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.
2026 Firearm Prices Are Up 10–20% Depending On Manufacture An Explanation from Gregg Kielma-Tactical K Training and Firearms As someone who lives and breathes this industry every single day—both as an FFL and as a firearms instructor—I pay close attention to the trends that affect responsible gun owners. When prices jump 10–20% in a single year, people notice. Students ask me about it on the range, customers ask about it during transfers, and families ask about it when they’re trying to budget for their first defensive firearm. Here’s the straight, practical breakdown of why firearm prices have climbed, and what it means for everyday gun owners. 1. Manufacturing Costs Are Up Across the Board Firearms are machines built to extremely tight tolerances. When the cost of raw materials rises—steel, aluminum, polymers, machining components—manufacturers feel it immediately. Over the last year: • Steel prices increased • Precision machining costs rose • Shipping and freight costs jumped When the cost of building a firearm goes up, the final price inevitably follows. 2. Labor Shortages and Skilled Work Demand Firearms manufacturing isn’t an entry level job. It requires skilled machinists, quality control techs, and experienced assembly workers. Many companies have had to raise wages to attract and retain talent. That cost gets baked into the final product. 3. Increased Demand from New Gun Owners Every year, more Americans decide to take responsibility for their own safety. That’s a good thing. But higher demand—especially for handguns, AR platform rifles, and carry pistols—puts pressure on supply. When demand outpaces production, prices rise. 4. Regulatory Pressure and Compliance Costs Whether people agree with the politics or not, the reality is this: Every new rule, form, compliance requirement, or manufacturing standard costs companies money. From serialization requirements to shipping restrictions to background check system changes, manufacturers and distributors spend more time and money staying compliant. Those costs don’t disappear—they get passed on. 5. Supply Chain Disruptions Haven’t Fully Recovered COVID-era disruptions never fully settled. Some specialty parts—springs, barrels, optics components—still face delays. When a single part is delayed, entire production lines slow down. Slower production means fewer guns on shelves, which means higher prices. 6. Brand Competition Has Shifted Companies like SIG, Smith & Wesson, Glock, and Ruger have invested heavily in R&D. Optics-ready slides, modular frames, improved triggers, and better ergonomics all cost money to develop. The modern pistol is far more advanced than what we saw 10 years ago. Innovation raises quality—but it also raises price. 7. Insurance, Liability, and Operational Costs This is the part most people never see. Manufacturers, distributors, and FFLs all face rising insurance premiums and operational costs. Liability coverage for anything firearm-related has skyrocketed. That cost trickles down through the entire supply chain. What This Means for Responsible Gun Owners Price increases aren’t a sign of the industry collapsing—they’re a sign of an industry adapting to economic pressure, regulatory changes, and increased demand. For the everyday gun owner, it means: • Budgeting a little more for quality • Buying once, crying once • Maintaining what you already own • Training is becoming even more valuable than gear A well-trained shooter with a reliable firearm is always more effective than someone chasing the newest model. Kielma’s Parting Shot: My Advice as an Instructor and FFL If you’re planning to buy: • Buy sooner rather than later—prices rarely go backward • Focus on proven platforms • Invest in training before accessories • Take care of the firearms you already own And as always, stay informed, stay responsible, and stay prepared. That’s what separates a gun owner from a protector. Gregg Kielma
Transporting Firearms: What Are the Rules? By Gregg Kielma, Owner & Lead Instructor, Tactical K Training and Firearms Transporting a firearm—whether it’s across town or across the country, it should never be a guessing game. As responsible gun owners, we owe it to ourselves, our families, and our communities to understand the laws that govern how firearms must be moved from point A to point B. The rules aren’t complicated, but they are specific, and failing to follow them can turn an ordinary trip into a legal headache. This is the guidance I give every student who trains with me. 1. Know the Difference Between Carrying and Transporting Carrying a firearm means it’s on your person or readily accessible. Transporting means it’s stored in a way that is not immediately accessible. Why does this matter? Because the law treats these two situations very differently. Even if you have a valid concealed carry permit, some states do not honor it. When you cross into those states, you are no longer “carrying”—you must be “transporting.” 