Gregory Kielma • June 18, 2023
Armed self-defense Good Read Tale a look

Pro-gun groups on the right have for years promoted the right to armed self-defense and warned of pervasive threats. Experts and critics say the recent shootings of innocent people are the consequence.
Ringing the wrong doorbell, pulling into the wrong driveway, accidentally getting in the wrong car: Mundane, everyday mistakes ended in the shootings of several young people – and the death of one of them – last month when the men on the receiving end of the errors reached for their firearms and decided to shoot.
The shootings captured public attention nationwide, breaking through the unfortunate white noise of pervasive gun violence for their brazenness and similarities. They have reignited the fight over so-called “stand your ground” laws expanding the legal protections around self-defense. And critics, too, have pointed to the incidents as the natural end result of a society flooded with firearms.
But experts and gun control advocates say the shootings are a symptom of a much broader cause: the proliferation of rhetoric on the pro-gun right and among conservatives in general about persistent, pervasive threats, danger and crime, and also of guns as the only means of personal safety against the criminals that lurk around every corner.
“For seven years, all of us here today have been engaged in an epic struggle against the corrupt forces and communist maniacs – and they’re all over the place – that are absolutely trying to destroy our country,” former President Donald Trump said this month in a speech at the National Rifle Association’s annual meeting. “They want to take away your guns while throwing open the jailhouse doors and releasing bloodthirsty criminals into your communities.”
Wayne LaPierre, the embattled chief executive officer of the pro-gun organization, expressed similar sentiments.
“You don’t need the government to tell you the sky is blue, water’s wet or that you have the God-given right to self-defense,” he said.
‘This Could Happen to Anybody’
In Kansas City, Missouri, Ralph Yarl, a Black teenager, rang the wrong doorbell on April 13 while trying to pick up his siblings from a friend’s house. The octogenarian homeowner inside the house shot Yarl in the head in what he said was self-defense, in an action prosecutors say had a “racial component.” Two days later in upstate New York, a car full of young people pulled into the wrong driveway while looking for another friend’s house. The homeowner shot at the car from the porch. Twenty-year-old Kaylin Gillis died. And just days after that, a man shot two teenage cheerleaders in Elgin, Texas, after one of them tried to get into his car by accident, thinking it was her ride. She realized her mistake, exited the car and tried to apologize. But the man opened fire. Yarl’s shooting made headlines in part because it highlighted issues relating to race, and public attention quickly turned to the other shootings in the days after. Though the U.S. experiences gun violence at the highest rate of any developed nation, the shootings broke through the news cycle in part because they easily inspired empathy.
Gun Control and Gun Rights Cartoons
“This could happen to anybody. I mean, there was a racial factor involved in at least one of these. But beyond that, it's just like, this could happen to me or this could happen to my kid,” says Michael Lawlor, an associate professor of criminal justice at the University of New Haven and a former member of the Connecticut House of Representatives. Lawlor, a Democrat, also served as the state’s undersecretary for criminal justice policy.
Focus turned, then, on Missouri’s “stand your ground” law, which is like a law of the same name that is in place in Texas. Gun rights advocates have pushed for years to enact the measures, which expand protections around the use of force when acting in self-defense. Under the law, a person has the right to use deadly force when acting in self-defense anywhere they have a legal right to be, and without first retreating – in other words, using force does not have to be a last resort. The laws burst onto the public debate stage in 2012, when Florida police noted it as the reason they refused to arrest George Zimmerman, who fatally shot Trayvon Martin, a Black unarmed teenager. Zimmerman was later charged and then acquitted.
New York has a similar, albeit more limited, law called the “castle doctrine” that allows for use of force by a person defending their own home – or castle, so to speak. And the passage of “stand your ground” laws has happened in concert with a focused emphasis by the pro-gun right on crime, threats, and self-defense. While promoting firearms as a tool for self-defense is not a new idea, the expansion of laws allowing for use of deadly force may contribute to a climate where gun owners are more ready to do so, says Matthew Lacombe, an associate professor of political science at Case Western University who specializes in gun politics, the NRA and political ideology.
“The NRA narrative that you might use guns for armed self-defense is not new. What is newer is liberalization of particularly state-level laws pertaining to how, when and why you can use lethal force to defend yourself,” Lacombe says.
The men who perpetrated the recent shootings will likely not be covered under such laws, Lacombe notes. But in a wider context, “it's probably the case that the general shift legally has encouraged more and more people to think about self-defense in these terms, encouraged more people to buy guns specifically for self-defense purposes, and in some ways emboldened them in terms of what they see as a reasonable use of them,” he says. The NRA Institute for Legislative Action, which has championed the laws, did not respond to a request for comment about the recent shootings and self-defense laws.
Politicians and advocates for more restrictive gun control laws have pointed the finger at “stand your ground” laws for such an embodiment.
“I think we now have a shoot-first, ask-later policy in this state – or at least that is what people have interpreted it to be,” Missouri state Rep. Maggie Nurrenbern, a Democrat, was quoted by The Kansas City Star as saying in the wake of Yarl’s shooting. Nurrenbern introduced a measure in the legislature earlier this year to limit the state’s law, but the bill went nowhere. The context around the laws, including a focus on firearms as a means for self-defense as opposed to other uses, Lacombe says, is critical for understanding what effect they may have on society.
“It's not just the laws, it's also the sort of marketing campaigns and rhetoric surrounding the laws, which I think have increasingly turned the gun-rights space into one focused on armed self-defense specifically, as opposed to other uses of guns,” Lacombe says.
Part of that context also includes a pervasive narrative pushed by pro-gun advocates and the NRA that has intertwined gun rights and core values like freedom, making expansive gun rights a core part of the conservative ideology – even identity. “Owning a gun isn't just having an object that you might use for recreation or self-defense, but it's more of a sort of symbol of who you are and what you stand for. And part of that relates to self-sufficiency,” Lacombe says of the narrative. “We think of self-sufficiency as being politically coded – you know, ‘I don't need handouts’ – but it's also in recent years come to even involve notions of protection.”
Fear and Freedom
Republicans have in recent years emphasized crime and threats in their electoral messaging around – a threat they say is posed by an “invasion” of illegal immigration, the threat posed by criminals emboldened by Democrats’ soft-on-crime policies, the threat of eroding rights and norms.
“The sinister forces trying to kill America have done everything they can to stop me, to silence you, and to turn this nation into a socialist dumping ground for criminals, junkies, Marxists, thugs, radicals and dangerous refugees that no other country wants,” Trump told the crowd at the Conservative Political Action Conference earlier this year. “If those opposing us succeed, our once-beautiful USA will be a failed country that no one will even recognize – a lawless, open-borders, crime-ridden, filthy, communist nightmare.”
Trump is considered the current front-runner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination. His comments echo narratives threaded through many right-leaning news and commentary shows and other forms of media, as well as the electoral strategies of other candidates.
Fear is an old and effective political motivator, experts say, and that motivation was also on display at the NRA’s annual meeting earlier this month, with speeches replete with warnings about self-defense, crime and protecting freedoms from those who want to take it away by force.
“Threat is a pretty powerful motivator, so associating support for gun rights with addressing different types of threats is something that historically has worked pretty well for the NRA,” Lacombe says.
Lawlor, the criminal justice professor, and former state legislator, describes fear and threat as a “political business model” that shifts and changes in topic over the years but remains a pervasive strategy.
“In 2004, the presidential election was all about gay marriage. Right now, it’s all about drag queens. A couple of cycles ago, it was all about immigrant caravans. There is always something that can be that thing that everyone should fear,” Lawlor says. “And so, we're back to crime now. That's where we are now – that you should be scared that someone's going to steal your car or break into your house.”
Though crime rates vary by city, the violent crime rate in the U.S. overall has plummeted since the 1990s, when gang violence associated with an epidemic of crack cocaine fueled urban homicide rates. In fact, violent crime rates have been slashed by more than half – though polling shows that Americans believe the number has gone up, despite the data.
The result of threat-based rhetoric, Lawlor argues, can be what happened in Missouri – a senior citizen “who's watching Fox News all day with the volume all the way on max, has a gun, of course, to protect themselves, and he's been told that sooner or later, some Black guy is going to show and try and kill you or break into your house or whatever.”
‘There's a 16-year-old kid knocking on his door by mistake, and – boom, right? So this outcome is predictable,” he says.

