Billionares and Guns...Money Talks
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.
Open carry is "the law of the state," Florida's top cop says The open carry of firearms is now legal in Florida thanks to a recent court decision deeming the state's ban on the practice unconstitutional, Attorney General James Uthmeier announced Monday. Why it matters: His guidance provides a statewide read of the appellate court decision amid differing interpretations by local law enforcement leaders. Driving the news: "As of last week, open carry is the law of the state," Uthmeier posted on X about the First District Court of Appeal's ruling, issued Wednesday. • Attached was a memo to Florida law enforcement agencies and state attorney's offices saying they "should refrain from arresting or prosecuting law-abiding citizens carrying a firearm in a manner that is visible to others." Between the lines: Although the nearly 40-year-old law banning the practice can only be repealed by the Legislature, several agencies indicated prior to Uthmeier's guidance that they would stop enforcing it. Yes, but: Some sheriffs — including those in Pinellas, Polk, Hernando and Manatee — said that open carry remains illegal until Sept. 25, after the 15-day window during which parties can appeal the court ruling. • "To be on the safe side, you probably don't want to change your actions until Sept. 25," Hernando County Sheriff Al Nienhuis said Monday in a Facebook Live video. • Uthmeier refuted that in his memo, citing legal precedent that says the effective date "is the date appearing on the face of the decision." The intrigue: Pinellas Sheriff Bob Gualtieri, who has long been against open carry, further questioned the reach of the ruling, saying Friday in a statement that Pinellas is under the jurisdiction of the Second District Court of Appeal, not the First. • Gualtieri also noted a previous Florida Supreme Court ruling that upheld the ban, saying that it may trump the lower court's decision. What they're saying: "We will follow the law and respect statutes and court decisions," said Gualtieri, who is also a lawyer. "However, we must know 'what' the law is and where it is applicable before we can decide 'what' and 'how' we enforce the law." • The agency will publish additional guidance to the public before Sept. 25, Gualtieri said, "but in the meantime, please remember, the open carry of guns in Florida is still unlawful." • Gualtieri did not immediately return Axios' request for comment Monday. Zoom out: Both local sheriffs and Uthmeier emphasized that last week's decision doesn't impact where you can bring a gun. • Private property owners maintain their right to ask those bearing arms to leave. • Guns remain banned at government buildings and meetings, schools, polling places, college campuses and bars.
They killed the man… but they could never slay the idea. Charlie Kirk drew his last breath at the hands of a depraved assassin. He leaves behind a widow and two small children – one of whom instinctively ran to him for comfort after hearing the shot ring out. Charlie was a family man. A believer in fair, open-minded dialogue. A champion of good-faith debate. These things carried him… until that bullet stole his life. Take a moment. Let grief wash over you. Feel the ache for his wife, his children, his loved ones. This was no political encounter. This was an innocent soul, cut down while standing for what he believed. But here’s what they won’t understand: Charlie may have fallen, but the ideals he championed swirl stronger now than ever. A single bullet might end a heartbeat… but it cannot end the idea that beat within that heart. That idea is you. Millions across this nation stand in that very heartbeat. With courage. With conviction. With eyes wide open to the evil forces rising among people who are fundamentally at war against the principles that make this nation great, forces that traffic in coercion, in censorship, in an unhinged thirst for power. These are not abstract threats: they seek to break you, your family, your freedom. When they require silence, we must roar. When they want you cowed, we must stand tall. Now is no time for quiet compliance. Now is the time to organize, to rally, to fortify yourself politically and spiritually. To that end, Tactical K Training and Firearms is donating $1,000 to Turning Point USA… because we can’t think of a better way to pay tribute to this fallen Patriot, a God and family loving man for truth and freedom. We invite you to stand beside us. Please donate today. Every dollar you give fuels: • The courage to speak truth… even when the mob demands silence • The training to understand politics, policy, and our rights… so we can defend them • The infrastructure to build movements rooted in grace, strength, and unyielding hope Invest in the idea. Invest in your children’s future. Because they killed the man, but never the idea. And you are that idea alive, beating, and refusing to yield. Stand with us. Honor him. Protect your family’s freedom. Please give to Turning Point USA God Bless America, Charlie Kirk and his family.
