Gregory Kielma • November 23, 2023
Boy This is One Mad Judge
Federal Judge: There’s No Constitutional Right to Buy a Gun
By TTAG Contributor -November 22, 202387
From the NRA-ILA
Honest people can disagree with the Founders’ decision to enshrine the Second Amendment within the Bill of Rights. They cannot, however, pretend that decision never happened. For much of the 20th Century, however, gun control activists tried to convince the public that “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms” had nothing to do with the right of individuals to keep and carry guns for their own self-protection.
That charade – never convincing to anyone who could read – has been debunked by the U.S. Supreme Court no less than four times in the last 15 years. But Second Amendment denialism remains an active strain of the firearm prohibition effort, as demonstrated by a federal judge in Colorado who ruled last week that whatever the provision means, it does not include the right to buy a gun
That decision came in the case of Rocky Mountain Gun Owners v. Polis, which challenged Colorado’s three day waiting period for firearm purchases. Proponents of the law undoubtedly knew it was in trouble after the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which clarified how lower courts are to analyze challenges to gun control laws under the Second Amendment.
Bruen stated: “When the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct. The government must then justify its regulation by demonstrating that it is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.” This test likely spells doom for Colorado’s waiting period, as laws of that type were completely unknown to the generation that adopted the Second Amendment.
Faced with this reality, Judge John L. Kane – appointed to the federal bench by Jimmy Carter in 1977 – decided to stretch reason to the breaking point by deciding the right to possess a firearm doesn’t include the right to acquire one.
The court began its analysis by acknowledging that the Second Amendment right articulated by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 2008 case of District of Columbia v. Heller meant “the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation.” But then Judge Kane went on to insist: “purchase and delivery are one means of creating the opportunity to ‘have weapons.’ The relevant question is whether the plain text covers that specific means. It does not.”
Oregon gun store counter assault rifle AR-15
According to this “reasoning,” a state could completely ban the sale and delivery of firearms without implicating the Second Amendment. This would imply a right to have something, but not to obtain it through the most obvious and ordinary means.
Of course, it’s true that the Second Amendment says nothing explicitly about buying and receiving guns. But it’s also true the First Amendment says nothing explicitly about buying and receiving newspapers. Nevertheless, any judge insisting a ban on newspaper sales would not implicate the First Amendment prohibition on “abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press” would in doing so disgrace himself and ruin his professional and intellectual credibility.
Perhaps recognizing this, Judge Kane hedged his bets by offering a number of alternative theories about why Colorado’s waiting period did not infringe the Second Amendment.
First, he theorized, “Even if purchasing a firearm could be read into the terms ‘keep’ or ‘bear,’ receipt of a firearm without any delay could not be, as the Founders would not have expected instant, widespread availability of the firearm of their choice.” Judge Kane attempted to bolster this argument by pointing to “expert” testimony that indicated firearm purchases at the time of the founding were not as convenient, prompt, or accessible as they are today.
But even these “experts” acknowledged this was because technology, production, and marketing were circumstantially more primitive in those days, not because legislators made a deliberate choice to delay firearm purchases. Of course, virtually nothing that involved the delivery of a good was as efficient and accessible to the founding generation as it is in modern times. But the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly made clear that it will not tolerate “frivolous” arguments that 18th Century technological limitations delineate the scope of constitutional rights in the present day, including in a Second Amendment case that dealt with stun guns.
Next, Judge Kane pointed to language in Heller that he claimed rendered “presumptively lawful” any regulation on “the conditions or qualifications” of the “commercial sale of firearms.” He then argued: “Colorado’s Waiting-Period Act regulates only the sale, and specifically sellers, of firearms. … The Act does not apply to anyone who does not ‘sell a firearm.’”
Putting aside the fact that the disputed issues in Heller had nothing to do with firearm sales, much less mandatory waiting periods, Judge Kane was again resorting to frivolous formalism in attempting to stake his reasoning on the distinction between sellers and purchasers. Colorado’s waiting period imposes an arbitrary and de facto impediment on the purchase of guns, thereby implicating the rights of buyers at least as much as sellers.
