Buckeye Firearms Association

Armed wife fires one shot to save husband from gunman at their home

SHummel — Fri, 24 Jul 2026 10:00:00 +0000

by AmmoLand Editor Duncan Johnson

An armed wife saved her husband from a gunman who allegedly brought a social-media dispute directly to the couple’s Springfield, Massachusetts, home, according to prosecutors who ruled the fatal shooting lawful.

The fatal encounter occurred July 5 on Fairfield Street in Springfield. After reviewing witness statements, surveillance footage, 911 recordings, physical evidence, and electronic communications, Hampden District Attorney Anthony Gulluni determined that the woman acted lawfully in self-defense and defense of another.

WWLP reported that the Hampden District Attorney’s Office announced on July 14 that no criminal charges would be filed. The case is now considered closed.

Social-media dispute reaches couple’s doorstep

According to the district attorney, the confrontation began with a dispute on social media involving people who knew one another.

Investigators determined that 35-year-old Robert Murchison of Springfield traveled to the home of the married couple. Once on the homeowners’ property, Murchison allegedly initiated a physical altercation with the husband. The situation then escalated from a fistfight into a deadly-force encounter.

Time is running out! Register now for the 2026 Patriot Fest - Aug. 22 in Hilliard, Ohio

“Murchison then produced a handgun and pursued the male while pointing the firearm at him,” the district attorney’s office reported.

The husband’s wife witnessed the armed pursuit and recognized that her husband faced an immediate threat of death or serious bodily injury. Authorities described her as a licensed firearm owner. She drew her firearm and discharged one round, striking Murchison and stopping the threat. Murchison died from the gunshot wound.

There was no reported barrage of uncontrolled gunfire. The woman fired one shot when an armed attacker was allegedly chasing her husband with a handgun pointed at him.

Evidence supported homeowners’ account

Following the shooting, the husband and wife immediately called police and fully cooperated with investigators.

That cooperation was backed by considerably more than the couple’s version of events. Investigators reviewed statements from the people involved, an account provided by an independent eyewitness, Ring-camera footage, 911 recordings, physical evidence recovered at the scene, and text and social-media messages exchanged before the confrontation.

According to the district attorney, that evidence “clearly establishes” that the woman acted lawfully.

The DA’s office said she used her firearm only after Murchison came to the couple’s home, initiated a physical confrontation with her husband, drew a handgun, and created an immediate deadly threat.

Under Massachusetts law, deadly force can be justified when a person reasonably believes it is necessary to protect herself or another person from an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury.

“After reviewing all available evidence, the District Attorney determined that his office could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the homeowner’s actions were unlawful,” prosecutors stated.

No charges will be filed against the woman.

A firearm made the difference

This case presents another straightforward example of why the right to keep and bear arms includes the ability to protect not only yourself but also the people you love.

The woman did not go looking for a confrontation. According to investigators, the confrontation came to her home. She did not initiate the physical altercation, and she did not introduce a firearm into the dispute. She acted only after an armed man allegedly pointed a handgun at her husband and pursued him.

At that moment, she did not have the luxury of waiting for police to arrive, investigators to collect evidence, or prosecutors to determine who was legally at fault. Her husband faced an immediate threat, and she had seconds to act.

Because she was armed, she was able to intervene.

Her conduct after the shooting matters as well. The couple called 911 immediately, remained at the scene, cooperated with authorities, and provided investigators with the information necessary to determine what happened. Independent evidence then supported their account.

A social-media argument should never have reached the point of an armed confrontation at a private home. But when it did, a lawfully armed woman was prepared to protect her family. She fired one shot, stopped an imminent threat, and saved her husband from a man who prosecutors say was pursuing him at gunpoint.

That is precisely what the right of armed self-defense looks like when a deadly threat arrives at your doorstep.

Republished with permission from AmmoLand.

John Lott op-ed lends added support to national right-to-carry effort

SHummel — Thu, 23 Jul 2026 10:00:00 +0000

by NRA-ILA

National right-to-carry reciprocity has been a popular topic lately. President Donald Trump brought it up during an appearance at a Mack Trucks facility in Macungie, Pennsylvania, on June 23, proclaiming, “National Right-to-Carry, we’re working on it.” And when he addressed the nation during the celebration of 250 years of American independence on July 4, he reminded us all why he is often considered the most pro-Second Amendment president in the NRA’s history of protecting the right to keep and bear arms.

Meanwhile, Real Clear Politics published an op-ed by economist John Lott on July 4 that spoke to the need for passage of national right-to-carry reciprocity legislation.

Of course, anyone who has been involved in the defense of our right to arms is familiar with the work of Dr. Lott. In the late 1990s, he burst onto the gun policy scene with the publication of the book More Guns, Less Crime, which supported the idea that allowing more law-abiding citizens to carry firearms for self-defense leads to a reduction in violent crime.

SCOTUS takes up rifle bans: Here's what review means for hunters, sportsmen

Since then, Lott has been actively promoting reducing restrictions on firearms ownership and carry based on his methodical research showing the potential, and often realized, benefits of such policy. This includes his work in Trump's first administration and with the Crime Prevention Research Center, which he founded in 2013.

