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.
Dennis Rader: The People Who Suffered Because Of This Bastard. Paula Dietz's Unsettling Tale of Her Marriage to Dennis Rader Gregg Kielma Says Gregg Kielma, Firearms Instructor, Safety Instructor, First Aid Fundamentals Instructor and Gunsmith: Friends, this is why I carry a firearm and teach firearm use and situational awareness. Bastards like Rader can be stopped. It should have never taken 17 years to get this bastard. Please let me show you how to stay safe. Please protect yourself and family. Paula Dietz lived with the BTK killer for 34 years without knowing who he was. Dennis Lynn Rader is an American serial killer who goes by the nickname "BTK," which stands for "bind, torture, kill." Between 1974 and 1991, he killed ten people in Wichita and Park City, Kansas, and then sent letters to the police and the media, bragging about what he had done. Rader stopped sending letters for ten years, but he started again in 2004, which led to his arrest in 2005 and his guilty plea. Paula Dietz Paula Dietz had known her husband for 34 years as a loving husband, church council president, and Cub Scout leader. Nevertheless, she was shocked to discover that he was also a serial killer. On February 25, 2005, Dietz's husband was taken into custody, shattering everything she had previously believed to be true. Authorities abruptly identified the man who had been her children's adoring father and the head of their church council as the BTK Killer, The cognitive whiplash that Dennis Rader's wife went through was undoubtedly indescribable. In 1970, she fell in love with the retired US Air Force officer, and a few months later they were married. After they settled into their Park City, Kansas, house, Dietz took care of their two kids, and Rader went to work as an electrician. Dietz had no idea that he was using his electrical skills to break into homes at night and murder innocent people while wearing a mask. Despite a trail of clues left in her husband's wake, Dietz only learned Rader's true identity when he was apprehended. Paul Dietz Love Story Paula Dietz was born in Park City, Kansas, on May 5, 1948. Most of what is known about her came to light after her husband was arrested, as she lived a relatively quiet life with her family until the BTK Killer was exposed for his crimes. Dietz, on the other hand, was raised in a religious household by devout parents. Her father worked as an engineer, and her mother as a librarian. Paula Dietz attended the National American University of Wichita after graduating from her local high school in 1966 and earned a bachelor's degree in accounting in 1970. That same year, she met Rader at church, and the two fell in love quickly. Living With The BTK Killer On the surface, Rader appeared to be a kind U.S. Air Force veteran. But Rader had grown up torturing helpless women and killing small animals, and Dietz had no idea that side of him existed. Dietz married Dennis Rader on May 22, 1971, unaware that he liked to photograph himself in women's underwear or engage in autoerotic asphyxiation. When Paula Dietz discovered she was pregnant in 1973, she was overjoyed, and on November 30, she gave birth to her and Rader's son Brian. Six weeks later, her husband committed his first murders. He broke into the home of Joseph Otero, 38, and his wife Julie on January 15, 1974, and strangled them in front of their children. He then dragged Josephine, 11, and her brother Joseph, 9, into the basement. He suffocated young Joseph before hanging her and masturbating as she died. Before fleeing, Rader took gruesome photos of the scene, which he kept in a lockbox filled with mementos from his victims, including Josephine's underwear. Over the next 17 years, Rader murdered six more women while portraying the ideal family man by day. In 1978, Dietz gave birth to her second child, a girl named Kerri. Rader enjoyed taking his kids fishing and even led his son's Cub Scout troop. Dietz was completely unaware of her husband's secret double life. The Shocking Discovery Rader was finally caught in 2005, almost 15 years after his last murder. He sent letters to local news outlets with photos and information about his past crimes. He kept the photos, the underwear, and the IDs of the women he had killed in a lockbox at home, and Paula Dietz had never thought to open it. When the FBI searched Rader's home after he was arrested on February 25, 2005, they found these strange items. Dietz had no idea what was going on. She told police that her husband was "a good man and a great father." But after he admitted to killing 10 people and pleaded guilty on June 27, 2005, Dennis Rader's wife stopped talking to him. She never wrote him another letter, and she never went to see him in jail or to any of his court hearings. Kielma's Parting Shot: Rader you two-bit piece of shit....rot in hell you deranged bastard. Gregg Kielma
