordinated emergency response.

Designed specifically for houses of worship, this course helps teams protect congregations while maintaining a safe, welcoming environment. Attendees will be offered a shooting qualification standard at the end of the training.

The primary instructor is Forrest Sonewald, a veteran law enforcement professional and tactical instructor with more than 30 years of experience in patrol, SWAT operations, and law enforcement training. He currently serves with the Perry Village Police Department as a firearms and defensive tactics Instructor, where he develops and delivers advanced training programs that enhance officer proficiency and safety. Sonewald also is a Red Team instructor with the Ohio Tactical Officers Association who trains law enforcement officers all around the state of Ohio in active-killer response, among other valuable training.

The training will be held at Mushin Safety & Security Training, LLC, 10288 Amity Road, Brookville, Ohio.

We invite all dedicated safety team members serving houses of worship to join us on the range and showcase your skills in a supportive, professional environment. Whether you patrol the sanctuary, secure the parking lot, or stand ready to protect your congregation, this is your opportunity to sharpen critical marksmanship, tactical movement, and decision-making abilities alongside fellow defenders who understand the responsibility you carry. Come train with purpose, build camaraderie with other faith-based security teams, exchange best practices, and demonstrate the competence and readiness that keeps your community safe. Slots are limited, so reserve your spot today and prove that vigilance has no off day.

There will be a working lunch, so please bring your own food and beverage.

To register or for more information, check out our calendar listing or call Angela Armstrong at 614-715-4867.

BFA has several events and classes scheduled for this summer. Check out our Events page.

BFA-backed SB 392 'Freedom to Carry Act' scheduled for 1st hearing May 20

SHummel — Tue, 19 May 2026 10:00:00 +0000

by Joe D. "Buck" Ruth

An Ohio Senate bill that would advance gun rights on multiple fronts is up for its first hearing in the Senate General Government Committee on Wednesday, May 20.

Senate Bill 392, known as the Freedom to Carry Act and supported by Buckeye Firearms Association, would, among other things, rename a concealed handgun license a concealed weapons license, allow a concealed weapons licensee to carry a concealed deadly weapon other than an exclusive deadly weapon, allow the possession or transportation of a loaded firearm while in a motor vehicle or vessel, and lower the age of "qualifying adult" from 21 to 18.

SB 392, introduced March 23 by Sens. Al Cutrona (R-Canfield) and Terry Johnson (R-McDermott) and referred to the Senate General Government Committee on March 25, proposes significant revisions to Ohio’s weapons laws by expanding the scope of lawful carry, broadening the definition and treatment of “deadly weapons,” and reinforcing statewide preemption over local regulation. The legislation renames the current concealed handgun licensing framework and substantially increases the rights of license holders and individuals generally with respect to possession, transport, and carry. For a more in-depth description of the bill, check out our April 7 article.

The committee will meet at 2:30 p.m. Live coverage will be available on the Ohio Legislature homepage and later on the committee's video webpage.

Joe D. "Buck" Ruth, a pen name for Scott Hummel, is a longtime small-game hunter and gun owner who spent nearly three decades in the news industry. He is the website and social-media manager for Buckeye Firearms Association.

Democrat strategist Carville reveals plan for one-party rule, packed anti-gun SCOTUS

SHummel — Mon, 18 May 2026 10:00:00 +0000

by Larry Keane, NSSF

The Ragin’ Cajun who once advised President Bill Clinton has spoken, giving anti-gun Democrats a roadmap of what they should do if they take control of Congress next year. James Carville didn’t go off script. He said the quiet part out loud.

The veteran Democratic strategist recently argued that if Democrats win back both chambers of Congress, they should move immediately to make Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico states to bank four more U.S. Senate seats and expand the U.S. Supreme Court to 13 justices, packing it with justices who would vote against protecting Second Amendment rights.

That wasn’t the most revealing part, though. Carville’s advice was not to persuade the public. It was to conceal the agenda until after the election: “Don’t run on it. Don’t talk about it. Just do it,” he flatly stated.