Convicted Felon Sentenced to 87 Months in Trafficking Nine Firearms, Including to Buyer Who Said He Was ‘At War’ Thursday, April 30, 2026 U.S. Attorney's Office, District of Columbia WASHINGTON - Brandon Smith, 34, a previously convicted felon residing in the District of Columbia, was sentenced today in U.S. District Court to 87 months in prison for conspiring to traffic at least nine firearms to a prohibited buyer over the course of six months, announced U.S. Attorney Jeanine Ferris Pirro. “Brandon Smith was already on supervised probation for a violent felony when he chose to traffic firearms, and he continued even after being told the buyer intended to use them for violence,” said U.S. Attorney Pirro. “Over the course of six months, he arranged the sale of at least nine guns—including one with an obliterated serial number—to a prohibited individual. This was not a momentary lapse in judgment, but a sustained and deliberate effort to arm someone who could not legally possess firearms. My office remains committed to holding accountable those who endanger our communities by trafficking illegal guns.” On Jan. 9, 2026, Smith pleaded guilty before Judge Howell to conspiracy to commit trafficking in firearms. In addition to the 87-month prison term, Judge Howell ordered Smith to serve three years of supervised release. Federal prosecutors had requested a 108-month prison term. According to court papers, beginning in November 2023, ATF opened an investigation after a confidential source reported that Smith, then on supervised probation for a violent felony, was actively advertising firearms for sale by texting photographs of guns to prospective buyers, including individuals with prior felony convictions. During the next six months, Smith sold or arranged the sale of nine firearms to a buyer on six separate occasions. During the transactions, Smith sold his own personal carry firearm on multiple occasions when a supplier failed to deliver, then purchased a replacement for himself afterward. In early January 2024, as Smith and the buyer discussed an upcoming transaction, the buyer told Smith he needed the firearms because he was “at war” after his cousin had been killed. Smith proceeded with the sale. The buyer had also told Smith he was serving a criminal justice sentence at the time of the transactions. Smith acknowledged that he, too, was “on papers.” Smith arranged a total of six transactions from Nov. 30, 2023, through May 30, 2024, resulting in the sale of nine firearms. At least one of the firearms had its serial number obliterated. On Oct. 26, 2024, MPD officers conducted a traffic stop on the 1600 block of 16th Street SE and found Smith in the front passenger seat of a parked vehicle. Officers observed open containers of alcohol and discovered a satchel at his feet. Inside the satchel, in plain view, was a loaded Glock Model 19X 9mm handgun with a round in the chamber and 16 additional rounds in the magazine. The bag also contained a bank card and government-issued identification in Smith’s name. Smith has prior convictions for Simple Assault (2011), Attempted Robbery (2013), and Robbery and Possession of a Firearm during a Crime of Violence (2016), for which he was sentenced to five years in prison. He was serving a term of supervised probation from the 2016 conviction at the time of the firearms trafficking conspiracy. This investigation was conducted by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Washington Field Office, and the Metropolitan Police Department. The matter was prosecuted by Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Brendan M. Horan. Convicted Felon Sentenced to 87 Months in Trafficking

