Gregory Kielma • August 6, 2024
Billionaires Laura and John Arnold – through Arnold Ventures, a Houston-based for-profit corporation are Anti Gun and funding Flawed Research
Laura and John Arnold
Billionaire Backing Biased Anti-Gun Research
“In this world, you get what you pay for,” said Kurt Vonnegut in Cat’s Cradle, his fourth novel. And when billionaire philanthropists are involved, Mr. Vonnegut is more than right. Nowadays, billionaires get exactly what they pay for.
An investigation by the Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project reveals how a former Enron trader and his wife are quietly paying millions of dollars every year to colleges, universities, think tanks and other groups for biased anti-gun research, which is then cited as gospel by the corporate media and used as propaganda by anyone who wants to infringe upon law-abiding Americans’ Second Amendment rights.
Billionaires Laura and John Arnold – through Arnold Ventures, a Houston-based for-profit corporation the couple founded to “proactively achieve social change” and their nonprofit, the Laura and John Arnold Foundation – are quietly bankrolling research that promotes and supports their radical anti-gun views. Their Foundation has more than $3.5 billion in assets.
Despite their predilection to work in secret, the couple’s actions have not gone unnoticed.
“Arnold Ventures is the gun control backer most Americans have never heard of. They quietly work behind the scenes, unlike Michael Bloomberg. However, their influence on trying to shape gun control policy rivals that of the biggest backers of antigun efforts. They regularly donate money to think tanks and academia to propel biased research into the policy arena. Arnold Venture’s philanthropic outreach sounds well-intentioned, but they’re serving up snake oil when they peddle firearms as a disease,” Mark Oliva, public affairs director for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, said last week.
The Arnolds’ massive financial clout creates an unholy alliance between grantor and grantee. Their paid researchers publish findings that support the couple’s views, or they risk the cash spigot being turned off and the loss of millions of dollars to their organization.
When it comes to their donations, it is clear who determines where the money goes.
“Laura and John established the Laura and John Arnold Foundation in 2010. They believe philanthropy should be transformational and should seek through innovation to solve persistent problems in society. As co-founders, Laura and John actively engage in the organization’s overall direction and daily execution,” the group’s website states.
John Arnold started as a trader for Enron, according to Influence Watch. He quit before the company imploded and was never accused of wrongdoing. In addition to gun control, the couple supports health care reform, criminal justice reform, prison reform and several nonprofit media groups.
The RAND Corporation is a major recipient of the Arnolds’ funding. RAND now maintains a gun-policy page. Much of their research is sponsored by the Arnolds.
According to the Laura and John Arnold Foundation’s 2022 IRS form 990, the couple paid RAND at total of $2.8 million, of which $1.7 million was for anti-gun research, including:
• $1,261,269 “to conduct research on how to reduce gun violence.”
• $99,000 “to support the first national conference on gun violence prevention research.”
• $89,000 “to support a convening relating to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the Bruen case.”
• $283,546 “to provide objective information about firearm violence and how state laws reduce or exacerbate this violence.”
That same year, the couple paid more than $1.8 million for anti-gun research from other groups, including:
• $28,040 to the National Opinion Research Center “to support the NORC expert panel on reducing gun violence and improving data infrastructure.”
• $219,122 to the University of California at Berkeley “to evaluate the advance peace gun violence reduction program.”
• $1,065,933 to Princeton University “to develop a research infrastructure that helps cities better understand and respond to waves of gun violence.”
• $475,093 to the University of Maryland “to support the center for study and practice of violence reduction.”
In total, the Foundation donated more than $185 million, according to their 2022 IRS Form 990.
Arnold Ventures public relations director, Angela Landers, declined to be interviewed for this story, arrange an interview with the Arnolds or discuss the gun-control research they funded. Instead, Landers chose to send a written statement, which is unedited and reprinted in its entirety:
“Philanthropy can play a unique role in supporting research regarding the impact of many public policies, including those related to gun violence. In this instance, Arnold Ventures partnered with RAND Corp., a nonpartisan and widely respected research institution, to conduct scientific research that offers the public and policymakers a factual basis for developing fair and effective gun policies in the interest of public safety. Sound research is an important part of building evidence-based solutions,” Landers said in her statement.