2. Federal Law: The Safe Passage Provision Under the Firearm Owners Protection Act (FOPA), federal law protects lawful gun owners traveling through states with restrictive laws—as long as you follow the transport rules: • Firearm must be unloaded • Firearm must be in a locked container • Ammunition must be stored separately • Neither firearm nor ammo can be readily accessible (trunk is ideal) This protection applies only when you are traveling from one lawful location to another. It does not protect you if you stop for sightseeing, overnight stays, or unnecessary detours in restrictive states. 3. State Laws Vary—A Lot Every state has its own rules on: • Whether your permit is recognized • How firearms must be stored in a vehicle • Whether long guns and handguns are treated differently • Whether ammo must be separate • Whether a locked case is required • Whether the firearm must be visible or concealed inside the vehicle Some states are extremely permissive. Others are extremely strict. Never assume your home-state rules apply anywhere else. 4. Best Practices for Vehicle Transport Even when the law is flexible, I teach my students to follow the safest, most universally accepted method: • Unload the firearm • Place it in a locked hard case • Store the case in the trunk or rear cargo area • Keep ammunition in a separate container • Keep your carry permit and ID accessible • Avoid unnecessary handling of the firearm during travel These steps keep you compliant in nearly every jurisdiction and demonstrate responsible intent if questioned. 5. Air Travel: TSA Rules If you’re flying, the rules are federal and very clear: • Firearm must be unloaded • Firearm must be in a hard-sided, locked case • Only you retain the key or combination • Declare the firearm at the airline counter • Ammunition must be in factory packaging or a proper ammo box Never attempt to check a firearm in a soft case or carry it through security. TSA does not play around with this. 6. Moving to a New State Transporting firearms during a move is legal, but once you arrive, you must comply with that state’s laws. Some states require: • Registration • Waiting periods • Magazine restrictions • Specific storage requirements If you’re relocating, research the laws before you arrive—not after. 7. Documentation Matters I always recommend keeping: • Your carry permit • A copy of FOPA’s Safe Passage provision • Proof of your destination (hotel reservation, training class, hunting license, etc.) If you’re ever questioned, documentation helps demonstrate lawful purpose. Kielma’s Parting Shot Transporting a firearm responsibly is part of being a responsible gun owner. The rules aren’t meant to intimidate you, they’re meant to keep you safe, compliant, and confident. When in doubt, follow the strictest standard: unloaded, locked, separate, and inaccessible. Gregg Kielma
Red flags in gun shops: Phrases that signal you should walk away Gregg Kielma Walking into a gun shop should feel professional, transparent, and safety focused. Responsible dealers understand that firearms are serious tools that require knowledge, proper handling, and honest communication. Unfortunately, not every shop follows the same standards. Some rely on aggressive sales tactics, vague claims, or misleading advice to push a purchase. In many cases, the warning signs appear in the words a salesperson uses. Certain phrases can reveal poor knowledge, unsafe attitudes, or even questionable business practices. Recognizing these red flags can help you avoid buying unreliable equipment or receiving bad guidance. Paying attention to what staff members say and how they say it can tell you a lot about whether a shop deserves your trust. Everyone Buys This One. You Don’t Need to Research It A trustworthy gun dealer encourages customers to research, compare options, and choose what fits their needs. When a salesperson insists that “everyone buys this one,” it can be a sign they are more focused on making a quick sale than providing useful advice. Firearms vary widely in size, recoil, ergonomics, and purpose. What works well for one person may be uncomfortable or impractical for another. A responsible shop will ask questions about your experience level, intended use, and preferences before recommending a product. When staff dismiss the importance of research or push a single model as the obvious choice, it suggests limited expertise or an attempt to move inventory rather than guide customers toward the best decision. This Gun Never Has Problems No mechanical device is completely free from the possibility of malfunction. Firearms, like any complex equipment, require maintenance and responsible use. When a salesperson claims that a particular gun “never has problems,” it should raise immediate suspicion. Honest dealers usually discuss both the strengths and limitations of a product. They may mention reliability, but they also acknowledge that regular cleaning, proper ammunition, and safe handling are essential. Absolute statements often indicate exaggeration or a lack of technical understanding. A knowledgeable professional will explain realistic expectations and maintenance requirements instead of promising perfection. If someone dismisses all potential issues, it may suggest they are prioritizing sales over providing accurate information. You Don’t Need Training to Use This Any firearm requires a basic level of training and safety awareness. When a shop employee