Recently a friend learned someone they know owns a firearm. How do I 'red flag' them so the government takes the firearm away and destroys it? Gregg Kielma Says Gregg Kielma, firearms Instructor, FFL Gunsmith and First Aid Fundamentals Instructor, "thank you, John, for your question, it highlights the reason why most gun owners protest red flag laws. It's because of people like you John, that believe that just owning a firearm is a crime. You are the one that cause legal firearms owner death of innocent people through lies and deceit. John, what do you think happens when the police come in the middle of the night with a no-knock warrant? The lies you told law enforcement concerning a legal firearm owner who use firearms for protection and their safety amounts to a crime. It sets the stage for armed confrontation and for what? A police officer or innocent homeowner dies because you don't like firearms and you're a liar? John, thank you for your question. This may help clarify why some people have concerns about red flag laws. John’ if you ever do such a thing you should go to jail for the rest of your life. No appeal, no questions—just time in a jail cell to reflect on your actions. Shame on you.
If you are carrying a concealed firearm and are approached by someone with a knife with the intention of robbing you, should you threaten them by saying you have the gun, or draw it first? Thoughts from Tom H. Says Kielma, you give the commands, stop, stop, The perp has one of two choices, retreat or continue to advance. Either way you're in a very difficult position. Use distance and time to your advantage. Always be situationally aware. T he perp already knows the risks and is committed. See Tom’s reasoning below. Your gun is ‘all or none’. Don’t threaten, don’t brandish, don’t mess around. Use it, or don’t. Once you decide that you need to shoot and commit to that course of action, you draw and fire. If he didn’t get the picture in the half second or so you afforded him, that’s unfortunate for the perp. He should have thought about that when he decided to try to rob you with a deadly weapon. If he’s within twenty-one feet, or just a little more than the length of a full-sized pickup truck, you are essentially out of time. If he gets any closer before you decide to draw and fire, he can charge you and slash or stab you with his blade before you’ll be able to draw, aim, and fire at him. You might have hit him as he’s closing in, however, he’ll still have the inertia to reach you if you can’t make space between you and him. You also don’t know what he has in mind unless he says things that clue you in. He may be wanting to rob you, but he also may just want to stab you to death for whatever twisted reason his broken brain can conjure up. There may be someone or something he absolutely despises, and for some reason, when he looked at you, his delusional mind registers that. If he attempts to attack you with a knife, you counter his attack with your gun to keep his knife away from you.
Common Myths and Misconceptions About Firearms and Ammo Gregg Kielma Firearms and ammunition tend to stir strong emotions and heated arguments. Some of that comes from genuine concerns, but just as much is fueled by myths that have been repeated so often they feel like fact. You'll hear them in news stories, political debates, gun shop chatter, and even around the dinner table1 claims about how guns work, how dangerous ammunition really is, and what different terms actually mean. If you want a real conversation about firearms, it helps to clear away the fog. Here's a closer look at some of the most persistent gun myths, with a dose of reality. Key Points • Inaccurate ideas about firearms from rumors, mass media, and political rhetoric can endanger people and distort policy debates. It's important to ground our perspectives in facts. Why These Myths Matter • Some of these misconceptions are harmless but others shape how people vote, legislate, and talk about safety. Believing that a suppressor makes a gun silent, for example, can lead to calls for bans based on an inaccurate picture of what they do. Thinking that ammo is dangerously unstable might cause unnecessary fear, while assuming a gun never needs cleaning could result in a dangerous malfunction. Reliable information enables safe gun maintenance, clarifies risks for non-owners, and ensures informed public discussion. For those wanting more gun regulations, understanding how they work can help focus political effort on things that really will help improve public safety, not just assuage public opinion. Myth 1: "Silencers" Make Guns Whisper-Quiet • In Hollywood, the hitman fires a pistol with a little metal tube on the end and all you hear is a soft pfft. The truth is far less sneaky. A suppressor often called a "silencer “doesn’t make a gunshot silent. It simply reduces the noise by about 20 to 35 decibels, which is enough to make shooting safer for hearing but nowhere near silent. A typical suppressed