Marijuana and The Law: The Laws are Changing But When and How? Gregg Kielma 4/27/2026 Many people are confused about how marijuana use interacts with federal firearm law, especially as more states legalize cannabis. Under federal statute 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3), anyone who is an unlawful user of a controlled substance is prohibited from possessing firearms or ammunition, and marijuana remains a Schedule I controlled substance, for now, under federal law even in states where it’s legal. That means regular, ongoing marijuana use can place someone in a prohibited category, though recent ATF rule changes require evidence of consistent, current use rather than a single incident. At the same time, courts are actively reviewing how this law applies, and the Supreme Court is considering cases that challenge whether the federal ban is constitutional when applied to marijuana users. The legal landscape is evolving and enforcement varies, concerns about someone’s behavior are best handled by focusing on safety, communication, and lawful reporting of specific dangerous actions—not assumptions about their private habits. If someone is acting in a way that poses an immediate threat to themselves or others, contacting local authorities to report the behavior—not their status—is the appropriate and lawful step. Gregg Kielma

Gun Rights Group Files Brief To Rebut DOJ’s Misleading Arguments In NFA Challenge Mark Chesnut Arguments by the Trump Administration’s Department of Justice for continuing the registration portion of the National Firearms Act (NFA) now that the tax has been eliminated have drawn the ire of a major gun-rights group. Congress killed the $200 tax on suppressors, short-barreled rifles (SBRs), short-barreled shotguns (SBSs), and any other weapons (AOWs) when it passed President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill last summer. Gun-rights groups immediately filed a handful of lawsuits challenging the remainder of the NFA, and the DOJ is unexpectedly fighting those lawsuits, despite the administration’s promise to battle anti-Second Amendment laws. In one of the cases, Brown v. ATF, the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) recently filed a supplemental reply brief countering the federal government’s arguments in support of the NFA. “This reply brief gave us the perfect opportunity to rebut the government’s arguments in support of the NFA,” Bill Sack, SAF director of legal operations, said in a news release announcing the filing. “We were encouraged the court requested targeted supplemental briefing that addressed key elements of the proper Second Amendment analysis. In our principle brief, we laid out in detail why the answer to every question posed supported our position. And now with this reply brief, we have driven home the point and dismantled each of the government’s arguments to the contrary.” In the brief, FPC argued that the government used incorrect reasoning in its argument about which arms are “in common use” and which are not. And in doing so, pointed out the government’s inability to address the second Bruen standard.