suggests that a gun can be used safely without proper instruction, it reflects a concerning attitude toward responsibility. Firearms demand careful handling, familiarity with safety rules, and an understanding of local laws. Ethical dealers often encourage first-time buyers to take safety courses or spend time at a shooting range before relying on a firearm. They may even recommend professional instruction. Dismissing the need for training sends the message that the shop values convenience over safety. A reputable store understands that informed owners are safer owners, and it should actively support education rather than minimizing its importance. The Laws Don’t Really Matter Here. Any suggestion that firearm laws are unimportant or easily ignored should be treated as a major warning sign. Responsible gun shops operate with strict attention to regulations, background checks, and documentation requirements. When someone casually dismisses these rules, it may indicate questionable business practices or a lack of respect for legal responsibilities. Firearm laws exist to promote safety and accountability, and legitimate dealers take them seriously. A trustworthy salesperson will clearly explain the legal process involved in purchasing and owning a firearm. If an employee implies that regulations are optional or suggests shortcuts, it is wise to leave immediately. Shops that disregard the law can place customers in serious legal trouble. You Won’t Find a Better Price Anywhere Competitive pricing is common in the firearms market, but absolute claims about unbeatable deals should be approached with caution. When a salesperson insists that you will not find a better price anywhere, it may be an attempt to pressure you into buying quickly without comparing options. Reliable dealers understand that informed customers often check multiple sources before making a purchase. They may explain why their price is competitive, or highlight included services such as warranties or support. However, they rarely discourage customers from doing their own research. High-pressure pricing tactics can indicate insecurity about the product or a desire to close the sale before the buyer has time to think carefully. You Don’t Need to Handle It First Comfort and fit are critical when choosing a firearm. A responsible shop allows customers to safely handle a firearm following proper safety procedures so they can evaluate its grip, weight, and balance. If a salesperson discourages this step or claims it is unnecessary, it suggests a lack of concern for customer experience. Firearms that feel awkward or poorly balanced in the hand may be difficult to control or use confidently. Knowledgeable dealers encourage buyers to handle multiple options to find the best fit. Preventing customers from doing so can signal impatience, poor service, or even an attempt to hide flaws in the product being sold. Maintenance Is Basically Unnecessary Firearms require regular maintenance to remain reliable and safe. Cleaning, proper lubrication, and periodic inspection help prevent malfunctions and extend the life of the equipment. When a salesperson claims that maintenance is unnecessary or minimal, it often reflects misinformation. Experienced gun owners know that even high-quality firearms need care after regular use. Dust, residue from ammunition, and environmental factors can affect performance over time. Responsible dealers usually explain basic maintenance routines and may even recommend cleaning supplies or instructional resources. Downplaying the importance of upkeep suggests either a lack of technical knowledge or an attempt to simplify the purchase conversation at the expense of accuracy. This Is the Only Gun You’ll Ever Need Firearms serve many different purposes, from sport shooting to hunting to personal protection. Because of these varied uses, no single model can truly meet every possible need. When a salesperson insists that one firearm is the only one a person will ever need, it can signal oversimplified sales tactics. A knowledgeable dealer typically discusses how different firearms perform in different situations. They may explain why certain models are better suited for specific tasks or user preferences. Claiming that one option solves every scenario ignores the complexity of firearm design and personal comfort. Such statements often reveal marketing language rather than genuine expertise. Trust Me, You Don’t Need the Details Transparency is a hallmark of a reputable gun shop. Customers should feel comfortable asking questions about specifications, safety features, warranties, and the manufacturer’s reputation. When a salesperson discourages questions or suggests that details are unnecessary, it undermines trust. Firearm purchases involve significant responsibility, and buyers deserve complete information before deciding. Knowledgeable staff members typically enjoy explaining how a firearm works and what makes it suitable for certain uses. Dismissing questions may indicate impatience, limited knowledge, or a desire to avoid discussing weaknesses. If a dealer avoids providing clear information, it is often a sign that you would be better off purchasing from a more transparent retailer.