RAND’s Response
While there were infrequent gun-related projects over the years, the RAND Corporation as a whole did not research “gun violence” until 2016, when there was a mass-shooting near their California office, according to Andrew R. Morral, PhD, a senior behavioral scientist at RAND and the Greenwald Family Chair in Gun Policy.
“A lot of our staff were rattled by it, as were RAND trustees and friends of RAND,” Morral told the Second Amendment Foundation last week. “They contacted our president and asked what we were going to do about it.”
RAND set aside some internal funds because the work was not yet sponsored and investigated, Morral explained. In 2018, they released their first tranche of research.
“Arnold Ventures picked it up and has funded us since then,” he said.
Today, Arnold Ventures is RAND’s largest sponsor of gun-control research. Together with the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the two groups pay RAND more than $1.5 million annually, Morral said. Federal grants from the National Institute of Health and the National Institute of Justice provide additional “gun-violence” research funding.
None of RAND’s estimated 1,900 employees are researching gun-control full time, Morral said. Although he estimated between six to eight staffers are studying gun-control topics “as part of their research portfolios.”
Morral denied that Arnold Ventures or any other donor interfered with their research.
“We are very careful to not allow that to happen,” he said. “We haven’t experienced any pressure and we have not been asked to share our findings with Arnold Ventures or any other sponsor. We aren’t held accountable for producing results in a certain direction. Our donors, generally, are interested in us being neutral and objective, which is part of the reason they came to RAND.”
Still, Morral acknowledged that their sponsors can use their research however they see fit.
“We realize it’s used for advocacy, of course. We’re producing scientific results. We can’t control how they’re used. People will use that in a variety of ways. Our results are used by both advocates for more restrictive gun laws as well as advocates for less restrictive gun laws.”
Morral said RAND takes no position on the right to keep and bear arms. “We don’t have policy positions on that or on gun laws or anything else,” he said. “We don’t advocate. We don’t do any advocacy.”
However, it is RAND’s opinion and Morral’s that “gun-violence” constitutes a public health crisis.
“I certainly think there’s a crisis in terms of the number of people dying and being injured each year,” he said. “The numbers are high enough to call that a crisis.”
RAND, Morral said, stands by the validity of their gun-violence research, “subject to the limitations reported in our reports. All research has limitations, and we try to be upfront about that,” he said.
RAND’s position on two frequent gun-control targets is clear, concise and published on its website.
• Concealed-carry laws increase homicides rates: “Evidence shows that concealed carry laws – when states implement more permissive concealed carry laws, there’s a small increase in homicide rates. Our own research has found evidence of that – some suggestive evidence,” Morral said.
• Stand-your-ground laws increase homicide rates: “The current evidence is that when states implement stand-your-ground laws, firearm homicide rates increase,” he said.
RAND researchers published a report last Wednesday, which was funded by Arnold Ventures and a National Institute of Health grant, titled “State Policies Regulating Firearms and Changes in Firearm Mortality.”
Morral was one of the scientists involved in the project.
The objective was to estimate the effects state firearm policies have on gun-related deaths. The researchers examined six policies: “background checks, minimum age, waiting periods, child access, concealed carry, and stand-your-ground laws.”
The findings were mixed. Child-access prevention laws can reduce gun deaths by 6%, and stand-your-ground laws can increase firearm deaths by 6%, the authors claimed.
“Our finding that most of these individual state-level firearm policies have relatively modest and uncertain effect sizes reflects that each firearm policy is a small component of a complex system shaping firearm violence. However, we found that combinations of the studied policies were reliably associated with substantial shifts in firearm mortality,” the authors noted.
All of the authors – Terry L. Schell, PhD; Rosanna Smart, PhD; Matthew Cefalu, PhD; Beth Ann Griffin, PhD and Morral – work for RAND at either its Santa Monica, California, or Arlington, Virginia, offices.
All of the authors except Morral disclosed conflicts of interest: “Dr Schell reported receiving grants from Arnold Ventures and National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism during the conduct of the study. Dr Smart reported receiving grants from Arnold Ventures and the National Institutes of Health during the conduct of the study. Dr Cefalu reported receiving grants from Arnold Ventures during the conduct of the study. Dr Griffin reported receiving grants from Arnold Ventures during the conduct of the study. No other disclosures were reported.”