In his recent op-ed, Lott points out that most states already recognize permits issued by other states, and no significant problems have been brought to light concerning such recognition. He further notes that right-to-carry laws have been shown to reduce murder rates for both men and women and that the two fastest-growing demographics for new permits over the past decade have been female and Black Americans.

Lott also mentions that the vast majority of police chiefs and sheriffs (86%) as well as rank-and-file law enforcement officers (90%) support right-to-carry reciprocity.

“Police play an indispensable role in public safety,” he said. “But around 700,000 officers cannot protect over 340 million Americans everywhere at once.”

And while opponents of the idea claim permit holders (presumably visiting from other states) would commit crimes, Lott explains that there is no evidence to support such a claim and that history has shown permit holders to be exceptionally law-abiding. He also clarifies that contrary to the claim that permit holders would be confused by differing carry laws when they travel to another state and may be prone to unknowingly violating local gun laws, “no evidence shows that out-of-state permit holders create such problems.”

Similar to carry permitting laws, driver’s licenses vary somewhat in issuing standards across the country, as do driving laws themselves. There is no reason to believe those who carry firearms for self-defense will be suddenly incapable of complying with the law when they drive across a state line, just as common experience shows lawful behavior is overwhelmingly the case with driving itself.

Lott closes his argument by simply stating the obvious.

“Congress should ensure that law-abiding Americans do not lose their ability to defend themselves simply by crossing a state line.”

We wholeheartedly agree with both Lott and President Trump in supporting the passage of right-to-carry reciprocity legislation, and we look forward to the day when Congress finally catches up to the rest of America on this commonsense policy.

Registration for 2026 Fall Youth Shoot now open

drieck — Wed, 22 Jul 2026 10:00:00 +0000

Don't miss the 2026 Fall Youth Shoot.

REGISTER TODAY

When:
Saturday and Sunday
Sep. 11-13, 2026
Camping on-site starting Friday night, Sep. 11

Where:
Tusco Rifle Club
2132 Midvale Mine Rd SE
Dennison, OH 44621

Cost:
Only $10 per Youth
Adult Volunteers Free
Weekend Camping Free

This is a special 2-day event to offer youth the chance to camp, shoot, and compete.

Activities include a firearm safety class for all new shooters and the opportunity to experience archery, .22 rifle, and trap shooting for beginners, and an introduction to handguns for more experienced attendees. All firearms and ammunition provided.

In addition, you will have the opportunity to learn about our founding and how special America is in history.

Click here to read complete details and register.

Ohio controlled hunting permit applications open until July 31

SHummel — Tue, 21 Jul 2026 10:00:00 +0000

From Ohio Department of Natural Resources

The Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) Division of Wildlife is accepting applications for public land-controlled hunts until Friday, July 31. These hunts provide special chances for people to pursue deer, waterfowl, doves, pheasants, and more on public lands during the 2026-27 season.

The ODNR Division of Wildlife as well as the ODNR Division of Parks & Watercraft host controlled hunts on select areas around Ohio. Hunts for adults, youth, people with mobility impairments, and mentors with apprentices are available. Species-specific hunts include deer, waterfowl, dove, ring-necked pheasant, ruffed grouse, squirrel, rabbit, raccoon, and bobwhite quail. Firearm and archery hunts are available for some species.

Hunters may apply for controlled hunts by completing the application process online using Ohio's Wildlife Licensing System or via phone by calling 1-866-703-1928. There is a $5.50 service fee for the phone option. Each hunt requires payment of a non-refundable $3 application fee. Customers may apply for more than one hunt but can only apply to each hunt once per year.

All applicants, youth and adult, are required to possess a valid Ohio hunting license and meet age requirements. Youth hunters are required to be under the age of 18 at the time of the hunt to participate. Adults are required to be 18 years old or older at the time of the application. Those applying for deer hunts will also need a valid deer permit. Find more information on the controlled hunt page.

Participants may use a deer management permit during controlled deer hunts. Deer management permits cost $15 and are valid for antlerless deer throughout the deer season. Firearm and archery hunts are also available for some species.

New controlled hunting and trapping permits

Ruffed grouse hunting is limited to controlled hunts on designated areas. Only hunters with a permit may hunt grouse during the 2026 season. Permits are available via controlled access lottery for Appalachian Hills Wildlife Area, Shawnee State Forest, Vinton Furnace and state forest, and Zaleski State Forest with the adjacent Waterloo Wildlife Area.

Also new this year, individuals interested in raccoon hunting and trapping should now apply in July. Previously, controlled raccoon hunting and trapping lotteries were conducted in-person in October.

Drawing and notification

Hunters are randomly drawn, lottery style, from submitted applications. Successful applicants will be notified the week after the application period ends and provided additional hunt information, including a permit, rules, and a hunting area map. Each controlled hunt is unique, and applicants are encouraged to thoroughly review all site-specific information, including rules and requirements, before applying. Application statuses can be viewed through Ohio’s Wildlife Licensing System. Successful applicants cannot buy, sell, exchange, or trade their permits, and can only transfer permits if nothing is received in return.

