Buckeye Firearms Association

Ohio’s 2026 youth turkey hunting results - south zone

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

From ODNR Division of Wildlife

Youth wild turkey hunters in Ohio’s south zone checked 1,941 birds during the state’s special youth-only weekend April 18-19, according to the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) Division of Wildlife. The two-day season was open to hunters ages 17 and younger, and participants were required to be accompanied by a nonhunting adult.

The south wild turkey hunting zone encompasses 83 of Ohio’s 88 counties. The three-year average for turkeys taken in this area during the youth season (2023-2025) is 1,681 birds. In 2025, youth hunters checked 1,625 turkeys.
The top 11 counties for wild turkeys checked during the 2026 youth season in the south zone include:

Highland (65)
Tuscarawas (65)
Guernsey (62)
Monroe (57)
Meigs (56)
Adams (55)
Gallia (55)
Harrison (55)
Carroll (52)
Brown (50)
Noble (50)

The youth-only hunting weekend for the northeast zone, which includes Ashtabula, Cuyahoga, Geauga, Lake, and Trumbull counties, is scheduled for Saturday, April 25 and Sunday, April 26. As of Sunday, April 19, the Division of Wildlife has issued 6,472 youth turkey permits, which can be used throughout the 2026 turkey hunting season. The season limit is one bird, and only bearded turkeys may be taken.

Spring turkey hunting season for all ages opens this weekend in the south zone, with the northeast zone opening in May.

Wild turkey hunting season dates

South zone: Saturday, April 25, to Sunday, May 24

Northeast zone: Saturday, May 2, to Sunday, May 31

Season dates in the northeast zone correspond with later turkey nest incubation in that region.

The top five counties for wild turkeys taken during the 2025 hunting season were as follows:

Ashtabula (516)
Monroe (462)
Belmont (459)
Guernsey (419)
Muskingum (406)

Hunters are required to have a valid hunting license in addition to a spring turkey permit unless exempted. Successful hunters are required to game-check their turkey no later than 11:30 p.m. on the day of harvest. Game check, licenses, and permits are available on the HuntFish OH app, on the Ohio Wildlife Licensing System, or at a participating license agent. Game check can also be done by phone at 1-877-TAG-IT-OH (877-824-4864). Find complete details in the 2025-26 Hunting and Trapping Regulations booklet.

Some Ohio felons could get expedited pardon, gun rights restored

SHummel — Wed, 22 Apr 2026 10:00:00 +0000

by Joe D. "Buck" Ruth

Are you a convicted felon of a nonviolent crime? Have you turned your life around for the better since your prison release?

Felony convictions can lead to a lifetime of hurdles and the loss of rights, including gun ownership, but if you answered yes to the questions above, it might not have to be that way.

Gov. Mike DeWine created the Ohio Governor's Expedited Pardon Project in December 2019 as an alternative to the traditional clemency application process, according to the project webpage. Too many pardon requests from those who had not been rehabilitated caused frequent delays in the process for those who have reformed their lives, leading some to forgo applying entirely just to avoid a wait list that could last two years.

The program is exclusively for qualifying reformed ex-offenders, providing applicants with one-on-one assistance to accelerate the process time to months instead.

“I believe those who’ve committed certain felony offenses in the past and have gone on to lead good lives deserve better," DeWine said. "They should not pay for their mistakes their entire lives.”

DeWine's office partnered with the University of Akron School of Law, The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law, Cleveland State University College of Law, University of Dayton School of Law, and the Ohio Justice & Policy Center — all working to increase awareness and improve access to the expedited application process. To start the process, visit Ohio State's page here.

As of Feb, 2, 2026, the project has received more than 1,600 applications from 84 Ohio counties and 33 states, according to the Ohio State Moritz College of Law website for the project.

One successful candidate noted under the project webpage's "Stories of Ohio Pardon Recipients" section was Aaron Ward, who at age 23 had been convicted in 1985 for drug trafficking and breaking and entering.

“I love to hunt but with my record, I was only allowed to use a bow,” Ward said. “When friends would ask me, ‘Did you shoot any deer today?’ I would always have to make an excuse because I didn’t want them to know why I couldn’t use a gun.”

After being out of trouble for more than 20 years, Ward applied for and received an expedited pardon in 2021.

"I got a Kentucky hunting license," he said. "I've had fresh fish out of a lake and now I'm waiting on winter to get here and see if I can put a little bit of deer in my freezer. My life's changing.”

