Key Takeaways

• Ohio Senate Bill 214, introduced by Sen. Kyle Koehler, would remove suppressors from the state's dangerous ordnance classification.
• The bill passed the Ohio Senate 31-1 in March and is now before the House Public Safety Committee.
• State Rep. Monica Robb Blasdel supports amendments that would also remove short-barreled rifles and shotguns from the dangerous ordnance classification.
• Under current Ohio law, possessing a suppressor or short-barreled firearm without NFA registration can result in state felony charges.
• Blasdel's office says recent federal court rulings and the federal government's decision to end NFA enforcement prompted the push to update Ohio law.

Estimated reading time: 3 minutes

COLUMBUS, OH — Ohio Senate Bill 214 would remove firearm mufflers and suppressors from the state’s classification of dangerous ordnance. Sen. Koehler introduced it in the 136th General Assembly. It amends sections 1533.04, 2923.11 and 2923.17 of the Ohio Revised Code.

The bill passed the Senate 31-1 in March and is now pending before the House Public Safety Committee, as reported by the Ohio House of Representatives. The release comes from State Rep. Monica Robb Blasdel (R-New Waterford). It identifies the sponsor as Sen. Kyle Koehler (R-Springfield). It also backs proposed amendments that would extend the bill’s changes to short-barreled rifles and short-barreled shotguns. NRA-ILA also reported the Senate’s passage of the bill in March.

Here is why this matters. Under current Ohio law, suppressors, short-barreled rifles and short-barreled shotguns are all classified as dangerous ordnance. According to Blasdel’s office, possessing one without federal National Firearms Act registration or another qualifying exemption can result in state felony charges.

The timing is tied to changes at the federal level. Blasdel’s office points to “a landmark federal court ruling limiting federal enforcement,” which I covered previously. It also cites the federal government’s announcement that it will end enforcement of “dangerous ordnance registration under the NFA.” The concern is that Ohio’s own parallel enforcement statute stays on the books. That could leave law-abiding Ohio gun owners exposed to state penalties even as federal enforcement backs off.

“The Second Amendment is a fundamental right, and law-abiding Ohioans should not face felony charges because our state law has not kept pace with changes at the federal level,” Robb Blasdel said. “I have heard from constituents across Columbiana and Carroll Counties who care deeply about this issue, and I will be watching Senate Bill 214 closely as it moves through committee to make sure their voices are heard.”

The bill also amends section 2923.11, the definitions section of Ohio’s weapons laws. That section already spells out what Ohio calls a “sawed-off firearm”: a shotgun with a barrel under 18 inches, a rifle with a barrel under 16 inches, or either one under 26 inches overall. That definition covers the short-barreled rifles and shotguns the proposed House amendments target.

SB 214 also touches section 1533.04, Ohio’s hunting statute on suppressors. That section lets a licensed hunter pursuing game birds or wild quadrupeds use a suppressor on a gun authorized for hunting. The hunter must be allowed to possess the suppressor under state and federal law and must have it registered under the National Firearms Act.

More from USA Carry:

• Ohio Law Files a Suppressor Next to Grenades and Rocket Launchers. SB 214 Would End That, and the House Still Has Not Voted.
• Texas Set to Recognize All Valid Out-of-State Handgun Licenses Starting September, Pending Governor’s Signature
• House Passes Removing Suppressors from NFA by One Vote in 215-214 Decision, Urge Senate to Finish the Job
• Bill Banning Gun Confiscation, Store Closures Amid Emergencies Passes Through Ohio Senate
• Ohio Senate Blocks Cities from Limits on Concealed Knife Carry

Blasdel also cosponsored House Bill 495, the Freedom to Carry Act, which is pending before the same House Public Safety Committee. For a look at where current law stands for permit holders, my guide to Ohio concealed carry laws covers permits and carry rules in the state.

I will continue tracking SB 214 as it moves through the House Public Safety Committee, including whether the short-barreled rifle and shotgun amendments make it into the final bill.

Legislative data provided by LegiScan (CC BY 4.0, legiscan.com).

Read the original story: Ohio Senate Passed Its Suppressor Bill 31-1. Now a House Lawmaker Wants Short-Barreled Rifles and Shotguns Added.

Key Takeaways

• A NuggMD poll found 26 percent of marijuana consumers are more likely to buy a gun after the Supreme Court struck down the federal ban.
• The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that criminalizing gun possession by cannabis users under federal law violates the Second Amendment.
• Among Republican cannabis consumers, 41 percent said the ruling makes them more likely to buy a gun, compared to 26 percent of Democrats.
• NuggMD surveyed 654 cannabis consumers in state-legal markets between October 8 and 15, with a margin of error of plus or minus 3.83 percentage points.
• The Supreme Court has begun applying the ruling to other cases involving cannabis consumers prosecuted for possessing firearms.

Estimated reading time: 3 minutes

WASHINGTON, DC — One in four marijuana consumers say they are more likely to buy a gun now that the Supreme Court has struck down the federal ban on firearm possession by cannabis users, according to a new poll from the cannabis telehealth platform NuggMD.

The survey found that 26 percent of marijuana consumers said they are “more likely to purchase a firearm” because of the ruling, as reported by Marijuana Moment. In June I covered the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision striking down the federal gun ban on marijuana users. This poll is a first look at what that decision may mean at the gun counter.

The justices ruled unanimously that the government’s effort to criminalize gun possession by cannabis consumers under Section 922(g)(3) of federal law violates the Second Amendment. The other 74 percent of consumers in the poll said the ruling does not make them more likely to want to buy a gun.

The split by party was wide. Among Republican cannabis consumers, 41 percent said the ruling makes them more likely to buy a gun. Among Democrats, the figure was 26 percent.

NuggMD interviewed 654 cannabis consumers living in state-legal markets from Oct. 8 to 15. The margin of error is plus or minus 3.83 percentage points, meaning the true share could run roughly four points higher or lower than the reported figure.

“One of the most common questions we receive from patients is whether getting a medical card will affect their right to own a firearm,” Tyler Elson, director of content at NuggMD, told Marijuana Moment. “Our latest poll found that 1 in 4 cannabis consumers say the Supreme Court’s ruling makes them more likely to purchase one, which suggests how many people the federal ban was holding back.”

“Much of the celebration has focused on cannabis consumers being able to own firearms,” Elson said. “But the more exciting victory is that gun owners no longer have to choose between their Second Amendment rights and their healthcare needs.”

The ruling is already spreading beyond the original case. Marijuana Moment reports that the Supreme Court has started applying it to other cases involving cannabis consumers prosecuted for possessing firearms. The federal agency that regulates guns says it plans to issue guidance on the ruling. In August, the Department of Justice unveiled a rule meant to help restore gun rights to people barred from possessing firearms. That rule includes provisions blocking officials from denying applications over marijuana use or cannabis-related convictions. Another recent poll found that most Americans support the court’s decision, including majorities across party lines.

More from USA Carry:

• Two Federal Courts, Two Weeks Apart, Split on Whether Silencers Are Protected Arms
• FPC Just Asked the Supreme Court to End Maryland’s Carry Bans, and the List of Banned Places Is Staggering
• Washington’s High Court Says the State Can Take Your Guns Over DUIs, Even If You Never Touched One
• AAG Harmeet Dhillon: Supreme Court Will Eventually Rule AR-15s Are Legal for All Law-Abiding Americans
• Supreme Court Unanimously Strikes Down Federal Gun Ban on Marijuana Users

If you are in that 26 percent, the purchase is the easy part. Training and the right mindset are what make a firearm useful for self-defense, so budget time for both. If you plan to carry, start with your state’s concealed carry permit requirements.

I will continue tracking the federal guidance and how courts apply the ruling.

Read the original story: 26 Percent of Marijuana Consumers Say They Are More Likely to Buy a Gun After Supreme Court Struck Down Federal Ban

Key Takeaways

• Four people followed Ortagus Bennett's Escalade from Atlanta clubs to his Buford apartment complex at about 6:40 a.m. on Sept. 5, 2026.
• Bennett wrestled a silver revolver from robber Marvin Wiley, 23, killed him with it, and shot a second robber across the midsection.
• The second shot robber, E'imod Sanchez Toboris Taylor, could not use his legs and was left by the others at Grady Memorial Hospital.
• Taylor and Brinson Bernard Crumbley, 23, are each charged with felony murder, armed robbery, aggravated assault, and firearm possession during a felony.
• Bennett has not been charged in the shooting, though police noted he is a convicted felon, which carries separate legal implications under federal and state law.

Estimated reading time: 3 minutes

BUFORD, GA — A homeowner who was trailed from Atlanta to his Buford apartment complex by four would-be robbers turned one of their own guns on them, killing one man and leaving a second unable to walk, according to the Gwinnett County Police Department.

Gwinnett County police say the shooting happened near 1400 Laurel Crossing Parkway on Sept. 5, 2026. Responding officers found three people shot. One of them, Marvin Wiley, 23, of Atlanta, was pronounced dead at the scene. Detectives determined Wiley was one of the armed robbers. The wounded homeowner, identified by police as Ortagus Bennett, was taken to the hospital in stable condition. A Gwinnett County police detective laid out how the robbery unfolded at a preliminary hearing on Wednesday, Oct. 21, as reported by WSB-TV.

Corporal J.K. Bell testified that the group began following the man’s Escalade in a white Kia between 3 and 4 a.m. as he went out to clubs with friends in Atlanta. A screenshot on Wiley’s phone placed the Kia at the man’s last stop that morning. The Kia carried a Texas tag registered to a Ford F-150. It waited as the man parked at the Ellison apartments around 6:40 a.m., Bell said, and three people got out with guns while a camera next door recorded.

What happened next is why this case matters. The robbers came armed. The man they targeted did not stay a victim. Bell testified that the homeowner fought Wiley for the silver revolver Wiley was carrying, took it, and killed him with it. He then shot a second robber across the midsection.

“The second individual who was shot across the midsection was trying to crawl back to the vehicle, the suspect vehicle, but was unable to use his legs,” Bell said.

That second man is E’imod Sanchez Toboris Taylor. Police say the Kia left him at Grady Memorial Hospital. Taylor is charged with felony murder, armed robbery, aggravated assault, and possession of a firearm during the commission of certain felonies. A second suspect, Brinson Bernard Crumbley, 23, faces the same charges. Police believe Crumbley drove the getaway Kia. Under Georgia’s felony murder rule, both men are charged in Wiley’s death because he died during the armed robbery they are accused of committing, even though neither of them fired the shot that killed him.

Detectives are still looking for a fourth person. Police say they believe this was an isolated incident with no known threat to the public.

More from USA Carry:

• Two Robbers Shot Dead After Following Man from Bank
• Pueblo Resident Uses .22 Revolver to Shoot Intruder Armed With Knife
• Illinois Homeowner Confronted by Four Armed Intruders But Comes Out On Top
• Florida Homeowner Fires 17 Rounds, Hits Two in Defense Against Four Armed Intruders
• Homeowner Fends Off 4 Home Intruders; 1 Leaves His Car at the Scene

The man who fired has not faced charges. Under questioning from Crumbley’s attorney, Bell agreed that the robbed man fired first and that he is an uncharged convicted felon. A convicted felon is prohibited under federal and Georgia law from possessing a firearm, and that status is a legal problem of its own that is separate from the robbery he fought off. No charging decision has been announced against him for the shooting, and police have attributed the gunfire to his effort to stop four armed robbers who tracked him across two counties to his own front door. Bell testified that a recorded Instagram call two days later appears to capture someone who was present, describing a plan to rob the man of his jewelry that went badly.

The charges against Taylor and Crumbley are allegations. Both are presumed innocent unless convicted.

Read the original story: Buford Homeowner Followed Home From Atlanta Wrestles Revolver From One of Four Robbers, Kills Him and Shoots a Second

Key Takeaways

• Tonie Wilson, 20, is seeking Stand Your Ground immunity in the 2024 shooting death of 16-year-old Julian 'JuJu' Keel at a Columbia graduation party.
• Wilson testified he fired back during the shootout but never saw who was shooting at him before he returned fire.
• Prosecutors allege Wilson armed himself with a .300 Blackout rifle and fired about 20 rounds into the crowd, striking Keel in the back.
• More than 50 rounds were fired from at least four different guns during the party, which drew more than 100 people.
• The judge did not rule Monday and the hearing is scheduled to resume Tuesday at 1:30 p.m.

Estimated reading time: 5 minutes

COLUMBIA, SC — A 20-year-old man charged with murder in the 2024 shooting death of a 16-year-old bystander testified Monday that he fired back during a chaotic graduation-party shootout but never saw who was shooting at him, and he is now asking a judge to grant him immunity under South Carolina’s Stand Your Ground law.

Tonie Wilson took the stand Monday in Richland County as his immunity hearing began, as reported by WIS, which detailed the charges and the state’s ballistic allegations, and by WACH, which reported his testimony that he fired back but never saw who was firing at him. No court opinion is available because the judge has not ruled. Everything below comes from in-court testimony and argument as the two outlets reported it, not from a written record of any holding.

Wilson is charged with murder, possession of a weapon during a violent crime, and breach of the peace of a high and aggravated nature, according to Columbia police and court testimony reported by WIS. The teen who died was Julian “JuJu” Keel, a three-sport athlete at W.J. Keenan High School. Prosecutors say Keel was an innocent bystander, not the target of anyone’s gunfire, when he was shot in the upper body while trying to leave a graduation party outside a Columbia business on June 2, 2024. He died at a hospital. He would have turned 17 two days later.