Dragonmans gun store range
Returning to the First Amendment, no one would take seriously an argument that a person’s First Amendment right to access information was not implicated just because a particular restraint applied to a publisher or bookseller and not the reader himself.
Meanwhile, the language Judge Kane invoked to argue the Supreme Court allows firearm sales to be regulated cuts against his primary ruling by suggesting the Supreme Court considers such sales as the default starting point under the Second Amendment.
But Judge Kane wasn’t finished, and proposed yet another reason why Colorado’s waiting period is consistent with the Second Amendment, even if he were wrong about everything else.
Again, while acknowledging – as the parties themselves agreed – that waiting periods for firearm purchases were unknown in American law until well into the 20th Century, he still found them consistent with America’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. This was because, he said, “our Nation had a historical tradition of regulating the carrying and use of firearms by intoxicated individuals,” and “the Waiting-Period Act and the intoxication laws both work to prevent individuals in a temporary impulsive state from irresponsibly using a firearm.”
Judge Kane was dismissive of plaintiffs’ attempts to point out the obvious distinction that intoxication speaks to the condition of a particular individual in a particular moment, while the waiting period broadly applies to firearm sales generally, regardless of the buyer’s condition or state of mind. His response to this fundamental difference was that the intoxication laws affected all intoxicated persons, some of whom also might not have behaved irresponsibly with a firearm.
Judge Kane’s final gambit was to suggest that the Supreme Court had indicated a general openness to shall-issue licensing schemes for carrying firearms, so long as they were not directed to “abusive ends.” This, he said, was analogous to the waiting period, because both require a “defined requirement” to be met before exercise of the right, and plaintiffs had not proven the waiting period was abusive.
Judge Kane offered no limiting principles for what sorts of laws purportedly aimed at impulsive or irresponsible behavior or that imposed “defined requirements” prior to the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms might be permissible under the Second Amendment. But it’s difficult to understand how his reasoning would be distinguishable from the “interest-balancing” the Supreme Court specifically rejected in Bruen, which likewise focused on why the government purported to be acting, not on whether such actions were well-established in American history.
There is perhaps no legal rule so clear and unequivocal that it cannot be purposely misconstrued by a judge who is more interested in his preferred outcome than in actually following the law. But if the Polis case shows anything about Bruen’s historical test, it’s that it makes spotting such judges easier than ever.
This article originally appeared at nraila.org and is reprinted here with permission.
Understanding Mass Shootings: A Safety Focused Perspective Gregg Kielma 1/1/26 This is a very difficult subject for me to write or comment about. Due to the sensitive nature of this article, please be advised that mass shooting incidents do occur. We need to understand why and work together to stop senseless killings. I’ll have more thoughts on this in future articles. If you own a business, please give me a call and we can set up our training for your company and staff. Kielma says, Let’s Take a LOOK Mass shootings are tragic events that raise difficult questions, and many people look for simple explanations. The reality is more complex. These incidents rarely stem from a single cause; instead, they emerge when several risk factors overlap. By understanding these patterns, we can focus on awareness, prevention, and responsible safety practices. Most research points to a combination of personal crisis, unresolved grievances, and a desire for recognition as common drivers behind these attacks. Many perpetrators experience a period of emotional instability or hopelessness leading to the event. While mental health struggles alone do not predict violence, untreated distress combined with social isolation can increase risk. Access to firearms during a moment of crisis is another factor that can turn harmful intent into harmful action. It’s also important to recognize the role of cultural and social dynamics. Polarization, alienation, and the breakdown of support systems can contribute to the environment in which these events occur. Media attention can unintentionally create a copycat effect, where individuals identify with previous attackers and seek similar notoriety. At Tactical K Training and Firearms, our focus is not on fear — it’s on preparedness, responsibility, and education. Understanding the factors behind mass shootings helps individuals and communities recognize warning signs, promote responsible firearm storage, support those in crisis, and build safer environments. Knowledge empowers us to take meaningful steps toward prevention while reinforcing the values of responsible firearm ownership.