Much like U.S. House Speaker Emeritus Nancy Pelosi’s (D-California) infamous Obamacare line, “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,” the instinct is the same. Carville wants those same politicians that crave more gun control to keep the real agenda vague, secure power first and disclose the consequences later. Carville just updated that instinct to gain control at all costs for 2026.

Raw partisan leverage

Carville’s blunt “blueprint” was telling. It’s a list of familiar items on the wish list of the politicians that would erase Second Amendment rights altogether. That agenda already has a legislative paper trail.

Congress has the constitutional authority to admit new states under Article IV, Section 3 and Congress can approve more justices to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court currently consists of one chief justice and eight associate justices. Packing the court was a refrain during the last presidential election. The reason then was as it is now. Carville wants to abuse the court to wield partisan political power and negate the balance of power between the three branches of government.

Aug. 22 in Hilliard, Ohio: Register now for the 2026 Patriot Fest

That’s the real scoop. Those same politicians who fawn in front of news cameras about “norms,” “threats to democracy” and “protecting institutions” have suddenly grown an appetite for brute-force institutional rewiring when they seek to ram a political agenda that has no widespread public support.

If Carville and those politicians who listened to him truly believed this agenda was legitimate, they would make the case openly to voters. They would defend it on the merits with public discussions and debates. They would explain why changing the composition of the Senate and the Supreme Court is good for the country, not just good for their side.

Carville doesn’t dare do that. Instead, hide it. Win first. Do it later.

Gun owners, beware

The firearm industry and Second Amendment advocates can’t, and don’t, treat this as some distant parlor game.

Institutional power is policy power. If Democrats could add friendly Senate seats and recast the Supreme Court, they would clear the path for the rest of their agenda — no doubt including more crippling federal gun control, more regulatory suffocation and a more hostile judiciary for Second Amendment cases.

That is not speculation. It is already playing out at the state level.

In Virginia, Gov. Abigail Spanberger is deciding what to do next after SB 749, legislation that would ban the purchase of many Modern Sporting Rifles (MSRs), semiautomatic shotguns used for hunting and home defense, many pistols and standard-capacity magazines was sent to her by the legislature. She already vowed to enact strict gun control while campaigning for the highest office in the Commonwealth. Virginians have responded exactly the way Americans always do when politicians threaten to restrict a constitutional right. Virginians are exercising their Second Amendment rights while they still can. They’re buying guns in big numbers.

The same can be expected should anti-gun politicians control Congress. Anti-gun politicians have been signaling it all along. They want bans on semi-automatic rifles and confiscation, bans on popular and common handguns, to repeal the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), to require universal background checks and the creation of a federal gun ownership registry, banking discrimination that would suffocate the industry, traditional ammunition bans, and the list goes on and on.

Believe when they say it

Politicians claiming to be defenders of democracy are being urged by a strategist to conceal a program of statehood-for-advantage and court-packing-for-control until after voters go to the polls. That is not “small-d democratic” confidence. That is machine politics dressed up as moral urgency.

For gun owners, the warning is even clearer. Any political movement willing to quietly restructure the Senate and Supreme Court to secure durable partisan power will not hesitate to use that power against the Second Amendment.

Carville did not misspeak. He clarified.

“If the Democrats win the presidency and both houses of Congress, I think on day one, they should make Puerto Rico [and] D.C. a state, and they should expand the Supreme Court to 13. *expletive* Eat our dust,” he said.

Voters should pay attention. Democratic candidates might just take his advice.

Republished with permission from NSSF.

Canada: Multimillion-dollar 'red flag' regime all show, no go

SHummel — Fri, 15 May 2026 10:00:00 +0000

American “red flag” laws (“punishment now, due process later”) have been opposed for years by groups as varied as the NRA and the ACLU because of their shaky science, minimal evidentiary requirements, and significant erosion of constitutional due process and property rights.