Here is the scene the state describes. More than 100 people were at the party when a confrontation between two groups escalated into gunfire, investigators said, and more than 50 rounds were fired from at least four different guns, as reported by WIS. That detail is the center of this case. When dozens of rounds come from four or more weapons in a crowd, nobody in that parking lot could say with certainty where every bullet came from, and that cuts in more than one direction.

Wilson’s defense is self-defense. His attorney argued he did not know the rival group would be at the party, came unarmed on a last-minute decision to attend, and only picked up a friend’s gun and fired back after shots were already coming at him and his friends. “Shots are fired at his back, he waits for the shots to stop, they don’t, so he shoots back,” defense attorney Makenzie Thomas argued, according to WACH. “Unfortunately, an innocent bystander was shot and killed.” Wilson testified he feared for his life because, in his words, these were “the same people that said they would kill me the next time they see me.”

I am not a lawyer, but the piece that stops me is Wilson’s own testimony that he fired back and never saw who was shooting at him. South Carolina’s Protection of Persons and Property Act, the state’s Stand Your Ground statute, protects a person who reasonably believes deadly force is necessary against an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm. Blind-firing into a crowd of roughly 100 to 200 people, which is how the state characterized Wilson’s conduct, is a hard fit for a law built around a defender who identifies and meets a specific threat. The defense frames it as returning fire under attack. The prosecution frames it as firing about 20 rounds into a crowd. The judge has to decide which account the law covers, and that is exactly what Stand Your Ground immunity hearings are for. If you carry in South Carolina, the state’s self-defense and permit framework is worth knowing cold before you ever have to invoke it.

There is a second question tangled in the first. Prosecutors allege a bullet fired by Wilson struck Keel in the back, traveled through the vehicle he was in, and exited the windshield, and they say Wilson armed himself with a .300 Blackout rifle, walked back into the crowd, and fired about 20 rounds, prompting return fire, as reported by WIS. That is the state’s theory of who killed Keel. It is an allegation, not a finding. With more than 50 rounds flying from at least four guns, the question of whose round killed a bystander is precisely the kind of thing the state will have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt if this reaches trial. For now, Wilson is charged, not convicted, and no court has ruled on either his immunity claim or his guilt.

More from USA Carry:

• Teen Shoots Man After Being Grabbed By The Throat
• Iowa Court of Appeals: Profane Tirade at a Salvation Army Food Pantry Was Disorderly Conduct That Stripped Stand-Your-Ground Protection Before the Shove
• Retreating from Danger: Misconceptions on Stand Your Ground Laws
• Florida Man Uses Backup Gun to Shoot Robber After Primary Gun is Stolen
• Florida Judge Rejects Stand Your Ground Defense in Theatre Shooting

Prosecutors pushed back hard on the self-defense account, pressing Wilson about prior conflicts with the juvenile co-defendant and about alleged threats he made before the shooting. On cross-examination they asked whether he had threatened to shoot up the other suspect’s mother’s house. Wilson denied remembering making the threat or telling law enforcement he had, according to WACH. The state also asked why he did not simply leave a parking lot packed with people instead of staying and firing. Columbia police announced the arrests of Wilson and a second suspect, who was 16 at the time, in October 2024. Wilson has been held at the Alvin S. Glenn Detention Center since being denied bond in May 2025, as reported by WIS.

The hearing produced no ruling Monday and is scheduled to resume Tuesday at 1:30 p.m., after prosecutors said their witnesses would not be available until then. The judge’s decision will determine whether Wilson is immune from prosecution or whether the murder case proceeds to trial. I will continue tracking the outcome of the Stand Your Ground hearing.

Read the original story: He Testified He Never Saw Who He Was Shooting At. Now He Wants Stand Your Ground Immunity for a Teen’s Death.

Key Takeaways

• A woman in a Roanoke Rapids home on Coleus Lane shot and killed Tony Lee Creekmore after he forced his way inside around 4 a.m. Sunday.
• Creekmore was facing child abuse charges stemming from a July investigation involving a child found with severe bruises on the same Coleus Lane.
• Deputies were still en route when the caller reported Creekmore had already forced his way into the residence.
• The Halifax County Sheriff's Office said no criminal charges have been filed against the woman and the investigation remains ongoing.
• The sheriff's office has not identified the woman who fired or confirmed whether she is connected to the earlier child abuse case.

Estimated reading time: 3 minutes

ROANOKE RAPIDS, NC — A woman inside a home in the Roanoke Rapids area shot and killed a man facing child abuse charges early Sunday after he forced his way into the residence, according to the Halifax County Sheriff’s Office.

As reported by RRSpin, Major Anzell Harris said deputies were dispatched around 4 a.m. to a domestic call at a residence on Coleus Lane. A man identified as Tony Lee Creekmore was banging on the door. Harris said it was not clear why Creekmore was there.

Deputies were still en route when the caller reported that Creekmore had forced his way inside. A woman in the home fired. Deputies arrived to find Creekmore dead from an apparent gunshot wound. Harris said the woman’s name is being withheld.

The timeline here is the part every armed citizen should study. The call went out while he was still outside banging on the door. By the time he was through it, help was still on the road. Whatever happened inside that house happened in the gap between the 911 call and the patrol car pulling up. That gap is what a home defense mindset has to be built around. A firearm is part of it, but so are a plan, a safe spot inside the home, and a phone already dialed.

Members of the sheriff’s Criminal Investigations Division responded to the scene. Harris said no criminal charges have been filed and the investigation remains ongoing to determine whether charges will be warranted. I would be surprised to see charges here. What the sheriff’s office has described so far is a man facing child abuse charges forcing his way into a home at 4 a.m. while deputies were still on the way. Still, no charging decision has been announced.

The charges Creekmore was facing stemmed from a July investigation that also began with a domestic call on Coleus Lane. Deputies found a child with severe bruises and marks consistent with being struck by an extension cord. He was charged with intentional child abuse resulting in serious physical injury, three counts of resisting a public officer, and disorderly conduct.

In September, investigators determined Creekmore had been around the household despite being ordered to stay away. He was charged with misdemeanor child abuse and violating a court order. A woman connected to the residence was charged at the same time with aiding and abetting and accessory after the fact. She is accused of coercing a child to lie during a forensic interview to protect Creekmore. The sheriff’s office has not identified the woman who fired on Sunday or said whether she is connected to that case.

Creekmore’s case was still moving through Halifax County District Court when he was killed. Late in the week before the shooting, Assistant District Attorney Sonravea Privette moved to strike a failure to appear and a bond forfeiture against him and to recall an order for his arrest. According to the motion, another North Carolina district attorney’s office had alerted the state to extenuating circumstances and safety concerns that kept Creekmore from appearing in court as scheduled.

More from USA Carry:

• Ohio Mother Shoots and Kills Ex-Boyfriend Who Kicked In Her Door at 2 A.M. With Her Three Children Inside the House
• Arizona Homeowner With Two Small Children Inside Shoots and Kills 67-Year-Old Man Trying to Enter Through a Window
• Juvenile Grabs Gun and Kills Man Armed With Knife and Gun Who Was Assaulting Woman Inside Fayette County Home, DA Says Evidence So Far Backs Defense-of-Another Claim
• South Carolina Homeowner Shoots and Kills 19-Year-Old Stranger Found Inside Chesnee Home at 2 A.M.
• Georgia Apartment Resident Shoots 48-Year-Old Man Who Forced His Way Inside Armed With a Knife at 11:20 P.M.

On Monday, the day after the shooting, Judge W. Rob Lewis II found good cause and granted the motion. He recalled the arrest order, struck the failure to appear and bond forfeiture, and rescheduled the trial for Jan. 28. The charges against Creekmore were allegations, and he was never convicted.

The sheriff’s office asks anyone with additional information to contact Detective Sergeant M. Hasty at 252-554-9733.

Read the original story: Woman Inside Roanoke Rapids Home Shoots, Kills Man Facing Child Abuse Charges After He Forced His Way In at 4 A.M.

Key Takeaways

• A Del Rio homeowner shot an unknown man he found inside his home on the 200 block of Ricks Drive late Saturday night.
• The homeowner told police he was asleep when a noise from his living room woke him and he got up to investigate.
• The wounded suspect fled before officers arrived but was later located and transported to San Antonio for medical treatment.
• Police are investigating the incident as a residential burglary and say criminal charges against the suspect are pending.
• The Del Rio Police Department has not announced any charging decision regarding the homeowner.

Estimated reading time: 2 minutes

DEL RIO, TX — A Del Rio homeowner shot an unknown man inside his house late Saturday night after an unusual noise from his living room woke him up, according to the Del Rio Police Department.

Officers responded at approximately 10:39 p.m. Saturday, Oct. 24, to the 200 block of Ricks Drive after a report of a residential burglary involving shots fired. When they arrived, they made contact with the homeowner. He told them he had fired his gun after discovering an unknown male inside his residence.

According to the homeowner, he was asleep when the noise came from his living room. He got up to investigate. He encountered a man he did not know inside his home. He fired, striking him.

The man was wounded but fled the residence before officers arrived. Police searched the surrounding area and later located him. Because of the nature of his injuries, he was transported to San Antonio for further medical treatment. Police have not released his name or his condition.

The department’s account is brief, but the core facts are not complicated. The man was a stranger, and he was inside someone else’s home late at night. Police are handling it as a residential burglary, and they refer to him as the suspect.

More from USA Carry:

• Intruder Enters Through Unlocked Door Gets Shot By Homeowner
• 22-Year-Old Florida Man Fires a Single 9mm Round During a Brawl with Acquaintance in Living Room
• Sheriff Points to Idaho’s Castle Doctrine After Kootenai Man, 21, Stops Choking Attack With a Single Shot
• Virginia Homeowner Confronts Then Shoots Man Trying To Break In Through Window
• Charlotte Homeowner Opens Fire On Intruder Who Forced Way Inside Before Dawn

Getting up to check a noise in your own house is one of the most common things a homeowner does, and it is one of the hardest situations to handle well. You are coming out of sleep, you do not know what is waiting for you, and you have no idea how many people are inside. When the layout allows it, holding a position you can defend and calling 911 keeps the encounter on your terms instead of the intruder’s. That is not always possible, and the mindset has to be settled before the noise ever comes, not while you are standing in a dark hallway trying to figure it out.

The Criminal Investigations Division is still investigating. Police say criminal charges against the suspect are pending. He has not been named or charged, and any charges filed will be allegations, not convictions. The department has not announced any charging decision regarding the homeowner.

Read the original story: Del Rio Homeowner Awakened by Noise in His Living Room Shoots Unknown Man Inside His House Late Saturday Night

Key Takeaways

• Former Florida prosecutor Lisa Chittaro is calling for a 'Second Amendment immunity defense' modeled on Florida's Stand Your Ground statute.
• Chittaro's proposal would give gun owners arrested in gun-free zones a fast route to appellate courts without waiting years.
• Under her model, prosecutors would bear the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that immunity does not apply.
• Chittaro says cases involving no knowledge or intent, such as a parent forgetting a firearm near a school, should be covered.
• The proposal targets prosecutions in gun-free zones like schools, sporting events, and airports where criminal intent was absent.

Estimated reading time: 4 minutes

TALLAHASSEE, FL — A former Florida prosecutor wants gun owners arrested in gun-free zones to get the same fast exit from prosecution that Florida’s Stand Your Ground statute gives people who use deadly force in self-defense. In an article published by the Second Amendment Foundation, Lisa Chittaro calls for a “Second Amendment immunity defense” built on the Stand Your Ground model, only broader.

“We need a Second Amendment immunity defense for anything involving the lawful possession of a firearm,” Chittaro said, according to SAF. “It should mirror Stand Your Ground statutes, but it needs to be broader. It should allow defense attorneys to ask the court to find immunity under the protections of the Second Amendment quickly and efficiently and if they don’t, it should provide a quick route to the appellate level without having to go through the entire court process, which can take years.”

To understand the proposal, start with what Stand Your Ground already does. In a 2013 op-ed posted by Gun Owners of America, John Lott described these laws as allowing people who face serious bodily harm or death to defend themselves without first having to retreat as far as possible.

Florida’s version adds a procedural shield on top of that. According to SAF, when a defendant in a defensive shooting files a Stand Your Ground motion, the case goes on hold and prosecution stops. The trial court then holds a hearing, which SAF calls “a sort of mini trial,” to decide whether the defendant’s use of force qualifies for immunity. The burden shifts to prosecutors, who must prove by “clear and convincing evidence” that the defendant is not entitled to it. That standard is a high bar for the state, well above “more likely than not,” though short of the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard used at trial.

After the hearing, the judge either dismisses the charges or lets the case move forward. If the charges stand, SAF says the defendant can file a Writ of Prohibition, a request asking a higher court to step in before trial. That puts the case in front of appellate judges quickly. SAF says this skips the 18 months to two years it usually takes to reach the appellate level, along with the jury trial, sentencing, and other delays in between.

SAF says Stand Your Ground was created to protect people from “unjust, malicious or politically motivated prosecutions” after they acted in self-defense. Lott made a related point in his op-ed. He wrote that these laws make it easier for would-be victims to protect themselves when police cannot arrive fast enough.

Chittaro wants that same structure applied to a different kind of case. According to SAF, most of the prosecutions she has in mind come from arrests in gun-free zones such as schools, sporting events, and airports. SAF says many of those cases lack knowledge on the part of the gun owner, “much less actual intent to commit a crime.”

“If a parent picks up their child from school and they forgot their firearm and someone sees it and complains, they should be covered by Second Amendment immunity,” Chittaro said. “The same goes for other gun-free-zone prosecutions where there was no knowledge or intent.”

SAF argues that police and prosecutors handling prohibited-place arrests often forget that Americans have a constitutional right to keep and bear arms. It says a trial judge or appellate court should review these cases to determine whether they involved that protected right.