The Why You Should Take Care of and Clean Your Firearm Gregg Kielma 01/01/2026 Note: Gregg Kielma owner of Tactical K Training and Firearms; I'm working on writing clearer, more concise articles for my family, clients, and friends who visit this blog. My goal is to present polished heart felt, professional content. This year, I'll be inviting guest authors from the firearms industry to share insights and perspectives on topics that matter most to my readers. If your gun has be neglected, please give us a call. Whether it's a minor tune up or deep clean in our ultrasonic cleaner we can get you firearm back to functioning properly. Take care of your firearm and it will take care of you. Let’s Take a LOOK at Firearm care, my thoughts and Reasons for WHY! Kielma advises, owning a firearm is more than a right, it’s a responsibility. Whether you carry daily, train regularly, or keep a firearm for home defense, proper care and maintenance are essential. A well maintained firearm isn’t just cleaner or nicer to look at; it’s safer, more reliable, and far more capable of performing when you need it most. Responsible ownership begins with understanding why firearm care matters. 1. Reliability When It Counts: A firearm is a mechanical tool, and like any tool, it must be kept in proper working order. Carbon buildup, fouling, and debris can cause malfunctions that range from inconvenient to dangerous. Regular cleaning and inspection ensure your firearm cycles smoothly, chambers properly, and fires consistently — exactly what you expect from a life saving tool. Sources show that residue from ammunition can affect accuracy and reliability if not cleaned regularly and built-up debris can impede operation and reduce performancekwickstrike.com. 2. Safety for You and Those Around You: A neglected firearm is a safety hazard. Malfunctions such as misfires, failures to eject, or out of battery conditions can create dangerous situations for the shooter and anyone nearby. Routine maintenance helps prevent these issues and reinforces safe handling habits. Experts emphasize that proper maintenance reduces the risk of jams, misfires, and unintended consequences. 3. Protecting Your Investment Firearms are long term investments: Moisture, dirt, and corrosion can damage internal components and shorten the lifespan of your firearm. Regular cleaning, lubrication, and proper storage protect your equipment and preserve its value. Firearms that sit unused still accumulate moisture and residue that can lead to permanent damage if ignored. 4. Better Accuracy and Performance: A clean barrel and well-maintained action directly impact accuracy. Fouling can alter bullet trajectory, affect grouping, and reduce consistency. When your firearm is properly maintained, you get the performance you paid for — and the precision you train for. 5. Reinforcing Responsible Ownership: Taking care of your firearm is part of being a responsible gun owner. It demonstrates respect for the tool, commitment to safety, and dedication to skill development. Maintenance isn’t just a chore; it’s part of the discipline that separates casual owners from true professionals. Organizations emphasize that clean, well-maintained firearms are safer and more reliable, and that proper maintenance is a core part of responsible gun ownership. 6. Building Familiarity and Confidence: Regular cleaning and inspection help you understand your firearm inside and out. You learn how it functions, how parts wear, and how to identify issues before they become problems. This familiarity builds confidence — something every shooter benefits from, whether on the range or in a defensive situation. Kielma’s Parting Shot Caring for your firearm isn’t optional — it’s essential. Reliability, safety, longevity, and performance all depend on consistent maintenance. At Tactical K Training and Firearms, we emphasize that responsible ownership begins long before you step onto the range. When you take care of your firearm, it will take care of you.
Illegal Glock Switch China and More Illegal Glock Switch's: Pensacola Florida Man Going to Jail Sam Rogers 12/31/25 19-year-old Pensacola resident, Tre’Veonce Ezekiel Sanders, pleaded guilty in federal court to possessing a machine gun, an unregistered firearm, and intent to distribute marijuana after a parcel from China led to his arrest. Federal agencies HSI and ATF investigated the case, which is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Jessica S. Etherton. Sanders faces up to ten years in prison for each firearm charge and five years for the drug offense, with sentencing scheduled for March 10, 2026.