The authors claimed that neither Arnold Ventures not the NIH exercised any control of their work.
“The funders had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication,” the report states.
RAND’s NIH Grant of $790,100 was awarded Sept. 25, 2020, and is ongoing.
“Don’t Get Mad About Guns …”
Three months ago, the Trace – the propaganda arm of former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s anti-gun empire – announced they were creating a Gun Violence Data Hub, which would “help journalists access data on one of America’s most critical – and opaque – public health crises.”
“The Data Hub is a multiyear project to increase the accessibility and use of accurate data on gun violence in journalism. Its team of editors, reporters and researchers will proactively collect and clean datasets for public distribution, write and share tip sheets, and serve as a resource desk to other newsrooms, assisting journalists in their pursuit of data-informed reporting,” the Trace reported.
Arnold Ventures was one of the Data Hub’s top sponsors.
To be clear, Arnold Ventures has radical anti-gun views. The group believes “firearm violence” constitutes a public health crisis. “Gun violence,” it claims, has become the leading cause of death of “young people,” not children, the group states on its website. By referring to young people rather than children, they can include 18- to 20-year-olds in their data set to make the numbers work.
Arnold Ventures wants to bridge the gap in anti-gun research, which they say was created by the 1996 Dickey Amendment, which prohibits the federal government from conducting anti-gun research.
Don’t Get Mad About Guns — Get Funding for Research, the group offers on its website.
“It isn’t enough to get mad about gun violence,” Asheley Van Ness, Arnold Ventures former director of criminal justice, wrote in The Houston Chronicle.“Change starts with adequate funding for research, or else policymakers may end up spending time and money on programs that simply don’t work.”
In 2018, to streamline its funding efforts, Arnold Ventures launched the National Collaborative on Gun Violence Research (NCGVR). Its mission is to “fund and disseminate nonpartisan, scientific research that offers the public and policymakers a factual basis for developing fair and effective gun policies.”
“At Arnold Ventures, we use our resources to confront some of the most pressing problems facing our nation,” Arnold Ventures President and CEO Kelli Rhee stated on the group’s website. “Five years ago, we, like many others, recognized that our understanding of gun violence was suffering from a severe lack of investment in research, and we joined together with our partners to try and fill some of the gap. While more investment from both public and private entities is undoubtedly needed, the National Collaborative on Gun Violence Research has made significant progress in building the gun policy evidence base.”
Since 2022, the NCGVR has issued more than 50 grants, including “13 dissertation research projects and seven post-doctoral research fellowships, as well as awards for large new studies on domestic gun violence, officer-involved shootings, harms to firearm owners associated with gun laws, gun suicides, gun policy analysis and urban gun violence.”
Arnold Ventures chose RAND to administer the NCGVR, and RAND put Morral in charge. Today, Morral co-leads the NCGVR, which he says brings RAND “a couple hundred-thousand dollars per year.”
“It was an opportunity to improve research in the field,” Morral told the Second Amendment Foundation. “It was something that seemed like an interesting project to work to elevate. There wasn’t much research going on, and it was an area we were trying to make some headway in with our own funding. We recognized there was a gap in knowledge about gun policy that wasn’t being studied.”
Takeaways
There is certainly nothing unlawful about a well-heeled couple sponsoring gun-control research or research of any kind. The Arnolds are free to spend their millions as they see fit. However, since their largesse can negatively impact the civil rights of millions of law-abiding Americans, the Arnolds should be prepared to answer for their philanthropy.
The couple has created a pipeline of sorts, cash goes in one end and anti-gun propaganda comes out the other.
The risks they’ve created are dire.
“When a cable TV news actor cites some farcical statistic about guns or gun owners, it’s important to understand how that number made it onto the teleprompter,” said Second Amendment Foundation founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “It starts with donor dollars sent to researchers at left-leaning colleges, universities or other groups, who publish reports that mirror their donors’ views, which are then regurgitated by the corporate media. It’s a factory-like process. We don’t have anything like that. We don’t need it. We simply rely upon the truth.”
The Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project wouldn’t be possible without you. Click here to make a tax-deductible donation to support pro-gun stories like this.