Applicant criteria

Ohio State's dedicate website at ohioexpeditedpardon.org lists the following criteria for applying for an expedited pardon:

The person must have completed the sentence for the Ohio conviction(s) for which they are seeking a pardon at least 10 years ago.
The person must not have committed any additional crimes in at least the past 10 years, including DUI and OVI which are considered criminal offenses. Minor traffic citations are ok during this period.
The person must not have been convicted of any disqualifying offenses (see details below).
The person must have made good faith efforts to meet all requirements of sentencing, such as the payment of fines or restitution.
The person must have a post-offense employment history or a compelling reason why he or she has not been employed.
The person must have some history of performing volunteer work or community service.

Disqualifying offenses

Those convicted of any of the following offenses are not eligible for the project, according to the Ohio State page:
Aggravated murder, murder, attempted murder, voluntary manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter, reckless homicide, negligent homicide, aggravated vehicular homicide, vehicular homicide.
Rape, sexual battery, unlawful sexual conduct with a minor, gross sexual imposition, sexual imposition, pandering obscenity involving a minor, pandering sexually oriented matter involving a minor, illegal use of a minor in nudity-oriented material or performance, felonious sexual penetration, importuning, compelling prostitution, promoting prostitution, disseminating matter harmful to juveniles, displaying matter harmful to juveniles, pandering obscenity, deception to obtain matter harmful to juveniles, human trafficking.
Kidnapping, abduction, felony child endangering, terrorism.
Domestic violence, patient abuse.

For more information on the project, visit the Ohio Governor's Expedited Pardon Project webpage or the Ohio State Moritz College of Law website.

BFA-backed HB 5 would restore gun rights for nonviolent offenders

Ohio House Bill 5 would crack down on repeat felons but restore rights for nonviolent offenders who have paid their debt to society and have lived a productive life.
In May 2025, Buckeye Firearms Association (BFA) again testified before the Ohio House Judiciary Committee in support of HB 5.

"House Bill 5 clarifies the process for sealing and expungement for low level offenders, making it easier to navigate for those who have paid their debt to society. It solves the issue for those who no longer live in Ohio," BFA's Rob Sexton told the committee during testimony. "The framers of our Constitutions did not envision a lifetime of lost Constitutional protections for low level offenses."

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.

New York subway attack underscores failure of ‘sensitive places’ gun bans

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

by AmmoLand Editor Duncan Johnson

The Grand Central machete attack is exactly the kind of real-world example gun owners should point to when anti-gun politicians insist that “sensitive places” laws make the public safer.

On Saturday morning, April 11, police say 44-year-old Anthony Griffin randomly attacked three people with a machete inside the 42nd Street–Grand Central subway station before NYPD officers shot and killed him when he refused repeated commands to drop the weapon and advanced toward them. By the time police stopped the threat, an 84-year-old man, a 65-year-old man, and a 70-year-old woman had already been badly injured. AP reported the victims’ injuries were serious but not believed to be life-threatening.

That is the ugly truth behind New York’s so-called “sensitive places” regime. New York and other anti-gun states can put all the signs they want on the wall and write all the criminal statutes they want into the books, but violent criminals do not care. They do not stop and think, “This subway station is a prohibited area, so I guess I won’t carry a weapon today.” Criminals do not reconsider because Albany declared a crowded public space off-limits to concealed carry permit holders. They simply go where people are vulnerable and do what they were already planning to do. Meanwhile, the people who actually obey the law are the ones forced to go unarmed.

New York’s Concealed Carry Improvement Act explicitly treats public transportation and transit facilities as “sensitive locations.” The law covers not just subway cars and train cars, but also stations and other transit facilities connected to passenger transportation. State guidance is even clearer: licensed citizens cannot legally carry firearms in “public transportation and transit facilities,” even if they have a concealed carry license.

That means ordinary, law-abiding New Yorkers are expected to enter one of the most crowded and unpredictable environments in the country without the most effective means of self-defense, all because the state has decided that being around a lot of people somehow makes your right to bear arms disappear.

A New York City subway station is not a courtroom. It is not a secure screening zone at an airport checkpoint. It is a public thoroughfare used by working people, families, the elderly, tourists, and commuters who have no choice but to pass through confined spaces, blind corners, stairwells, platforms, and rail cars with strangers every single day. If anything, that environment strengthens the case for lawful concealed carry. It does not weaken it.

