Philadelphia... The Cheese Steak is Safe LOLOL

Parrish Man Indicted For Arson Of A Vehicle Friday, April 11, 2025 U.S. Attorney's Office, Middle District of Florida Tampa, Florida – United States Attorney Gregory W. Kehoe announces the return of an indictment charging Kendarius Devonta Stitten (25, Parrish) with a violation of the federal Anti-Arson Act. If convicted, Stitten faces a minimum penalty of 5 years, up to 20 years, in federal prison. The indictment also notifies Stitten that the United States intends to forfeit assets that are alleged to be traceable to proceeds of the offense. According to the indictment, on March 20, 2025, Stitten set fire to a rental van that was parked at a motel in Bradenton. An indictment is merely a formal charge that a defendant has committed one or more violations of federal criminal law, and every defendant is presumed innocent unless, and until, proven guilty. 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 will be prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Adam W. McCall. Updated April 11, 2025

Lawmaker Zbur Pulls California Bill Imposing Duty To Retreat In Self-Defense Situations Mark Chesnut A measure before the California State Assembly that would have imposed a duty to retreat upon citizens before using lethal force to protect themselves from threats has been pulled from consideration by the bill’s author. The measure had been introduced by Democratic Caucus Chair Rick Chavez Zbur, who touted the measure in a recently released statement to close a dangerous legal loophole “that could allow armed aggressors to initiate confrontations in public, kill their victims, and then exploit self-defense laws to escape accountability.” It seems that Zbur had been listening to the inane rhetoric of gun control groups too much and accidentally believed one of their favorite talking points about how Stand Your Ground laws are bad. On its website, Everytown for Gun Safety writes: “Shoot First laws—also known as Stand Your Ground legislation—are deadly, reckless, and extreme. They give people a license to kill, allowing them to shoot first and ask questions later, then claim self-defense.” Sound familiar? Zbur’s excuse is a pretty good rendition of Everytown’s longtime lie about an important self-defense issue. “This legislation builds on California’s gun safety legacy and lays the blueprint for the rest of the nation,” Monisha Henley, Everytown senior vice president for government affairs, had said in praise of the measure. “White supremacists and other extremists have hidden behind self-defense laws to fire a gun and turn any conflict into a death sentence. Now, lawmakers have an opportunity to help stop that and save lives.” With the legislation now withdrawn, gun rights and self-defense proponents are declaring victory—and a much-needed victory at that. Rick Travis, legislative director for the California Rifle & Pistol Association, told Cam Edwards of Cam & Company that people around the country were so insulted that many got involved in fighting the measure. “That doesn’t happen much in California,” Travis said. “That amount of a coalition voice had an impact where several other legislators that would normally support Zbur took two steps back with a ‘not my circus, not my monkey’ kind of an attitude. Then, Zbur pulled back and said, ‘Well, I’m going to amend it.’ “The hilarious point was he is one of the biggest fear-mongers, he is one of the biggest mis informers that we’ve ever had in the capital. And yet, he pointed a finger at us and said, ‘All you guys like to do is fear-monger and misinform people. We started laughing and were like, ‘Look in the mirror, buddy. That’s you.’” In the end, Travis said, Zbur amended the measure to try to make himself look good, but that didn’t work. “No one bought it, number one,” Travis said. “Number 2, he made the bill even worse. Then he just said, fine, forget it, and pulled the bill. So, the bill is dead for this session.” Ultimately, Zbur’s pulling the bill makes California a little freer than it would have been had the measure passed and become law. But as we all know, there’s still a long way to go for the Golden State to recognize the Second Amendment rights of its citizens as it should.