Explore detailed information about each hunting area through the Controlled Hunting Access Lotteries webpage. For more information about hunting in Ohio, download the HuntFish OH mobile app or visit wildohio.gov.

Why people in the land down under are completely defenseless

SHummel — Mon, 20 Jul 2026 10:00:00 +0000

by Lee Williams

Australians who defend themselves against an armed invader inside their own homes can be charged with a crime. That is how badly the laws have changed.

“We’ve had a massive increase of violent crime, and we’re defenseless,” said Australian Topher Field.

Field is one of Australia’s leading Libertarian commentators. For more than 15 years, he has used films, commentary and scores of public speaking events to inspire his countrymen to do what is right. He is up against one of the most civil rights-bending governments in this world, who instituted anti-gun laws at breakneck speed.

“We’re sick of gun control,” Fields said. “If a guy breaks into your home with a machete and you hit him with a bat you can be charged.”

ICYMI: Could SCOTUS ruling be beginning of end for AR-15 bans?

To counter this, Field said, Australia’s One Nation party — a conservative political party launched in 1997 by Pauline Hanson — is growing in popularity.

“There’s a political awakening happening,” he said. “We’re famous for our rights attitude because we’ve been bitten on the bum. They’re now leading in the polls. Our candidate will be the next premier of Australia and will make it safer for Australians to use self-defense.”

Currently, anyone who wants to own a gun must first ask the police for permission and then pass a multitude of tests.

“If you want to own a firearm you must explain to the government why you need one, prove a lawful excuse and show you’re a member of a shooting club or have access to land where pests need to be controlled,” Field said. “The next step is a written application, which the police review. They call it their ‘fit and proper test.’ They decide if you’re fit and proper to own a firearm. In practice, that’s used as political leverage. I would never be granted a gun license in Australia.”

Australian police view any political dissent as a reason to bar someone from owning a firearm.

“During COVID, people would join our protests, which were more like rallies. Police would come in and use facial recognition cameras. If they found any protesters with a gun license, they would enter their homes and take their firearms. That amount of political leverage is scary,” Field said.

If an Australian gun license applicant passes all of the tests, they will be issued a license for a bolt action or single-shot rifle or shotgun. No semi-autos or even pump-actions are allowed. Licensees must store their weapons in a safe. Ammunition must be stored in a separate safe.

“The firing pin needs to be locked with the ammo,” Field said. “For all practical purposes the guns are not available for self-defense. If they are ever used for self-defense, all of the guns are taken by police.”

Legal handgun ownership is even more difficult.

“If you want to own a handgun, you’ve got to repeat the whole process and you’ve got to be a club member,” Field said. “If you cross all of those hurdles, once you’re permitted to acquire a handgun, it has to be locked up at your gun club for the first year of ownership. You can’t even take it home. It must be locked in the club’s safe. That’s the current situation. It’s so much worse than people think.”

As a result, if someone uses a firearm for self-defense in their home, police automatically assume the owner has been storing their weapon illegally.

One recent self-defense case has made news all over Australia. A farmer and his wife heard someone beating down their back door. They could see that the man was armed. The farmer grabbed his handgun from the gun safe while his firing pin and ammunition were still in their second safe. The farmer confronted the attacker with the unloaded pistol, and the suspect surrendered. They farmed and then drove the suspect to the police department, which was 30 kilometers away.

“You would think that’s pretty clear-cut. The good guy didn’t hurt him,” Field said. “A couple weeks later police showed up at the house and investigated the farmer for a storage violation.”

Maduro diet

In 2015, Field spent a week in Caracas, Venezuela, attending a friend’s wedding.

“It felt like Melbourne. There was beautiful architecture, people were friendly, birds were chirping,” he said. “It could have been Melbourne until I saw the breadlines. I was there for a friend’s wedding — a wealthy politically connected family. They had been stockpiling butter and flour for weeks. People call it the Maduro diet. People lost 25 pounds across the country.”

When he returned home, Field started thinking about the experience.

“We’re not special in Australia,” he said. “If we make the same mistakes, we’ll get the same results. If nothing changes, if we keep this government, where does it lead? It leads to Venezuela. I’m not being dramatic. There will be less ability to defend yourself. Functionally speaking, gun control in Australia is a government run protection racket for criminals. Criminals are protected by the government. Victims are punished.”

Said Field: “The road to Venezuela is paved with good intentions.”

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

ODNR offers special deer hunts on state nature preserves, scenic river lands

SHummel — Fri, 17 Jul 2026 10:00:00 +0000

From Ohio Department of Natural Resources

The Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) Division of Natural Areas and Preserves is holding special deer hunts at state nature preserves and state scenic river lands across Ohio during the 2026-2027 hunting season. These locations were identified as areas where browsing by high deer populations poses a threat to native plant communities.