Grand Central just proved the point again.

The only thing that stopped the attacker was armed law enforcement. The officers involved deserve credit for ending the attack before even more people were hurt. But it also highlights the deeper problem with “sensitive places” laws. Police did not prevent the attack. Police responded to it. They arrived in time to end it, but not before three innocent people had already been cut up by a man carrying a machete in a place where the law had already ensured the decent people around him were unlikely to be armed.

Anti-gun lawmakers always want the public to imagine an idealized version of these laws where everyone dangerous is disarmed and everyone harmless is protected. In reality, it works the other way around. The violent criminal ignores the law. The intended victim obeys it. The government then congratulates itself for preserving a “gun-free zone” after the blood is already on the floor.

Gun owners have been told that certain places are simply too crowded, too sensitive, too emotionally important, or too administratively complicated to allow lawful carry. But none of those labels changes the basic constitutional question. The right to bear arms does not evaporate whenever politicians decide a place has excessive foot traffic. And from a practical standpoint, density is not an argument against self-defense. It is often the reason self-defense matters more.

The state’s job should not be to monopolize self-defense in places where police, no matter how professional or well-intentioned, will almost always arrive after the violence has started. A constitutional system worthy of the name should trust law-abiding adults with the means to protect themselves, especially in the kinds of public places where random violence can erupt without warning.

That is why the Grand Central attack should not just be treated as another ugly crime story. It should be seen for what it is: a direct indictment of the “sensitive places” mindset that has spread through blue-state gun control regimes. These laws do not create safety. They create victim zones. They disarm the very people most likely to follow the rules and leave them dependent on a government response that, by definition, comes after the attack begins.

New York can keep calling the subway a “sensitive place” if it wants. But words do not stop machetes. Signs do not stop psychopaths. And criminal statutes do not stop men who are already willing to butcher strangers in public. What stops that kind of violence is immediate force.

In Grand Central, that force came from armed police, but only after three innocent people were already bleeding. Law-abiding citizens should not be forced to wait helplessly for that moment to arrive. They should have the right to defend themselves before the damage is done.

Republished with permission from AmmoLand.

Sportsmen’s Alliance secures key 'farm bill' fix to remove anti-hunting language

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

From Sportsmen's Alliance

As a result of tireless advocacy by the Sportsmen’s Alliance, its partners, members and affiliates, and strong congressional leadership, anti-hunting language amended into the farm bill has been removed. Specifically, the House Agriculture Committee and Chairman G.T. Thompson have put forth a farm bill fix that removes language submitted by animal-rights groups that would ban certain types of hounds in hunting, as well as the use of “live lures” for training or field trials.

How the Sportsmen’s Alliance protected hunting traditions

“We’re grateful for Chairman Thompson’s leadership on the farm bill, generally, and more specifically, his concerns for hunters and conservationists, and his efforts to remove the anti-hunting language from the farm bill,” said Torin Miller, Associate Litigation Counsel at the Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation. “We’ll now focus our efforts on getting a clean farm bill passed on the House floor. The farm bill is an incredibly important piece of conservation legislation, and with hunting-dog bans removed, we’re looking forward to advancing conservation programs and funding on behalf of hunters, anglers, and trappers.”

Threat of Greyhound Protection Act (H.R.5017)

The Greyhound Protection Act of 2025 (H.R.5017) was amended into the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026 (farm bill) in early March. That bill, backed by animal-rights extremist Wayne Pacelle and his group Animal Wellness Action, would have impacted nearly anyone who hunts with retrievers, bird dogs or scent hounds by banning the use of live animals in dog training. Amendment supporters never told committee members of the broader impacts of the bill. Despite concerns by Chairman Thompson, H.R.5017 was amended into the farm bill by voice vote.

Restoring a clean farm bill for conservation

Since then, the Sportsmen’s Alliance has been advocating for changes to the adopted language that would remove any trace of the anti-hunting language. With Chairman Thompson and the Ag Committee’s leadership, those changes have been formally adopted. The farm bill will now work through the House Rules Committee before being heard on the House floor.

Power of the hunting community’s voice

“This result is a strong testament to the strength of the Sportsmen’s Alliance’s membership and the hunting community as a whole,” said Rob Sexton, senior vice president at the Sportsmen’s Alliance. “Thousands of hunters, dog owners, and trainers made their voices heard, and we’re thankful for strong Congressional leaders that kept their ears open. Our job now is to protect this clean farm bill and make sure the Senate version is free from any anti-hunting threats as well.”