More from USA Carry:

• EXONERATED: Concealed Carry Holder Who Fatally Shot Aggressor Inside Florida Walgreens Cleared of Charges Under Stand Your Ground Law
• Florida Stand Your Ground Law Clears Shooter
• Florida Man Uses Backup Gun to Shoot Robber After Primary Gun is Stolen
• Florida Judge Rejects Stand Your Ground Defense in Theatre Shooting
• New York Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground Laws Facts and Myths

Chittaro is describing a proposal, not an existing law. Under her model, the state would carry the burden early, and the gun owner would get a fast route to appellate judges instead of waiting years for one.

The school pickup example is the one most carriers will recognize. Prohibited places change from state to state, and keeping track of them through my concealed carry permit information by state is part of a responsible carry mindset. Training your routine matters just as much: know what you are carrying, and know where you are about to walk before you get there. Even disciplined people still forget things. Chittaro’s question is whether a mistake made with no knowledge and no intent should cost a gun owner years in the court system before a higher court ever looks at the Second Amendment question.

Read the original story: Former Florida Prosecutor Wants Stand Your Ground Style Immunity for Gun Owners Arrested in Gun-Free Zones Without Intent

Key Takeaways

• A woman shot and killed one of two masked men who broke into her apartment at Park at Inverness Apartments in Jackson at 2:30 a.m. on Feb. 8.
• The resident fired after fearing for her life when the two ski-masked intruders broke in; one suspect died inside and the other fled.
• The dead suspect was identified as 15-year-old Kaden Young; the resident was interviewed by police and released.
• Police arrested the second suspect, 18-year-old Quintavion Myles, the same day on murder and burglary charges.
• Myles faces the murder charge under a law that holds felony participants responsible for deaths that occur during the crime, regardless of who fired.

Estimated reading time: 2 minutes

JACKSON, MS — A woman shot and killed one of two masked men who broke into her apartment at the Park at Inverness Apartments around 2:30 a.m. on Sunday, Feb. 8. The second man ran.

When detectives arrived at the complex on the 5800 block of Ridgewood Road, they found a man dead inside the apartment, as reported by WLBT.

According to the investigation WLBT described, two men wearing ski masks broke into the apartment. The resident, fearing for her life, fired. One round hit the suspect who had come inside. He died there. His partner fled.

The coroner took custody of the body. That afternoon, the dead suspect was identified as 15-year-old Kaden Young. The resident was taken to police headquarters, interviewed, and released.

Two masked men at 2:30 in the morning leaves no time to come up with a plan. Whatever she had in place was in place before anyone set foot in that apartment. The possibility of more than one intruder belongs in your mindset when you plan, not something you work out in the dark.

Police found the second suspect, 18-year-old Quintavion Myles, and arrested him the same day. He was booked into the city holding facility on murder and burglary charges. In court on Monday, Feb. 9, he received a $150,000 bond on the burglary charge and no bond on the murder charge.

More from USA Carry:

• Houston Homeowner Shoots and Kills Masked, Gloved Intruder Found Inside His Home Before Dawn
• Jackson Homeowner Shoots and Kills Suspect Who Kicked in Door in Pre-Dawn Home Invasion
• Florida Man Shoots Intruder After Walking In on Home Invasion at Jacksonville Apartment
• Home Invasion Turns Fatal When Resident Fires on Intruders in Jackson, MS
• Man Fatally Shot After Forcibly Entering Apartment Despite Restraining Order

Myles is the one charged in Young’s death, even though the shot that killed Young came from the resident. Many states allow a murder charge against anyone who takes part in a felony when someone dies during it, regardless of who fired.

A 15-year-old is dead, and an 18-year-old faces a murder charge. The charges against Myles are allegations, and he is presumed innocent unless convicted. No charging decision regarding the resident has been reported.

Read the original story: Mississippi Woman Shoots and Kills One of Two Masked Men Who Broke Into Her Jackson Apartment at 2:30 A.M.

Key Takeaways

• A woman's ex-boyfriend climbed onto her apartment balcony near 66th Place and Victor Avenue in Tulsa on Sept. 25 and tried to enter through a window.
• The woman's current boyfriend had already warned the suspect not to come inside before the suspect scaled the balcony.
• The current boyfriend shot the suspect once in the leg as he went for a window with the woman and her child inside.
• Officers arrived to find the suspect bleeding on the balcony, applied a tourniquet, and paramedics transported him to the hospital.
• Once released from the hospital, the suspect faces booking into Tulsa County Jail on a charge of first degree burglary.

Estimated reading time: 2 minutes

TULSA, OK — A woman’s ex-boyfriend who climbed onto her apartment balcony and tried to come in through a window on the morning of Friday, Sept. 25, was shot once in the leg by her current boyfriend, according to the Tulsa Police Department. The woman and her child were inside at the time.

Officers were called to a domestic disturbance at an apartment near 66th Place and Victor Avenue around 8:51 a.m., according to a post on the department’s X account. The woman told police her ex-boyfriend was at her door threatening to break in if she did not open up. Her current boyfriend warned him not to come in.

The suspect went around instead. He scaled the balcony. He went for a window. The boyfriend fired once, hitting him in the leg.

Officers arrived to find the suspect bleeding on the balcony. They applied a tourniquet, and paramedics took him to the hospital. Once he is released, police say he will be booked into the Tulsa County Jail on a charge of first degree burglary. That is an arrest, not a conviction, and the post does not mention any charges against the boyfriend.

The sequence here matters. He was told no at the door. He was warned by the man inside. He answered both by climbing to a different point of entry and going for a window into an apartment with a child in it. Every step narrowed the options for the people inside, and the last one took the ambiguity out of it.

Domestic situations carry a risk that a stranger burglary usually does not. The person forcing entry knows exactly who is on the other side and wants them specifically. A locked door does not turn him around, because the door was never what he was after. There is nowhere to retreat to in an apartment, and no reason to assume he stops once he is through the window.

More from USA Carry:

• Ohio Mother Shoots and Kills Ex-Boyfriend Who Kicked In Her Door at 2 A.M. With Her Three Children Inside the House
• Arizona Homeowner With Two Small Children Inside Shoots and Kills 67-Year-Old Man Trying to Enter Through a Window
• Woman Fatally Shoots Child’s Father During Alleged Assault in Tulsa Apartment
• Tulsa Towing Business Owner Returned Fire Before He Collapsed After a Repossession Argument Turned Into a Gunfight in His Office
• 30-Year-Old Dearborn CPL Holder Who Pulled a Handgun From Her Purse and Shot the Man Attacking Her Boyfriend in a Shoe Store Will Not Be Charged

The new partner inherits that problem. If you are with someone whose ex has already shown he cannot accept the end of the relationship, that is your threat now too. Know the history. Talk through what you will both do if he shows up. Keep the door locked, keep the phone close, call 911 the moment it starts, and have the means to defend yourself and the people next to you if the door and the window do not hold.

Protective orders and blocked numbers matter, but they are paper and software. Neither one stops a man on a balcony. The person inside has to be ready to.

Read the original story: Tulsa Boyfriend Shoots Woman’s Ex in the Leg After He Scales the Balcony and Goes for a Window With Her Child Inside

Key Takeaways

• Gun Owners of America says its legal team returned to a Virginia court to fight the state's so-called assault weapons ban.
• GOA's lawyers argued for a full statewide injunction that would block Virginia from enforcing the ban anywhere in the state.
• The court's ruling and hearing record were not available, so this account rests entirely on GOA's description of what happened.
• GOA's update does not name the court, the judge, or the case, and it reports no ruling so far.
• A hearing is not a ruling, and last week's arguments do not change anything on the ground for Virginia gun owners.

Estimated reading time: 2 minutes

RICHMOND, VA — Gun Owners of America says its legal team was back in court in Virginia last week, asking a judge for a full statewide injunction against the state’s so-called “assault weapons” ban.

The details come from GOA’s own weekly update, published Saturday, Oct. 24, as reported by Gun Owners of America. GOA wrote that it “headed back to court in Virginia to fight the state’s so-called ‘assault weapons’ ban,” and that its lawyers argued for a full statewide injunction. “Our legal team made their case to the Judge, and we’re excited to see what happens next,” the group said.

GOA is a party to this case. The court’s ruling and the hearing record were not available, so this account rests entirely on GOA’s description of what happened. GOA’s update does not name the court, the judge, or the case, and it reports no ruling so far.

An injunction is a court order telling the government to stop enforcing a law. A full statewide injunction, which is what GOA says it asked for, would block Virginia from enforcing the ban anywhere in the state.

GOA’s own headline frames this as the ban going to court “again,” and the group describes the hearing as a return trip. A hearing is not a ruling. Until the judge acts on GOA’s request, last week’s arguments do not change anything on the ground for Virginia gun owners.

More from USA Carry:

• Virginia Judge Blocks Spanberger’s Assault Firearm Ban Statewide Days Before It Takes Effect
• Gun Owners of America Moves to Hold Virginia State Police Chief in Contempt After Agency Restarts Banned Background Checks
• 13 Judges to 3: Fifth Circuit Tosses Everytown-Backed Challenge to Texas Gun Signs
• Lancaster County Judge Joins Four Other Courts and Pauses GOA’s Challenge to Virginia’s “Assault Firearm” Ban
• Police Say Port St. Lucie Delivery Driver Backed Away From Man With Knife Before Firing; Aggressor Faces Felony Charges

That is where mindset matters. If you own or carry in Virginia, you need to know what the law says today, not what you hope it says after a ruling. My Virginia concealed carry laws and permit information page covers the carry side of that picture.

I will continue tracking GOA’s challenge to Virginia’s “assault weapons” ban and will report the judge’s decision when it comes.

Read the original story: GOA Goes Back Before a Virginia Judge Seeking a Full Statewide Injunction Against the “Assault Weapons” Ban

Key Takeaways

• A man believed to be an intruder was shot and killed at a home on Northwest 5th Avenue in Miami just after 5 a.m. Monday.
• Miami Fire-Rescue crews found the man, believed to be in his 40s, with a gunshot wound and pronounced him dead at the scene.
• Miami Police spokeswoman Officer Kenia Fallat said one person was taken to the station and questioned in connection with the shooting.
• Detectives were seeking a search warrant to enter the home while canvassing neighboring properties for video evidence.
• Police have not identified the dead man or the person being questioned, and no charging decision has been announced.

Estimated reading time: 3 minutes

MIAMI, FL — A man police believe may have been an intruder was shot and killed at a home east of Interstate 95 early Monday morning, and one person was taken to the station for questioning while detectives work to get a search warrant for the house, according to the Miami Police Department.

Officers responded to reports of a shooting in the 4600 block of Northwest 5th Avenue just after 5 a.m. on Monday, Sept. 21, as reported by CBS Miami. Miami Fire-Rescue crews found a man, believed to be in his 40s, with a gunshot wound. He was pronounced dead at the scene.

“What we know thus far, and this is very preliminary, is that a person believed to be an intruder may have been the person who was shot,” Miami Police spokeswoman Officer Kenia Fallat said. “We also have one person at the station that we are speaking to.”

Video from the scene showed two people taken into custody for questioning. Police later said in an updated release that one person was being questioned in connection with the shooting. Fallat said it is not yet clear whether the resident is a homeowner or a tenant, and police were seeking a search warrant to enter the home.

That is the part of this story I want to focus on, because the details are thin and that one fact is not. One man is dead. Police do not know the sequence. The person they most want to hear from is sitting in a room at the station, and the home itself is sealed until a judge signs a warrant.

“Detectives are on the scene combing through the evidence that they obtained and possibly trying to gather video from neighboring homes,” Fallat said. “There is a lot that we don’t know. We are speaking to a person at the station, and we are hoping that he is going to tell us what happened.”

If you ever fire a gun inside your own home, expect exactly this. Expect to be handcuffed. Expect your firearm taken into evidence. Expect to be separated from your family and driven to a station while detectives canvass your street for doorbell video. Expect a warrant for your house, and expect hours before anyone tells you anything. None of it means police think you did something wrong. It means a man is dead and they have to build the record from the ground up, and the only account that matters at that point is the one the evidence supports.

More from USA Carry:

• Houston Resident Shoots Suspected Intruder During Sunday Morning Break-In, Police Say
• Girlfriend Shoots, Kills Boyfriend After “No Contact Order” Doesn’t Stop Him From Attacking Her
• Home Invasion Turns Deadly in Virginia: Husband Shoots Intruder After Wife Fatally Stabbed
• One Dead, Three Flee After Suspected Break-In at Miami-Dade Home
• Woman Shoots Intruder in Self-Defense the Day After Buying a Revolver

Being detained is not the same as being arrested, and being arrested is not the same as being charged. The mindset piece is understanding that before it happens, so the handcuffs do not feel like a verdict. Police have not said who fired, have not identified the dead man or the person being questioned, and no charging decision has been announced.

Police are asking anyone with information to contact Miami Police. “That information, no matter how little it is, may be instrumental to help detectives with the investigation,” Fallat said.

Read the original story: Suspected Intruder Shot Dead at Miami Home Just After 5 A.M., and Police Have One Person at the Station While They Seek a Warrant for the House

Key Takeaways

• A man was shot while breaking into a home on the 6000 block of Bend of River Road near Godwin, NC on the night of Sept. 19.
• Cumberland County Sheriff's Office deputies responded at 10:21 p.m. after a report of a shooting and found the man with a gunshot wound.
• The suspect's injuries were severe enough that he was airlifted by medical helicopter to WakeMed in Raleigh for treatment.
• Lt. Mickey Locklear said charges are pending but did not specify who might be charged or what charges are being considered.
• The Cumberland County Sheriff's Office described the shooting as an isolated incident and said there is no threat to the public.