handgun is still as loud as a jackhammer. It won't go unnoticed, and hearing protection is still a must at the range. Suppressors are about reducing ear damage and improving shooter comfort, not about turning gunfire into a whisper. Myth 2: Ammunition "Goes Off" Easily • Some imagine that a box of cartridges is like a row of tiny grenades, ready to detonate if dropped or left in the sun. A bullet fires only when its primer is sharply struck, usually by a gun's firing pin. Dropping a round might dent the casing or damage the bullet, but it won't cause the kind of dramatic explosion you see in movies. Extreme heat can make ammo dangerous, and rounds tossed into a fire may pop. But without a gun barrel to contain and direct the energy, the bullet isn't going to rocket across the room like a miniature missile. Safe storage still matters, but the odds of "accidental" firing from normal handling are extremely low. Myth 3: Modern Civilian Guns Are "Machine Guns" • A common confusion exists between semi-automatic and fully automatic firearms. Civilian rifles that resemble military models are typically semi-automatic, firing one round per trigger pull. In contrast, fully automatic weapons—often called machine guns—fire continuously while the trigger is held and have been strictly regulated in the U.S. since 1934. Visual similarity does not mean identical function. Myth 4: Bigger Caliber Means Guaranteed "Stopping Power • Pop culture often portrays larger bullets as having greater effects, but while bigger calibers can generate more energy, shot placement is generally more important for stopping a threat. A small round placed accurately may be more effective than a larger one that does not hit vital areas. Medical studies indicate that there is no specific bullet size that ensures instant incapacitation, except for explosive devices such as grenades. Actual outcomes are influenced by factors like target movement, shooter accuracy, ammunition design, and chance. Myth 5: Ballistic "Fingerprints" Are Foolproof • Crime shows often portray forensic experts matching a recovered bullet to a specific gun with certainty. While it's true that rifling in a barrel leaves unique marks on bullets, these markings can change over time as the barrel wears. Poor-quality ammo, damaged bullets, or environmental factors can make identification harder. In the real world, ballistic matching can be a valuable investigative lead, but it's far from the flawless "fingerprint" you see on TV. Myth 6: You Don't Need to Clean Modern Guns • Some owners believe that advancements in modern manufacturing make gun cleaning less necessary. While many contemporary firearms are more corrosion-resistant than older models, regular maintenance remains important. Powder residue, dirt, and moisture can cause malfunctions, particularly with frequent use or improper storage. Cleaning and applying lubrication support reliable firearm function. For guns kept loaded for home defense, periodic inspection and maintenance—at least every few months, or sooner if fired—is recommended. Myth 7: "Smart Guns" Are Common and Reliable • Smart guns, designed to work only for authorized users via fingerprint or RFID technology, remain costly, slow, and prone to malfunction in real-world scenarios. Adoption by police, military, and civilians has been minimal. Colorado's Bio fire is among the first to offer a biometric gun with facial recognition. Myth 8: Gunshots Have Great Range and Accuracy • Many people believe firearms can easily hit distant targets, but actual effective range varies by firearm type, ammunition, and shooter skill. Most handguns are reliable up to 25–60 yards, while rifles require training and good equipment for consistent long-range accuracy—details often overlooked in movies. Myth 9: "Armor-Piercing" Ammo Is Everywhere • The term "armor-piercing" is often misused. Police body armor stops most handgun rounds, but some rifle cartridges can penetrate based on bullet type, velocity, and armor rating. True armor-piercing rounds are military-grade and illegal for civilians. Myth 10: Ammunition Expires Quickly • Ammunition has a shelf life of decades when stored in a cool, dry place away from temperature extremes. Many World War II surplus rounds still function reliably. However, any ammo showing signs of corrosion, swelling, or damage should be safely discarded. Myth 11: Explosions, Richochets, and More • Films often depict cars exploding when shot, bullets propelling individuals backward, and ricochets occurring on any metal surface. Gunfire rarely causes cars to explode, as gasoline must vaporize and mix with air at a specific concentration for an explosion to occur, and vehicles are constructed to reduce fuel explosion risks. Individuals struck by bullets typically fall in place or stumble rather than being forcefully moved. Ricochets are less frequent than commonly portrayed; their occurrence and behavior depend on the bullet type, the material's hardness, and the angle of impact.