Welcome to My New Outdoor Firearms Range: A Place Built for Learning, Safety, and Confidence Gregg Kielma 03/087/2026 Opening a new firearms range isn’t just about building a place to shoot—it’s about creating an environment where people feel safe, supported, and genuinely empowered. That’s exactly what I set out to do with my outdoor range here in Parrish, Florida. Set on a quiet stretch of farm pasture, the private range offers a calm, rural backdrop that helps students focus, breathe, and learn without pressure or distraction. This space was designed with purpose. Every lane, every berm, every piece of equipment reflects my commitment to responsible firearm ownership and high quality instruction. Whether someone is touching a firearm for the first time or refining advanced skills, the range gives them room to grow at their own pace. What makes this range special isn’t just the setting—it’s the philosophy behind it. My teaching approach centers on safety, avoidance, and sound decision making. Students learn not only how to shoot, but how to think, evaluate, and stay in control. The goal is always the same: build confidence through competence. The outdoor environment also allows for more realistic, practical training. Students experience natural light, real-world conditions, and the kind of spatial awareness that simply can’t be replicated indoors. It’s a place where people can slow down, ask questions, and get hands on guidance tailored to their needs. Most importantly, this range is personal. It’s built on my belief that education saves lives, that responsible ownership matters, and that every student deserves a safe, welcoming place to learn. I’m proud to open these gates to the community and look forward to helping more people become confident, capable, and responsible firearm owners. If you’re ready to train in a supportive environment that puts safety and skill first, I’d be honored to work with you. Gregg Kielma
Florida Marijuana Laws & Firearm Ownership (2026) Gregory Kielma, Tactical K Training & Firearms 03/08/2026 As a firearms instructor in Florida, I spend a lot of time helping people understand the law—not the rumors, not the social media myths, but the real legal landscape. One of the most confusing areas today is the intersection of marijuana use and firearm ownership. Florida allows medical marijuana, and recreational legalization efforts continue to gain traction, but federal law has not caught up. That creates a legal conflict every responsible gun owner needs to understand. Florida Law vs. Federal Law: The Core Conflict Florida’s medical marijuana program is fully legal under state law. Nothing in Florida statutes prohibits a medical marijuana patient from owning or possessing a firearm. But federal law is a different story. Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3), anyone who is an “unlawful user of a controlled substance” is prohibited from possessing or purchasing a firearm. Marijuana—whether medical or recreational—remains illegal federally, even with recent federal discussions about rescheduling. A January 2026 legal analysis confirms that even if marijuana is moved from Schedule I to Schedule III, the federal firearm prohibition still applies unless Congress changes the law. Recent Court Rulings: Progress, But Not Final Florida saw major movement in 2025 when the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that medical marijuana patients may have a valid Second Amendment claim to own firearms. This was a significant step forward for patients’ rights. However, the ruling did not eliminate the federal prohibition. The case may still reach the Supreme Court, and until a final nationwide decision is issued, the federal ban technically remains in place. What This Means for Florida Gun Owners in 2026 1. Purchasing a Firearm Anyone buying a firearm from an FFL must complete ATF Form 4473. The form directly asks whether the buyer uses marijuana. • Answering “yes” results in a denied purchase. • Answering “no” while using marijuana is a federal felony. • The form explicitly states that marijuana is illegal federally regardless of state law. 2. Possessing a Firearm Florida law does not prohibit medical marijuana patients from possessing firearms. Federal law still technically does. In practice, §922(g)(3) is usually enforced when another crime is involved, but the risk remains. 3. Recreational Marijuana Efforts Florida’s push for recreational legalization continues, with a revised initiative aimed at the 2026 ballot. Even if recreational marijuana becomes legal in Florida, federal firearm restrictions would still apply unless federal law changes. My Professional Guidance as a Firearms Instructor At Tactical K Training and Firearms I teach that responsible ownership starts with understanding the law as it exists today—not how we wish it worked. Here’s my advice to students and clients: • Do not lie on Form 4473. • Understand that state legality does not override federal firearm law. • Stay informed—the legal landscape is shifting, and court decisions in the next few years may finally resolve this conflict. • If you are a medical marijuana patient, be cautious about purchasing or possessing firearms until federal law or the courts provide clear, final guidance. Kielma's Parting Shot • Florida allows medical marijuana and does not restrict firearm ownership for patients. • Federal law still prohibits marijuana users from possessing or purchasing firearms. • Court rulings in 2025–2026 show momentum toward restoring gun rights for medical marijuana patients, but nothing is final yet. • Recreational legalization efforts for 2026 do not change federal firearm rules. • Responsible gun owners should stay informed and avoid federal violations. Gregg Kielma