Estimated reading time: 1 minute

GODWIN, NC — A man was shot while breaking into a home in the Godwin area on the night of Sept. 19, and deputies say charges are pending without yet saying against whom, according to the Cumberland County Sheriff’s Office.

Deputies responded to the 6000 block of Bend of River Road near Godwin at 10:21 p.m. after a report of a shooting, CCSO Lt. Mickey Locklear said, as reported by The Daily Record. Officers arrived and found a man with a gunshot wound.

During the investigation, detectives determined the man was breaking into a home when he was shot, Locklear said.

Godwin-Falcon Fire Rescue and Cumberland County EMS also responded. The man’s injuries were severe enough that emergency personnel requested a medical helicopter, and firefighters set up a landing zone at Falcon Children’s Home. He was transported by ambulance from the scene to the landing zone, then flown to WakeMed in Raleigh for treatment.

More from USA Carry:

• Alabama Robbery Victim Shoots Armed Suspect Who Demanded a Wallet at Gunpoint at a Boat Ramp
• Break-In Attempt on a Quiet Portsmouth Street Ends With the Intruder Dead at the Scene
• Homeowner Catches Break-In Suspect in the Act and Holds Him at Gunpoint Until County Deputies Arrive
• Double Murder Suspect Shot Dead After Trying to Break Into Mississippi Home
• Wounded Suspect Takes Shotgun from Homeowner During Struggle After Being Shot

Locklear said charges are pending but did not specify who might be charged or what charges investigators are considering. That leaves the most important question open for now. The sheriff’s office has described conduct, a man breaking into a home and getting shot in the process, but it has not announced a charging decision or characterized the shooting as justified.

The Sheriff’s Office called the shooting an isolated incident and said there is no threat to the public. No additional details were being released as of the following day.

Read the original story: Break-In Suspect Shot, Airlifted From Cumberland County Scene as Investigators Decide on Charges

Key Takeaways

• In Croydon, Pennsylvania, masked car thieves shot at a homeowner who came outside with a firearm around 4:15 a.m. on October 23.
• The thieves fled without taking the homeowner's car, then returned minutes later and fired 10 to 13 rounds into his home and car.
• Bullets struck at least two houses on Colonial Drive, and a neighbor's brand-new pickup truck was stolen during the incident.
• Bristol Township Police believe the suspects may be part of a larger theft ring operating across Bucks County, including Bristol Township and Bensalem.
• Police are asking residents not to confront the armed thieves and to call 911 immediately if they spot them.

Estimated reading time: 4 minutes

CROYDON, PA — A Bucks County homeowner who spotted masked car thieves on his Ring camera early Friday morning, Oct. 23, grabbed his own firearm and went outside to stop them from taking his vehicle. At least one of the thieves was armed. They shot at him, fled, and came back minutes later to fire into his house, according to Bristol Township Police.

The homeowner never fired, as reported by KYW Newsradio. “His statement to police was that he saw on the Ring camera that one of them appeared to be armed, so he retrieved his firearm as well,” Bristol Township Police Lt. Mark Titus told the station. The thieves got away without the man’s car, then returned and started shooting at his home on Colonial Drive. Bullets struck at least two houses. No one was hurt.

Surveillance video obtained by Fox 29 captured the gunfire with full sound. Neighbor Kyle Brooks told the station it came around 4:15 a.m. and woke him, his wife, and their 18-month-old. He counted 15 or 16 shots, loud enough that it sounded like they were in his bedroom. When he looked out the window, his brand-new pickup was gone. So was another vehicle from the neighborhood. The SUV next door had been shot up, and two houses had five or six bullet holes in the siding, he said.

Brooks said it was his neighbor who had gone outside to confront the masked, armed thieves. “They scattered off and then they shot around the block and then they stopped at his house and fired off what, 10 to 13 rounds into his car and his home,” he told Fox 29.

The moment this homeowner opened his door and stepped out, he traded walls, a locked door, and a live camera feed for a dark driveway facing several people, at least one of them carrying a gun. He showed restraint once he was out there. He did not send rounds down a residential street. But the better decision was available before he touched the doorknob: stay inside, call 911, and let the camera keep recording.

A truck is replaceable. Brooks said it himself, even with his tools, equipment, and business paperwork inside the one he lost. “Who cares about a vehicle? You can have it. But you’re gonna let shots off in a residential neighborhood, no regard for human life? It’s sad; it’s a shame,” he told NBC10 in comments relayed by KYW. The firearm you keep at home is for an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm. Walk out to a car-prowling crew and you are the one creating the contact, outnumbered, on their timetable, with your neighbors’ bedrooms as the backstop. And as this crew proved, the fight does not necessarily end when they drive off. They came back.

I understand the pull to go out there. Nobody works to pay for a truck just to watch a stranger drive off with it on a camera feed, and the instinct to protect what you own is a decent one. The mindset I want every armed homeowner to carry into a night like this is to separate that instinct from the trigger. The gun does not change the math on the truck. It matters when someone is coming for you or your family, and that fight goes a lot better from behind a locked door than in a driveway you walked into.

More from USA Carry:

• Homeowner Holds Intruder at Gunpoint for 47 Minutes Waiting for Police
• Homeowner with a Shotgun Stops Knife Wielding Serial Burglar
• He Rammed Their Car Twice Outside a Police Station. Minutes Later, He Was Shot in the Parking Lot.
• Machetes No Match for Shotgun as Georgia Homeowner Stops Two Robbery Suspects With Single Blast
• Sheriff Points to Idaho’s Castle Doctrine After Kootenai Man, 21, Stops Choking Attack With a Single Shot

Police believe the thieves may be part of a larger ring operating across the region. Police told Fox 29 the pattern is several individuals arriving in one vehicle, checking car doors, taking what opens, and leaving, passing through Bristol Township and Bensalem rather than staying. “This one was different because of the firearm involved,” police said. “The minute that firearms and putting people at risk like that, it takes it up to the next level.” Bristol Township Police are asking residents not to confront these thieves, who have shown they are armed, and to call 911 immediately if they see or hear them, on a Ring camera or otherwise, anywhere in Bucks County. Neither report mentions an arrest.

Brooks said he needs the truck for his roofing and siding business. One neighbor told Fox 29 the shooting makes you wonder how the thieves got their guns and what could have happened. “Someone could have gotten killed.” Another said the biggest issue on the block is that residents want the case taken more seriously. “This is gunshots. This is somebody shooting into homes.”

Read the original story: Pennsylvania Homeowner Grabs His Gun and Steps Outside to Stop Armed Car Thieves at 4 A.M. Minutes Later They Return and Fire Into His Home

Key Takeaways

• In southeast Albuquerque on Sept. 17, two men attacked a third man with a knife and a pole.
• A fourth man intervened and shot one of the attackers, who died from the gunshot wound.
• The stabbing victim fled on a motorcycle, crashed nearby, and was taken to the hospital in stable condition.
• Albuquerque police are investigating the shooting as a possible justifiable homicide, and no charges have been filed.

Estimated reading time: 2 minutes

ALBUQUERQUE, NM — A man who stepped in to help someone being attacked with a knife and a pole on the morning of Sept. 17 shot and killed one of the attackers, and Albuquerque police are now investigating the shooting as a possible justifiable homicide.

The attack happened in the area of Decatur Avenue and Tennessee Street in southeast Albuquerque, as reported by KOB 4. A preliminary investigation found two men were attacking a third man with a knife and a pole. A fourth man stepped in to help the victim. He shot one of the alleged attackers. That man died.

The stabbing victim drove away on a motorcycle and crashed nearby. First responders took him to the hospital in stable condition to treat his stab wounds. Police also investigated a crash with injuries in the area of Utah Street and Central Avenue that they believed was connected.

Police have not identified anyone involved. Detectives are still investigating, and no charges have been filed.

Stepping into someone else’s fight is the hardest call an armed citizen can make. You arrive mid-fight with no backstory, you do not know who started it, and you own every round you fire. That is a mindset problem before it is ever a gear problem, and it is why I tell people to think through third-party intervention long before they are standing on a street corner watching it happen.

What police describe here cuts most of that doubt down. Two men on one. A knife and a pole. A victim who was already being stabbed. The law lets you defend another person to the same extent that person could defend himself, and a man being carved up by two attackers armed with a blade and a club is facing an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm by any reasonable reading. The fourth man did not have to guess at that. He could see it.

More from USA Carry:

• Battle Creek Police Disarm 5-Year-Old Who Answered Door With Knife, Then Loaded Handgun
• Police Say Port St. Lucie Delivery Driver Backed Away From Man With Knife Before Firing; Aggressor Faces Felony Charges
• Chesapeake Delivery Driver Will Not Be Charged After Man Blocked His Vehicle In, Attacked Him, Then Came Back With a Knife
• Aurora Daughter Grabs a Swiffer, Then a Baseball Bat, to Run Off the Man Beating Her 63-Year-Old Father in His Own Garage
• Courthouse Security Officer Shoots, Kills Man Who Pulled Knife after His Pistol Failed at Screening Checkpoint

That said, what police have said is that they are investigating this as a possible justifiable homicide. That is their preliminary characterization, not a ruling. Prosecutors make the final call, and that call has not been made. Until it is, the man who intervened is someone police are looking at, not someone who has been cleared.

One man is dead, one is in the hospital with stab wounds, and the man who pulled the trigger is waiting on detectives to finish their work.

Read the original story: Two Men With a Knife and a Pole Were Beating a Third. Then a Fourth Man Stepped In and Opened Fire.

Key Takeaways

• A man living in a camper in DeLand shot and killed a trespasser on the night of September 1, according to the Volusia Sheriff's Office.
• The shooter told investigators he found a 38-year-old man asleep in the laundry room who was no longer welcome at the property.
• The shooter said he called 911, gave repeated warnings to back away, and fired 12 times after the man lunged at him.
• Deputies found the shooter standing on the side of the road with his hands raised when they arrived around 10:47 p.m.
• No charges have been announced and the investigation was still ongoing as of September 2.

Estimated reading time: 3 minutes

DELAND, FL — A man living in a camper on a DeLand property shot and killed a trespasser on the night of Sept. 1 after, by his own account, the man ignored repeated warnings and came at him, according to the Volusia Sheriff’s Office.

Volusia County deputies and DeLand police officers responded around 10:47 p.m. to North Boulevard Court after a caller reported he had shot a trespasser, as reported by WESH. Deputies found the caller standing on the side of the road with his hands raised.

The other man was lying in the driveway with multiple gunshot wounds. He was pronounced dead at the scene.

The initial investigation indicates the shooter lives in a camper at the property, deputies said. The man who was killed had stayed there before but was no longer allowed to remain. The night of Sept. 1, he was found asleep in the laundry room of the house, which led to an argument and the initial trespassing call.

The shooter told investigators the man advanced toward him despite warnings to back away or he would be shot. He then fired several rounds, deputies said.

The shooter also spoke with WESH off camera. He said he came home and found a 38-year-old man sleeping in his laundry room, a man who used to stay there off and on but was no longer welcome because he had been getting into trouble and had just been released from jail. He said he called 911 to report the trespassing and told the man to leave. The man would not. He said he gave him dozens of warnings. The man kept coming and lunged at him. He said he feared for his life and fired 12 times.

Two details in his account will matter to detectives and, eventually, to the State Attorney. He says he called 911 before anything went physical, and he stayed on scene afterward and met deputies in the road with his hands up. Both are the right moves, and both are documented.

The harder question is the threat itself. A man refusing to leave is not a threat to anyone’s life. A man closing the distance after repeated warnings may be, depending on his size, what he is holding, and what he does when he gets there. Nothing in the sheriff’s account so far says the man was armed, and twelve rounds is a number investigators will measure against the threat the shooter describes. I am not drawing a conclusion either way. That is exactly the work detectives spent several hours on that night and were still doing the next morning, Sept. 2.

More from USA Carry:

• Indiana Homeowner Shoots Man He Found Standing in His Living Room in Self-Defense
• He Rammed Their Car Twice Outside a Police Station. Minutes Later, He Was Shot in the Parking Lot.
• I Solved Chris Ramsay’s WESN Knife Puzzle Box… The Wrong Way (Three Times)
• Woman Shoots Intruder Through Door After Hiding In Bedroom with Kids
• Homeowner Fires 9 Shots at Intruder That Broke In Through Young Son’s Room

Jamie Padilla was working nearby when it happened. “All of a sudden, I just heard these loud shots,” he told WESH. “A minute or two later, boom, all these cops just started pulling up.”

Deputies have not publicly named the man who was killed or the man who shot him. The investigation remains ongoing, and no charging decision has been announced.

Read the original story: He Found a Man Asleep in His Laundry Room and Called 911. Minutes Later, He Fired 12 Times.

Key Takeaways

• A 23-year-old Chicago man with a valid Illinois concealed carry license shot one of two people who approached him on foot Sunday morning.
• The incident happened at 10:25 a.m. in the 3100 block of West Cermak Road, when a fight broke out between the three.
• The shooter fired toward both people, striking one in the body, and that person was taken to Mt. Sinai Hospital in critical condition.
• Police confirmed the 23-year-old held a valid CCL and FOID card, meaning he was carrying legally at the time.
• No arrests have been announced, and investigators and Cook County prosecutors have not yet issued a charging decision.

Estimated reading time: 2 minutes

CHICAGO, IL — A 23-year-old man with a valid Illinois concealed carry license shot one of two people Sunday morning after they approached him on foot and a fight broke out on West Cermak Road, according to Chicago police.