Seven years ago, commentators were already warning that the orders weaponized constitutionally protected First and Second Amendment activity into the basis for orders, furnished malicious individuals with a legal means to persecute others, and stripped the gun rights of innocent citizens for imagined future — not actual — offenses.

Canada’s Liberal government, relentlessly pro-gun control and blissfully unconstrained by legal norms, had no problem embracing the concept and, in 2023, introduced new “red flag” orders (Emergency Prohibition Orders and Emergency Limitations on Access Orders) via Bill C-21. A “backgrounder” on the law declared that “[p]rotecting the safety and security of victims of intimate partner violence and gender-based violence is of paramount importance. Victims need to feel protected and fully supported when they ask for help.”

Register now! 2026 Patriot Fest - Aug. 22 at Makoy in Hilliard, Ohio

Under the law, anyone may apply for an order. Initial hearings are ex parte (without notice to the affected person, who is not present to respond to the allegations made), and once granted, the orders mandate the revocation of any firearm license and the removal of a person’s firearms, ammunition and “other weapons or associated items” for anywhere between 30 days and five years (for orders of over 30 days’ duration, the person’s firearms, license, and other items “won’t be returned”).

Bill C-21 was presented as part of a comprehensive plan to “keep Canadians safe from gun violence” and, in March, Frank Caputo, a Conservative member of Parliament, inquired how these orders contributed to public safety and at what cost. His written parliamentary question requested the details of federal government spending “on the ‘Red Flag’ Awareness Initiative 2025 and on other measures promoting the laws” (along with a cost breakdown), the number of “red flag” orders issued since Bill C-21 went into effect, and the total number of firearms obtained or seized by way of these orders.

The response of the Minister of Public Safety was telling, both in what was disclosed and what was not.

As of mid-March, CAD$728,829 had been spent to “raise awareness” of red flag laws, out of a total of CAD$4.8 million committed to the awareness project. In the last two and a half years, though, only a single“red flag” order, in Ontario in 2025, had been reported to the RCMP’s Canadian Firearms Program and recorded in its database. No information was given about that order or the firearms seized, if any: the government-speak the response was couched in advised that categories for seizures “do not provide the level of details necessary to associate a specific firearm to an emergency prohibition order. As a result, the Canadian Firearms Program does not have the information to provide the number of firearm(s) obtained.” Translated into plain English, it seems government records don’t specifically track gun seizures due to “red flag” orders, a peculiar omission if there’s any interest in assessing the purported effectiveness of the new law and the related multi-million dollar investment it has forced on taxpayers.

2026 primary election: 90% of BFA PAC-endorsed candidates win

The Canadian Broadcasting Corp. (CBC) confirms that there’s no demonstrated utility in these orders “because no one appears to be keeping track of when, where or how often they are being implemented.” According to the process outlined by Public Safety Canada, courts issuing “red flag” orders are required to inform the regional chief firearms officer of their issuance and any subsequent variations or revocations, all of which must be recorded in the RCMP’s Canadian Firearms Information System, the database used to verify whether a person’s gun license is valid. The CBC’s investigation revealed that the eleven provincial and territorial chief firearms officers (responsible for gun license revocations) had no data on red flag-related seizures, and neither did the Ontario Provincial Police or Sûreté du Québec. As we’ve seen, Public Safety Canada was able to document just one order nationwide. Federal Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree reportedly declined an interview with the CBC and his office advised “it was not in a position to respond to CBC News questions about the data gap.”

One person the CBC did persuade to comment was Christian Leuprecht, a political science professor at the Royal Military College, who summed up the situation perfectly as another example of performative politics:

Much of what we do on gun policy in this country has no grounding in evidence and is all about ideology on the one hand, and about electoral payoff and specific ridings on the other…Usually when government introduces these types of measures, they’re not particularly intended for an effect. They’re intended for a public perception that government wants to be seen as doing something.