Domestic Violence and Firearms in Florida By Gregory Kielma, Tactical K Training & Firearms 03/08/2026 Domestic violence is one of the most dangerous and unpredictable situations a family can face. As a firearms instructor, I emphasize that responsible gun ownership is rooted in safety, legality, and prevention. Understanding how Florida and federal law treat firearms in domestic violence cases is essential for every gun owner in our state. Why Domestic Violence and Firearms Matter Domestic violence incidents are emotionally charged, fast moving, and often escalate without warning. When firearms are present, the risk of serious injury or death increases dramatically. Florida lawmakers have recognized this reality, and in recent years the state has moved toward stronger protections for victims — including clearer rules on firearm surrender when a court issues a protective injunction. Federal Law: Firearm Prohibitions in Domestic Violence Cases Under 18 U.S.C. §922(g)(8), a person is prohibited from possessing firearms or ammunition if they are subject to a qualifying protection order. This applies when: • The order was issued after a hearing with notice and opportunity to be heard • The protected party is an intimate partner (spouse, former spouse, co parent, or cohabitant) • The order includes language restraining threats, harassment, or violence Federal law also prohibits possession after a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence conviction. These federal restrictions apply in Florida regardless of state statutes. Florida Law Today Florida historically did not require officers to remove firearms at the scene of a domestic violence incident, nor did it have a state level prohibition for misdemeanor domestic violence convictions. Instead, Florida relied heavily on federal law and background checks to prevent prohibited persons from purchasing firearms. However, the landscape is changing. New for 2026: HB 729 — Mandatory Firearm Surrender After a Final Injunction Florida’s 2026 legislative session introduced HB 729, a major step toward strengthening victim safety. Under this bill: • When a final judgment of injunction for protection against domestic violence is issued, the respondent must surrender all firearms, ammunition, and concealed carry licenses to local law enforcement. • Law enforcement agencies must create standardized procedures for collecting, documenting, storing, and returning firearms. • Firearms may be transferred to a third party if the respondent chooses. • Firearms are returned only when the injunction is vacated or expires. • Penalties increase for repeat violations of protective injunctions. This bill was filed in response to real tragedies where abusers ignored court orders to surrender firearms, with deadly consequences. HB 729 aims to close that enforcement gap. Other Domestic Violence Reform Efforts in Florida Florida’s 2026 legislative session has seen a surge of domestic violence–related bills, reflecting rising concern statewide. Lawmakers are considering: • Electronic monitoring for high risk offenders • Enhanced penalties for violating injunctions • Address confidentiality protections for victims • Improved enforcement mechanisms for protective orders Advocates describe domestic violence in Florida as a “deadly epidemic,” and these reforms aim to reduce repeat victimization and improve early intervention. What This Means for Florida Gun Owners As responsible firearm owners, we must understand: 1. A domestic violence injunction can immediately affect firearm rights. Even temporary orders may restrict possession under federal law. 2. Final injunctions now trigger mandatory firearm surrender under HB 729. This is a major shift in Florida’s enforcement structure. 3. Violating an injunction — including firearm possession — carries serious criminal penalties. 4. Firearm rights may be restored only after the injunction is lifted and all legal conditions are met. 🔹 My Perspective as an Instructor At Tactical K Training and Firearms, I teach that firearms are tools of defense — not intimidation, anger, or control. Domestic violence is never a “private matter.” It’s a public safety issue, and the law reflects that. If you or someone you know is navigating a domestic violence situation, firearms must be handled with extreme caution and full legal compliance. Safety comes first, always. Kielma’s Parting Shot Domestic violence and firearms intersect at one of the most critical points of personal safety. Florida’s evolving laws — especially HB 729 — show a clear trend toward stronger protections and clearer enforcement. As gun owners, we have a responsibility to stay informed, stay compliant, and promote a culture of safety and respect.