The account comes from the Chicago Police Department’s weekend shooting summary, as reported by CBS Chicago.

Police said it happened at 10:25 a.m. in the 3100 block of West Cermak Road. The 23-year-old was outside when two people walked up to him on foot. A fight followed.

He drew a firearm. He fired shots toward the two. One of them was hit in the body.

That person was taken to Mt. Sinai Hospital in critical condition. Police reported no other injuries.

Police noted that the 23-year-old is a valid CCL and FOID cardholder. In Illinois, you need a FOID card to legally own a firearm and a separate Concealed Carry License to carry a loaded handgun in public. My Illinois concealed carry guide covers both. That detail tells us he was carrying legally. It does not, on its own, answer whether pulling the trigger was justified.

The police summary leaves the most important questions open. It does not say who started the fight, whether either person was armed, or what the fight involved. Neither party has been identified. No arrests, charges, or charging decision have been announced, and whether the shooting holds up will come down to what investigators and Cook County prosecutors conclude.

More from USA Carry:

• 49-Year-Old Chicago Concealed Carry Holder Shoots Burglary Suspect Who Pulled the Screen Off Her Window at 4:50 A.M.
• Licensed Concealed Carry Holder In Chicago Forced To Defend Himself From Inside Vehicle
• Second Self-Defense Shooting at Chicago Mall This Year
• Concealed Carrier Shoots Man Who Opened Fire on Three People
• Carjacker, 18, Shot Dead by Armed Citizen After Robbing Three People During Chicago Crime Spree

Deadly force is justified only against an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm. A fistfight does not automatically clear that bar. Being outnumbered two to one can change the picture, but the facts of the fight are what decide it, and none of those facts are public yet.

Two people approaching on foot is the moment that matters most, before anyone throws a punch. Mindset is noticing that approach early, creating distance, and having a plan to leave before a fight starts. A license puts the gun on your hip legally. It does not decide when you are allowed to use it.

Read the original story: 23-Year-Old Chicago Concealed Carry Holder Shoots One of Two People Who Approached Him on Foot Before Sunday Morning Fight on Cermak Road

Key Takeaways

• Security guard Douglas West shot 22-year-old Jacory McIntosh outside Nashville's Greyhound bus station on Sunday morning.
• Police say McIntosh threw hot coffee in West's face, knocked him down, and struck his head repeatedly with West's own magazine.
• McIntosh had threatened to kill West before West fired three shots, hitting McIntosh in the hip and leg.
• Police say West will not be charged, while McIntosh is expected to face felony aggravated assault charges after leaving the hospital.

Estimated reading time: 2 minutes

NASHVILLE, TN — A 39-year-old security guard shot a man outside Nashville’s Greyhound bus station Sunday morning. Police say the man threw hot coffee in the guard’s face, knocked him to the ground, and struck him in the head with a magazine that had fallen from the guard’s vest.

Metro Nashville police identified the guard as Douglas West and the man as 22-year-old Jacory McIntosh, as reported by FOX 17 News and WSMV 4. According to police, West had asked McIntosh to leave the station off Rep. John Lewis Way South about an hour before the shooting.

Detectives say surveillance video shows what happened next. McIntosh came back. He threw a cup of hot coffee in West’s face. He charged at him multiple times and punched him.

Then McIntosh knocked West to the ground. A firearm magazine had fallen from West’s vest, and police say McIntosh used it to strike him in the head again and again. He also threatened to kill West, according to police.

A bystander, John Hoan, recorded part of the fight on his phone. The video shows two security guards struggling with a man in a white shirt.

“It was shocking. It was disturbing,” Hoan said. “I saw the one security officer on the ground by the car getting punched on by the dude.”

The fight moved around a car, with a second security guard now involved. McIntosh broke away. West fired three shots.

McIntosh was hit in the hip and leg. Hoan said two people from the bus station ran outside to call 911 and apply a tourniquet. Police said McIntosh is recovering at a hospital. West suffered burns and bruising to his face.

West was armed through the whole fight, and the man on top of him was hitting him with a piece of West’s own gear.

More from USA Carry:

• Courthouse Security Officer Shoots, Kills Man Who Pulled Knife after His Pistol Failed at Screening Checkpoint
• Florida Security Guard Disarms Armed Robber, Then Shot in Back of Head During Miami Gunfight
• Michigan Family Dollar Store Security Guard Killed Over Dispute About Wearing A Face Mask
• Police Say Port St. Lucie Delivery Driver Backed Away From Man With Knife Before Firing; Aggressor Faces Felony Charges
• New York Homeowner Watches Two Burglary Suspects on His Live Security Feed, Shoots Out Their Car’s Tires and Holds Them at Gunpoint Until Deputies Arrive

In video aired by WSMV 4, West draws his gun and fires twice while McIntosh is out of frame. Police say surveillance footage shows McIntosh making a slight movement toward West just before he fired. The video then shows West following McIntosh around a white car and firing once more. The coffee, the repeated head strikes, and the threat to kill all came before those shots.

Police said McIntosh is expected to be arrested and charged with felony aggravated assault once he is discharged from the hospital. No charge has been filed yet, and any charge is an allegation until proven in court. Metro police say West will not be charged, according to WSMV 4.

Read the original story: Nashville Greyhound Security Guard Shoots Man Police Say Threw Hot Coffee in His Face, Then Beat Him With the Guard’s Own Magazine

Key Takeaways

• A 39-year-old Kerrville man went to a home on West McFarland Drive Thursday morning to confront a resident over an alleged debt.
• The 39-year-old pulled a knife during the confrontation at the front door, and the 47-year-old resident shot him multiple times.
• The wounded man was flown to a San Antonio trauma center, underwent surgery, and remained in critical condition.
• The resident cooperated with investigators, and detectives preliminarily believe he acted in self-defense.
• The case will be sent to the 216th District Attorney's Office for final review, and no charges have been announced.

Estimated reading time: 2 minutes

KERRVILLE, TX — A 47-year-old Kerrville man shot another man who showed up at his door Thursday morning over an alleged debt and pulled a knife on him, according to the Kerrville Police Department. The 39-year-old was shot multiple times and remained in critical condition after surgery.

Officers were sent to a report of a shooting at a residence in the 100 block of West McFarland Drive at about 8:03 a.m. on Thursday, Sept. 10, 2026, as reported by News 4 San Antonio. They found a 39-year-old Kerrville man in front of the house with multiple gunshot wounds. Officers started first aid. He was taken by ambulance to Peterson Regional Medical Center, then flown to a San Antonio trauma center. He underwent surgery and was listed in critical condition. Police released no further update on him.

Investigators say the 39-year-old went to the house to confront the man who lives there about an alleged debt. The resident, 47, met him at the door. Police say the 39-year-old brandished a knife during the confrontation. The resident shot him.

A knife at a doorway is a contact-distance weapon. There is no space to back up, no time to talk it down, and the man holding it is already close enough to use it. The resident did not go looking for this fight. It came to his threshold, and he answered it where he stood.

The resident is cooperating and has already been interviewed by detectives, police say. Based on preliminary information, detectives believe he acted in self-defense. That is the department’s characterization, not a ruling. The case goes to the 216th District Attorney’s Office for review once the investigation is finished, and the district attorney makes the final call. No charges have been announced against either man, and the investigation is ongoing.

More from USA Carry:

• Boca Raton Homeowner Arrested After Pulling Gun On Teen Amid ‘Ding Dong Ditch Prank’
• Man Shot And Killed After Allegedly Pulling Knife On Armed Resident
• Denied Over the State on His Driver’s License: NRA Sues Denver, Says Visitors Have No Legal Way to Carry a Gun There
• Permit Rule, Residency Rule, Local Open Carry Bans: GOA Lawsuit Says Oregon Stacked Them Into a Total Nonresident Carry Ban
• Federal Judge Lets Out-of-State Gun Owners’ Challenge to Massachusetts Carry Permit Delays Proceed, Tosses Facial Claim

The resident’s cooperation matters here. Sitting for an interview and giving detectives a clear account early is what lets them reach a preliminary self-defense finding this quickly instead of leaving the question open for weeks.

Neither man has been publicly identified. Anyone with information is asked to contact Detective Darin Trahan at 830-258-1311.

Read the original story: Man Confronting Kerrville Resident Over Alleged Debt Pulls Knife, Gets Shot Multiple Times at Front Door

Key Takeaways

• A security officer at the Fred D. Thompson Federal Building and Courthouse in Nashville shot and killed a man at the public screening checkpoint.
• The attacker walked up to the entrance, pulled the trigger on a pistol that failed to fire, then drew a knife and lunged at the screening area.
• The security officer fired several shots, and the man was taken to a hospital where he was pronounced dead.
• The Tennessee Bureau of Investigation is leading the investigation, with the ATF and other federal partners assisting.
• Neither the security officer nor the attacker has been publicly identified, and no motive has been released.

Estimated reading time: 2 minutes

NASHVILLE, TN — A security officer at the Fred D. Thompson Federal Building and Courthouse shot and killed a man who tried to fire a pistol at the public screening checkpoint and then came at the entrance with a knife when the gun would not fire, according to police and federal officials.

The man, described only as being in his 40s, walked up to the public security entrance of the downtown courthouse with a pistol and pulled the trigger, as reported by Conservative Advocacy News. The weapon did not fire. He pulled a knife. He lunged at the screening area. The security officer fired several shots. The man was taken to a hospital, where he was pronounced dead.

“The security individual fired on the armed individual,” Don Aaron, director of the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department media relations office, said at the scene.

Acting U.S. Attorney Robert E. McGuire described the scramble and fear among staff and visitors inside the courthouse as it unfolded.

The sequence is the lesson. The attacker’s pistol failed, and that could have ended it. Instead he went to a knife and closed the distance. The officer read that correctly and did not wait to find out whether the pistol would work on the second try. That is mindset. The threat is the person, not the tool in his hand, and when the tool changes, the threat does not go away.

The Tennessee Bureau of Investigation is leading the investigation, with the ATF and other federal partners assisting. At a briefing, officials said the matter remains under investigation and that they are working to gather as many facts and as much evidence as they can, adding that someone bringing a firearm into a federal courthouse “is not acceptable.”

More from USA Carry:

• Good Guy With a Gun: Sacramento Deputy Shoots and Kills Knife Attacker Who Was Actively Stabbing 26-Year-Old Daughter After She Pulled Him Off Her Mother
• Armed Security Officer Shoots and Kills Suspected Smash-and-Grab Thief at Fort Worth’s La Gran Plaza, Police Say
• Rochester Bar Security Officer Shoots, Kills Ejected Man Who Retrieved a Handgun From His Car and Came Back Waving It at a Crowded 1:30 A.M. Bar
• Homeowner Sees Break-in On Phone App, Confronts Them Through Window, Shoots and Kills One
• Armed Bystander Helps Disarm Knife-Wielding Suspect at Las Vegas Mall

Neither the security officer nor the man he shot has been publicly identified, and officials have not said which agency or contractor employed the officer. No motive has been released, and no determination on the shooting has been announced.

A pistol that would not fire, a knife, and a lunge at the front door of a federal courthouse. The officer behind that checkpoint had seconds, and the accounts so far describe him stopping the man before he got any farther.

Read the original story: Courthouse Security Officer Shoots, Kills Man Who Pulled Knife after His Pistol Failed at Screening Checkpoint

Key Takeaways

• A property owner in Bowman, Georgia shot an intruder he found inside his vacant house on Bowers Street.
• The suspect attempted to assault the owner, and a fight broke out before shots were fired.
• Elbert County deputies located the wounded intruder a short time later and took him to a hospital with non-life-threatening injuries.
• The suspect is in stable condition and is in the custody of the Elbert County Sheriff's Office.
• Neither man has been publicly identified and the incident remains under investigation.

Estimated reading time: 2 minutes

BOWMAN, GA — A property owner shot a man he found inside his vacant house on Bowers Street after the suspect tried to assault him and a fight broke out, according to Elbert County deputies.

Deputies responded to the house on Monday, September 21, on a report of shots fired, as reported by WSPA. Following an investigation, deputies said the owner encountered a male suspect inside the residence. The suspect reportedly attempted to assault the owner. A fight followed. Shots were fired. The intruder was hit and ran from the scene.

He did not get far. Deputies located him a short time later, and he was taken to a hospital with non-life-threatening injuries. He is listed in stable condition and is in the custody of the Elbert County Sheriff’s Office.

What deputies describe is a fight at contact distance, not a standoff across a room. The suspect came at the owner first, and the two were already fighting before any shot was fired. At that range there is no time to size up the other man, no way to know if he is armed, and no guarantee of coming out on top with your hands. The owner was in it whether he wanted to be or not, and the gun is what ended it.

More from USA Carry:

• Florida Homeowner Fatally Shoots Intruder Who Crashed Car, Broke In With Family Inside
• Michigan Homeowner Fatally Shoots Intruder Who Broke Into Attached Apartment and Assaulted Tenant Before Trying to Enter Home
• Wichita Homeowner Shoots Intoxicated Man Who Banged on His Door at 11 P.M. and Then Tried to Walk Inside
• Intruder Critically Wounded by Muzzleloader in Vermont Home Defense Incident
• Houston Homeowner Shoots and Kills Masked, Gloved Intruder Found Inside His Home Before Dawn

If you own a vacant property, walk in with the mindset that someone could already be inside. The owner in this case was in a fight before he had a chance to think about it, and the only reason it ended with him walking away is that he had a way to end it.

Neither man has been publicly identified. No charges have been publicly announced against either man, and the incident remains under investigation.