For those following events in Canada, this approach is completely consistent with the Liberal government’s stance on lawful gun ownership. In the same way that the government is squandering millions of dollars and the goodwill of Canada’s responsible gun owners by blundering forward with its pointless “assault style” gun ban and confiscation, it appears committed to implementing its “red flag” law for appearances’ sake, lack of public safety impact notwithstanding.

Ohio Wildlife Council approves 2026-27 hunting seasons

SHummel — Thu, 14 May 2026 10:00:00 +0000

From ODNR Division of Wildlife

The Ohio Wildlife Council approved 2026-27 hunting and trapping seasons for white-tailed deer, small game, migratory birds, and furbearers during its regularly scheduled meeting on Wednesday, April 29, according to the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) Division of Wildlife.

Deer hunting

The 2026-27 deer hunting seasons are similar to last year. Only one antlered deer may be harvested, regardless of where or how it is taken. Hunting hours are 30 minutes before sunrise to 30 minutes after sunset. The statewide deer hunting dates for 2026-27 include:

Deer archery — Saturday, Sept. 26, 2026, to Sunday, Feb. 7, 2027
Youth deer gun — Saturday, Nov. 21, and Sunday, Nov. 22, 2026
Deer gun — Monday, Nov. 30, to Sunday, Dec. 6, 2026; Saturday, Dec. 19, and Sunday, Dec. 20, 2026
Deer muzzleloader — Saturday, Jan. 2, to Tuesday, Jan. 5, 2027

Deer management permits were approved for use throughout the hunting season on both private land and public hunting areas. Deer management permits may only be used to take antlerless deer.

Deer bag limits increased to three in Defiance, Paulding, and Warren counties. The bag limit in Athens, Meigs, and Washington counties, areas affected by an unprecedented outbreak of Epizootic Hemorrhagic Disease in 2025, is two deer (no more than one antlerless). The Wildlife Council also approved a season bag limit in the CWD surveillance area of six deer.

Aug. 22 at Makoy in Hilliard: Register now for the 2026 Patriot Fest

The Chronic Wasting Disease surveillance area was expanded to include all of Allen County, Van Buren Township in Hancock County, and Holmes Township in Crawford County.

Hunters in the disease surveillance area will have additional opportunities to take deer:

Early deer archery — Saturday, Sept. 12, 2026, to Sunday, Feb. 7, 2027
Early deer gun — Saturday, Oct. 10, to Monday, Oct. 12, 2026

Additional hunting seasons

The Ohio Wildlife Council also approved 2026-27 hunting seasons for waterfowl, small game, migratory birds, and fall wild turkey. Most season dates are similar to previous years.

Ruffed grouse hunting will be limited to controlled hunting on four designated areas. Hunters may apply for those limited permits in July. Wild turkey hunting during the fall season is permitted only with shotguns using shotshells. No fall turkey hunting with archery equipment will be allowed.

Waterfowl hunting seasons will be split into three zones with new boundaries that were approved in 2025. Find the full list of hunting season dates at wildohio.gov.

Endangered and threatened species

Also during Wednesday’s meeting, the Ohio Wildlife Council voted to update Ohio’s threatened and endangered species list as part of a comprehensive five-year review.

The American barn owl was downlisted from threatened to a species of concern after genetic testing revealed the species likely has a larger contiguous Midwest population. The blackchin shiner was also downlisted from extirpated to endangered following its reestablishment in specific Ohio lakes.

Further changes include the addition of 17 bees and 16 aquatic invertebrates to the state’s threatened and endangered list following comprehensive surveys. These species were previously unlisted.

About Ohio Wildlife Council

The Ohio Wildlife Council is an eight-member board that approves all Division of Wildlife proposed rules and regulations. Council meetings are open to the public. Individuals interested in providing comments are asked to call 614-265-6304 at least two days prior to the meeting to register. All comments are required to be three minutes or less.

Church safety training puts participants through active-killer scenario

SHummel — Wed, 13 May 2026 10:00:00 +0000

by John Fryman, THE VILLAGE REPORTER

With church safety and security becoming a hot topic these days, the Buckeye Firearms Association conducted a daylong training seminar for area residents at the Church of Christ at West Unity on Saturday, April 4.