If I bought a gun for someone and registered it at the store and its stolen, can something come back on me? From an Avid Reader of my blog Let’s Take a LOOK! You “bought a gun for someone”? As in “You bought a gun with your own money and gave it to someone as a gift?” or “ Someone gave you money to buy a gun for them”. I have a feeling it’s the second. So yes, you can be in a lot of trouble, because you have committed a federal felony known as a straw purchase. You can spend up to ten years in federal prison for it. Most states don’t have registration, but yes, if you registered it as belonging to you, and then gave it to someone, and it turns up as used in a crime, it will get traced to you, and likely be evidence that you either did a straw purchase or transferred a firearm illegally. Enjoy your time in Club Fed! ETA: A number of comments question the nature and legality of gifting firearms. So I’m going to write this once more, and delete any comments that continue misinformation: • It’s perfectly legal, at the federal level, to give someone a bona fide gift of a firearm. • There are no particular restrictions on this about who you may gift a firearm too (they may be family members, friends, etc. • There are no particular restrictions that one must own a firearm for some period of time before gifting it to another. You may go to a gun store on Christmas Eve, tell them that you are buying a gun to give to your wife/mistress/girlfriends/best friend/best friends wife/child for Christmas and they will happily help you out. • You can’t legally give a firearm to someone who you know or should know is a prohibited possessor. • (Broadly) you can’t legally give a firearm to someone where that firearm would cross state lines as part of the gifting process. • It is NOT legal to make a “gift” that isn’t actually a gift. Again, the key word here is a “bona fide gift”. A firearm given in exchange for something isn’t really a bona fide gift anymore. • The 4473 form asks for the “actual buyer/transferee”, which means “The person who is paying the money”, not the recipient of a gift. • Whatever you heard from your uncle’s friends ex-lovers wife’s cousin isn’t relevant. References: Gifting Guns - Is It Legal - FFL License https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/whom-may-unlicensed-person-transfer-firearms-under-gca https://www.ffl123.com/gifting-guns-is-it-legal/ https://www.guns.com/news/2013/12/12/gifting-guns-need-know https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/4473-part-1-firearms-transaction-record-over-counter-atf-form-53009/download
National Concealed Carry Reciprocity: What Gun Owners Need to Know By Gregg Kielma-Tactical K Training and Firearms March 15,2026 Congress may soon vote on national concealed carry reciprocity. Let's Take a LOOK! Understanding Current LawsConcerning Reciprocity Travel in the United States: Why It’s Your Responsibility to Know the Law Traveling while armed is a reality for millions of responsible gun owners across the United States. But the moment you cross a state line, the rules change — sometimes dramatically. That’s where reciprocity comes in. Understanding reciprocity travel isn’t optional; it’s a core part of responsible firearm ownership. As an instructor, I remind every student: your permit doesn’t travel unless the law says it does. And it’s your job to know where it does — and where it doesn’t. What Is Reciprocity? Reciprocity refers to the agreements between states that recognize each other’s concealed carry permits. Some states honor many permits, some honor only a few, and others honor none at all. This patchwork of laws means that a permit valid in your home state may be completely invalid the moment you cross into another jurisdiction. Ignorance of the law is never a defense, and mistakes can carry severe legal consequences. Why Reciprocity Matters When You Travel Every state sets its own rules for: • Who may carry • How they may carry • Where they may carry • What training is required • Whether out of state permits are recognized When you travel armed, you are responsible for complying with the laws of every state you enter — even if you’re only passing through. A state that honors your permit may allow you to carry concealed. A state that does not honor your permit may require you to store your firearm unloaded, locked, and inaccessible. Some states have magazine restrictions, ammunition restrictions, or location based prohibitions that differ from your home state. Safe Passage Isn’t the Same as Reciprocity Federal law (FOPA) provides a “safe passage” provision for travelers transporting firearms through restrictive states. But this protection is limited: • The firearm must be unloaded • It must be locked away and not accessible • You must be traveling from one lawful location to another • You cannot make unnecessary stops Safe passage does not give you the right to carry. It only protects lawful transport. Your Responsibility as a Gun Owner Reciprocity travel requires preparation. Before you hit the road: • Check the reciprocity laws for every state on your route • Understand each state’s carry restrictions • Know prohibited locations • Review transport requirements • Keep documentation with you Laws change frequently, and relying on outdated information can put you at risk. Responsible gun owners stay informed — every trip, every time. Kielma’s Final Thoughts Reciprocity is a privilege, not a guarantee. When you choose to travel armed, you take on the responsibility of knowing and following the laws of every state you enter. That responsibility protects your rights, your safety, and your freedom.