GOA Suing ATF Over Gag Order On Secret Surveillance Documents With no action on the topic more than two months into the Trump Administration, Gun Owners of America (GOA) has announced it has filed a lawsuit against the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) over a gag order placed on its attorneys in the matter of secret surveillance documents gained through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. GOA filed the action on March 12, a year and a half after a protective order was placed on GOA lawyers to not release the information, which the gun-rights group says is still pertinent today. According to a report at ammoland.com, the order was issued after GOA filed a 2021 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking “records about a secret government surveillance program which unlawfully and unconstitutionally monitors and records the firearm purchases of American citizens who are perfectly eligible to purchase and possess firearms.” The ATF eventually gave the documents to GOA, then tried to force the group to return all the documents and destroy any copies made of them. When GOA refused, ATF asked the court for a protective order to keep the organization from releasing the documents. Since that order has been in effect, GOA has not released the documents but now is asking the court to allow it to release the papers. “Relying on the asserted ‘implied power’ of courts ‘to issue a temporary protective order for inadvertently produced FOIA materials,’ this Court granted Defendant’s requests, issuing first an order to ‘sequester’ and subsequently a protective order that ‘plaintiffs and their counsel’ ‘shall sequester’ and ‘shall not disseminate, disclose, or use for any purpose those records or the content of those records,’” the brief states. “Thus, for the past 17 months, Plaintiffs—members of the press—have been prohibited from printing the news, while Plaintiffs’ lawyers have been prohibited from communicating with their clients, advocating for their clients’ interests, or even accessing portions of their own attorney work product.” As GOA also pointed out in their brief, if the documents were classified, they still would not be entitled to a “sweeping protective order.” Only portions of the papers affecting national security would be eligible for protection via a protective order. Ultimately, it’s a shame that GOA must continue fighting in court a questionable decision resulting from President Joe Biden’s weaponized ATF now that the new administration is in place. With the change of administration, ATF should back off of all such actions but seems to be reluctant to do so. In fact, earlier this month we reported how Biden holdovers at the ATF are attempting to stall litigation on the ATF’s “engaged in the business” Final Rule by filing a motion asking for a stay. In response, GOA, Gun Owners Foundation (GOF) and the states of Texas, Louisiana, Utah and Mississippi filed an opposition to the DOJ’s motion, arguing that a stay in the ruling could harm gun owners across the nation. Lately, some in the gun-rights community have been questioning the Trump Administration’s dedication to protecting the right to keep and bear arms in light of Trump only addressing guns once, in an executive order, in his first two months in office. In that order, he instructed new Attorney General Pam Bondi to “examine all orders, regulations, guidance, plans, international agreements, and other actions of executive departments and agencies (agencies) to assess any ongoing infringements of the Second Amendment rights.” The deadline for that report passed last week and at the time of this writing, Bondi still had not submitted a report.

Jessica Abner Bondi on the Death of Former U.S. Attorney Jessica Aber Saturday, March 22, 2025 Office of Public Affairs Attorney General Pamela Bondi made the following statement regarding the death of former U.S. Attorney Jessica Aber: “The loss of Jessica Aber, former U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, is deeply tragic. Our hearts and prayers go out to her family and friends during this profoundly difficult time.” Cause of death: Epilepsy Updated March 31, 2025

Why are suppressors for guns legal and common in many European countries, but heavily regulated in the United States? From a Reader of The Blog Mainly because of ill Informed people like this: Silencers are not designed for hearing protection. Silencers were designed to allow people to commit murder and get away with it. -Heather Martens, executive director of Protect Minnesota: Working to End Gun Violence. Gun modifiers are attachments to a firearm that make firearms more deadly. There are several types of modifiers on the market – some of which are legal and some of which are illegal. Among these modifiers are auto sears and switches, bump stocks, silencers, and stabilizing braces. -Brady United

Why would you want to take a concealed carry gun everywhere you go? From A Reader of My Blog I was assaulted while working unarmed in a convenience store. He was wearing brass knuckles. I had a fractured skull and 256 stitches in the face. It took a week to catch him. He had 15 years of time to think. I received numerous threats. I armed myself and let it be known. The crap stopped. Eight years later I am walking back from the post office. I was jumped by 2 thugs. One tried to sweep my legs, the other tried to hit me in the back of the head while yelling “knockout!” I put them both down. One staggered away. The other tried again. I stuck my 9 mm in his eye and asked him if he wanted to die. He started to stammer and cry. He was unarmed. I let him stumble away. Not so tough now. All of these punks were about 20. In both cases it took the cops more than 20 minutes to arrive. The cops rarely prevent crime. They usually deal with the aftermath. If I am not allowed to defend myself, I will be a victim. Never again!