Fourteen area residents took part in the “Protecting Houses of Worship” training, in which they were trained by a pair of licensed firearms instructors, Forrest Sonewald and Angela Armstrong of the Buckeye Firearms Association.

“This training is not only valuable for the people in the house of worship for their day-to-day lives, but we also give them trauma medical training,” said Armstrong. “The more rural areas we do have longer response times. If you got trained knowledgeable people on how to respond to neutralize that threat as soon as possible, it’s very critical.”

The “Protecting Houses of Worship” training program started last year and has been successful so far.

Looking for training? Check out the BFA Events page.

“We’ve got interest from several different states around the country that are interested in bringing us there,” said Armstrong. “Right now, we’re doing it in Ohio, and we do have another class in the area scheduled later this year.”

It also raised an important question: Does your church have a security team ready to go, and are they prepared to counter an active killing event?

The training was designed as an introduction to help identify security needs as well as organizational and team training standards. It focused on hands-on tactics in realistic church scenarios.

“It’s critical that anybody that’s in a safety or security position with a church or any house of worship get training and understand how to respond and neutralize a threat,” said Armstrong. “You think it’s just common sense to call 911 and understand what information needs to be transferred to 911.

“That’s after you secure the scene whether it’s the firearm or getting people out of the area and start providing medical care.”

Armstrong stressed the first part of the training gave participants an idea of the history of active killing events in houses of worship.

“We’re trying to get people to understand because there is an issue, and it can actually happen anywhere,” said Armstrong. “One thing which is eye-opening is what we’re doing here today with the different scenario training and get to see how people respond under stress.

“People learn whether they are a responder or whether they are role players. It’s very valuable training, and we price it very reasonable. We’re hoping to get more people in this training.”

Sonewald, who is also a firearms defensive tactics instructor with the Perry Village Police Department in northeast Ohio and is certified with the Buckeye Firearms Association, gave a presentation on medical training, tactics and active killer response scenarios. He presented a list of hostilities against churches in 2024, which included 55 involving arson, 28 gun-related incidents, 14 bomb threats, 284 vandalism incidents and 47 other incidents.

“Obviously, you have a little better idea on what is going on with the people shooting and being shot,” said Sonewald. “Watch what the congregation does during the shooting, some people get down and some people jump up. The responders then would see when the other people come in.”

Armstrong and Sonewald, along with Archbold Police Department part-time officer Jeff Lehman, who had joined the Buckeye Firearms Association last September, conducted active shooter scenario training exercises throughout the church building.

“Unfortunately, we’re in a society where things are getting worse and tend to be ramping up,” said Lehman. “This is something that is just like CPR, a defibrillator or firefighting. You should be training and pray that you never have to use it.

“Unfortunately, we never know who, where, when or by whom the next attack is going to come.”

He stressed the importance of training as part of the identification of potential threats.

“It’s going to address those potential threats when needed should they have to use violence or extreme violence against the threats,” said Lehman. “They’re going to be prepared and proficient. We’re encouraging today to continue with quality training and to carry this out farther through.”

Among the participants was Greg Brillhart, a law enforcement veteran who took part in the active shooter training drills.

“Unfortunately, we live in an environment where churches are targeted, and it’s a matter of being prepared and not being paranoid,” said Brillhart. “Our ministry is to reach out to people and at the same time, I think we must be cognizant of the fact that we’re in a different world than we were 20 years ago.

“I never would have thought we would see the day I think we were to have this kind of training. It moves churches to be further prepared and people know what to do.”

Republished with permission from The Village Reporter.

DC gun laws failed again at Washington Hilton

SHummel — Tue, 12 May 2026 10:00:00 +0000

by AmmoLand Editor Duncan Johnson

Washington, D.C., has spent more than a century proving the same lesson the gun control lobby refuses to learn: Criminals, assassins, and would-be killers do not stop because a city council, legislature, or Congress passed another weapons law.