Gregg Kielma Florida Gun Law Changes to Watch in 2026 Gregg Kielma 12/31/25 Happy New Year Florida Firearm Owners and Firearm Owners Around the Country. Today we look at firearm ownership in Florida. Don’t dismay, I promise to look at all the firearm 2026, laws monthly in each state across the United States starting with Alabama in a few days. Please be patient and check back as I receive the best and most updated information in real time as I receive it. Disclaimer: I’m not an attorney, however, as I scour the internet and make calls to state capitols to verify, I’ll give you the best information I receive in r eal time. My Home State, Florida: Let’s Take a LOOK A Tactical K Training & Firearms Educational Brief As we move into 2026, Florida gun owners are facing a year of significant legal movement. While no single sweeping law automatically takes effect on January 1, several major legislative and court driven changes are in motion that could reshape how Floridians purchase, carry, and train with firearms. At Tactical K Training & Firearms , our mission is to keep our community informed, prepared, and confident in their responsibilities as lawful gun owners. Florida: Below is a clear, no-nonsense breakdown of the most important developments to watch in 2026. 1. Possible Change: Long Gun Purchase Age Lowered to 18 Florida lawmakers are again considering lowering the minimum age to purchase rifles and other long guns from 21 back to 18. A bill advancing through the Legislature would reverse the 2018 post Parkland age increase. If passed, this would: • Restore 18–20 year old adults’ ability to purchase long guns • Align Florida with federal standards • Expand access for younger hunters, sports shooters, and new firearm owners This is one of the most closely watched proposals of the 2026 session. 2. Open Carry May Become Legal A recent appeals court ruling found Florida’s open carry ban unconstitutional, setting the stage for a major shift in how Floridians may legally carry firearms. What this could mean: • Florida could move from permitless concealed carry to full permitless carry • Open carry could become lawful statewide • Final outcome depends on whether the Florida Supreme Court upholds or overturns the ruling f or gun owners, this is a potential game changer. 3. Thirteen Gun Related Bills Filed for the 2026 Session Lawmakers have filed a wide range of firearm related bills for consideration in 2026. These include proposals to: • Repeal the under 21 purchase restriction • Expand or clarify permitless carry • Introducing new background check requirements • Adjust existing statutes based on recent court decisions Not all of these bills will advance, but the volume alone signals a year of active debate. 4. U.S. Supreme Court May Review Florida’s Under 21 Rifle Ban Florida’s 2018 law restricting long gun purchases to those 21 and older is now positioned for potential review by the U.S. Supreme Court. If the Court takes the case: • A ruling could override Florida law • The Legislature may adjust state statutes in response • National precedent could be set This is a major federal level factor influencing Florida’s 2026 landscape. 5. Permitless Concealed Carry Remains in Effect Florida’s 2023 permitless concealed carry law remains unchanged. Optional concealed weapon licenses (CWLs) continue to be available, and the state has streamlined the application process with faster approvals and reduced administrative delays. At Tactical K Training and Firearms, we continue to recommend training and education for all firearm owners — with or without a permit. What This Means for Florida Gun Owners 2026 is shaping up to be a pivotal year. The most likely areas of change include: • Age requirements for long gun purchases • Open carry legality • Court driven adjustments to existing statutes • Legislative updates affecting training, purchasing, and carrying As always, Tactical K Training & Firearms will continue to monitor developments and provide clear, responsible updates to our students and community. Kielma’s Parting Shot: Stay Informed Stay Responsible. Whether you’re a new gun owner or a seasoned shooter, understanding Florida’s evolving legal landscape is essential. Tactical K Training and Firearms is committed to delivering accurate information and high-quality training that empowers you to carry confidently and responsibly. Gregg Kielma