Gun recovered in Charlie Kirk assassination revealed — and ammo bore pro-trans, anti-fascist messages A rifle recovered in the hunt for conservative influencer Charlie Kirk’s assassin contained ammo engraved with “transgender and anti-fascist ideology,” according to preliminary reports from law enforcement sources. The weapon — an imported .30-06-caliber Mauser bolt-action rifle was discovered wrapped in a towel by investigators in a wooded area following the killing of the conservative leading light, who was shot once while speaking at an event at Utah Valley University on Wednesday, according to the memo. A bolt-action rifle recovered near the scene where Charlie Kirk was fatally shot is seen in a photo obtained by the New York Post. Obtained by the NY Post A source familiar noted that the Justice Department is investigating the descriptions alleged in the ATF memo, but that the agency was unable to confirm that the description matched the evidence recovered at the scene. Kirk, 31, was struck in the neck by a single shot fired from a distance of around 200 yards while answering an audience member’s question about mass shootings committed by transgender people. A surveillance image of the person of interest wanted for the shooting of Charlie Kirk. Sources said they believe the fatal shot was a high-caliber round — similar to the ammo used in long-range sniper rifles or for hunting big game. The father of two and Turning Point USA founder was rushed to a nearby hospital, where he was later pronounced dead.
If someone is pointing a gun on you, would you still try to draw your gun? Gregg Kielma No. Not while they are looking directly at me anyway. That’s a good way to end up shot or possible dead. You wait your turn. Anyone carrying a concealed firearm should have at least a 1.5 second draw to the first shot time. So, the idea is to wait until the chance presents itself and then go to work. That is called “waiting your turn”. For example, if someone is pointing a gun at you and they turn their head to look at something else and their ear is towards you, that means it is now your turn. With a 1.5 second draw to the first shot time, if his ear is towards you, you can literally put a couple bullets in the guy before he has time for his mind to register what is going on and react. A 1.5 second draw to the first shot is not that hard to accomplish. Anyone who is a concealed carrier should be able to achieve a 1.5 second draw to first shot. If the perp turns the back of his head towards you, it gets even better for you because now all you need is about a 2.5 second draw to the first shot time which is easy to accomplish with practice. However, if the perp is looking directly at you… it’s practically a no-win situation for you so it’s almost always better to wait your turn. I highly suggest training with Tactical K Training and Firearms today. There is information on the website to sign up for class with a certified instructor. We will conduct real self-defense encounters, break down the options, analyze what is happening, and teach you about when and how to react. It’s lifesaving information. Please call or sign up today.