Take action

Farm bill passage is never easy, but it is vital. The farm bill positively impacts countless wildlife species, hunting access, and American families. The House is expected to vote on the farm bill in the coming weeks. Sportsmen’s Alliance members, and everyone who fought so hard, need to contact their Representatives and ask them to support the farm bill and the fix that removed the anti-hunting language.

Republished with permission from Sportsmen's Alliance.

NSSF files FEC complaint against Giffords PAC

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

NSSF, The Firearm Industry Trade Association, on April 13 filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) against Giffords PAC, the political fundraising arm of the gun control group Giffords: Courage to Fight Gun Violence. In the complaint, NSSF alleges Giffords PAC and its allies are skirting the FEC’s joint fundraising rules when they solicit funds for both Giffords PAC and their preferred candidates for elected office. Giffords PAC has been using these joint fundraising solicitations to enrich their own antigun agenda, while failing to comply with the FEC’s joint fundraising filing and disclaimer requirements. NSSF is urging the FEC to take action against Giffords PAC and the candidates with whom they are jointly fundraising, for these violations.

“Giffords PAC has been playing fast and loose with how they are soliciting funds to support themselves and their preferred gun control candidates for elected office,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF’s senior vice president and general counsel. “The FEC’s joint fundraising rules are clear, but Giffords ignores them because they believe they are above accountability. Their fundraising misleads consumers by falsely claiming these joint fundraising solicitations are not authorized by any candidates or their campaign committees. Giffords PAC and these candidates are knowingly ignoring mandatory FEC disclosure requirements.”

Ohio's May primaries: 2026 BFA-PAC Grades and Endorsements

Giffords PAC sent fundraising emails in partnership with preferred federal and gubernatorial candidates for office that ask potential donors to “split a donation between my campaign and Giffords PAC…” yet it has failed to properly follow the required FEC joint fundraising procedures. FEC regulations require the appointment of a joint fundraising representative or formation of a joint fundraising committee with the associated campaigns, yet Giffords PAC’s most recent FEC Statement of Organization does not reflect its involvement in any joint fundraising efforts.

Further, these emails soliciting donations stated they were “Paid For By Giffords PAC” and “not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee.” However, the joint fundraising emails are obviously authorized by candidates. In fact, the emails are signed by candidates and jointly solicit contributions for the campaigns. Those email solicitations sent donors to an ActBlue website that asked donors to support candidates and Giffords antigun agenda. FEC regulations require that mass mailings of 500 or more substantially similar communications include appropriate disclosures, however Giffords PAC has not included appropriate joint fundraising disclosures in either their emails or ActBlue contribution pages, and falsely claim that these communications are not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee.

Giffords PAC has sent these solicitations that enriched their own antigun agenda in coordination with U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colorado), Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Georgia), Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D-Virginia), Sen. Adam Schiff (D-California), Gov. Mikie Sherrill (D-New Jersey), Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota), Gov. Roy Cooper (D-North Carolina), and Gov. Katie Hobbs (D-Arizona).

Giffords PAC and the campaigns are flouting the FEC’s joint fundraising regulations and obscuring how these fundraising efforts are financed. The joint fundraising regulations ensure that each participant pays its own allocable share of fundraising costs based on funds raised. Disclaimer requirements inform the public of who is paying for a communication and whether a candidate is standing behind the communication.

Republished with permission from NSSF.

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

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

by Joe D. "Buck" Ruth

The Ohio Senate on April 15 voted 24-9 along party lines to pass Senate Bill 278, a measure that could get costly for municipalities that try to violate Ohio law by illegally enacting local gun ordinances.

SB 278, sponsored by Sen. Terry Johnson (R-McDermott) and supported by Buckeye Firearms Association, effectively puts teeth into Ohio's preemption laws (ORC 9.68) by allowing residents to sue cities for punitive and/or monetary damages if they try to ignore the state's preemption laws on guns.

The Senate's Local Government Committee passed the bill 5-2 on March 11, also along party lines.

Jim Samuel, BFA's legislative affairs director, testified in favor of SB 278 in February.