Marijuana & Firearm Ownership in Florida: What Tactical K Training and Firearms Students and Firearm Transfers Need to Know Gregg Kielma 12/31/25 Kielma says "Let's Take a Look" At Tactical K Training and Firearms, we believe responsible firearm ownership starts with understanding the law. One topic that continues to create confusion for Florida gun owners and Gun owner around the United States, is the relationship between medical marijuana use and firearm possession. Because state and federal laws don’t currently align , it’s essential for every gun owner — especially medical marijuana patients — to understand the risks and responsibilities involved. Florida Law: Medical Marijuana Is Legal Florida’s medical marijuana program allows qualified patients to legally obtain and use cannabis for approved medical conditions. Under state law, holding a medical marijuana card does not prevent someone from owning or possessing a firearm. Florida does not have a statute that restricts gun ownership based solely on medical marijuana use. Federal Law: Marijuana Is Still a Controlled Substance Even though Florida permits medical marijuana, federal law still classifies marijuana as a Schedule I controlled substance. Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3), anyone considered an “unlawful user of a controlled substance” is prohibited from possessing or purchasing firearms. This creates the conflict: • State law allows medical marijuana and firearm ownership. • Federal law prohibits firearm possession by anyone using marijuana, even medically. When purchasing a firearm from a licensed dealer, buyers must complete ATF Form 4473, which asks whether they use marijuana. Answering “yes” results in a denied purchase. Answering “no” while using marijuana is a federal felony. Recent Court Activity Federal courts have recently questioned whether the marijuana and firearm prohibition is constitutional. Some rulings have favored medical marijuana patients, but these decisions are not final nationwide and may continue to evolve. For now, the federal prohibition technically remains in place. What This Means for Tactical K Training and Firearms Students and Firearm Transfers At Tactical K Training and Firearms, our mission is to help every student stay safe, informed, and compliant with the law. Here’s what Florida gun owners should keep in mind: 1. State and federal laws conflict You may be legal under Florida law but still restricted under federal law. 2. Form 4473 must be answered truthfully Lying on the form is a serious federal offense. 3. Enforcement varies Most §922(g)(3) cases arise during other criminal investigations, but the risk still exists. 4. Stay informed Legal challenges are ongoing, and the landscape may change in the coming years. Tactical K Training and Firearms Position Tactical K Training and Firearms does not provide legal advice, but we do emphasize: • Safe handling • Responsible ownership • Understanding the laws that apply to you If you are a medical marijuana patient or considering becoming one, it’s important to stay aware of how your choices may affect your firearm rights under federal law. Kielma’s Parting Shot: The intersection of marijuana and firearm ownership in Florida is complex, and the laws continue to evolve. Tactical K Training is committed to helping our students navigate these issues with clarity and confidence. As always, responsible ownership begins with education — and we’re here to support you every step of the way. Gregg Kielma
Keeping Your Home Safe: Practical Steps That Make a Real Difference Gregg Kielma 12/30/2025 Gregg Kielma of Tactical K Training and Firearms advises and teaches during his CCW classes, a safe home doesn’t happen by accident. We need to think about smart habits, layered security, and a little preparation. Whether you live in a quiet neighborhood or a busy community, taking proactive steps can dramatically reduce risks and increase peace of mind. Kielma Suggests: Strengthening Your Entry Points • Doors & Locks: Use quality deadbolts, reinforced strike plates, and solid-core doors. • Windows: Install locks, security film, or sensors, especially on ground-level windows. • Garage & Sliding Doors: These are common weak spots. Reinforce them and keep them locked at all times. Kielma Suggests: Use Lighting to Your Adv antage • Exterior Lighting: Motion-activated lights deter intruders and improve visibility. • Interior Lighting: Timers or smart bulbs make your home look occupied even when you’re away. Kielma Suggests: Add Smart Technology • Cameras: Modern systems offer real-time alerts and cloud storage. • Alarms & Sensors: Door, window, and glass-break sensors add another layer of protection. • Smart Locks: Control access remotely and track who enters your home. Kielma Suggests: Practice Everyday Awareness • Keep doors locked—even when you’re home. • Don’t advertise vacations on social media. • Get to know your neighbors; community awareness is a powerful tool. Kielma’s Parting Shot: Responsible Firearm Ownership For those who choose to keep firearms for home defense, secure storage and proper training are essential. At Tactical K Training and Firearms, we emphasize safety, readiness, and responsible ownership so you can protect your home with confidence.