Why Do People Enjoy “The Firearm Sports” and why "Do People Want to Take Our Firearms Away From Law Abiding, Responsible People" Gregg Kielma Tactical K Training and Firearms 4/26/2026 Kielma states, "This debate has lasted for years. The gun control community wants to end our sport and hobby because, in their view: • We're bad people for owning guns. • We're irresponsible. • They don't want anyone armed. • They're afraid of what they don't understand. • They don't appreciate shooting as a sport." I do know this, people enjoy firearm sports because they offer a rare combination of discipline, focus, and personal growth that few activities can match. Whether it’s precision rifle, trap, or action shooting, these sports demand calm breathing, steady hands, and clear mind skills that build confidence and carry over into everyday life. The community is another major draw: responsible gun owners tend to be safety driven, respectful, and eager to help newcomers succeed. For many, the range becomes a place of mentorship, family bonding, and lifelong learning. At the same time, debates about firearms often create tension, and some lawmakers and advocacy groups argue for stricter regulations because they believe it will reduce crime or increase public safety. Others, however, feel these efforts unfairly target the very people who follow the law, train regularly, and store their firearms responsibly. From that perspective, it can feel as though responsible owners are being lumped together with criminals, even though their behavior, mindset, and values are completely different. This disconnects between those who see firearms as a disciplined sport and personal responsibility, and those who view them primarily through the lens of risk drives much of the ongoing debate. Gregg Kielma

Ammunition Quality and Why It Matters: Let’s Take a LOOK! Gregg Kielma Tactical K Training and Firearms 4/26/2026 Ammunition matters because it is the heart of every firearm’s performance, safety, and purpose. It determines how reliably a firearm functions, how accurately it shoots, and how responsibly we use it in training, hunting, or self-defense. Ammunition is far more than a simple component it is a complete system made up of the bullet, casing, primer, and propellant, each playing a critical role in how a round ignites, burns, seals the chamber, and ultimately sends a projectile downrange. When the primer ignites the propellant, rapidly expanding gases push the bullet through the barrel at high velocity, and the design of each component influences accuracy, recoil, and terminal performance. From a practical standpoint, choosing the right ammunition is essential for safety and effectiveness. Different tasks demand different types of rounds: full metal jackets for training, hollow points for self-defense due to controlled expansion, soft points for hunting, and specialized loads for shotguns depending on the game or purpose. Using the wrong ammunition can damage a firearm, cause malfunctions, or create dangerous over penetration risks. Matching ammunition to the firearm’s caliber and intended use is a foundational responsibility for every gun owner. Ammunition also matters because it directly affects ethical and responsible shooting. Hunters rely on rounds that deliver clean, humane results. Instructors and competitors depend on consistent, reliable ammunition to build skill and confidence. Law abiding citizens who carry for protection choose ammunition designed to stop a threat while reducing unintended harm. Every one of these decisions reflects a commitment to safety, discipline, and respect for the power we hold. Beyond performance, ammunition carries legal and regulatory significance. Caliber classifications, bullet types, and even certain expanding rounds are regulated in various jurisdictions. Proper identification and understanding of ammunition types support compliance, safe storage, and responsible ownership. Kielma’s Parting Shot: Ammunition matters because it represents the evolution of firearms themselves. From ancient projectiles to modern engineered cartridges, advancements in ammunition have shaped accuracy, reliability, and capability across civilian, sporting, and military contexts. Understanding ammunition isn’t just technical knowledge it’s part of being a responsible, informed firearm owner who values safety, precision, and the discipline that comes with training. Gregg Kielma

My Private 150 Yd Range Base is Down! The Plan Comes Together! Gregg Kielma 4/25/1016 Friday afternoon, 4/24/2026, I put in a solid 6 hours leveling and laying down the base that will support the shooting platform for my 150‑yard range. It was one of those jobs that looks simple, until you’re knee‑deep in it, but the base is in and ready for the next step. The plywood deck goes in on May 9th, along with the outdoor carpet that will be applied to the decking, and once that’s done, the platform will finally be completed. Note to self: sugar sand will absolutely get your truck stuck—ask me how I know. LOL Gregg Kielma
