"Enacted in 2007, ORC Section 9.68 clearly states that cities cannot create their own gun laws based on home rule," Samuel said. "Specifically, a political subdivision can not regulate firearms, their components, ammunition, or knives. The Ohio Supreme Court even ruled that the state's preemption law is valid, saying “R.C. 9.68 is a general law that displaces municipal firearm ordinances and does not unconstitutionally infringe on municipal home rule authority.”

Under current law, a person, group, or entity adversely affected by any manner of ordinance, rule, regulation, resolution, practice, or other action enacted or enforced by a political subdivision could bring a civil action against said political subdivision "seeking damages from the political subdivision, declaratory relief, injunctive relief, or a combination of those remedies. Any damages awarded shall be awarded against, and paid by, the political subdivision."

The proposed amendment would add legal teeth by strengthening damages to include "punitive or exemplary."

"It's time we put a stop to Ohio cities ignoring established law and continuing to pass their own gun regulations," said Dean Rieck, BFA executive director. "We have thoroughly litigated this issue. The Ohio Supreme Court has ruled for us and against cities twice, and yet some cities, including Columbus, have defied the court. This bill will make this egregious behavior painful and expensive for lawbreaking cities and their grandstanding leaders."

The bill now will move on to the Ohio House of Representatives.

BFA thanks Sen. Johnson for his leadership and urges the House to also pass this important legislation.

BFA-PAC endorses Vivek Ramaswamy for Ohio governor

drieck — Wed, 15 Apr 2026 09:00:00 +0000

Buckeye Firearms Association PAC is proud to endorse Vivek Ramaswamy and Rob McColley in the 2026 Ohio gubernatorial race.

"We've been working on elections for nearly a quarter century. And this is one of the rare times when the choice is easy, obvious, and exciting," said Dean Rieck, executive director of Buckeye Firearms Association. "Vivek is not only a supporter of the Second Amendment; he's also an outspoken champion. And I couldn't be happier with our PAC's decision to endorse him."

BFA PAC made the announcement during a special news conference at Vance Outdoors in Obetz, Ohio, on Tuesday, April 14. Ramaswamy accepted the endorsement, spoke about his respect and admiration for the Second Amendment, and then spent time on the shooting range with BFA leaders.

In announcing the endorsement, Linda Walker, BFA president and an NRA board member, praised Ramaswamy’s commitment to defending constitutional freedoms.

“We know that Vivek is a strong supporter of the Constitution," Walker said. "We look forward to working with him on issues important to gun owners, hunters, and families throughout the state. For these reasons and many more, Buckeye Firearms Association PAC enthusiastically endorses Vivek Ramaswamy for governor of Ohio.”

Ramaswamy is one of a handful of candidates for any office who has received BFA PAC's endorsement with an A+ grade (see our 2026 grades and endorsements).

He is a husband, father, and proud Cincinnati native who believes deeply in Ohio’s promise. He and his wife of 10 years, a surgeon at The Ohio State University, are raising their family in greater Columbus, and it’s their love for Ohio that fuels Vivek’s run for governor.

He is also a proud gun owner and NRA member who has for years proclaimed his unwavering support for gun rights, describing himself as a "Second Amendment absolutist." He opposes restrictions on law-abiding citizens, supports constitutional and concealed carry, opposes red flag laws, and advocates for armed security in schools.

He has even gone further, arguing correctly that law-abiding gun ownership deters violent criminals and, speaking at the NRA Leadership Forum in 2023, outlining his plan to dismantle the ATF.

Here is Ramaswamy in his own words:

There is no true freedom without the Second Amendment. China, Iran, and many other despotic nations have, on paper, the same freedoms that our Constitution guarantees, with one glaring exception: the Second Amendment.

The Second Amendment is the amendment that puts the teeth into the entire Bill of Rights, and our framers knew what they were doing when they included it.

In a news release following the event, Ramaswamy said he was honored to win BFA's support.

"The right to keep and bear arms is not negotiable, and Ohio needs a governor who stands for the Second Amendment without apology," he said, adding that he would "stand shoulder to shoulder with gun owners across our state to protect the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution."

BFA PAC urges every gun owner in Ohio to vote for Vivek Ramaswamy and Rob McColley for governor and lieutenant governor in the 2026 Primary Election and then in the General Election in November.

Check out our 2026 Pro-Gun Voter Guide.

How Fifth Circuit panel's home distillery opinion could help NFA challenges

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

by Dean Weingarten

On April 10, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued its opinion in Morris v. DOJ, reinforcing a long-standing constitutional limit on Congress’s taxing power: it may impose taxes that raise revenue, but it cannot simply prohibit conduct under the guise of taxation.