The division is offering gun and archery hunts in 22 counties this year. Five state nature preserves will permit gun or muzzleloader hunts. Permits for all special hunts will be awarded through a lottery system.

To participate, hunters must attend a mandatory meeting for each preserve where they would like to hunt. After each meeting, hunters will have an opportunity to purchase a $5 ticket (cash only) to be entered into the preserve’s special hunt drawing. Hunters who wish to apply for hunts at multiple sites will have to attend multiple meetings and purchase additional tickets. Entry forms will not be accepted by mail.

After the drawing, successful entrants will be asked to remain for a pre-hunt orientation. Other special hunt requirements include:

Hunters must possess a valid 2026-2027 hunting license to purchase tickets.
Some of this year’s hunts will require an adult hunting license. Visit ohiodnr.gov for eligibility requirements.
Names will be randomly drawn, and those selected will be assigned a specific time to hunt. For archery hunts, an orientation will be conducted immediately following the drawing.
Hunters will be permitted to hunt with a partner; the partner is not required to attend the drawing or orientation.
Hunters interested in the multiple types of special hunts at Caesar Creek Gorge, Lake Katharine, and Sheepskin Hollow state nature preserves will have to purchase separate lottery tickets for each hunt lottery.

Some of the hunts this year will be “antlerless deer only,” whereas others will allow the taking of antlered deer but only after harvesting an antlerless deer first. Harvesting the does first helps manage the deer population. Other special regulations will be addressed at the orientation meetings following the drawings.

All preserves listed below will be offering special archery hunts, with the exception of Caesar Creek Gorge (Warren County), which will offer special gun and muzzleloader hunts. Additionally, Lake Katharine (Jackson County) and Sheepskin Hollow (Columbiana County) will offer special gun and archery hunts, and Boch Hollow (Hocking County) and Stage’s Pond (Pickaway County) will offer gun hunts.

Locations and dates for special hunt meetings are listed below. For more details related to available hunting dates at each site and local contact information, visit ohiodnr.gov.

BUTLER and PREBLE COUNTIES

Hueston Woods State Nature Preserve (archery). Meeting will be held on Aug. 15 at 9 a.m. at Hueston Woods State Park Lodge located at 6301 Park Office Road, College Corner, OH 45003.

CHAMPAIGN COUNTY

Davey Woods State Nature Preserve (archery). Meeting will be held on Aug. 23 at 11:30 a.m. at the preserve parking area located at 7661 Lonesome Road, St. Paris, OH 43072.

CLARK COUNTY

Gallagher Fen State Nature Preserve (archery). Meeting will be held on Aug. 23 at 9 a.m. at the preserve parking area located at 4709 Old Columbus Road, Springfield, OH 45504.

CLINTON COUNTY

Culberson Woods State Nature Preserve (archery). Meeting will be held on Aug.15 at 2 p.m. at Caesar Creek State Nature Preserve office located at 4080 Corwin Road, Oregonia, OH 45054.

COLUMBIANA COUNTY

Sheepskin Hollow State Nature Preserve (archery and gun). Meeting will be held on Aug.16 at 3 p.m. at Middleton Twp. Fish and Game located at 50501 Richardson Ave., Negley, OH 44441.

DARKE COUNTY

Abshire-Graves Scenic River Lands (archery). Meeting will be held on Aug.13 (ticket sales at 5:30 p.m., drawing at 6:20 p.m. and meeting at 6:30 p.m.) at Stillwater Prairie Preserve maintenance barn located at 9750 State Route 185, Covington, OH 45318.

FULTON COUNTY

Goll Woods State Nature Preserve (archery). Meeting will be held on Aug. 22 at 9 a.m. at the preserve office located at 26093 County Road F, Archbold, OH 43502.

GREENE COUNTY

Roxanna Scenic River Lands (archery). Meeting will be held on Aug. 20 (ticket sales at 5:30 p.m., drawing at 6:20 p.m. and meeting at 6:30 p.m.) at Spring Valley Wildlife Area Shooting Range located at 3570 Houston Road, Waynesville, OH 45068.

HARDIN COUNTY

Lawerence Woods State Nature Preserve (archery). Meeting will be held on Aug. 22 at 1 p.m. at preserve parking area located at 13278 County Road 190, Kenton, OH 43226.

HOCKING COUNTY

Boch Hollow State Nature Preserve (gun). Meeting will be held on Aug. 22 at 11:30 a.m. at the preserve office located at 7211 Bremen Road, Logan, OH 43138.

HURON COUNTY

Augusta-Anne Olsen State Nature Preserve (archery). Meeting will be held on Aug. 22 at 10 a.m. at the preserve office located at 4934 W. River Road, Wakeman, OH 44889.

JACKSON COUNTY

Lake Katharine State Nature Preserve (archery and gun). Meeting will be held on Aug.15 at 10 a.m. at the preserve office located at 1703 Lake Katharine Road, Jackson, OH 45640.