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has shown the country how pro-gun governors operate By Lee Williams Every morning as I don my Staccato 9mm and my Microtech automatic knife without any permits or paperwork cluttering my wallet, I realize that these freedoms would never have taken place without the honest pro-gun leadership of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. Law-abiding Floridians no longer need to apply in writing or pay a state fee to carry a concealed weapon. Gov. DeSantis saw to that. For the state’s millions of gun owners, our 46-year-old, soon-to-be-former governor has been a true friend. Unfortunately, DeSantis is term-limited and barred from running again. Fortunately, during his terms in office, the good governor gave gun owners one heck of a good ride. Let’s take a close look at his pro-gun accomplishments. Permitless concealed carry On April 3, 2023, in Florida’s state capitol of Tallahassee, Gov. DeSantis signed House Bill (HB) 543, which strengthened Floridians’ Second Amendment rights by allowing concealed weapons to be carried without a state permit. Concealed-carry permits are still available but are no longer required. “Constitutional Carry is in the books,” Desantis said at the time. Florida became the 26th state to enact concealed-carry legislation. However, Open Carry remains prohibited. According to state law, Floridians may only carry an exposed handgun “while traveling to or from fishing, camping, hunting or target shooting.” “Would be great to see it hit my desk — Florida needs to join the overwhelming majority of states and protect this right,” DeSantis posted about Open Carry on X. DeSantis has promised he would change this and sign Open Carry legislation; however, the state’s Republican-led legislature has never given him a bill to sign, and they have never fully explained why. Some believe tourism – Disney and the beaches – as well as the powerful Florida Sheriffs Association could be the reasons why millions of Floridians do not yet enjoy all of their Second Amendment rights. Florida State Guard In December 2021, while Joe Biden occupied the White House, DeSantis created the Florida State Guard, a 200-member volunteer paramilitary force that answered to him, not Joe Biden. The Florida State Guard assists the Florida National Guard in state emergencies. DeSantis noted that the Florida State Guard was not “encumbered by the federal government,” and that the unit would give him “the flexibility and the ability needed to respond to events in our state in the most effective way possible.” Florida, he pointed out, has always been one of the most pro-military and veteran-friendly states. “We are proud of our veterans and active-duty military members and proud of what our communities do to support them,” DeSantis said in a press release. “Florida is one of the most veteran friendly states and I think there are very few places that you would rather be on duty than in the state of Florida. As a veteran, I really appreciate what everyone who wears the uniform does in our state and am excited about these proposals – they will go a long way and have a meaningful impact. In Florida, we are going to continue our momentum of supporting our military, supporting our veterans and being good stewards of our military installations.” Other 2A actions Last May, DeSantis ended a confusing portion of state law that automatically imposed reprehensible firearm restrictions during a local state of emergency.
Jefferson Parish Man Guilty of Possessing Machine Gun Thursday, September 4, 2025 U.S. Attorney's Office, Eastern District of Louisiana shane.jones@usdoj.gov NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA – Acting U.S. Attorney Michael M. Simpson announced that on August 21, 2025, JAHBRELL PRICE (“PRICE”), age 25, of Marrero, La. plead guilty before United States District Judge Nannette Jolivette Brown to a two-count indictment pending against him. Count 1 charged PRICE with possession with the intent to distribute a controlled substance, in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Sections 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(3). Count 2 charged PRICE with possession of a machine gun, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 922(o) and 924(a)(2). Sentencing is set for December 4, 2025. According to court documents, on January 7, 2024, Jefferson Parish Sheriff’s Office detectives located PRICE at a motel in the 6700 block of Westbank Expressway, Marrero, Louisiana. He was taken into custody for an outstanding Orleans Parish arrest warrant. Detectives then secured a search warrant for PRICE’s hotel room and located twenty (20) bottles of promethazine (9,460 ml), $1,375.00 in United States currency, and a Glock Model 45 nine-millimeter handgun with an attached external and visible machine gun conversion device. PRICE faces up to 1 year imprisonment, up to a $100,000 fine, and a $50 mandatory special assessment fee as to Count