The latest reminder came at the Washington Hilton, the same hotel where John Hinckley Jr. shot President Ronald Reagan in 1981.

During the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner April 25, a suspect allegedly tried to breach security while President Donald Trump, first lady Melania Trump, Vice President JD Vance, cabinet officials, journalists, and other guests were inside. According to Reuters, the hotel said the event was operating under strict Secret Service protocols when the suspect bypassed a checkpoint on the floor above the dinner and opened fire with a shotgun. A Secret Service agent was wounded, reportedly protected by a ballistic vest, and the suspect was arrested before reaching the ballroom.

The gun control crowd responded the same way it always does. They demanded more restrictions on the people who did not commit the crime.

Here in Ohio: Senate passes BFA-backed SB 278 - adding teeth to preemption law

CNN’s Brian Stelter quickly used the attack to complain that there would not be any “substantive discussion about access to weapons.” The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms was not impressed.

“In an analysis, CNN’s Brian Stelter insinuated that nobody will consider tougher gun laws to prevent such an incident,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “He should have looked at the facts before going off half-cocked.”

Gottlieb pointed out that the suspect reportedly purchased the shotgun and a handgun from two different California gun stores. The Washington Post, citing an FBI affidavit, reported that the suspect legally purchased the firearms in California in 2023 and 2025.

“He had to pass two California background checks and endure two separate waiting periods,” Gottlieb said. “It is widely known California has some of the strictest gun control laws in the country, and the suspect was able to complete his legal purchases. Just what more does Stelter think could be done?”

California already has the background checks, waiting periods, gun restrictions, ammunition restrictions, and political class the anti-gun movement keeps trying to impose everywhere else. Washington, D.C., already has the registration laws, carry restrictions, and gun control bureaucracy they insist will make people safe.

Yet a determined attacker still allegedly traveled across the country with weapons, showed up at a protected political event, and tried to get past armed security in the nation’s capital.

Even Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche resisted the media’s rush to turn the attack into another legislative gun control push. On CBS’s Face the Nation, Margaret Brennan pressed Blanche about whether the federal government should consider new rules after the suspect reportedly traveled from California to Washington by train with multiple weapons.

“Look, this isn’t about, in my mind, changing the law or making the laws more restrictive around possession of firearms,” Blanche said.

When Brennan continued pressing the train-travel angle, Blanche again pushed back.

“I don’t think the narrative here is about changing laws or making our laws more restrictive,” he said. “This is about law enforcement who are doing their jobs and a suspect who tried to do something and failed miserably.”

Even after an armed attack at a high-profile political event in Washington, the acting attorney general was not willing to pretend another layer of gun laws was the obvious answer. Blanche said investigators were still working to determine how the suspect got the guns, whether he got them legally, and what additional federal charges may apply. But he made clear the immediate lesson was not “pass another gun law.” The immediate lesson was that Secret Service and law enforcement stopped the attack before the suspect got near the president or anyone else in the room.

Washington already has the kind of gun laws they keep demanding for the rest of the country. D.C. law generally requires firearms to be registered. No person or organization in the district may possess or control a firearm without a valid registration certificate, subject to limited exceptions. D.C. law also makes it illegal to carry a pistol openly or concealed in the district without a D.C. carry license.

So what exactly did those laws stop?

They did not stop a determined attacker from showing up armed. They did not stop him from trying to get past security. They did not stop the first shot. What stopped him, according to the available reporting, was not a registration certificate, a carry ban, a waiting period, or a background check. It was armed people already on scene, ready to meet violent force with immediate force.

Gun control advocates treat the law-abiding citizen as the problem because the law-abiding citizen is the only person their laws can reliably control. The criminal who is willing to commit attempted murder, attack federal officers, or target a public event is not deterred by a paperwork requirement.

If the suspect purchased firearms legally in California, then he already passed through the very system gun control activists claim will prevent these attacks.