Why a Convicted Felon Cannot Legally Own a Firearm By Gregory Kielma, Tactical K Training and Firearms 03/08/2026 Firearm ownership in the United States is both a constitutional right and a serious personal responsibility. With that responsibility comes a clear legal framework designed to keep firearms in the hands of safe, lawful, and responsible citizens. One of the most important parts of that framework is the federal prohibition on firearm possession by individuals convicted of certain crimes—most commonly, felonies. Understanding why a convicted felon cannot legally own or possess a firearm helps every gun owner appreciate the balance between individual rights and public safety. The Legal Foundation: Federal Law Is Clear Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), anyone convicted of a crime punishable by more than one year in prison—what we commonly call a felony—is prohibited from: • Possessing a firearm • Purchasing a firearm • Receiving a firearm • Transporting a firearm This applies to all firearms, whether modern or antique, and includes ammunition as well. The law is strict, and violations are aggressively prosecuted. A felon found in possession of a firearm can face up to 10 years in federal prison, with even harsher penalties if the offense involves violence, drugs, or prior convictions. Why the Law Exists The purpose of this prohibition is straightforward: to reduce the risk of future violence and protect the public. Felony convictions typically involve conduct that demonstrates a disregard for the law or a threat to community safety. By restricting firearm access, federal law aims to: • Prevent repeat violent offenses • Reduce gun-related crime • Maintain safer communities • Ensure firearms remain in responsible hands This isn’t about punishing someone forever—it’s about preventing foreseeable harm. Firearm Ownership Requires Trust Owning a firearm is not just a right; it’s a privilege earned through responsible behavior. Lawful gun owners demonstrate: • Respect for the law • Safe handling and storage • Sound judgment under stress • A commitment to protecting—not endangering—others A felony conviction breaks that trust in the eyes of the law. Until that trust is restored through legal channels, firearm possession remains off-limits. Restoration of Rights: It Is Possible While federal law prohibits felons from possessing firearms, some individuals can have their rights restored through: • A full pardon • Expungement • Restoration of civil rights by the state where the conviction occurred However, this process is complex, varies by state, and must be completed before any firearm possession becomes legal. Attempting to “guess” or assume rights have been restored is dangerous—one mistake can lead to a federal felony. Anyone seeking restoration should consult a qualified attorney who specializes in firearms law. Why This Matters for Responsible Gun Owners Understanding these laws protects you as well. As a lawful gun owner, you must avoid: • Transferring a firearm to a prohibited person • Allowing a prohibited person access to your firearms • Storing firearms in a way that a prohibited person could reasonably access them Even accidental violations can carry serious consequences. Kielma’s Parting Shot: A Commitment to Safety and Responsibility At Tactical K Training and Firearms, we emphasize that responsible ownership begins with knowledge. Knowing who can—and cannot—legally possess a firearm is part of that responsibility. These laws aren’t meant to punish; they’re meant to protect. They help ensure that firearms remain tools of defense, sport, and personal empowerment—not instruments of further harm. Responsible gun owners stay informed, stay compliant, and stay committed to safety. That’s the standard we uphold, and the standard we teach. Gregg Kielma