MADISON COUNTY

Anges Andreae and Little Darby Forrest preserves (archery). Meeting will be held on Aug. 27 (Ticket sales at 5:15 p.m., drawing at 6:20 p.m., and meeting at 6:30 p.m.) at Pastime Park in the Youth Agriculture Building located at 370 N. Chillicothe St., Plain City, OH 43064.

MERCER COUNTY

Baker Woods State Nature Preserve (archery). Meeting will be held on Aug. 23 at 3 p.m. at Grand Lake St. Marys State Park Villa Nova shelter house located at 834 Edgewater Drive, St. Marys, Ohio 45885.

MIAMI COUNTY

Cool-Davis Scenic River Lands (archery). Meeting will be held on Aug. 13 (ticket sales at 5:30 p.m., drawing at 6:20 p.m. and meeting at 6:30 p.m.) at Stillwater Prairie Preserve maintenance barn located at 9750 State Route 185, Covington, OH 45318.

PICKAWAY COUNTY

Stage’s Pond State Nature Preserve (gun). Meeting to be held on Aug. 22 at 9 a.m. at the preserve office located at 4792 Hagerty Road, Ashville, OH 43103.

PORTAGE COUNTY

Eagle Creek State Nature Preserve (archery). Meeting will be held on Aug. 22 at 10 a.m. at the preserve office located at 11027 Hopkins Road, Garrettsville, OH 44231.

SENECA COUNTY

Collier State Nature Preserve (archery). Meeting will be held on Aug. 22 at 4 p.m. at the preserve parking area located at 1655 W. Township Road 38, Tiffin, OH 44883.

SHELBY COUNTY

Gross Woods State Nature Preserve (archery). Meeting will be held on Aug. 23 at 2 p.m. at Grand Lake St. Marys State Park Villa Nova shelter house located at 834 Edgewater Drive, St. Marys, Ohio 45885.

UNION COUNTY

Milford Center Scenic River Lands (archery). Meeting will be held on Aug. 27 (Ticket sales at 5:15 p.m., drawing at 6:20 p.m. and meeting at 6:30 p.m.) at Pastime Park in the Youth Agriculture Building located at 370 N. Chillicothe St., Plain City, OH 43064.

Terra Nova Scenic River Lands (archery). Meeting will be held on Aug. 27 (Ticket sales at 5:15 p.m., drawing at 6:20 p.m. and meeting at 6:30 p.m.) at Pastime Park in the Youth Agriculture Building located at 370 N. Chillicothe St., Plain City, OH 43064.

WARREN COUNTY

Caesar Creek Scenic River Lands (archery). Meeting will be held on Aug. 20 (ticket sales at 5:30 p.m., drawing at 6:20 p.m. and meeting at 6:30 p.m.) at Spring Valley Wildlife Area Shooting Range located at 3570 Houston Road, Waynesville, OH 45068.

Caesar Creek Gorge State Nature Preserve (gun and muzzleloader). Meeting will be held on Aug. 15 at 12:30 p.m. at the preserve office located at 4080 Corwin Road, Oregonia, OH 45054.

Deerfield Gorge Scenic River Lands (archery). Meeting will be held on Aug. 20 (ticket sales at 5:30 p.m., drawing at 6:20 p.m. and meeting at 6:30 p.m.) at Spring Valley Wildlife Area Shooting Range located at 3570 Houston Road, Waynesville, OH 45068

Halls Creek Scenic River Lands (archery). Meeting will be held on Aug. 20 (ticket sales at 5:30 p.m., drawing at 6:20 p.m., and meeting at 6:30 p.m.) at Spring Valley Wildlife Area Shooting Range located at 3570 Houston Road, Waynesville, OH 45068.

Halls Creek State Nature Preserve (archery). Meeting will be held on Aug. 20 (ticket sales at 5:30 p.m., drawing at 6:20 p.m. and meeting at 6:30 p.m.) at Spring Valley Wildlife Area Shooting Range located at 3570 Houston Road, Waynesville, OH 45068.

Maryland defends Glock ban by treating common pistols like machine guns

SHummel — Thu, 16 Jul 2026 10:00:00 +0000

by AmmoLand Editor Duncan Johnson

The constitutional fight over Maryland’s Glock ban comes down to one question: Can the state ban law-abiding citizens from acquiring some of America’s most popular handguns because criminals can illegally modify them with an already-prohibited machinegun conversion device?

Gun-rights groups say the answer is clearly no. Maryland now says Glock-style pistols can be treated differently from other semi-automatic handguns because of what they could become after an illegal modification.

That dispute is at the center of Bathras v. Moore, the federal Second Amendment challenge to Maryland Senate Bill 334.

Amended complaint adds Maryland gun owners and dealer

AmmoLand covered the original lawsuit after the National Rifle Association, Firearms Policy Coalition and Second Amendment Foundation sued Gov. Wes Moore and other Maryland officials on May 26 — the same day Moore signed SB 334. That immediate filing leaves Maryland’s newly asserted laches defense, which requires unreasonable and prejudicial delay, with no apparent factual basis.