California’s gun laws did not stop him. D.C.’s gun laws did not stop him. Armed, prepared people did.

Assassination attempts of U.S. Presidents in Washington, D.C. are unfortunately nothing new. Gun laws have always disarmed the law-abiding, while allowing violent criminals like John Wilkes Booth, Charles Guiteau, and John Hinckley Jr. to commit horrible crimes.

President Abraham Lincoln was shot at Ford’s Theatre in 1865, inside the old City of Washington. The city had already enacted an 1858 ordinance prohibiting the concealed carrying of pistols, dirks, Bowie knives, and other dangerous weapons. Yet John Wilkes Booth still carried a pistol into the theater and murdered the President.

President James A. Garfield was shot in 1881 at the Baltimore and Potomac Railroad Station in Washington, D.C. By then, the District had a 1871 law prohibiting the carrying of concealed deadly or dangerous weapons, including pistols, within the District. Yet Charles Guiteau still carried a revolver and shot the President.

President Ronald Reagan was shot in 1981 outside the Washington Hilton. By that time, D.C. had already adopted one of the harshest handgun control schemes in the country. Yet John Hinckley Jr. still got a revolver to the scene and nearly killed a President.

Another interesting note is that the first two would also have been immune from magazine restrictions, semi-auto bans, and numerous other proposed gun control legislation. A person determined to commit violence will do so by any means necessary, gun control or no.

Now, in 2026, the Washington Hilton is again the scene of a violent attack in a city already buried under layers of gun laws.

The pattern is hard to miss.

Gun control does not disarm violent criminals. It disarms the peaceable. It creates soft targets. It tells ordinary citizens to obey, wait, hide, and hope someone else with a gun arrives in time.

Gottlieb put the focus where it belongs: on the attacker and on the hateful political climate surrounding the attempt.

“President Trump referred to the suspect as a ‘whack job’ and after reading his manifesto, that description seems appropriate,” Gottlieb observed. “That’s not to suggest this guy should be allowed to plead insanity, because his writings show he was in complete control of his faculties. He appears to be someone consumed by the vile, hate-filled rhetoric that’s been used against Donald Trump for more than ten years. This was not some spur-of-the-moment act.”

That point is worth sitting with. Tens of millions of American gun owners went through that weekend without shooting anyone, threatening anyone, or attempting to assassinate anyone. They did what they do every day: went to work, raised their families, carried responsibly where legal, and harmed no one.

“Tens of millions of gun owners—people whose rights too many in the media seem to disdain—didn’t hurt anyone Saturday night,” Gottlieb said. “We watched in shock with everyone else, as a California teacher, obviously overwhelmed by fanatical anti-Trump demagoguery, attempt to kill people. He will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, but what about those who continue to spread their invective, hoping some harm comes to the president?”

That is the conversation media figures do not want to have. It is easier to blame guns than to examine a political culture that has spent years painting Donald Trump and his supporters as existential threats who must be stopped by any means necessary.

When the threat is seconds away, the answer is not another ordinance, another registration rule, another carry restriction, another waiting period, or another politician promising that the next law will work where the last hundred failed. The answer is immediate armed resistance from someone capable of stopping the threat before more innocent people are hurt.

At the Washington Hilton, that role fell to armed federal law enforcement. In the rest of America, it is often the armed citizen, the concealed carrier, the homeowner, the store clerk, the church volunteer, or the parent who refuses to be helpless.

That is why the Second Amendment matters. It is not a government-granted privilege for ideal conditions. It is a constitutional protection for the real world, where police cannot be everywhere, security checkpoints can be breached, and violent criminals do not care what the statute book says.

Proponents of gun control should stop hiding behind the claim that one more law, another infringement, or restriction is what they are looking for. They will not be satisfied until they have banned civilian ownership entirely.

The gun control lobby will look at Washington, D.C., and demand more of what failed. Gun owners should look at the same facts and draw the obvious conclusion: laws that burden only the law-abiding do not stop evil men. Armed, prepared people do.