Read the original story: Georgia Property Owner Shoots Intruder Who Tried to Assault Him Inside Vacant Bowman House

Key Takeaways

• A DeKalb County apartment resident shot 48-year-old Ennis Vantrell after Vantrell forced his way inside the unit armed with a knife.
• The incident happened around 11:20 p.m. on September 30 on the 1300 block of Friendly Heights Boulevard in unincorporated Decatur.
• Officers found Vantrell with a gunshot wound and transported him to a hospital, where he is expected to survive.
• Vantrell faces charges of home invasion, terroristic threats, and three counts of criminal damage.
• Police said the resident who shot Vantrell is not facing charges.

Estimated reading time: 2 minutes

DECATUR, GA — A DeKalb County apartment resident shot a 48-year-old man who forced his way inside armed with a knife on the night of Sept. 30, and police say the resident is not facing charges.

Officers were called to the 1300 block of Friendly Heights Boulevard in unincorporated Decatur around 11:20 p.m., as reported by Atlanta News First. They found a man with a gunshot wound. He was identified as Ennis Vantrell, and he was taken to the hospital, where he is expected to survive.

Police believe Vantrell forced his way into an apartment. He was reportedly armed with a knife. The resident fired. Vantrell went down with a gunshot wound.

Everything about this one comes down to distance, and the resident had none. A knife is a contact weapon, and a man who has already come through your door at 11:20 at night has closed the gap before you have finished processing what is happening. There is no safe room, no window to retreat through, and no time to go looking for a firearm stored somewhere else. The gun either is within reach when the door gives way, or it is not. That is the mindset piece. The fight picks the time and place, and it picked an apartment on a Wednesday night.

Police have not said what happened in the seconds between the door and the shot, and they have not identified the resident.

More from USA Carry:

• 19-Year-Old Apartment Resident Defends Against Three Armed Intruders; Hitting Two
• California Man Takes an Armed Teen’s Gun in a Midday Apartment Break-In and Kills Him With It
• California Homeowner Shoots 30-Year-Old Parolee Who Forced His Way Inside, Deputies Find Suspect Wounded Nearby
• Pampa Resident Grabs Handgun and Shoots 33-Year-Old Man Who Forced His Way Into Home at 11:30 P.M.
• DeKalb County Tenant Shoots Machete-Wielding Man Who Kicked at Apartment Doors Threatening to Kill Residents at 11:30 P.M., Then Broke Into His Unit

Vantrell is charged with home invasion, terroristic threats, and three counts of criminal damage. Those charges are allegations, and he has not been convicted. Police said the resident is not facing charges.

A man with a knife forced his way into an occupied apartment late at night. The resident had a firearm within reach and used it. Vantrell is the one in a hospital bed facing a home invasion charge.

Read the original story: Georgia Apartment Resident Shoots 48-Year-Old Man Who Forced His Way Inside Armed With a Knife at 11:20 P.M.

Key Takeaways

• A Laurel, Indiana homeowner shot a man who was attempting to break into the home on October 4.
• Indiana State Police described the suspect only as an adult male.
• The suspect was taken to a Cincinnati-area hospital and is expected to survive his injuries.
• Details such as whether the suspect was armed, the time of the incident, and who else was home have not been released.

Estimated reading time: 2 minutes

LAUREL, IN — A Laurel homeowner shot a man who was attempting to break into the home on Oct. 4, according to Indiana State Police.

The suspect, described only as an adult male, was taken to a Cincinnati-area hospital, where he is expected to survive his injuries, ISP said.

What ISP describes is a homeowner acting against a man trying to force his way inside. Whether the man was armed, what time it happened, and who else was in the house have not been released, and I am not going to fill those gaps.

The bare outline is still one every armed homeowner should think through before it happens. A stranger working on your door is not a theoretical problem. It is a handful of seconds in which you find out whether you have a plan or just a gun.

More from USA Carry:

• Wounded Suspect Takes Shotgun from Homeowner During Struggle After Being Shot
• San Antonio Homeowner Shoots Suspect in Both Legs in Car Burglary Attempt; Police Seek Second Suspect
• Father and Son Encounter Masked Intruders in Las Vegas; 1 Suspect Dead, the Other Arrested
• Fresno Homeowner Shoots Hammer-Wielding Man Who Smashed Windows and Threatened to Kill Family
• Homeowner Catches Break-In Suspect in the Act and Holds Him at Gunpoint Until County Deputies Arrive

Mindset comes before hardware. Where is the firearm when you are asleep, and can you reach it without crossing the path of the person coming in? Which direction leads to family members, and which leads toward the threat? Can you get everyone behind you, in one room, with a phone, so the intruder has to come to you instead of you going to find him? Have you decided, ahead of time, what someone has to do before you will fire? Those are not questions you can answer well with adrenaline dumping into your system and a door giving way. The time to answer them is now, at the kitchen table, when nobody is breaking in.

The other half of the plan is what happens after the shot. When the threat stops, the shooting stops. Then the phone comes out: 911, where you are, what happened, where you will be when officers arrive and what you look like, so the first trooper through the door does not have to figure out on his own which person is the homeowner. Put the gun down before they get there. Say little beyond the basics until you have talked to a lawyer. A homeowner who stops the threat and then handles the next ten minutes correctly has done the whole job, not just the loud part of it.

Read the original story: Indiana Homeowner Shoots Man Attempting to Break Into Laurel Home, Suspect Expected to Survive

Key Takeaways

• New Jersey filed a Supreme Court petition on October 1, 2026, asking the justices to hold Davenport v. ANJRPC pending decisions in Viramontes and Grant.
• New Jersey's rifle and magazine bans remain in effect under a Third Circuit stay granted August 4, 2026, while the case proceeds.
• The full Third Circuit voted 10-5 on July 17, 2026, ruling that semiautomatic rifles and magazines over ten rounds are arms in common use that cannot be banned.
• New Jersey warned that denying the petition now would cause a flood of currently restricted weapons entering the state that are near-impossible to retrieve.
• The Third Circuit acknowledged it stood alone, as the First, Second, Fourth, Seventh, Ninth, and D.C. Circuits have upheld similar laws.

Estimated reading time: 5 minutes

WASHINGTON, DC — New Jersey took its rifle and magazine bans to the Supreme Court on October 1, 2026, and the filing is not the one most people expected. The petition in Davenport v. Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs does not ask the justices to hear the state’s appeal and reverse the Third Circuit. It asks them to park the case until the Court rules in Viramontes v. Cook County and Grant v. Higgins, then erase the Third Circuit’s judgment and send it back down.

In July I covered New Jersey’s motion asking the Third Circuit to hold its mandate, the paperwork that puts a ruling into effect. The petition answers the question that article left open. The Third Circuit granted the stay on August 4, 2026, and the petition states plainly that “the LCM and Assault Weapons provisions remain in effect.” The stay lasts until the Supreme Court is finished with the case.

Attorney General Jennifer Davenport, with Solicitor General Sundeep Iyer as counsel of record, frames two questions: whether the Second and Fourteenth Amendments prohibit restrictions on “semi-automatic assault rifles” and on “large capacity magazines.” The state wrote those questions in its own vocabulary. What it actually wants is in the petition’s first paragraph: hold the case “pending its decision in Viramontes and Grant,” then, “if appropriate,” “grant the petition, vacate the judgment of the Third Circuit, and remand the case for further consideration.” Lawyers call that a GVR. The Court never rules on the merits; it wipes out the lower court’s decision and tells that court to try again under the new precedent.

The petition notes the Court is already holding NAGR v. Lamont, Duncan v. Bonta, and Gator’s Custom Guns v. Washington the same way, and calls the questions in NAGR “indistinguishable” from its own. The Court took Viramontes and Grant on June 30, 2026, on one question: whether the Second and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee the right to possess AR-15 platform and similar semiautomatic rifles. New Jersey leans on Judge Montgomery-Reeves’s concurrence below, which called the Cook County and Connecticut laws “nearly identical” to New Jersey’s.

Why a hold rather than a straight denial? The state says denying the petition now “would lead to a ‘flood of currently restricted weapons entering’ the State that are ‘near-impossible to retrieve once within the state,’” borrowing the Second Circuit’s words. On magazines, it does not claim the Third Circuit got the question wrong on its own terms. It argues the Viramontes answer “is also likely to clarify the standard applicable to challenges to LCM restrictions,” so whatever the Court says about rifles should reopen the magazine ruling too.

The ruling New Jersey wants erased came from the full Third Circuit on a 10-5 vote on July 17, 2026, with Judge Arianna Freeman writing. The court held that semiautomatic rifles and magazines over ten rounds are arms in common use for lawful purposes, and that a government cannot ban a class of arms in common use. It pointed to roughly 24 million AR-15s and similar rifles in circulation and more than 100 million 30-round AR-15 magazines, and borrowed the D.C. Circuit’s line that whatever capacity falls outside common use, “that capacity surely is not ten.” It called the rifle law a de facto ban, since no member of the public has ever received the license the statute technically allows. New Jersey’s complaint: “Despite changes in the technology and the rise of modern mass shootings, the Court disagreed with the State that this case involved an ‘unprecedented societal concern’ necessitating a more ‘nuanced approach,’ or that such an approach would change the outcome.”

The Third Circuit knew it stood alone. The majority acknowledged that the First, Second, Fourth, Seventh, Ninth and D.C. Circuits have upheld similar laws, including the Ninth Circuit’s Duncan v. Bonta on California’s ten-round limit. Judge Krause’s dissent called the Third Circuit “the only Court of Appeals in the Nation to afford constitutional protection to AR-15s and LCMs.” That disagreement is a circuit split, the main reason the Supreme Court takes cases, and New Jersey treats it as already headed for resolution in Viramontes.

The amicus briefs, filed by outside groups with a stake in the answer, are already in on that case. On September 4, Gun Owners of America and Gun Owners Foundation filed with Century Arms, Canik USA, B&T USA and Fostech, arguing the government cannot ban commonly owned firearms because politicians or judges consider them too dangerous or “military-style.” The NRA announced its own brief the next day. Manufacturers signing onto a Cook County case tells you who else understands that Viramontes will decide New Jersey.

More from USA Carry:

• A Federal Court Threw Out New Jersey’s Rifle and Magazine Bans. The State Is Asking to Keep Enforcing Them Anyway – USA Carry
• Third Circuit Strikes Down New Jersey’s Semiautomatic Rifle and 10-Round Magazine Bans as Unconstitutional
• Licensed to Carry in Ten States, Denied a Gun ID Card in New Jersey Over Online Posts: SAF Asks State Supreme Court to Step In
• Appeals Courts Now Split on 10-Round Magazine Bans, and California’s Is the Case Asking the Supreme Court to Step In
• Supreme Court Takes Up the Case That Could Strike Down Assault Weapon Bans Nationwide

For anyone living under New Jersey’s gun laws, nothing has changed on the ground. The ten-round limit stays. Knowing possession of an operable listed rifle remains a crime carrying up to ten years and a $150,000 fine. The state lost in front of fifteen judges, got that same court to let it keep enforcing the laws, and is now asking nine justices to leave its case untouched until they rule on somebody else’s. The mindset is simple: do not treat the Third Circuit’s ruling as the law of your state until the paperwork says it is.

I will continue tracking Davenport v. ANJRPC alongside Viramontes and Grant, and I will report on the gun owners’ response when it is filed.

Read the original story: New Jersey Keeps Enforcing Its Rifle and Magazine Bans and Asks the Supreme Court to Park Its Appeal Behind Viramontes

Key Takeaways

• Kurtae'vious Earl Tyson, 22, and Daronte Collins, 22, of Oxford attempted to rob a 25-year-old Tuscaloosa man in the parking lot of Magnolia Apartments on October 10.
• Shots were fired during the attempted robbery, and Tyson was critically wounded and later died from his injuries.
• Collins was charged with felony murder, first-degree robbery, attempted murder, and shooting into an occupied vehicle.
• Collins is being held in the Tuscaloosa County Jail without bond and has not been convicted.
• Police have not publicly stated who fired the shot that struck Tyson.

Estimated reading time: 2 minutes

TUSCALOOSA, AL — An attempted robbery in an apartment parking lot the night of Oct. 10 left one of the two suspects dead and the other charged with his murder, according to the Tuscaloosa Police Department.

Police said they were notified around 7:30 p.m. that a shooting victim had been taken to DCH Regional Medical Center, as reported by WBRC. Investigators traced the shooting to the parking lot of Magnolia Apartments on Highway 69 South, where they processed the scene and spoke with witnesses.

Police said Kurtae’vious Earl Tyson, 22, and Daronte Collins, 22, both of Oxford, attempted to rob a 25-year-old Tuscaloosa man. Shots were fired. Tyson was hit and critically injured. He later died from his injuries.

Collins was charged with felony murder, first-degree robbery, attempted murder, and shooting into an occupied vehicle. He is being held in the Tuscaloosa County Jail without bond.

Police have not publicly said who fired the shot that struck Tyson, and that is the question I want answered. Was the 25-year-old carrying his own gun and drew it when the two closed in on him? Was there a fight over a weapon, with Tyson catching the round in the struggle? Did the target strip a gun off one of them and fire it? Or did Collins fire into the vehicle and hit his own partner? WBRC’s report does not say, and each of those sequences reads very differently for anyone thinking through how he would handle the same moment.

The charge sheet still says plenty. Felony murder means a participant in a dangerous felony can be held responsible when someone dies during that crime, even if he never fired the round that killed the person. The attempted murder and shooting into an occupied vehicle counts mean police allege Collins himself fired into a vehicle with someone inside it during the robbery.

Robbery is treated as a violent felony because the threat is to the person. That is the whole reason the felony murder count exists. When a crime like this goes sideways, Alabama law puts the death on the men who started it, not on the man they picked out.