Gregg Kielma Kielma’s Thoughts on “What Makes a Good Firearm” Gregg Kielma 12/30/2025 A Tactical K Training and Firearms Perspective on Quality, Safety, and Performance Let's Take a LOOK. Your opinion? Am I right? Let's talk! At Tactical K Training and Firearms, I and we, my staff believe responsible firearm ownership begins with knowledge. Whether you’re a new shooter or an experienced enthusiast, understanding what makes a good firearm is essential for safety, confidence, and long-term performance. A quality firearm isn’t defined by brand names or trends—it’s defined by engineering, reliability, and how well it supports the shooter’s purpose. Kielma Suggests: Reliability The Foundation of Every Good Firearm A dependable firearm must function consistently under normal conditions. Reliability means: • Smooth cycling and consistent operation • Minimal malfunctions with quality ammunition • Performance that holds up over time and regular use In training and real-world application, reliability is non-negotiable. Kielma Suggests: Accuracy and Predictability A good firearm delivers repeatable results. Key factors include: • A well fitted, properly machined barrel • Quality sights or optic ready design • A clean, consistent trigger break Accuracy builds confidence—and confidence builds skill. Kielma Suggests: Ergonomics and Shooter Fit Every shooter is different. A firearm should complement the individual, not fight them. Good ergonomics include: • A grip that matches hand size and shooting style • Controls that are intuitive and easy to reach • Balanced weight and manageable recoil When a firearm fits properly, shooters learn faster and perform better. Kielma Suggests: Safety Focused Design At Tactical K Training, safety is always the priority. A quality firearm supports safe handling through: • Intuitive safety mechanisms • Clear visual/tactile indicators • Predictable, user-friendly controls Safety features should reinforce proper training—not replace it. Kielma Suggests: Build Quality and Materials Durability matters, especially for firearms used in training environments. Look for: • Corrosion resistant metals • Reinforced polymers • Precision machining and tight tolerances A well-built firearm withstands the elements, the range, and the test of time. Kielma Really Suggests This: Ease of Maintenance A firearm that’s simple to maintain is a firearm that stays reliable. Good platforms offer: • Straightforward field stripping • Readily available parts • No need for specialized tools for basic cleaning Maintenance is part of responsible ownership, and a good firearm makes that process accessible. Kielma Suggests: Manufacturer Reputation and Support A trustworthy manufacturer stands behind its products. Indicators include: • Consistent quality control • Strong customer service • Clear warranties • A proven track record Support matters—especially for new shooters building their foundation. Kielma’s Parting Shot: Purpose Driven Selection The “best” firearm is the one that fits the shooter’s needs and skill level. At Tactical K Training, we help students choose firearms that align with: • Their intended use (self-defense, sport, training, etc.) • Their experience level • Their physical comfort and confidence Training elevates every firearm’s potential, but the right platform makes the journey smoother. Gregg Kielma
A Look at Donald Trump, Firearm Rights, and the Second Amendment Gregg Kielma 12/30/2025 Millions of Americans believe the Second Amendment protects more than a right — it protects personal freedom. Supporters credit Donald Trump with standing firm for law abiding gun owners and defending responsible firearm ownership. At Tactical K Training and Firearms, we’re proud to promote safety, education, and the values that keep this tradition strong. The Second Amendment has long been a defining part of American identity, representing the principles of personal freedom, self-reliance, and responsible defense. Many supporters of the Second Amendment believe that Donald Trump has been a strong advocate for these values, often highlighting his administration’s stance on protecting the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. Let’s Take a LOOK Championing Constitutional Rights Supporters frequently point to Trump’s public statements and policy positions as evidence of his commitment to preserving the Second Amendment. They argue that his administration emphasized the importance of lawful firearm ownership and resisted efforts that they believed would weaken constitutional protections. A Focus on Law Abiding Citizens Many gun rights advocates appreciated Trump’s repeated distinction between responsible gun owners and those who misuse firearms. Supporters say this approach helped reinforce the idea that millions of Americans safely and responsibly exercise