Backstop 75' Across Will Accommodate 8 Shooters 150 Yard Outdoor Range Built for Real Training Gregg Kielma Opening my new 150 yard outdoor range marks an important step forward for Tactical K Training and Firearms and for every student who trains with me. This private range was built with a single purpose in mind: to give shooters a safe, private, and realistic environment where they can grow their skills with confidence. Set on quiet farm pasture in Parrish Florida, the range offers the kind of space and calm you simply can’t get at crowded public facilities. The open terrain, natural backstops, and controlled layout allow for true practical instruction—from foundational marksmanship to more advanced drills that require distance, movement, and real-world context. At 150 yards, the range supports everything from handgun fundamentals to rifle zeroing, precision work, and defensive carbine training. Students can finally experience what proper distance feels like, how their equipment performs, and how to apply solid technique under guidance rather than guesswork. Safety remains the backbone of everything we do. Every session is structured, supervised, and tailored to the individual. Whether someone is brand new or sharpening advanced skills, they get focused instruction without distractions, noise, or pressure from other shooters. It’s a place where learning is personal, calm, and effective. This new range isn’t just more space—it’s a better training experience. It reflects the values Tactical K Training and Firearms was built on: responsible ownership, practical skill development, and a commitment to helping people feel capable and prepared. Gregg Kielma
Gun Store Owner Indicted for Conspiracy and Attempting to Provide Material Support to Designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations Wednesday, March 25, 2026 U.S. Attorney's Office, District of Arizona PHOENIX, Ariz. – The owner of Grips By Larry, a former federal firearms licensee (FFL) was indicted last week on charges related to providing material support to Cartel de Jalisco Nueva Generacion (“CJNG”) and Cartel de Sinaloa (“CDS”), Mexican cartels that were designated as foreign terrorist organizations in 2025. On March 17, 2026, a federal grand jury in Phoenix returned a superseding indictment against Laurence Gray, 65, of Hereford, Arizona, for Attempting to Provide Material Support to a Foreign Terrorist Organization and Conspiracy to Provide Support to a Designated Foreign Terrorist Organization. Gray was arraigned on the indictment in federal court today. Gray, the owner of Grips by Larry, a federally licensed firearms dealer in Arizona, was previously indicted for firearms trafficking offenses in 2025, alongside a second individual, Barrett Weinberger, 73, of Tucson, Arizona. The original charges against both men included trafficking in firearms, aiding and abetting the straw purchasing of firearms, and aiding and abetting material false statements during the purchase of a firearm. In addition to more firearms charges, last week’s superseding indictment added material support to terrorism charges against Gray. The indictment alleges that Gray knowingly attempted to provide firearms to CJNG in May of 2025, and knowingly conspired to provide firearms to both CJNG and CDS that same year. Both cartels were designated by the U.S. Secretary of State as foreign terrorist organizations pursuant to Section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act on Feb. 20, 2025. Convictions for Conspiracy to and Attempting to Provide Material Support to a Designated Terrorist Organization each carry a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison, a fine of up to $250,000, or both. A conviction for Trafficking in Firearms carries a maximum penalty of 15 years in prison, a fine of up to $250,000, or both. A conviction for Aiding and Abetting the Straw Purchase of Firearms carries a maximum penalty of 15 years in prison, a fine of up to $250,000, or both. A conviction for Aiding and Abetting a Material False Statement During the Purchase of a Firearm carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison, a fine of up to $250,000, or both. 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). The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) conducted the investigation in this case. Assistant U.S. Attorney Marcus Shand, District of Arizona, Phoenix, is handling the prosecution. An indictment is a formal accusation of criminal conduct. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. CASE NUMBER: CR-25-00835-PHX-DJH RELEASE NUMBER: 2026-049_Weinberger, et al. # # # Contact Public Affairs Lennea Montandon Telephone: (602) 514-7542 Lennea.Montandon@usdoj.gov Updated March 25, 2026