One, and up to 10 years imprisonment, up to a $250,000 fine, and up to 3 years of supervised release for Count Two, as well as payment of a $100 mandatory special assessment fee for each count. This case is part of Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN), a program bringing together all levels of law enforcement and the communities they serve to reduce violent crime and gun violence, and to make our neighborhoods safer for everyone. On May 26, 2021, the Department launched a violent crime reduction strategy strengthening PSN based on these core principles: fostering trust and legitimacy in our communities, supporting community-based organizations that help prevent violence from occurring in the first place, setting focused and strategic enforcement priorities, and measuring the results. Acting U.S. Attorney Michael M. Simpson praised the work of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. The case was prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Mary Katherine Kaufman of the General Crimes Unit . Contact Shane M. Jones Public Information Officer United States Attorney’s Office, Eastern District of Louisiana United States Department of Justice Updated September 4, 2025
Laredo Weapons Trafficking Coordinator Pleads Guilty to Charges for Conspiring to Smuggle Military Grade Firearms to Mexican Drug Cartel U.S. Attorney's Office, Western District of Texas SAN ANTONIO – A Laredo man pleaded guilty in a federal court in San Antonio today to four conspiracy counts related to his role as the coordinator for a weapons trafficking organization that illegally obtained hundreds of firearms and smuggled them from the U.S. to Mexico in support of the Cartel Del Noreste (CDN). According to court documents, Gerardo Rafael Perez Jr. aka Jerry, 24, and his network of straw purchasers illicitly obtained the firearms, including FNH SCAR rifles, Barrett .50 caliber rifles, FNH M249S rifles, M240s and M1919s, from gun stores and unlicensed dealers in San Antonio and other Texas cities. They also acquired FightLite MCR belt-fed upper receivers, which allow standard AR-15 lower receivers to use belt-fed ammunition and provide for a greater capacity of continuous fire before reloading. Perez directed the acquisition, trafficking, and illegal export of guns and parts in support of the cartel, all without an export license or a license to deal firearms. Agents searched for the cell phones of multiple straw purchasers of firearms who were receiving directions from Perez, revealing communications in which Perez sent instructions on specific guns to buy from specific sellers across Texas. On one occasion, a straw purchaser purchased six firearms for Perez in San Antonio with nearly $50,000 in cash, including three FN SCAR 17S 7.62 caliber rifles, an FN SCAR 20S 7.62 caliber rifle, an FN M249S belt-fed rifle 5.56 caliber, and a Barrett M82A1 .50 caliber rifle, all which Perez acquired for the purpose of delivery to Mexico. Communications showed Perez telling another straw purchaser he was obliterating serial numbers from trafficked guns so there was no way the gun could be tracked to the original seller. On Sept. 26, 2023, law enforcement conducted a search of Perez’s residence and recovered multiple firearms and various types of ammunition, blank ATF Form 4473s, and CDN jewelry. Agents seized and searched Perez’s cell phone and found photos depicting him in tactical gear and wearing CDN jewelry, as well as photos of numerous guns. His phone also contained messages in which Perez solicited firearms, coordinated their purchase, and negotiated prices with sellers. Perez was arrested March 20, 2024, along with co-defendants Antonio Osiel Casarez, Luis Matias Leal, Francisco Alejandro Benavides Jr., and Mark Anthony Trevino Jr. Three other co-defendants, Gerardo Ibarra Jr., Gerardo Corona Jr., and Jose Emigdio Q. Mendoza were named in an earlier indictment and arrested in 2023. The ninth and tenth co-defendants, Armando Mata Jr., and Felipe Vasquez III, were charged in a superseding indictment and arrested in March 2025. Perez pleaded guilty today to conspiracy to traffic firearms, conspiracy to straw purchase firearms, conspiracy to smuggle goods from the United States, and conspiracy to possess firearms in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime. He faces up to 25 years in federal prison. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors. U.S. Attorney Justin R. Simmons for the Western District of Texas made the announcement. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and Homeland Security Investigations are investigating the case. Assistant U.S. Attorney William Calve is prosecuting the case. 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. Operation Take Back America streamlines efforts and resources from the Department’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETFs) and Project Safe Neighborhood (PSN). ### Contact USATXW.MediaInquiry@usdoj.gov Updated September 4, 2025