Buying guns in the USA - Is it true in the USA, people can just go into a store and buy a gun anytime they want? From A Reader of The Blog Pretty much… although you do have to pass a background check. But I’ll tell you what’s even funnier. I live in Tennessee, where a LOT of people own a LOT of guns, but in the ten years I’ve lived here I haven’t SEEN many people carrying guns. Most police officers have a holstered gun on their belt; and I see plenty of guns at the gun range, or in the gun store, or in the hands of hunters; and most of my neighbors probably have guns in their houses… but I rarely see people walking around the street carrying a gun. I can’t recall EVER seeing someone walking down my street carrying a rifle or shotgun, even though it would be perfectly legal to do so, and I can’t remember the last time I noticed a civilian with a gun in a holster. Now there is a good chance that I might not notice if someone was carrying a concealed handgun… but my point is that we DO NOT go around with gun-belts, and six guns, and those impressive bandoliers of cartridges strung over our shoulders… like you see in old movies. It just plain isn’t a big deal. (And, after all, your car is much bigger than any bullet and is equally capable of killing a bunch of people if you aim it at them, but you probably don’t worry that “people can just go into a dealership and buy a car” … and you don’t even have to pass a background check to do that.)

Robert Leider Named ATF Assistant Director And Chief Counsel March 21, 2025 Robert Leider, Associate Professor at Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University, has taken over as the ATF’s Assistant Director and Chief Counsel. This comes less than a month after the Trump administration issued walking papers to Pamela Hicks and showed her the door. The timing of the move couldn’t be better, as gun owners are losing patience with the process while watching other issues precede the Second Amendment and holdover idiots like U.S. Attorney Michael Simpson stating that suppressors fall outside the constitutional right to bear arms. Notably, Attorney General Pam Bondi has become somewhat of a polarizing figure, as her history on gun rights is not sterling, and she is past due with her report regarding the President’s executive order on the Second Amendment. AG Bondi and President Trump, however, have indicated a new leaf on the subject, and regardless of the snags we’ve experienced, it is tempting to see appointments like Kash Patel to ATF Director and hires like Robert Leider as incremental steps in the right direction. So, who is Rober Leider, and why should his new position within the ATF inspire a glimmer of hope for gun owners? Leider has earned his fair share of education with an undergraduate degree from George Washington University, a PhD from Georgetown, his J.D. from Yale, and he has clerked for the United States Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals. While this sounds impressive, it may also sound like he is well-versed in swamp culture, so we must examine his personal history to answer this question. As Washington Gun Law President and legal expert William Kirk points out, Leider is “well on record as a public author of being a staunch, staunch supporter of the Second Amendment.” In a recent video on his YouTube channel, Kirk talks about a late 2024 journal written by Leider entitled Analysis: Gun-Rights Advocates Would Benefit More From ATF Reform Than the Agency’s Elimination. This is an important issue as many gun owners, me included, have become understandably jaded by the agency and may not be seeing the forest through the trees on the matter. “These people were targeting gun owners– not going to happen under this administration. And we’re looking to hire really great people,” said Pam Bondi. This is a people problem, and as hard as it may be to hear, after years of abuse inflicted upon the Second Amendment community, a reformed ATF can serve Americans in a manner consistent with the Constitution. The agency can make defending our inalienable rights their number one priority. While I admit this is still a dream, I’d concede its possibility. I would invite an ATF that ceased all criminalization of Constitutionally protected activities and turned its focus to investigating and prosecuting violations of our rights federally, state by state, and municipality by municipality. To this effect, Robert Leider has an extensive written record of his duty to and reverence for the United States Constitution and the Second Amendment. I encourage reading his written work, including the following suggested entries, if knowing him better interests you. The Individual Right To Bear Arms For Common Defense The General Right to Bear Arms The Modern Militia Legal experts and pro-Second Amendment organizations like Gun Owners of America have responded to the announcement with excitement, not only for Leider but also for AG Pam Bondi’s decision to bring him aboard. Could this signal a more complex chess game being played at the highest levels as pieces are moved into place one by one, with the goal being to restore the Second Amendment? Maybe, but only time will tell. My reluctance to pop corks, however, comes from knowing that while these measures may be effective at stopping some of the bleeding, we will need Congress to right laws previously put in place that violate the Constitution, a task outside the unilateral authority of a regulatory agency. Coming to that point is a much steeper climb for the Second Amendment community, and setting up assurances that the same rights will not be violated again with political ebb and flow is a challenge. If I were in charge of meeting that challenge head-on, hiring someone like Robert Leider might be at the top of my to-do list. He is now in a position to make a difference, not only in ongoing ATF litigation but also in future actions against those who remain in defiance of American gun rights. So, don’t perceive my reluctance to raise the roof negatively. Understand it as well-tempered optimism while we remind leaders of their commitments and the loyalty and reward that accompany kept promises.