More from USA Carry:

• Armed Robbery Attempt Leaves One Suspect Dead, Another Wounded
• Armed 14-Year-Old Suspect and Intended Victim Shot During Botched Robbery in Missouri
• Armed Citizen Defends Himself After Suspect Pulls Gun During Online Sale, Teen Shot During Attempted Carjacking
• Daytime Home Invasion Ends with One Suspect Dead, Three Wounded
• Victim Fatally Shoots Suspect, Critically Wounds Another, While Sustaining Non-Life-Threatening Gunshot Wound

The charges against Collins are allegations, and he has not been convicted. No charging decision regarding the 25-year-old has been announced.

Two men drove in from Oxford, chose a target in a parking lot at 7:30 on the night of Oct. 10, and the robbery fell apart on them. One is dead. The other is sitting in the Tuscaloosa County Jail charged with his partner’s murder.

Read the original story: Attempted Robbery of 25-Year-Old Tuscaloosa Man Ends With One Suspect Dead and the Other Charged With Felony Murder

Key Takeaways

• ATF Director Robert Cekada ended federal registration and approval requirements for suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, and AOWs effective October 9, 2026.
• Gun Owners of America says Pennsylvania gun owners and dealers are in dangerous legal limbo because state law Title 18, Section 908 did not change alongside the federal rule.
• GOA warns that Pennsylvanians who acquire these items without federal paperwork that no longer exists could face first-degree misdemeanor charges and a lifetime federal firearm ban if convicted.
• GOA Pennsylvania's Val Finnell published a state alert on October 15, 2026, calling on Attorney General Dave Sunday to act to protect Pennsylvanians exercising these newly recognized rights.

Estimated reading time: 3 minutes

HARRISBURG, PA — Gun Owners of America says Pennsylvania gun owners and dealers have been left in “dangerous legal limbo” now that the federal government no longer requires registration or approval for suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, and “any other weapons,” and the group is calling on state Attorney General Dave Sunday to act. GOA Pennsylvania’s Val Finnell laid out the problem in a state alert published October 15, 2026.

Two weeks ago I covered ATF Stops Requiring NFA Approval and Registration for Suppressors, SBRs, SBSs and AOWs Nationwide, Effective October 9, 2026. ATF Director Robert Cekada’s open letter, dated and effective October 9, ended the federal approval and registration requirements for those four categories for everyone, not just the parties to the lawsuit. The lawsuit is Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF in the Northern District of Texas. On August 5, a district judge enjoined ATF from enforcing the NFA’s registration and transfer provisions for those items as of August 12, meaning the court ordered the agency to stop. The reasoning traces to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which cut the NFA making and transfer taxes on those items to $0. With the tax gone, the court held that the registration and transfer provisions were no longer an exercise of Congress’s taxing power for those items. The open letter also said, and I flagged it at the time, that state and local laws were untouched. GOA’s alert is about what that caveat means in Pennsylvania.

The problem, as GOA describes it, is Title 18, Section 908 of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code, Prohibited Offensive Weapons. GOA says ambiguous language in that section means a Pennsylvanian who makes or acquires one of these items without federal paperwork that no longer exists could face criminal investigation, what the group calls bogus arrests, and first-degree misdemeanor charges. GOA adds that a conviction on those charges carries a lifetime federal firearm ban. The federal rule changed on October 9. Section 908 did not change at all.

GOA’s position is that Section 908 was never meant to reach everyday citizens, and it makes a textual argument. Silencers, GOA says, are not firearms under Pennsylvania law, do not expel a projectile, and are not offensive weapons. Short-barreled rifles and “any other weapons” are not mentioned anywhere in Section 908, according to the alert. And factory-made short-barreled shotguns, GOA argues, have never been “sawed off” and fall entirely outside the statute. I find that reading persuasive, but a persuasive reading in a GOA alert is not a charging policy, and a prosecutor who reads the same words differently is exactly the exposure GOA is describing.

More from USA Carry:

• ATF Stops Requiring NFA Approval and Registration for Suppressors, SBRs, SBSs and AOWs Nationwide, Effective October 9, 2026
• Permit Rule, Residency Rule, Local Open Carry Bans: GOA Lawsuit Says Oregon Stacked Them Into a Total Nonresident Carry Ban
• Argument Over Vape Leaves Two Dead in South Carolina After the Second Victim Returned Fire
• Two DUIs From the Early 2000s, a Lifetime Gun Ban He Never Knew He Had: Third Circuit En Banc Rules the Felon Ban Unconstitutional as Applied to a Pennsylvania Man
• Federal Judge Still Thinks New Mexico’s Seven-Day Gun Waiting Period Is Constitutional. He Blocked It Anyway Because the Tenth Circuit Tied His Hands.

That is why GOA is putting this on Attorney General Dave Sunday. The group says Pennsylvanians who exercise rights the federal government now concedes they have should not be at risk of a criminal record for doing it, and it wants the Attorney General to protect them. The alert does not spell out, in the portion available to me, the specific action it is asking his office to take.

I will continue tracking Section 908 and any response from Attorney General Sunday’s office.

Read the original story: Federal NFA Paperwork Ended October 9, but GOA Says Pennsylvania’s Section 908 Still Leaves Suppressor and SBR Owners Facing Misdemeanor Charges and Wants AG Dave Sunday to Act

Key Takeaways

• A 36-year-old man was shot multiple times during a gunpoint robbery at River Crossing Apartments in Texarkana, Texas, around 2 a.m. Friday.
• Police say Ladaidrian Jackson, 18, shot the victim multiple times while he and Roberlynsti McHenry, 17, held the man at gunpoint.
• The victim returned fire and struck McHenry, who was taken to CHRISTUS St. Michael Health System and flown to a Little Rock hospital in critical condition.
• Texarkana, Texas, Police have obtained aggravated robbery warrants for both Jackson and McHenry; Jackson remains at large.
• Anyone with information on Jackson's location is asked to call 911 or Texarkana Area Crime Stoppers at 903-793-7867.

Estimated reading time: 2 minutes

TEXARKANA, TX — A 36-year-old man who was shot multiple times while being held at gunpoint during an early Friday robbery at River Crossing Apartments fired back and hit one of the two suspects, according to the Texarkana, Texas, Police Department.

Detectives have obtained aggravated robbery warrants for Ladaidrian Jackson, 18, and Roberlynsti McHenry, 17, as reported by Texarkana Today. Police say McHenry is the one who was struck when the victim returned fire. He is in critical condition. Jackson is still wanted.

Officers were called to the back of the complex in the 1000 block of College Drive a little before 2 a.m. on a report that someone had been shot. A few minutes later, a second wounded man was found in the CVS parking lot on North State Line Avenue. Detectives determined both men were shot during the same incident at the apartments.

According to police, Jackson and McHenry held the 36-year-old at gunpoint. Jackson shot him multiple times. The man fired back. His rounds hit McHenry.

Both the victim and McHenry were taken to CHRISTUS St. Michael Health System and then flown to hospitals in Little Rock.

Not every defensive gun use ends with the defender unhurt. Sometimes the attacker fires first, the defender is already hit, and the fight is still on. This man took multiple rounds and still put fire on one of the two men who had him at gunpoint. That is a mindset point as much as a marksmanship point. Getting shot is not the end of the fight unless you decide it is, and training that accounts for fighting through a wound is training worth doing.

Police have described the 36-year-old throughout as the robbery victim, and the only warrants announced are the two naming Jackson and McHenry. McHenry will be arrested on his warrant when he is released from the hospital. The charges against both are allegations, and neither has been convicted.

More from USA Carry:

• Mother Shoots Convicted ‘CM’ During Attack on Daughter in Indianapolis Hotel
• Armed 14-Year-Old Suspect and Intended Victim Shot During Botched Robbery in Missouri
• 23-Year-Old Woman w/ CCW Shoots Robbery Suspect Multiple Times
• Alabama Robbery Victim Shoots Armed Suspect Who Demanded a Wallet at Gunpoint at a Boat Ramp
• Machetes No Match for Shotgun as Georgia Homeowner Stops Two Robbery Suspects With Single Blast

Jackson remains at large. Anyone who knows where he is should call 911, Texarkana Area Crime Stoppers at 903-793-STOP (7867), or submit a tip at p3tips.com.

Police have not released the victim’s name, and as of Friday afternoon there was no update on his condition. I hope he pulls through and makes a full recovery.

Read the original story: Shot Multiple Times During 2 A.M. Gunpoint Robbery, 36-Year-Old Texarkana Man Returns Fire and Critically Wounds 17-Year-Old Suspect; 18-Year-Old Still Wanted

Key Takeaways

• A 32-year-old loss prevention employee shot and killed Edgar Perez Lopez, 33, Wednesday evening outside a Glendale beauty supply store near 43rd Avenue and Bethany Home Road.
• The employee had confronted Lopez and his girlfriend for smoking pills outside the store and told them to leave, leading to a confrontation.
• Investigators believe Lopez reached for a 9mm handgun during the confrontation before the employee fired and struck him.
• Lopez was taken to a hospital and later died; officers recovered suspected drugs and a 9mm handgun at the scene.
• The employee's actions remain under investigation and no charging decision has been announced.

Estimated reading time: 2 minutes

GLENDALE, AZ — A 32-year-old loss prevention employee at a beauty supply store shot and killed a man Wednesday evening after telling him and his girlfriend to leave, and investigators believe the man was reaching for a 9mm handgun when he was shot, according to Glendale police.

The shooting happened around 5 p.m. outside the store near 43rd Avenue and Bethany Home Road, as reported by AZFamily. Police say the employee confronted Edgar Perez Lopez, 33, and Lopez’s girlfriend, who were reportedly smoking pills, and told the couple to leave. That turned into a confrontation between the three.

Investigators believe Lopez reached for a firearm. The employee fired. Lopez was hit. He was rushed to the hospital and later died.

Police say Lopez had a 9mm handgun, and officers recovered suspected drugs at the scene.

There is not much more to this one yet, and I am not going to dress it up. A man was getting high outside a store, got told to move along, and police say he had a 9mm on him and went for it. Smoking pills in a parking lot is a bad night. Reaching for a gun when a loss prevention worker tells you to leave is how a bad night becomes a fatal one. Nothing about a shoplifting-prevention conversation requires anyone to die, and the person who introduced a firearm into it is the one who made that outcome possible.

More from USA Carry:

• Good Guy With a Gun: Sacramento Deputy Shoots and Kills Knife Attacker Who Was Actively Stabbing 26-Year-Old Daughter After She Pulled Him Off Her Mother
• Alabama Homeowner Shoots and Kills 32-Year-Old Woman Who Kicked In His Back Door at 1 P.M. as Her Family Insists She Was Not a Threat
• New Jersey Loses Its Assault Weapons Ban in Court, So Lawmakers Dust Off a Five-Year-Old Bill Targeting How You Store Your Guns
• Austin Homeowner Shoots and Kills 24-Year-Old Burglar Who Made It All the Way Into the Bedroom During 3:51 A.M. Break-In
• South Carolina Homeowner Shoots and Kills 19-Year-Old Stranger Who Forced Open a Back Door at 2 A.M.

Investigators initially said the employee was in custody, and it is unclear whether he will be charged. The employee’s “actions remain under investigation, and the circumstances surrounding the shooting will be evaluated as part of the investigative process,” Glendale police said in a statement. Police are still working to determine whether Lopez had the gun in his hand when he was shot. Deadly force is justified only against an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm, and a man going for a gun during a confrontation can meet that standard before the muzzle ever comes up. That is my framing, not the department’s. What police describe is a belief that Lopez reached for a firearm. Whether that holds up, and whether the employee faces charges, is a call for investigators and prosecutors, and no charging decision has been announced.

Video from the scene showed crime tape blocking off a corner of the shopping center that includes a barber shop and a bicycle store. Police said there is no threat to the public and the shooting appears to be an isolated incident. The employee has not been identified.

Read the original story: 32-Year-Old Glendale Loss Prevention Worker Shoots and Kills Man Who Investigators Say Reached for a 9mm After Being Told to Leave Beauty Supply Store for Smoking Pills

Key Takeaways

• The Iowa Court of Appeals affirmed the assault conviction of Montgomery McKernan, who shoved a patron to the floor at a Des Moines Salvation Army food pantry.
• McKernan directed repeated profane epithets at a receptionist and allegedly threatened to choke her before staff asked him to leave six to twelve times.
• The court held that McKernan's abusive language qualified as disorderly conduct, which stripped him of Iowa's stand-your-ground protection and restored a duty to retreat.
• The court ruled Iowa's stand-your-ground statute requires no close connection between the illegal activity and the force used to trigger the duty to retreat.
• McKernan was sentenced to two days in jail and a $430 fine plus a 15 percent surcharge after a jury convicted him in May 2024.

Estimated reading time: 6 minutes

DES MOINES, IA — The Iowa Court of Appeals has affirmed the assault conviction of a man who unleashed a profane tirade on a Salvation Army receptionist and then shoved another patron to the floor, holding that his own abusive language could count as the kind of “illegal activity” that strips a person of Iowa’s stand-your-ground protection and restores the duty to retreat.

The October 21, 2026 opinion in State v. McKernan, written by Judge Greer for a three-judge panel that included Chief Judge Tabor and Judge Ahlers, lays out the sequence. On May 23, 2023, Montgomery McKernan walked into a Salvation Army food pantry without the pickup appointment staff had reminded him to make many times before. When the receptionist asked whether he had scheduled one, he answered, “You fucking bitch, I don’t need to make an appointment,” and kept repeating the slur as she told him others were ahead of him in line. A manager came out to deescalate, told him he would get food but had to wait his turn, and recalled hearing him threaten to “choke the life out of” the receptionist. She told him to leave. He refused. Two more managers came to the lobby and told him to leave again, somewhere between six and twelve times in total by the court’s count.