SAF, FPC File SCOTUS Brief In Challenge To Illinois’ Public Transportation Carry Ban Mark Chesnut - Two major gun-rights organizations have filed a reply brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in a case challenging Illinois’ ban on the carry of firearms on public transportation. On March 3, the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) filed the brief in support of the cert petition in the case Schoenthal v. Raoul, which was originally filed in 2022 and challenges the state’s complete ban on carry on public transportation. According to the SAF, in order to legally carry a firearm in Illinois, residents are required to obtain not only a Firearm Owners Identification Card (FOID), but also a concealed carry license. However, even with both the FOID card and a carry license, Illinois still bans carrying a firearm on “…any bus, train, or form of transportation paid for in whole or in part with public funds, and any building, real property, and parking area under the control of a public transportation facility paid for in whole or in part with public funds.”
Philadelphia Man Sentenced to 15 Years in Prison for Violent Home Invasion Robbery Wednesday, March 11, 2026 U.S. Attorney's Office, Eastern District of Pennsylvania PHILADELPHIA – United States Attorney David Metcalf announced that Tyrek Byrd, 37, of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, was sentenced today by United States District Court Judge Cynthia M. Rufe to 15 years in prison for his role in a violent home invasion robbery targeting a local business owner and his family. In September 2025, a federal jury convicted Byrd of conspiring to commit armed home invasion robberies, Hobbs Act robbery, and using and brandishing a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence. As proven at trial, in December 2019, Byrd and two co conspirators carried out a violent home invasion robbery targeting business owners whom they believed kept large amounts of cash at their homes. The conspirators researched their victims and businesses and used a GPS tracking device to determine where the victims lived before carrying out the robberies. On the night of December 31, 2019, Byrd and two accomplices confronted the owner of a Delaware County nail salon as the victim returned to the business. The robbers forced the victim inside, zip tied his wrists, covered his mouth with duct tape, and beat him while demanding money. The men then forced the victim to take them to his home, where they encountered the victim’s wife, children, and nanny. Inside the residence, the robbers zip tied the family members, ransacked the home, and continued assaulting the victim while demanding cash. During the ordeal, the assailants threatened the family and stated that they had been watching the victims for weeks. After terrorizing the family for approximately 40 minutes, the robbers fled with thousands of dollars in business proceeds, jewelry, and other valuables. Byrd’s coconspirator, Shaquan Brown, was previously sentenced to more than 22 years’ in prison for his role in this and other robberies. Another coconspirator, Willie Singletary, received a sentence of 17 years’ imprisonment for this role in the conspiracy. The case was investigated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives the Haverford Police Department, Uwchlan Township Police Department, with assistance from the FBI and the Montgomery County Criminal Investigation Division and is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Anthony Carissimi, Brian Doherty, and J. Jeanette Kang. Contact USAPAE.PressBox@usdoj.gov 215-861-8300 Updated March 11, 2026
Honduran National Illegally In The United States Sentenced To Over Eight Years For Trafficking Firearms, Including A Machinegun, And Drugs Thursday, March 12, 2026 U.S. Attorney's Office, Western District of North Carolina CHARLOTTE, N.C. – A Honduran man illegally present in the United States was sentenced to prison yesterday for trafficking guns, including a firearm fitted with a machinegun conversion device known as a “switch,” and drugs, announced Russ Ferguson, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of North Carolina. Alicia Jones, Special Agent in Charge of the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), Charlotte Field Division, and Sheriff Eddie Cathey of the Union County Sheriff’s Office, join U.S. Attorney Ferguson in making today’s announcement. Michael Naun Antunez Vasquez, 22, was sentenced to 101 months in prison followed by two years of supervised release. He pleaded guilty to trafficking in firearms, possession of a machinegun, transfer of a machinegun, and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime. After serving his prison sentence, Vasquez will be removed from the country and is forbidden from returning to the United States. “Vasquez was in the country illegally and profited by putting dangerous guns on our streets—including a firearm converted into a machinegun,” said U.S. Attorney Ferguson. “When someone traffics guns and drugs and utterly disregards our nation’s laws and public safety, federal prison is the appropriate punishment.” “Firearms trafficking makes our communities less safe by putting guns in the hands of prohibited and possibly dangerous individuals,” said Special Agent in Charge Jones. “ATF, along with all of our law enforcement partners, is committed to stopping the illegal exchange of firearms and making sure that those who threaten our communities are held accountable.” According to court documents, Vasquez