2025: Best of CGIC Award Recipients ATF’s Crime Gun Intelligence Center (CGIC) of Chicago hosted its 2025 Year in Review meeting with partner agency executives. At the conclusion of the meeting, ATF Chicago Field Division Special Agent in Charge Christopher Amon, joined by each awardee’s agency head, presented this year’s 2025: Best of CGIC awards to individuals who have demonstrated an unwavering commitment to the pursuit of justice and the mission of the Crime Gun Intelligence Center of Chicago. Below are this year’s award recipients: From Tactical K Training and Firearms, well done, congratulations to all. Officer Patrick Fahey Jr. CGIC of Chicago Investigator of the Year Intelligence Research Specialist Daniel P. Golden CGIC of Chicago Intelligence Research Specialist of the Year Legal Assistant Denise Descamp Exceptional Organizational Leadership and Commitment to the Mission of the CGIC of Chicago Supervisory Legal Assistant Kristin Golfis Exceptional Organizational Leadership and Commitment to the Mission of the CGIC of Chicago Assistant U.S. Attorney William Dunne CGIC of Chicago Prosecutor of the Year Assistant State's Attorney Anne Kelly CGIC of Chicago Prosecutor of the Year Deputy Chief Andrew Whitfield CGIC of Chicago Prosecutor of the Year ATF is the lead federal law enforcement agency with jurisdiction involving firearms and violent crimes. More information about ATF and its programs is available at www.atf.gov. Headquarters
Parrish Florida Man Pleads Guilty to Setting Rental Van on Fire at Bradenton Motel Wednesday, March 25, 2026 U.S. Attorney's Office, Middle District of Florida Tampa, Florida – Kendarius Devonta Stitten (26, Parrish Florida) pleaded guilty today to a violation of the federal Anti-Arson Act. Stitten faces a minimum penalty of 5 years, up to 20 years, in federal prison. United States Attorney Gregory W. Kehoe made the announcement. According to court records, on March 20, 2025, Stitten used a lighter and a t-shirt to set a van on fire in a motel parking lot in Bradenton. A couple from Oregon had rented the van from Tampa International Airport. The fire damaged the van, as shown in the picture below: Stitten admitted to federal and state investigators that he had set the van on fire because he thought it belonged to a female acquaintance who failed to show up to a planned meeting at a room at the motel. 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). This case was investigated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the Manatee County Sheriff’s Office, the Florida Bureau of Fire, Arson, and Explosives Investigations, and Cedar Hammock Fire Rescue. It is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Adam W. McCall. Updated March 25, 2026
Gainesville Florida Man Pleads Guilty to Unlawful Possession of a Homemade Silencer Friday, March 27, 2026 U.S. Attorney's Office, Northern District of Florida Gainesville, Florida – Dean Allen Harper, 55, of Gainesville, Florida, pleaded guilty in federal court to possession of an unmarked and unregistered silencer, which qualifies as a firearm under federal law. The plea was announced by John P. Heekin, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Florida. U.S. Attorney Heekin said: “I deeply appreciate the excellent investigative work of our state and federal law enforcement partners to remove dangerous, armed criminals from our streets. My office will continue to back up their hard work on the front lines with aggressive prosecutions under the Department of Justice’s Operation Take Back America initiative to keep our communities safe from violent criminals.” Court documents reflect that on November 21, 2025, law enforcement conducted a traffic stop on a vehicle Harper was driving. The vehicle that contained numerous firearms, ammunition, methamphetamine, and drug paraphernalia. In total, Harper was in possession of two rifles, two pistols, multiple magazines, and numerous rounds of ammunition, including armor-piercing ammunition. One of the pistols also had an automotive oil filter converted into a homemade suppressor/silencer attached to its barrel: The threaded barrel had an aftermarket attachment which allowed the oil filter to be attached. The homemade silencer did not have a serial number and was not registered in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record. At sentencing, the defendant faces up to 10 years’ imprisonment, three years of supervised release, and a $10,000 fine. Sentencing is scheduled for June 16, 2026, at 9:00 a.m., at the United States Courthouse in Gainesville before Chief United States District Judge Allen C. Winsor. The case involved an investigation by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives and the Alachua County Sheriff’s Office. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Adam Hapner. 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 Contact United States Attorney’s Office Northern District of Florida USAFLN.Press.Office@usdoj.gov X: @USAO_NDFL Updated March 27, 2026