The reasoning and precedents cited in Morris could bolster challenges to the constitutionality of the NFA’s registration scheme for suppressors, SBRs, SBSs, and AOWs now that the making and transfer tax on those items has been reduced to zero.

The case in the Fifth Circuit is Morris v. DOJ. It concerns the federal ban on home distilleries, enacted in 1868. The ban does not require a person to pay a tax on producing distilled spirits at home. Instead, the law prohibits home distilleries altogether. The relevance is that there is no tax to be paid. From page 12 of the decision:

“Congress’s authority under the taxing power is limited to requiring an individual to pay money into the Federal Treasury, no more.”

The NFA has always been justified under the authority of Congress to raise taxes. It has not been justified as an authority given to Congress by the interstate commerce clause. This was emphasized by Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s Attorney General, Homer Cummings, as shown in a previous AmmoLand article:

Then-Attorney General Cummings was clear about this in his testimony to Congress during the debates over the bill in 1934:

"Oh, we do not attempt to escape it. We are dealing with another power, namely, the power of taxation, and of regulation under the interstate commerce clause. You see, if we made a statute absolutely forbidding any human being to have a machine gun, you might say there is some constitutional question involved. But when you say 'We will tax the machine gun' and when you say that 'the absence of a license showing payment of the tax has been made indicates that a crime has been perpetrated,' you are easily within the law."

Courts have consistently upheld the NFA, and its registration provision, on the grounds that it was a tax.

A separate federal case directly challenges the constitutionality of the NFA registration requirements, now that there is no tax on suppressors, SBRs, and SBSs. Brown v. ATF is at the district court level. Issues of standing are being addressed.

If Brown v. ATF proceeds to the merits, Morris v. DOJ could provide important persuasive support for the argument that Congress cannot rely on the taxing power to prohibit conduct where no tax is actually being paid into the Treasury. In the Fifth Circuit, that reasoning may carry even more weight. But Brown is pending in the Eastern District of Missouri, so Morris would not be binding there.

Related article: BFA joins federal lawsuit challenging ATF tax stamp requirement on suppressors, short-barreled rifles

Congressional power to tax was used in 1934 as a workaround to avoid the Second Amendment. The NFA has always been justified as a tax act, not a use of congressional power under the commerce clause.

In 1934, the commerce clause had far less reach than it would later. In 1934, the Supreme Court had yet to rule that the power to tax could not be used to subvert the Bill of Rights.

In 2026, there is a long-standing precedent that the power to tax cannot be used to destroy the Bill of Rights, and another that the taxing power must actually impose a tax to be legitimate. The NFA tax has been eliminated for silencers, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, and any other weapons.

The question is: how long will it take for the Supreme Court to recognize this?

Republished with permission from AmmoLand.

Virginia demonstrates importance of electing pro-gun governor

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

On April 10, Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger met the expectations of her anti-gun allies, signing two bills into law. This action sets the tone for what may come next as she has until April 13 to render a decision on the remaining gun bills.

SB27 and HB21 create sweeping new standards of “responsible conduct” for members of the firearm industry, including manufacturers, distributors, and retailers. The bill requires these businesses to establish and implement vague and subjective “reasonable controls” over the manufacture, sale, distribution, use, and marketing of firearm-related products. Further, it establishes a broad civil cause of action, allowing the attorney general, local government attorneys, or private individuals to sue firearm businesses for injunctions, damages, and costs. This is a direct attack on the firearms industry and is designed to regulate the industry out of existence through litigation — despite long-standing federal protections.

Midterms: 2026 BFA-PAC Grades and Endorsements for the Ohio Primary

SB323 and HB40 would end the centuries-old practice of individuals building lawful firearms for personal use without government interference by prohibiting the manufacture of firearms without serial numbers. Transfer and possession of an unserialized or plastic firearm would be prohibited. This legislation would also penalize individuals who lawfully purchased unfinished frames and receivers before the bill’s effective date.

Sen. Warren, Rep. Meeks embark on gun control fishing expedition

SHummel — Fri, 10 Apr 2026 10:00:00 +0000

by Larry Keane

U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Massachusetts) and U.S. Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-New York) are casting wide nets on a gun control fishing expedition, chumming the anti-gun waters with a new letter to the Commerce Department requesting data on semiautomatic firearms.