Related article: Seattle — nother anti-gun city ignores PLCAA, makes Glock its scapegoat

A June 25 amended complaint added Maryland residents David J. Bathras Sr. and Roslyn Mickens, along with Atlantic Guns in Rockville. The case is now captioned Bathras v. Moore.

Bathras owns a Glock and wants to purchase additional Glock-style pistols. He also wants to retain the ability to sell or transfer his current handgun through lawful channels. Mickens is a registered gun collector and licensed firearms instructor who also wants to acquire covered pistols.

Atlantic Guns has sold firearms in Maryland since 1950. The dealer says the law will force it to stop stocking and selling a substantial category of popular defensive handguns.

These plaintiffs are challenging a law that directly prevents them from buying, selling and transferring arms they otherwise may lawfully possess.

Maryland’s ban targets factory-built semi-automatic pistols

Beginning Jan. 1, 2027, SB 334 prohibits ordinary Marylanders from manufacturing, selling, purchasing, receiving or transferring what the state calls a “machine gun convertible pistol.”

The definition targets semi-automatic pistols with a cruciform trigger bar that can supposedly be converted into a machinegun by replacing the slide’s backplate with a pistol converter. That language is expected to cover nearly every Glock, along with Glock-pattern pistols such as the Palmetto State Armory Dagger, Ruger RXM and many Shadow Systems handguns.

A first offense can bring up to three years in prison, a $5,000 fine, or both.

A factory Glock is not a machinegun. It fires one round per function of the trigger. Making it fire automatically requires someone to install an illegal conversion device or otherwise unlawfully alter the firearm.

Federal law already treats the conversion device itself as a machinegun. Maryland also bans pistol converters as “rapid fire activators.” Neither prohibition is being challenged. The lawsuit is about whether Maryland can ban the unmodified handgun because someone could attach a separate piece of contraband to it. As the amended complaint states:

“That is a handgun ban. The fact that the ban targets only one category of popular handguns does not make it constitutional.”

Plaintiffs say Heller protects Glock-style pistols

The plaintiffs’ Second Amendment argument begins with District of Columbia v. Heller. The Supreme Court held that handguns are at the core of the right to armed self-defense and that commonly possessed firearms cannot be banned as “dangerous and unusual.”

Glock pistols are plainly common. The amended complaint cites sales rankings, ATF production figures, civilian market data and widespread law-enforcement use. It alleges that Glock manufactured more than half a million handguns for the American market in 2021 alone, before imported pistols are even counted.

The complaint also notes that Glock pistols are widely issued to police — including Baltimore officers. Maryland considers these handguns suitable for police defensive use while attempting to block ordinary citizens from buying the same basic firearms.

Under New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, the plaintiffs argue, the analysis is straightforward. Glock and Glock-style pistols are bearable arms. Buying and acquiring them is necessary to exercise the right to keep and bear arms. Maryland must therefore prove that its ban is consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.

The amended complaint says no such tradition exists.

Maryland says Glocks are different

Maryland’s July 13 answer disputes the plaintiffs’ central claim that Glock-style pistols are not meaningfully different from other semi-automatic handguns.

The state instead says certain Glocks are “semiautomatic firearms that are capable of being fully automatic weapons.”

That appears to be the foundation of Maryland’s Second Amendment defense: These pistols can be singled out because their design allegedly makes illegal conversion easier.

But the state’s wording blurs the difference between a lawful factory pistol and the machinegun created after someone installs an illegal conversion device. The converter is not part of the unmodified handgun. Glock does not manufacture the illegal switches, and neither do the manufacturers of Glock-pattern pistols.

The government cannot turn a legal handgun into a machinegun on paper by pointing to an illegal part that is not installed. By that logic, an AR-15 could be banned because illegal auto sears exist, or a shotgun could be prohibited because a criminal might cut down its barrel.

The constitutional analysis should concern the arm as lawfully manufactured and possessed — not a hypothetical contraband configuration.

Maryland avoids common-use evidence

Maryland also refuses to concede that Glock pistols are among the most commonly owned handguns in America.

When responding to the complaint’s allegations about Glock’s market share, production numbers, sales rankings and law-enforcement use, the state repeatedly says it is “without knowledge or information.”

That is a remarkable position for a government defending a sweeping firearm ban. Maryland knew enough about Glock pistols to prohibit their future sale and transfer, but it now declines to acknowledge public evidence showing just how common they are.

Common use is central because Maryland cannot plausibly call a firearm “unusual” when millions are owned for lawful purposes. A handgun does not lose Second Amendment protection simply because anti-gun legislators give it a menacing new name.

The Supreme Court reinforced that point in Wolford v. Lopez. At the plain-text stage, the question is whether the regulated weapon is an “Arm.” Maryland cannot avoid that threshold by relabeling an ordinary semi-automatic pistol a “machine gun convertible pistol.”

Maryland has not offered a historical tradition

Maryland’s answer says Bruen “speaks for itself,” but the filing identifies no Founding-era or Reconstruction-era tradition of banning ordinary handguns because criminals might illegally modify them.