Plains man sentenced to 7 years in prison for illegal firearm possession Thursday, March 5, 2026 U.S. Attorney's Office, District of Montana MISSOULA – A Plains man who was prohibited from owning firearms was sentenced today to 84 months in prison, followed by 3 years of supervised release, Acting U.S. Attorney Tim Racicot said. Graham Anthony Bowden, 49, pleaded guilty in November 2025 to one count of prohibited person in possession of a firearm and two counts of possession of an unregistered silencer. U.S. District Judge Donald W. Molloy presided. The government alleged in court documents that in the fall of 2024, law enforcement officers encountered Bowden in several instances in which they either observed him to be armed with a firearm or with firearms accessories. Based in part on those incidents, a federal search warrant was obtained to search Bowden’s residence, which was a camper parked on the property of Bowden’s friend. Also on the property was a freestanding home belonging to Bowden’s friend. Agents located eight firearms belonging to Bowden, along with two silencers and assorted ammunition. Law enforcement interviewed Bowden and he admitted he owned the firearms had been meaning to register them. Bowden acknowledged he had signed paperwork related to his California convictions that prohibited him from possessing firearms but said he thought his rights had been automatically restored at some point. Bowden produced no paperwork to support that assertion. Bowden also admitted to possessing the two silencers, saying one came with a firearm he purchased and that the other was a blank. Bowden said he didn’t know suppressors were federally controlled and needed to be registered. The silencers were not registered in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record. On January 6, 2012, Bowden was convicted of six counts of robbery in the second degree with a firearms enhancement in Orange County Superior Court of California and sentenced to 12 years in prison. He was paroled from custody in 2020. Assistant U.S. Attorney Brian Lowney prosecuted the case. The ATF, Plains Police Department, and Sanders County Sheriff’s Department conducted the investigation. Contact Keri Leggett Acting Public Affairs Officer keri.leggett@usdoj.gov
Convicted Felon with a Machinegun and Fentanyl Pleads Guilty Wednesday, March 4, 2026 U.S. Attorney's Office, Middle District of Georgia MACON, Ga. – A Georgia man with prior drug convictions admitted he was intending to distribute fentanyl and other drugs when officers found him illegally in possession of three firearms, including a machinegun. Rodricas Montreal Jacks, 39, of Sparta, Georgia, pleaded guilty to one count of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon before U.S. District Judge Marc Treadwell on March 3. Jacks is facing a maximum of 15 years in prison to be followed by three years of supervised release and a $250,000 fine. The sentencing hearing is scheduled for June 2. There is no parole in the federal system. “Repeat felony offenders possessing the most dangerous weapons and distributing the deadliest drugs in our communities will be held accountable at the federal level, where there is no parole,” said U.S. Attorney William R. “Will” Keyes. “We appreciate the dedication of our law enforcement partners to make our communities safer for all residents and working with us to ensure justice.” According to court documents and statements referenced in court, Jacks was on probation for a felony drug distribution conviction when he failed to comply with his community service as directed by the Court and failed two drug tests. As a result, law enforcement conducted a search of his residence on Nov. 3, 2022, and found a machinegun plus two firearms in the house, including a firearm that was stolen. Officers also located fentanyl and marijuana, which he intended to distribute, along with multiple digital scales, small plastic bags and a large amount of cash. Officers also discovered suspected crack inside his car. 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 and protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime. The Georgia Department of Community Supervision investigated the case with assistance from the Ocmulgee Drug Task Force and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). Assistant U.S. Attorney Hannah Couch is prosecuting the case for the Government.