their rights every day — hunters, sports shooters, collectors, and individuals who choose firearms for personal protection. Encouraging a Culture of Responsibility Throughout his presidency, Trump often spoke about the importance of training, safety, and education. Supporters believe this helped promote a culture where firearm ownership is paired with accountability and preparedness — values that align closely with the mission of professional training organizations across the country. Standing Firm on the Second Amendment For many Americans, the Second Amendment is more than a legal right — it’s a symbol of personal liberty. Supporters credit Trump with defending that principle on the national stage, voicing strong opposition to policies they viewed as restrictive or unconstitutional. Kielma’s Parting Shot The debate over firearm rights is ongoing, but one thing remains clear: millions of Americans see the Second Amendment as essential to their safety, independence, and heritage. Supporters of Donald Trump believe he played a significant role in keeping that conversation alive and ensuring that the voices of lawful gun owners were heard. Gregg Kielma
Gregg Kielma A Pro 2A Counter Analysis of the GIFFORDS Gun Law Scorecard Gregg Kielma 12/30/2025 Gabby Gifford’s “gun law score card” a real time look at points and counterpoints that make sense. Have a comment, please let me know. Let’s Take a LOOK The GIFFORDS Gun Law Scorecard is often presented as an authoritative measure of firearm safety. But when you strip away the branding and look at the mechanics, it becomes clear that the scorecard is less a scientific evaluation and more a political grading sheet. From a Second Amendment perspective, the scorecard’s flaws are not subtle — they are foundational. 1. The Scorecard Starts With Its Conclusion and Works Backward The GIFFORDS scorecard doesn’t discover that restrictive states get higher grades — it defines it that way. If a state passes the policies GIFFORDS prefers, it gets an A. If it expands gun rights, it gets an F. The outcome is predetermined. This is not analysis. This is advocacy dressed up as data. A true safety assessment would measure outcomes first and policies second. Kielma Reflects: The scorecard does the opposite. 2. It Treats Correlation Like Proof — and Ignores Everything Else The scorecard leans heavily on the idea that “stronger gun laws equal lower gun death rates.” But this ignores the obvious: States differ dramatically in demographics, crime patterns, policing, economics, and culture. Violence is a complex social issue. The scorecard reduces it to a single variable: Did you pass the laws we like? Kielma Reflects: That’s not science. That’s confirmation bias. 3. It Completely Erases Defensive Gun Use One of the most glaring omissions is the total absence of lawful defensive gun use — a major component of the national firearms landscape. Millions of Americans use firearms each year to stop assaults, home invasions, robberies, and violent crimes. These incidents save lives. They prevent tragedies. They matter. The scorecard pretends they don’t exist. Kielma Reflects: A tool that claims to measure “gun safety” but ignores the safety benefits of lawful ownership is not a neutral tool. 4. It Punishes States for Expanding Constitutional Rights Under the GIFFORDS system, a state can reduce crime, improve training access, and strengthen enforcement — and still get downgraded simply for recognizing constitutional carry or streamlining permitting. In other words: If you respect the Second Amendment, you lose points. Kielma Reflects: That alone tells you what the scorecard is really measuring. 5. It Measures Laws on Paper, Not Safety in Practice A state can have dozens of restrictive laws but weak enforcement. Another state can have fewer laws but aggressively prosecute violent offenders. The scorecard doesn’t care. It rewards the existence of laws, not their effectiveness. Kielma Reflects: This is like grading a fire department based on how many hoses they own, not how well they put out fires. 6. High Grades Don’t Guarantee Low Crime — and Low Grades Don’t Guarantee High Crime If the scorecard’s theory were airtight, the map would be simple: A grade states would be the safest, and F grade states would be the most dangerous. Reality doesn’t follow that pattern. Kielma Reflects: Crime is driven by criminals, not by the legal status of a tool. The scorecard’s simplistic model cannot account for that. 7. It Ignores the Most Important Factor: Training and Culture Firearms instructors, safety professionals, and responsible gun owners know that safety is built through: • Education • Training • Community culture • Responsible handling • Enforcement of existing laws Kielma Reflects: The scorecard measures none of this. It treats legislation as the only variable that matters — a view that anyone with real world firearms experience knows is incomplete at best. Kielma’s Parting Shot: The GIFFORDS Gun Law Scorecard is not a neutral assessment of public safety. It is a political tool that: • Rewards states for aligning with a specific policy agenda • Ignores defensive gun use • Penalizes constitutional rights • Overlooks enforcement and real world behavior • Relies on correlation instead of causation • Excludes training, education, and culture A pro 2A perspective doesn’t reject safety — it demands real safety, grounded in evidence, experience, and respect for constitutional freedoms. Gregg Kielma