They hope to sink their hooks into firearm manufacturers who lawfully export firearms in an attempt to blame them for crime in other countries.

2026 Primary Election: BFA-PAC Grades and Endorsements

The senator and member of Congress sent a letter to Under Secretary of Commerce Jeffrey Kessler, demanding “a sweeping accounting of semi-automatic firearm export licenses approved since January 2025,” according to a Reuters report.

“The request covers semi-automatic rifles, pistols, shotguns, and associated accessories and asks the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) to disclose the number of licenses approved, the countries receiving the exports, the types of purchasers cleared to receive them, and details of any monitoring conducted to prevent diversion into illegal markets,” the report noted.

The two anti-gun lawmakers claim U.S. firearm manufacturers “are responsible for almost 20% of crime gun traces in Central America and over 37% globally outside of North America,” according to the letter.

Same tall tale

The real goal is to lay the blame for crime in foreign countries at the feet of U.S. firearm manufacturers and the Trump administration. Except both Warren and Meeks have well-documented anti-gun track records to support any and all gun control that comes across their desks.

In fact, it was Warren who complained in 2022 that she couldn’t use her Senate post to block firearm exports. She was joined in that complaint by disgraced former Sen. Bob Menendez (D-New Jersey), who was later convicted of taking bribes for illegal international gun running. Warren cheered the Biden administration for “pausing” firearm export licenses for more than six months before publishing a policy decimating firearm exports.

President Donald Trump’s administration rolled back those punitive policies early in his second administration. That sent Warren into a fit, blaming the Trump administration for arming criminal drug cartels. Interestingly, Mexico wasn’t among the countries for which Warren and Meeks are seeking firearm export data, Bearing Arms noted. That might be because, as Bearing Arms noted, the majority of firearms traced to the United States were actually lawfully sold to Mexico’s military and law enforcement agencies.

What’s really happening

Here’s the truth about firearm exports. All firearm and ammunition exports are — and always were — subject to both Defense and State Department review, and either can halt the export if there are security or human rights concerns. This was the case for many years before the Biden administration throttled exports and remains the case today.

Firearm and ammunition license applications undergo a 100% end-user check by the BIS Office of Export Enforcement (OEE), regardless of how long an exporting company has been doing business with that customer, regardless of how many times the buyer was subjected to an end-user check and regardless of whether BIS has no derogatory information on that customer, even if the end user was recently approved. At present, no other commodity is subject to the same 100% check.

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

Further, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) reported that 11% — or 18,749 — firearms recovered at crime scenes in foreign nations were lawfully exported from the United States and later recovered between 2017 and 2021. That’s not the entire picture, though. NSSF pointed out that these firearms recovered at crime scenes in a foreign nation and traced represent less than 1% of the total — or 2,793,002 — firearms that were lawfully exported out of the United States between 2016 and 2020, according to ATF data.

The problem isn’t the lack of safeguards around U.S. firearm exports. The problem is crime in foreign countries. If the end user in a foreign nation is found to be illegally trafficking firearms, the license is revoked. End of story.

More to the story

This is just the latest salvo from Warren against the firearm and ammunition industry. She and her anti-gun allies in Washington are relaunching an attack on commercial utilization of ammunition production at Lake City Army Ammunition Plant. She recently introduced S.4015, the Stop Militarizing Our Streets Act. Warren insists that U.S.-made ammunition is a source of criminal violence in foreign nations. What she’s really doing is attempting to choke off the proven funding model that ensures that today’s warfighters have ample ammunition through the commercial utilization of ammunition produced at Lake City for recreational marksmen.

Discussing the bill with GunsAmerica Digest, NSSF’s Mark Oliva said, “These attempts risk the military readiness of Lake City Army Ammunition Plant, to which the U.S. Army has credited for its ability to keep the warfighter supplied with necessary ammunition needed to defend our nation. Commercial utilization enables the Army to ensure the readiness of not just the machinery needed to produce ammunition but also the funds for the necessary skilled labor to keep the plant in peak operation so there are no gaps in military readiness.”

Warren and Meeks are posturing about their concerns for crime in foreign nations. They disguise their antigun angst as their oversight responsibility. They want their overtly political tool to punish highly regulated firearm exports to sink their hooks into firearm manufacturers. Their real anger is they can’t get over the big one that got away.

Republished with permission from NSSF.