That was true in 1865. It was true in 1881. It was true in 1981. And it is still true today.

Republished with permission from AmmoLand.

Federal bill portrays national firearm prohibition agenda as 'Virginia model'

SHummel — Mon, 11 May 2026 10:00:00 +0000

Virginia has recently been featured in a lot of headlines about gun control, for all the wrong reasons. A number of them have mentioned a federal gun control bill pending in the U.S. Senate, sponsored by Tim Kaine (D) and Mark Warner (D) of Virginia.

Dubbed “The Virginia Plan to Reduce Gun Violence Act of 2026,” the Senate bill tries to portray Virginia as a gun control leader whose policies could serve as a model for the rest of the nation. But, like most firearm prohibition branding, this framing is not only untrue; it is the opposite the truth. Virginia, in reality, is the victim of a national gun control agenda, not the progenitor of one.

The latest slate of gun control laws unleashed on Virginians by their Democrat-controlled legislature and governor are not some thoughtful or tailored set of policies that organically arose from Virginia’s unique public safety picture or the particular dynamics of its crime. Instead, it is a grab bag of generic policies pushed by national gun control groups, approved by their billionaire donors, and modeled on a globalist paradigm arising in nations that have no constitutional rights to arms. Virginia is simply an opportunist expansion market for these concepts, not their origin point.

REGISTER NOW! 2026 Patriot Fest - Aug. 22 at Makoy in Hilliard, Ohio

What is being cheered as “groundbreaking gun safety policy” was never part of a homegrown effort, nor was it ever for Virginia, by Virginia. National firearm prohibition groups don’t grade states based on their innovative local policies and responsiveness to local concerns. They grade them according to a predetermined slate of policies the groups hope to enact in every state. That opportunity in Virginia came in the form of Abigail Spanberger and the investment in her gubernatorial campaign of over $1 million by billionaire Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety.

Everytown brags about itself as the pipeline for gun control candidates from coast to coast. These candidates sign on to Everytown’s agenda, and in return, they receive massive amounts of financial support. It is top-down and cookie cutter in operation, AstroTurf in presentation.

As for “The Virginia Plan to Reduce Gun Violence Act of 2026,” don’t be fooled. This same federal bill with its core policies has been regurgitated in various forms since 2019, a time when Virginia was still a moderately pro-gun state.

Claiming the effort “would build on Virginia’s commonsense framework to reduce gun violence,” this latest 50-plus-page federal legislation comes straight from the Everytown and Giffords playbook and includes:

An “assault weapons” ban to prohibit the sale, manufacture, and importation of semi-automatic firearms and magazines that have the ability to hold more than 15 rounds of ammunition.
Rationing gun purchases to one handgun per month.
A federal "red flag" firearm seizure law.
Incentives for states to implement their own red flag laws.
Penalizing lawful gun owners for lost or stolen firearms with arbitrary reporting requirements that can give rise to criminal penalties.
One-size-fits-all mandatory storage requirements.
A ban on the purchase, sale, and possession of privately made firearms.
More “gun-free zones” throughout the states.

This Virginia plan is the California plan, which is the Everytown plan, which is the Bloomberg plan, which is the Australia plan. It has nothing to do with the citizens of Virginia or with the Old Dominion’s culture and values. What an ignominious fall from grace for a state that produced some of the most important and influential of America’s Founding Fathers. In evaluating this fall, it is important to recognize that the core elements are being driven, not by ordinary Virginians, but by globally orientated billionaires, national public interest groups, and a Democratic National Committee that would love to see Richmond morph into the San Francisco of the East Coast.

Beware the rhetorical shift and media narrative to flip the script and make an established national policy package appear more locally grounded and politically palatable, even though its underlying structure has remained unchanged for years.

Further beware that your state may be next. If it can happen in the cradle of American Constitutionalism and the home of NRA’s Headquarters, no gun-owning American should believe it could never come home to him or her.