was a Honduran national who was in the United States illegally. On July 9, 2024, Vasquez sold a Romarm/Cugir pistol with a 30-round magazine to an individual working with the ATF. Vasquez also told the individual that he was able to sell additional firearms, machinegun conversion devices, and controlled substances. On July 18, 2024, Vasquez met with an undercover ATF agent, who told Vasquez he was purchasing guns to resell in another state for profit. Vasquez sold the agent two firearms: a Glock Model 30, .45 caliber semiautomatic pistol with a 25-round magazine, and a Glock, Model 19, 9mm semiautomatic pistol. The Model 19 was assembled from different parts that were stolen. Court documents show that on August 1, 2024, the ATF agent bought two more firearms from Vasquez. The first firearm was a Glock, Model 19, 9mm pistol that had been converted to a machinegun. The second firearm was a Glock, Model 48. During that meeting, Vasquez told the agent that he could also obtain pounds of methamphetamine. Vasquez agreed to sell the agent a machinegun, a Romarm/Cugir pistol, and a pound of methamphetamine. According to court records, Vasquez was riding in the front passenger seat of a car on the way to meet with the undercover agent when the vehicle was stopped by Union County Sherriff’s deputies. The deputies seized from the vehicle a machinegun conversion device, a Romarm/Cugir pistol, a Glock pistol, a Beretta pistol, a Palmetto State Armory pistol, several high-capacity magazines, ammunition, and approximately 28.7 grams of methamphetamine. Vasquez will remain in the custody of the U.S. Marshals and will be transferred to the custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons upon designation of a federal facility. In making today’s announcement, U.S. Attorney Ferguson thanked the ATF and the Union County Sheriff’s Office for their investigation of the case. The U.S. Attorney’s Office in Charlotte prosecuted the case. Updated March 12, 2026
Virginia Man Charged with Illegally Selling the Firearm Used in the Campus Shooting at Old Dominion University Friday, March 13, 2026 Kenya Mcchell Chapman, 32, of Smithfield, Virginia, appeared in federal court today and was charged by criminal complaint with dealing in firearms without a license in connection with the March 12 shooting at Old Dominion University (ODU), and with three counts of making false statements during purchases of firearms. View complaint here. View affidavit here. “The Biden Department of Justice declined to prosecute this man and let him off easy with a warning,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi. “Left-wing soft-on-crime policies cost lives — but this Department of Justice doesn’t tolerate crime, we punish it.” “Chapman allegedly stole a firearm and illegally sold it to a convicted terrorist, who murdered a decorated American veteran, and he will finally face the full weight of justice,” said Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche. “Thanks to the hard work of our dedicated ATF and FBI agents, in partnership with state and local law enforcement officers, we have arrested and charged this safety threat and removed him from the community.” “If you steal firearms, lie on federal forms, and put weapons in the hands of convicted terrorists, this FBI will find you,” said FBI Director Kash Patel. “I want to thank our Norfolk Field Office and partners who continue to work 24/7 to bring to justice those responsible for yesterday’s attack. In the meantime, we continue to keep the victims, their families, and the entire Old Dominion community in our prayers.” On March 12, Mohamed Bailor Jalloh, 36, committed a shooting at ODU in Norfolk during an Army Reserve Officer’s Training Corp (ROTC) class, killing one victim and wounding two more. Today, law enforcement searched Chapman’s residence and located ammunition consistent with the firearm recovered from the ODU shooting. Chapman allegedly stole the firearm from a vehicle in Newport News one year before the ODU shooting and sold it to Jalloh days before the ODU shooting. Jalloh was convicted in the Eastern District of Virginia in 2016 of attempting to provide material support to a foreign terrorist organization. As a previously convicted felon, Jalloh could not legally purchase or possess firearms or ammunition. In addition, according to court documents, in 2021, Chapman allegedly purchased three firearms that were recovered from crime scenes shortly afterward. Two were recovered from the scene of a homicide and another recovered from a drunk in public incident. If convicted, Chapman faces a maximum penalty of 35 years in prison. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors. The FBI’s Norfolk Field Office and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) Washington Field Division are investigating this case. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Luke Bresnahan and Rebecca Gantt for the Eastern District of Virginia are prosecuting the case. A criminal complaint is merely an accusation. The defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Chapman Affidavit.pdf Updated March 13, 2026