The state may present a fuller historical argument in later briefs. An answer is not ordinarily where the government lays out its entire constitutional defense. Still, Maryland has now made clear where the parties disagree.

The plaintiffs say Glock-style pistols are common semi-automatic handguns protected by Heller and Bruen. Maryland says their potential for illegal conversion makes them different.

That leaves the court with a basic choice: Judge the handgun as it lawfully exists, or allow Maryland to ban it based on a crime somebody might commit with a separate illegal device.

The Second Amendment protects the actual firearm in the citizen’s holster—not the imaginary machinegun Maryland politicians have constructed around it.

Republished with permission from AmmoLand.

Have you heard? Suppressor sales are booming

SHummel — Wed, 15 Jul 2026 10:00:00 +0000

by Salam Fatohi, NSSF

America’s gun buyers are quietly making big noise when it comes to their shooting preferences. They are buying items regulated by the National Firearms Act (NFA) in huge numbers. That includes suppressors, short-barrel rifles (SBRs) and short-barrel shotguns (SBSs).

Those figures aren’t in the hundreds, thousands or even tens of thousands. The number is creeping up toward 1 million for this year alone, according to data provided to NSSF from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). And there are still seven months of purchasing data to collect this year.

Related article: BFA and partners ask court to strike down NFA rules on suppressors, short-barreled rifles

That data shows over 845,000 suppressor applications were submitted and 768,000 were approved from January through May this year. Those totals include both Form 1 applications to manufacture suppressors and Form 4 applications to possess a suppressor either as an individual or in a trust with several parties.

In fact, NSSF reported a 177% increase in NFA checks in June 2026 over the previous year. That number jumped to 166,677 last month compared to 60,147 last June.

The top 5 states for NFA checks in June were as follows:

Texas, 23,133
Virginia, 18,235
Florida, 11,782
North Carolina, 6,785
Georgia, 6,711

The reasons

NSSF noted in January that 2026 could be the “Year of the Suppressor.” That prediction is turning out to be spot-on accurate. There are a couple reasons driving these figures.

Undoubtedly the One Big, Beautiful Bill, signed into law in the summer of 2025, turned an increasing interest in suppressors by gun owners into an all-out frenzy. A provision in that law, by deeming the required tax stamp as paid, in effect reduced the tax to $0 from $200.

Without the $200 tax added to the cost of each suppressor, buyers are finding it an easier investment to make. Turns out, when government gets out of the way of exercising rights, law-abiding citizens will want to exercise those rights even more.

Another reason for the dramatic rise in suppressor applications is that the ATF’s NFA Division is approving them in a matter of days, not months. NSSF worked diligently starting back in 2013 to ensure that ATF’s NFA Division had the budgetary resources needed to institute electronic form processing, or eForms.

The ATF reports that current Form 1 processing times are 62 days for eForms and 33 days for paper forms. Form 4 processing times for trusts are at 25 days for both eForms and paper forms and Form 4 for individuals are at eight days for eForms and 63 days for paper forms.

Silencer Central has even more encouraging data. They are reporting that individual Form 4 applications are being approved in three days and trust applications are being approved in 19 days, on average.

Silencer Shop, likewise, reports that eForm 4 approvals are finalized within three-to-10 days, with the median wait range at four days for individuals and 23 days for a trust.

It also turns out that as more recreational marksmen and hunters become exposed to the benefits of shooting suppressed, the more they like it — and want it. A study commissioned by NSSF, titled “Suppressor Owner Study: Market Size, Purchase Profile & Journey, Satisfaction 2025,” found the suppressor market saw a 265% growth in suppressor registrations from 2020 to 2024, and that during that same period, the total number of suppressors in circulation doubled. That NSSF data revealed that approximately 35% of the 2020–2024 suppressor purchasers were first-time buyers. Guns.com reported in March 2026 that 2010 data show roughly 285,000 registered suppressors but topped 3.5 million by 2024. The growth of silencer ownership has been exponential.

According to the ATF’s National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record (NFRTR), there are 6.3 million suppressors in the registry as of May 2026.

Industry responds

Suppressors are legal for ownership in 42 states and legal for hunting in 41. They not only reduce the noise associated with a firearm’s report or muzzle blast (to a level similar to a jackhammer), but they also reduce recoil and make follow-up shots more accurate. Suppressor manufacturers are responding to the spike in demand. Silencer Central, for example, recently expanded their headquarters with a new $20 million, 70,000-square-foot distribution center at their Sioux Fall, S.D. location.

The Outdoor Wire’s Paul Erhardt reported in May 2026, that FN America, Bergara and Lyman were notable manufacturers entering the suppressor market. Erhardt also noted that Silencer Shop grew to nearly 7,000 dealers, with a third of those using their kiosks to aide their customers through the application process.