Federal Judge Rejects Trump DOJ Motion To Gut Ruling Striking Down Post Office Carry Ban We reported back in November that, after a federal court ruled the ban on carrying firearms in post offices unconstitutional, the Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a motion to significantly limit the scope of the injunction. In the case Firearms Policy Coalition Inc. v. Bondi, the court ruled on September 30: “The Court determines that both 18 U.S.C. § 930(a) and 39 C.F.R. § 232.1(1) are inconsistent with the principles that underpin this Nation’s regulatory tradition. Thus, they are unconstitutional as applied to carrying firearms inside an ordinary post office or on post office property.” Unsatisfied with the ruling, the DOJ immediately filed a motion to limit the scope of the injunction to only the named individual plaintiffs and to members of SAF and its partner organizations who were members when the complaint was originally filed and who have been identified and verified. That, of course, prompted both the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) to fight back, filing a brief countering the federal government’s request. On March 17, a District Court judge in Texas ruled in favor of the two organizations and their partners, confirming that all current and future members are covered by the injunction in the case, which bars enforcement of the post office carry ban at most ordinary locations.
Amtrack: Firearms in Checked Baggage 3/22/2026 Amtrak accepts reservations of firearms and ammunition for carriage between Amtrak stations and on Amtrak trains within the United States that offer checked baggage service and a ticket office. Amtrak Connection bus services are not to be included in this service. The following policies are in effect: • Notification that the passenger will be checking firearms/ammunition must be made no later than 24 hours before train departure by calling Amtrak at 800-USA-RAIL. Online reservations for firearms/ammunition are not accepted. • The passengers must travel on the same train that is transporting the checked firearms and/or ammunition. • All firearms and/or ammunition must be checked at least 30 minutes prior to scheduled train departure. Some larger stations require that baggage be checked earlier. Please contact your departure station for more details. • All firearms (rifles, shotguns, handguns, taser guns, starter pistols) must be unloaded and in an approved, locked hard-sided container not exceeding 62" L x 17" W x 7" D (1575 mm x 432 mm x 178 mm). The passenger must have sole possession of the key or the combination for the lock to the container. The weight of the container may not exceed 50 lbs/23 kg. • Smaller locked, hard-sided containers containing smaller unloaded firearms such as handguns, taser guns and starter pistols must be securely stored within a suitcase or other item of checked baggage, but the existence of such a firearm must be declared. • All ammunition carried must be securely packed in the original manufacturer's container; in fiber, wood, or metal boxes; or in other packaging specifically designed to carry small amounts of ammunition. The maximum weight of all ammunition and containers may not exceed 11 lbs/5 kg. • The passenger is responsible for knowing and following all federal, state, and local firearm laws at all jurisdictions to and through which he or she will be traveling. • All other Amtrak checked baggage policies apply, including limits on the number of pieces of checked baggage, the maximum weight of each piece (50 lbs/23 kg). • Firearms/ammunition may not be carried in carry-on baggage; therefore, checked baggage must be available on all trains and at all stations in the passenger's itinerary. • At the time of check-in, passengers will be required to complete and sign a two-part Declaration Form. • BB guns and Compressed Air Guns (to include paintball markers), are to be treated as firearms and must comply with the above firearms policy. Canisters, tanks, or other devices containing propellants must be emptied prior to checking and securely packaged within the contents of the passenger's luggage. Passengers failing to meet the above-mentioned requirements for checking firearms will be denied transportation.