Another patron was in the lobby with her three-year-old son. She stepped forward over the profanity. When McKernan called the receptionist a “cunt,” she testified, “everyone kind of snapped” and several people shouted for him to leave. She moved within arm’s reach. McKernan shoved her backward. She hit the floor and injured her underarm and right leg.

McKernan’s account was different. He testified the women were “chanting” at him, that the patron pushed his chest, and that he feared the group was about to attack him, so he turned and pushed her away in self-defense. The patron denied ever touching him, and neither the receptionist nor any of the three managers saw her do so. A jury convicted him of assault causing bodily injury in May 2024, and he was sentenced to two days in jail and a $430 fine with a 15 percent surcharge.

He appealed on four grounds: the denial of his ninth motion to continue, the duty-to-retreat instruction, the refusal of a spoliation instruction, and the denial of an on-site jury view. The court rejected all four, but the retreat instruction is the one every Iowan who carries should read.

Iowa Code section 704.1(3) says a person who is not engaged in illegal activity has no duty to retreat from any place where the person is lawfully present before using force. The trial court told the jury McKernan’s force was not justified if he was not lawfully present, made no effort to retreat, and retreat was a reasonable alternative, or if he was committing disorderly conduct where he used force and the same retreat conditions applied. Disorderly conduct, under Iowa Code section 723.4(3), includes directing abusive epithets that a person knows or reasonably should know are likely to provoke a violent reaction.

McKernan argued his words were protected speech, not “fighting words,” so there was no disorderly conduct and no duty to retreat. Fighting words are the narrow category of direct personal insults, aimed at someone present, that by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace, and they get no First Amendment protection. The court applied an objective test, asking how a reasonable person in that lobby would understand the words and react, and found substantial evidence they fell inside the category: repeated, targeted epithets at one employee in a heated, face-to-face confrontation in a confined space, a bad history between the two, a receptionist who testified she was shaken, three employees pulled from the back of the building, and bystanders who stepped in. The alleged threat to “choke the life out of” the receptionist was separately a true threat, which has never been protected. McKernan’s claim that he only meant to “make a point” was immaterial.

His fallback argument has the broader reach. He contended that even if he committed disorderly conduct, the illegal activity has to be “germane,” meaning closely connected, to the later use of force before it can trigger a duty to retreat. He pointed to State v. Lorenzo Baltazar, where the Iowa Supreme Court held that a defendant’s unlawful possession of the handgun he used in a murder was illegal activity that defeated stand-your-ground, but left open whether a connection is always required. The Court of Appeals answered that the statute’s plain language contains no such requirement, and that even if it did, the shove “flowed directly from McKernan’s verbal barrage.” The panel added that fighting words are by nature an “invitation to exchange fisticuffs,” and that letting a speaker ignite a confrontation and then claim no duty to retreat from it would be an incongruous result.

The jury returned a general verdict, meaning it found him guilty without saying which theory it relied on. Under Iowa Code section 814.28, that verdict stands if any one instructed theory has enough evidence behind it, and the panel found two more that did: every witness but McKernan said the patron never touched him, so the jury could find he had no reasonable belief force was necessary, and the record is “replete” with instances of him being told to leave, so the jury could find he was trespassing when he shoved her.

More from USA Carry:

• Appeals Courts Now Split on 10-Round Magazine Bans, and California’s Is the Case Asking the Supreme Court to Step In
• Three Years Later: The Armed Citizen Who Ended a Mall Shooting in 15 Seconds and Saved Countless Lives
• Beaches, Parks and Bars Are Off Limits Again: Federal Court Clears Hawaii to Enforce Most of Its Carry Ban
• New Mexico Argued a Federal Judge Did Not Have to Follow the Appeals Court. He Blocked the State’s Gun Waiting Period Anyway
• A Federal Court Threw Out New Jersey’s Rifle and Magazine Bans. The State Is Asking to Keep Enforcing Them Anyway

The remaining issues went the same way. McKernan wanted a spoliation instruction, which tells jurors they may assume evidence the State intentionally destroyed would have hurt the State, over photographs of redness on his chest that the responding officer may or may not have taken. The court found no substantial evidence the photos ever existed, and the officer’s body camera footage of McKernan lifting his shirt was admitted anyway, so jurors could judge the redness themselves. The continuance denial was within the trial court’s discretion after eight prior continuances, five changes of counsel, and a speedy-trial waiver deadline he missed by more than a day and blamed on exhaustion. The jury view was unnecessary because photos and diagrams covered the same ground.

No gun was drawn in that lobby, but the statute the court interpreted is the same one an Iowa carrier would lean on after a shooting. Stand-your-ground is conditional on two things: being lawfully present and not being engaged in illegal activity. McKernan surrendered both before he touched anyone. He was told to leave and stayed, which made him a trespasser, and he kept the tirade going, which the jury was entitled to call disorderly conduct. Lorenzo Baltazar already showed that carrying unlawfully forfeits the protection. McKernan shows that your mouth can forfeit it too. The mindset that keeps you on the right side of section 704.1(3) walks out the door the first time you are told to leave and never says the words that invite the fight you then have to defend.

Read the original story: Iowa Court of Appeals: Profane Tirade at a Salvation Army Food Pantry Was Disorderly Conduct That Stripped Stand-Your-Ground Protection Before the Shove

Key Takeaways

• A fight between two armed men inside a Daytona Beach bar spilled onto Main Street around 2 a.m. on October 12.
• Police say both men began shooting at each other on Main Street near Grandview Avenue, and a bystander then shot Steven Ott.
• Ott, 26, of Port Orange was charged with attempted second-degree murder and is being held without bond.
• Both Ott and the person he fired on were taken to the hospital in critical condition.
• No charges against the bystander have been reported.

Estimated reading time: 3 minutes

DAYTONA BEACH, FL — A fight between two armed men inside a bar spilled onto Main Street around 2 a.m. on Oct. 12 and turned into gunfire, and it ended with a bystander pulling a gun and shooting the man police say opened fire.

Daytona Beach police arrested 26-year-old Steven Ott of Port Orange and charged him with attempted second-degree murder, as reported by WESH. The shooting happened near Grandview Avenue just days before Biketoberfest. Both Ott and the person police say he fired on were taken to the hospital in critical condition.

According to police, it started as a fight inside a bar between two people, both of whom were armed. The fight moved out onto Main Street. Police say the two began shooting at each other. Ott opened fire on the other person. A bystander pulled out a gun and shot Ott. Both Ott and the other person were hit.

The first lesson here has nothing to do with the bystander. Two armed men took a bar fight into the street. Some states allow carrying a firearm in places that serve alcohol. Florida does not allow carrying in bars, so the two men who started this were already carrying somewhere they were not supposed to be before the first punch was thrown. If you carry, a bar fight is something you walk away from, not something you finish outside. The gun on your belt raises the cost of every bad decision you make while wearing it, and escalating a fistfight when you know you are armed is about as bad as those decisions get. Mindset is what keeps a carrier out of that bar and out of that street in the first place.

The bystander’s position is harder to judge from the outside. Stepping into a gunfight already underway means reading, in a second or two, who the aggressor is, what is behind him, and who else is on a crowded tourist street at bar close. Carol Boprie-Daniel, who owns Carol’s Cat House nearby, told WESH she had never seen anything like it and was thankful she was not in the line of fire. That is the backstop problem in plain language.

More from USA Carry:

• Mobile, AL Man Robbed at Gunpoint Draws His Own Pistol, But Doesn’t Win the Gunfight
• Georgia Father Opens Fire on Three Men Who Shot His 19-Year-Old Daughter in the Arm for Ignoring Them on a 5 A.M. Walk Home
• I Finally Opened Up a Glock: Installing the Apex Evo 6 Trigger in My Glock 17 Gen 6
• “Buy Me a 20 Piece”: Stranger’s Demand Outside a Georgia Asian Market Escalates to a Shove, an Open Car Door, and Three Rounds From a DoorDash Driver’s Glock
• Hands-On: Sig Sauer P365 Review [9mm Micro-Compact]

Police arrested Ott around 8 p.m. that evening. The arrest report is heavily redacted, but it indicates officers spoke to about six witnesses and describes Ott as armed with what it calls an automatic handgun. He is being held without bond. The charge is an allegation, and he is presumed innocent unless convicted. Nothing in the reporting indicates the bystander has been charged, and no charging decision regarding that shot has been reported.

Two men are in critical condition and one of them is in jail without bond, over a bar fight that both of them could have ended by walking out the door.

Read the original story: Armed Bystander Shoots 26-Year-Old Who Opened Fire on Daytona Beach’s Main Street After 2 A.M. Bar Fight Spilled Outside

Key Takeaways

• Gov. Kathy Hochul signed Francesco's Law, requiring New York gun owners to store firearms in locked containers when not in use.
• Francesco's Law is named for a 17-year-old who died by suicide five years ago after accessing an unsecured shotgun.
• A second bill expands New York's ammunition background check system to include people under red flag orders and state-specific prohibitions.
• Hochul announced both signings at the New Yorkers Against Gun Violence annual benefit dinner in Rochester.
• NRA-ILA called the bills political grandstanding and said New York's existing laws have not delivered the public safety residents want.

Estimated reading time: 4 minutes

ROCHESTER, NY — Gov. Kathy Hochul signed two more gun bills this week, including “Francesco’s Law,” a secure storage mandate that requires New York gun owners to keep firearms in a locked container when they are not in use and sets penalties when a child or an unlicensed person gets to an unsecured gun.

Hochul announced the signings at the New Yorkers Against Gun Violence annual benefit dinner, as reported by WROC. The dinner fell on the fifth anniversary of the death of Francesco, a 17-year-old who died by suicide after accessing an unsecured shotgun. The storage bill carries his name, and a foundation, Francesco’s Foundation, has been set up in his memory.

The second bill expands background checks on ammunition purchases. Under it, anyone legally prohibited from owning a rifle or shotgun may not buy ammunition, and the ban extends to people under temporary or extreme risk protection orders, according to WROC’s account. Hochul’s words at the dinner: “Today, I’m proud to make our nation-leading laws even stronger to keep guns and ammunition out of the wrong hands and make our children and communities safer.”

NRA-ILA called the bills what they are: “political grandstanding.” New Yorkers consistently rank public safety as a top issue, NRA-ILA noted, “and it isn’t because of the absence of gun laws in New York.” The group pointed instead at the governor’s “catch-and-release criminal justice system,” which it says “has created a revolving door that has made the streets of New York nearly unwalkable,” and called on Hochul and her legislative allies “to target actual criminals for a change.”

I agree with every word of that. Hochul herself calls New York’s gun laws “nation-leading,” and the state still cannot deliver the public safety its residents keep asking for. If the laws were the answer, New York would already have it. Adding two more does nothing but widen the gap between the people who follow the rules and the people who were never going to.

Secure storage is a mindset issue, and I have pushed it for years. If there are kids in the house, or anyone who should not have access, the gun that is not on your body belongs in a locked container, and that was true before the governor signed anything. A storage statute does not change that calculation for responsible owners. It only creates a criminal penalty that lands on the law-abiding after the fact, while the people stealing guns and carrying them illegally were never going to buy a safe.

The ammunition bill builds on a system NRA-ILA calls “dubious,” and the history backs that up. New York runs its ammo checks through the State Police, not the FBI. The CCIA, in effect since September 2023, requires a check on every ammunition buyer, a $2.50 fee per check, and a State Police database of licenses and ammo sales records. Any hit on a disqualifying record holds the sale until State Police review it, and NRA-ILA says the rollout has been marked by delays and false denials, with buyers waiting hours or days to walk out with a box of ammunition. The state tried this once before. The 2013 SAFE Act’s ammo check was suspended by officials who considered it infeasible, so New York revived a system it had already abandoned, and the second version still misfires.

More from USA Carry:

• North Dakota Governor Signs Major Gun Law: No More Duty to Inform, Public Gathering Carry Downgraded to $100 Ticket, and Campus Firearms Approved
• Canik TP9 Elite SC 9mm: Field Test Review
• Check-In and Flying With Your Guns & Ammo | Step by Step
• NRA Reveals It Has Spent Over $3 Million Fighting California’s Ammo Laws as Ammunition Depot Launches Checkout Donations to Fund the Battle
• Don’t Worry About Ballistics – Concealed Carry With What You Like

The numbers make NRA-ILA’s case. In the first month, the group says, State Police processed 29,464 ammo checks, approved 29,037, and denied 161, about 0.55 percent. That is 99.5 percent of checks acting as friction on buyers who were going to pass anyway, with the fee, the delays, and the dealer-only shipping requirement landing on them. A denial does not prove a crime was prevented either; a prohibited person turned away at the counter can still buy ammunition privately or out of state. The new bill widens the net. According to NRA-ILA, prior law screened ammo buyers only against federal prohibitors under 18 U.S.C. 922(g), not New York-specific ones such as a red flag order or a “serious offense” conviction under Penal Law 265.00(17). The bill aligns the ammo screen with the gun screen, which means more categories of people denied, more records to check against, and more chances for false hits in a system that already struggles. The sponsor’s pitch was that anyone who fails a firearm check has no need for ammunition. The licensed New Yorkers who pass every time are the ones who will pay for that logic at the counter.

I will continue tracking both laws as the enrolled text, effective dates, and penalty schedule are published, and report what the statutes actually say.

Read the original story: New York Governor Signs ‘Francesco’s Law’ and an Ammo Check Expansion: Two More Rules for Law-Abiding New Yorkers, Nothing for the Criminals