NSSF continues to advocate for passage of the Hearing Protection Act (HPA), introduced as H.R.404 in the U.S. House of Representatives by Rep. Ben Cline (R-Virginia) and as S.364 by U.S. Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) in the Senate. The HPA would remove firearm suppressors from the NFA, eliminating onerous and duplicitous background checks. Instead, what is essentially a muffler for a gun would continue to be regulated under the 1968 Gun Control Act (GCA) with the same background check that is required for a retail firearm purchase.

NSSF is also leading the way encouraging states to deregulate suppressors under state law for when Congress passes the HPA. South Dakota’s Gov. Larry Rhoden signed an NSSF-supported law removing suppressors from the state’s definition of a “controlled weapon” and eliminated the statutory requirement that possession of these devices requires a federal tax stamp. Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly signed similar NSSF-supported law in her state in April. This legislation is needed in about 14 more states so that when the HPA is enacted state laws tethered to the NFA will not inadvertently render suppressors unlawful to possess.

If the current trend continues, the suppressor market could heat up further. The year is only half through and demand is booming. The desire to shoot quietly has never been as popular.

Republished with permission from NSSF.

SCOTUS takes up rifle bans: what review means for hunters, sportsmen

SHummel — Tue, 14 Jul 2026 10:00:00 +0000

by Sportsmen's Alliance

The U.S. Supreme Court announced that it will officially review challenges to state- and local-level semi-automatic rifle bans.

The high court has granted certiorari in cases originating out of Illinois and Connecticut. This marks the most significant Second Amendment development since the Bruen decision in 2022.

As the Sportsmen’s Alliance, we want to ensure our members fully understand what this means, why it matters, and how it impacts the future of hunting and shooting sports.

What 'granting certiorari' means

Certiorari (or “cert”) is the formal process the Supreme Court uses to select the cases it will hear. Because the court receives thousands of requests each year, it is highly selective and only takes a small percentage. It requires the agreement of at least four of the nine justices to grant cert.

It is important to note that granting certiorari does not mean we have won the case, nor does it mean these bans are struck down yet. It simply means the court has officially agreed to hear the case and has placed it on their docket for a final decision.

Why SCOTUS agreed to review semi-automatic rifle bans

Here is why the Supreme Court taking up these cases is a critical turning point for sportsmen:

Address a nationwide issue. Semiautomatic rifles are among the most popular firearms used by millions of law-abiding citizens for hunting, target shooting, and competitive events. A definitive ruling from the high court will finally address whether states have the constitutional authority to ban these standard sporting firearms.
Establish needed legal clarity. For years, lower federal courts have issued conflicting rulings on firearm restrictions, creating an unpredictable patchwork of laws across the country. This upcoming Supreme Court review is the necessary mechanism to establish a uniform, national standard for Second Amendment protections.
Set the rules for the next generation. The outcome of these cases will directly impact the future of our hunting heritage, including youth shooting sports and hunter-education programs that rely on these common firearms.

How Sportsmen’s Alliance is responding

Our legal and legislative teams will track developments with the utmost focus. As these cases move forward, we weigh all of our legal and advocacy options to best help defend and secure the rights of hunters and sport shooters.

We urge our members to stay informed, engaged, and patient as this monumental legal process begins. We will continue to provide balanced, factual updates as the timeline progresses.

Republished with permission from Sportsmen's Alliance.

Supreme Court rejects cert in 18-20 carry case; SAF win stands

SHummel — Mon, 13 Jul 2026 10:00:00 +0000

From Second Amendment Foundation

The U.S. Supreme Court on June 30 handed the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) a victory today by declining to hear a case brought by the organization to vindicate the firearm carry rights of young adults in Pennsylvania. By refusing to take the case, SAF’s victory in the Third Circuit Court of Appeals is now final.

The Third Circuit twice ruled in SAF’s favor, finding that adults under 21 are indeed members of “the People” as contemplated by the Second Amendment, and therefore enjoy the same scope of rights as all other adults. The ruling struck down a portion of Pennsylvania’s carry regime which prevented young adults from being able to carry firearms during declared states of emergency.

Related article: SCOTUS rules Hawaii 'Spirit of Aloha' cannot prohibit carry on property open to public

“While a cert grant on this case could have meant an opportunity for the Supreme Court to take our win in the Third Circuit and apply it nationally, we are still content that our victory in this case is now permanent and final,” said SAF executive director Adam Kraut. “Adults under 21 enjoy all the same constitutional rights as their older adult counterparts, and the rights protected by the Second Amendment are no different. This victory serves as a major stepping stone to striking down additional unconstitutional portions of Pennsylvania state law and those like it around the country.”

Joining SAF in Bivens v. SAF (formerly Lara v. Paris) are the Firearms Policy Coalition and three individuals.

“The Third Circuit ruled not once, but twice, that 18-20-year-olds have the same rights as their peers older than 21,” said SAF founder and executive vice president Alan M. Gottlieb. “Those over 18 in this country can buy property, join the military and get married just like those over 21 years old. Why then should they be forced to wait to enjoy their Second Amendment rights? There is no reason — they are adults under the law and should therefore be afforded their full constitutional rights.”

Republished with permission from Second Amendment Foundation.