PENSACOLA MAN PLEADS GUILTY TO SELLING MACHINE GUN CONVERSION DEVICES Tuesday, March 10, 2026 U.S. Attorney's Office, Northern District of Florida PENSACOLA, FLORIDA – Alaisjah Dayshawn Perkins, 22, of Pensacola, Florida, pleaded guilty in federal court to receipt, possession, transfer, and making of a firearm which is not registered in the National Firearms Registration & Transfer Record and not identified by a serial number. The plea was announced by John P. Heekin, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Florida. U.S. Attorney Heekin said: “Operation Take Back America was launched to devote the full might of the Department of Justice toward protecting our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime, and this successful prosecution delivers on that mission. Our brave state and federal law enforcement partners are on the front lines of the fight against violent criminals, and my office will continue to back up their efforts with aggressive prosecutions to keep our citizens safe.” Court documents reflect that on April 26, 2025, law enforcement officers observed posts on a Facebook profile advertising the sale of machinegun conversion devices (MCDs). Subsequently, an undercover officer began communicating with the defendant. Between April and May 2025, law enforcement conducted multiple undercover purchases of several MCDs from the defendant. Pursuant to a search warrant for the defendant’s home, officers located tools and supplies for manufacturing MCDs. T he defendant was arrested and a bag of 13 MCDs was located in his pocket. The MCDs were sent to the Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives for technical examination, and were determined to be designed to convert AR-style firearms from semi-automatic to fully automatic. Perkins faces up to ten years’ imprisonment. If Perkins is sentenced to a term of imprisonment, such term could be followed by up to a three-year term of supervised release. Thus, if Perkins were to violate any conditions of his release, he could potentially face an additional period of incarceration related to violating his supervision. This case was a joint investigation by Escambia County Sheriff’s Office and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Christopher C. Patterson. Sentencing is scheduled for May 19, 2025, at 1:00 p.m. at the United States Courthouse in Pensacola before United States District Judge M. Casey Rodgers. This case is part of Operation Take Back America, a nationwide initiative that marshals the full resources of the Department of Justice to repel the invasion of illegal immigration, achieve the total elimination of cartels and transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), and protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime. The United States Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Florida is one of 94 offices that serve as the nation’s principal litigators under the direction of the Attorney General. To access public court documents online, please visit the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida website. For more information about the United States Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Florida, visit https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndfl. Contact United States Attorney’s Office Northern District of Florida USAFLN.Press.Office@usdoj.gov X: @USAO_NDFL Updated March 10, 2026
Are Machine Guns Legal for You to Own? (Florida + Federal Law) Gregg Kielma-Tactical K Training and Firearms 3/13/2026 Kielma’s Known Short Answer Yes — but only under very narrow federal rules. In Florida, you may legally own a machine gun only if it is a federally registered, transferable machine gun made before May 19, 1986, and you complete the full ATF approval process. Anything made after that date is illegal for civilian possession under federal law. What Counts as a Machine Gun? Under federal law, a machine gun is any firearm that fires more than one round per trigger pull, including: • Fully automatic firearms • Frames/receivers of such firearms • Any part or combination of parts designed to convert a gun into a machine gun (e.g., auto sears, switches) US Federal Law (The Big Gatekeeper) Legal for civilians ONLY if: • It was manufactured and registered before May 19, 1986 • It is listed in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record (NFRTR) • You complete the ATF Form 4 process • You pass the federal background check • You pay the $200 NFA tax stamp Illegal for civilians if: • It was made after May 19, 1986 • It is unregistered • It is a conversion device (auto sear, switch, etc.) not registered before 1986 Penalties for illegal possession can include up to 10 years in federal prison. Florida Law Florida’s laws mirror federal law almost exactly. Florida allows machine gun possession ONLY if: • It is lawfully owned under federal law • It is a pre 1986 transferable machine gun Florida prohibits: • Possession of any machine gun that is or can be made operable unless federally registered • Possession of conversion devices (switches, bump stocks, etc.) Florida does not have its own machine gun registration system — it relies entirely on federal approval. What You Must Do to Legally Own One 1. Find a pre 1986 transferable machine gun (prices often $20k–$50k+) 2. Submit ATF Form 4 3. Provide fingerprints, photos, and background check 4. Pay the $200 tax stamp 5. Wait 6–12 months for ATF approval Only after approval may you take possession. What You Cannot Do • Buy or possess a post 1986 machine gun • Make your own machine gun • 3D print or possess an auto sear / Glock switch • Possess an unregistered machine gun All of these are felonies under federal law. Kielma’s Known Bottom Line for You As a Florida resident and firearms instructor, you can legally own a machine gun — but only a pre 1986, federally registered one, and only after completing the full ATF NFA process. Anything else is a serious federal crime.