GOA Suing ATF Over Gag Order On Secret Surveillance Documents Mark Chesnut With no action on the topic more than two months into the Trump Administration, Gun Owners of America (GOA) has announced it has filed a lawsuit against the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) over a gag order placed on its attorneys in the matter of secret surveillance documents gained through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. GOA filed the action on March 12, a year and a half after a protective order was placed on GOA lawyers to not release the information, which the gun-rights group says is still pertinent today. According to a report at ammoland.com, the order was issued after GOA filed a 2021 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking “records about a secret government surveillance program which unlawfully and unconstitutionally monitors and records the firearm purchases of American citizens who are perfectly eligible to purchase and possess firearms.” The ATF eventually gave the documents to GOA, then tried to force the group to return all the documents and destroy any copies made of them. When GOA refused, ATF asked the court for a protective order to keep the organization from releasing the documents. Since that order has been in effect, GOA has not released the documents, but now is asking the court to allow it to release the papers. “Relying on the asserted ‘implied power’ of courts ‘to issue a temporary protective order for inadvertently produced FOIA materials,’ this Court granted Defendant’s requests, issuing first an order to ‘sequester’ and subsequently a protective order that ‘plaintiffs and their counsel’ ‘shall sequester’ and ‘shall not disseminate, disclose, or use for any purpose those records or the content of those records,’” the brief states. “Thus, for the past 17 months, Plaintiffs—members of the press—have been prohibited from printing the news, while Plaintiffs’ lawyers have been prohibited from communicating with their clients, advocating for their clients’ interests, or even accessing portions of their own attorney work product.” As GOA also pointed out in their brief, if the documents were classified, they still would not be entitled to a “sweeping protective order.” Only portions of the papers affecting national security would be eligible for protection via a protective order. Ultimately, it’s a shame that GOA must continue fighting in court a questionable decision resulting from President Joe Biden’s weaponized ATF now that the new administration is in place. With the change of administration, ATF should back off of all such actions but seems to be reluctant to do so. In fact, earlier this month we reported how Biden holdovers at the ATF are attempting to stall litigation on the ATF’s “engaged in the business” Final Rule by filing a motion asking for a stay. In response, GOA, Gun Owners Foundation (GOF) and the states of Texas, Louisiana, Utah and Mississippi filed an opposition to the DOJ’s motion, arguing that a stay in the ruling could harm gun owners across the nation. Lately, some in the gun-rights community have been questioning the Trump Administration’s dedication to protecting the right to keep and bear arms in light of Trump only addressing guns once, in an executive order, in his first two months in office. In that order, he instructed new Attorney General Pam Bondi to “examine all orders, regulations, guidance, plans, international agreements, and other actions of executive departments and agencies (agencies) to assess any ongoing infringements of the Second Amendment rights.” The deadline for that report passed last week and at the time of this writing, Bondi still had not submitted a report.