S enator Cory Booker A Critical Look at Senator Booker’s Federal Firearm Licensing Proposal Gregg Kielma 12/30/3035 Kielma says these are my thoughts: The federal government's proposed law for firearm licensing should be opposed. My thought process and why I think this way. Have a comment? Please let me know. LET’S TAKE A LOOK Senator Cory Booker’s push for a federal firearm licensing system has drawn intense criticism from gun rights advocates, constitutional scholars, and everyday Americans who view the proposal as an unnecessary and intrusive expansion of federal power. While the plan is framed as a public safety measure, many argue that it represents a sweeping federal overreach that would burden law abiding citizens while doing little to deter criminal activity. A Federal License: A Solution in Search of a Problem Critics argue that Senator Booker’s proposal treats responsible gun owners as if they are the source of America’s crime problem. The plan would require every firearm owner in the country to obtain a federal license — a process involving fingerprinting, mandatory interviews, background checks, and recurring renewals. Opponents contend that this approach flips the presumption of innocence on its head. Instead of targeting criminals, it places the heaviest burden on citizens who already follow the law, train regularly, and store their firearms responsibly. A Bureaucratic System That Punishes the Law Abiding One of the strongest criticisms is the sheer scale of bureaucracy the proposal would create. A federal licensing system would require a massive new administrative structure, likely resulting in delays, inconsistent enforcement, and significant taxpayer expense. Gun rights advocates warn that such a system could become a de facto barrier to exercising a constitutional right. If the government can delay, deny, or revoke a license based on subjective criteria, critics argue that the right to keep and bear arms becomes a privilege granted by the state — not a right protected from it. Criminals Don’t Apply for Licenses Opponents also point out a fundamental flaw: criminals, by definition, do not follow licensing laws. They do not submit fingerprints, sit for interviews, or register their firearms. Critics argue that the proposal focuses on the wrong population. Instead of addressing the root causes of violence — such as gang activity, illegal trafficking, and repeat offenders — the plan targets the people least likely to commit crimes: responsible gun owners who already comply with existing regulations. A Threat to Privacy and Personal Freedom Another major concern is the creation of a centralized federal database of gun owners. Critics warn that such a system could expose citizens to privacy risks, data breaches, or political misuse. Many Americans are uncomfortable with the idea of the federal government maintaining detailed records of who owns firearms, what they own, and where they live. Opponents argue that this level of surveillance is incompatible with a free society. A Step Toward National Registration and Beyond For many, the licensing proposal is seen as a gateway to more restrictive federal measures. Critics fear that once a national licensing system is established, future lawmakers could expand it into mandatory registration, limits on ownership, or even confiscation. While supporters of the proposal dismiss these concerns as exaggerated, opponents argue that history — both in the U.S. and abroad — shows that licensing often precedes more aggressive restrictions. Kielma’s Parting Shot: A Policy That Misses the Mark Senator Booker’s federal licensing proposal is presented as a bold step toward reducing gun violence. But critics argue that it misses the mark entirely. Instead of focusing on criminals and illegal activity, it places new burdens on responsible citizens, expands federal bureaucracy, and risks eroding constitutional protections. For those who believe in responsible firearm ownership, training, and education — values at the core of Tactical K Training — the proposal represents a misguided approach that punishes the wrong people while failing to address the real drivers of violence. Gregg Kielma