No Automatic Glock Switches — It’s Against the Law Gregg Kielma-Tactical K Training and Firearms 3/13/2026 At Tactical K Training and Firearms , I teach responsible firearm ownership, and that starts with understanding what is legal and what is not. One point that cannot be overstated: Glock switches (auto sears) are illegal under federal law and in the State of Florida. A Glock switch is a conversion device that forces a semi-automatic Glock pistol to fire multiple rounds with a single pull of the trigger. Because of that function, federal law classifies a Glock switch as a machine gun all by itself — even if it’s not installed on a firearm. That means: • Possession is a felony, even if the device is not attached • Manufacturing, buying, selling, or 3D printing one is illegal • Penalties are severe, including federal prison time…10 plus years. • There are no exceptions for civilians, none…ZERO Do not do it! Responsible gun owners stay far away from illegal conversion devices. They put lives at risk, undermine the firearms community, and give lawmakers ammunition to push for broader restrictions on lawful gun owners. At Tactical K Training and Firearms , we stand for safety, legality, and professionalism. There is no place, currently, for Glock switches in responsible firearm ownership. It’s the law. Gregg Kielma
Man breaks into Parrish home, attacks woman in garage By Danielle Zulkosky Published March 12, 2026 6:12am EDT Manatee County FOX 13 News Husband protects wife from intruder A Parrish couple is trying to put a dangerous situation behind them after a brazen home invasion. A man attacked the wife in her garage, but the couple fought back. FOX 13's Danielle Zulkosky reports. The Brief • Eric Shea is accused of breaking into a Parrish home and attacking a woman inside the garage. • Doris and Eric Brust say they were in their garage when Shea got inside. Eric ended up saving Doris from the attack. • Doris said Shea lives in a neighboring subdivision and warns her neighbors to always be aware of their surroundings. PARRISH, Fla. - A Parrish couple faced an attack at home after a man broke into their garage on Sunday night. Eric and Dorris Brust said it was a freak attack on Sunday night in their Parrish home. "We started to come down our block, and we saw a gentleman on the road that was kind of staggering," Dorris said. "And then all of a sudden, this gentleman kind of runs up our driveway yelling things we just didn't really understand." That man was Edward Shea. Things took a turn when he got into their garage. "My husband, Eric, ran into the house to get a weapon because he had warned him, you need to get off my property," Dorris said. "And in that short amount of time, he ran into me, grabbed me, and started choking me." Instincts then kicked in for her husband. "I've never heard her scream like that before and when I came out here, and I saw him pushing her against the car, it took everything in my body not to severely hurt him," Eric said. The Manatee County Sheriff's Office said the two worked together to restrain Shea until deputies arrived at their home. "I'm grateful I didn't get our gun because I think I might have used it on him and I wouldn't want to live with that," Eric said. After the attack, Doris went to the hospital and only had a few bruises. She calls her husband ‘superman’ to come to her rescue. "It humbled me because I consider myself a pretty strong individual as a woman," Dorris said. "And it just, the reality was that I was easily overpowered and that part was scary." She said Shea lives in a neighboring subdivision and warns her neighbors to always be aware of their surroundings. "Be more aware of who's around you, who's acting strange, to keep your distance from somebody who might be acting strange," Dorris said. But hopes that Shea gets the help he needs. Th e Source: Information in this story comes from interviews done by FOX 13's Danielle Zulkosky.