Want a machine gun? These states might soon make buying one easier Joseph MacKinnon March 06, 2026 Lawmakers in West Virginia and Kentucky have introduced bills that would enable state police departments to procure and sell machine guns. Republican lawmakers in West Virginia and Kentucky are working on making it easier for Americans to acquire fully automatic firearms — a move that might catch on in other red states. Machine guns — defined by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives as a firearm that can fire "automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger" — are heavily regulated in the United States. While such weapons can be privately owned, Americans are greatly limited in what they can buy and must jump through numerous hoops to seal the deal. 'This is our constitutional right.' Per the Firearm Owners' Protection Act, civilians are barred from possessing a machine gun manufactured after May 19, 1986. Limited supply means a higher price — Silencer Central says that prospective buyers should expect to spend a minimum of $6,000 to $10,000. Interested American buyers at least 21 years of age, neither a felon nor a fugitive, and living in a state without a machine gun ban must pass an AFT background check, pay a one-time $200 transfer tax, and get approval from the government in order to take possession. Once those hurdles are cleared, they can take the machine gun home but fire it only on closed target ranges. In West Virginia, Republican state Sens. Chris Rose and Zack Maynard recently introduced legislation that would establish within the West Virginia State Police an office of public defense that would oversee the procurement and sale of machine guns to "qualified members of the public," namely any citizen presently eligible to purchase and possess firearms under West Virginia and federal law. The Cowboy State Daily reported that the new office would be authorized to transfer newer machine guns to state residents. Blaze News and Tactical K Training and Firearms has reached out to state Sen. Rose for clarification about whether out-of-state American citizens would be able to acquire a machine gun from the proposed authority.
DOJ Pam Bondi Scranton Man Sentenced To 12 Years For Possession Of A Machine Gun Tuesday, February 24, 2026 U.S. Attorney's Office, Middle District of Pennsylvania SCRANTON - The United States Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania announced that Naim Mustafa House, age 28, of Scranton, Pennsylvania, was sentenced on February 24, 2026, to 144 months’ imprisonment by United States District Judge Karoline Mehalchick for possession with intent to distribute marijuana and possession of a machine gun. According to United States Attorney Brian D. Miller, on July 8, 2024, Scranton Police Officers initiated a traffic stop on a vehicle that House was a passenger. House fled on foot and was found hiding under a rear porch of a residence. During a search incident to arrest, police found marijuana packed for resale on his person and inside his backpack found 30 additional grams of marijuana and a Glock 7, 9mm handgun equipped with a device to transition the firearm from a semiautomatic firearm into a fully automatic firearm. The firearm also had an extended magazine containing 10 rounds of ammunition. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and the Scranton Police Department investigated the case. Assistant United States Attorney Jenny P. Roberts prosecuted the case.
Brazilian National Unlawfully in the United States Sentenced for Selling 14 Firearms Without a License Thursday, February 26, 2026 U.S. Attorney's Office, District of Massachusetts Defendant sold AR-15 style rifles and large capacity magazines BOSTON – A Brazilian national unlawfully residing in Worcester has been sentenced to prison for selling firearms without a license. Joao Vitor Dos Santos Goncalves Pimenta, 21, was sentenced by U.S. District Judge Richard G. Stearns to 27 months in prison. The defendant is subject to deportation upon completion of the imposed sentence. In August 2025, Goncalves Pimenta pleaded guilty to one count of engaging in the business of dealing firearms without a license. Between July and September 2024, Goncalves Pimenta sold 14 firearms without the required license in exchange for cash. The firearms included pistols and AR-15-style rifles and large capacity magazines. United States Attorney Leah B. Foley; Thomas Greco, Special Agent in Charge of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Boston Field Division; Michael J. Krol, Special Agent in Charge of Homeland Security Investigations in New England; and Patricia H. Hyde, Acting Field Office Director, Boston, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Enforcement and Removal Operations made the announcement today. Valuable assistance was provided by the Massachusetts State Police and the Revere Police Department. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Michael J. Crowley and John Reynolds of the Organized Crime & Gang Unit prosecuted the case
