Gregory Kielma • November 17, 2023
Washington Post In Full Politicized Vulture Mode With Publication Gory Mass Shooting Picture
By
Jennifer Sensiba
November 17, 2023
Says FFL, Firearms Instructor and Gunsmith Kielma, Ms. Buzzbe, we can talk anytime and let's go on record and figure this out. Call me and let’s set up a day. Email; is good as well. kielmagregory@gmail.com
Kielma
continues, remember the picture above.
After recent mass shootings, I’ve seen a particularly unhinged request in comments sections: publish images of the dead. It seemed for months like nobody was going to answer that ugly call, but after warnings from some of the victims’ parents, the Washington
Post ran a non-paywalled post yesterday doing just that. I will not be sharing links to it, but it shows a lot of bloody images of school shootings and other attacks. One photo included showed bodies left behind after the Las Vegas shooting.
The media, of course, has every right to do this. The images are mostly taken from law enforcement evidence and those that were published were obtained by WaPo lawfully.
But just because you can legally do something doesn’t mean it’s morally right. Particularly when you do it as selectively and cynically as the Washington Post has. The Post has published only photos from shootings carried out by killers with AR-15 rifles. It’s chosen images designed to shock in a clearly politicized attempt to whip up opposition to “assault weapon” ownership.
The fact that shootings with ARs constitutes a tiny minority of all shootings in America — even using the inflated numbers cited by the WaPo from the debunked Gun Violence Archive — didn’t warrant a mention by the paper. The implication here is that that the aftermaths of shootings committed with ARs are somehow more bloody or shocking than those carried out with other weapons like shotguns, handguns, knives, or bombs.
That, of course, is false. But the Post’s editors had a cynical political point to make and didn’t care about the effect the published photos might have on victims’ families or survivors.
Parents’ Opposition
The only reason we knew ahead of time that the Washington Post was going to publish this activist stunt was that many of the parents and relatives of the shooting victims expressed their opposition on social media.
Here’s a tweet from Kimberly Garcia, a parent of a child who died at Uvalde, begging social media users to not look at the images and to not share them. I chose to honor her request and did not include links in this article.
Phillips revealed the date of publication and said she knew why WaPo intended to do it. They supposedly want the public to “better understand the trauma” associated with these shootings so that the public can know what it’s like to be a victim of them or a responder who has to deal with them.
A responsible newspaper does not publish such upsetting images lightly, but doing so showcases the destructive force of the AR-15 in a way words fail to do.
The fact remains that the Washington Post knows that the families and friends of the dead will suffer emotional harm from the publication of these photos. That’s clear from their attempt to reach out to give them a “heads up.”
But none of that ultimately mattered. The Post concluded that the political and potential anti-gun benefits of publishing the images outweighed any trauma and harm they might do to the shooting victims’ parents and survivors.
People Already Understand
Make no mistake…these images were released under a false pretext. Just about everyone knows the pain of losing a loved one. Almost everyone has lost a loved one, whether it was a grandparent when you were a child or a parent when you were older. Whatever age you might be, you’ve probably lost friends and family to accidents or illness. . Some of us have witnessed death first-hand.
But because journalists generally do not have access to crime scenes and news organizations rarely if ever publish graphic content, most Americans have no way to understand the full scope of an AR-15’s destructive power or the extent of the trauma inflicted on victims, survivors and first responders when a shooter uses this weapon on people.
Releasing gory images, however, doesn’t improve our ability to empathize with those who’ve lost their loved ones. We already know what it’s like to lose people close to us. That pain runs just as deep whether the cause of death was old age, cancer, or a deranged killer who took them from us.
That I had to take a break from writing after typing that last paragraph (and you may have needed a break after reading it) is proof enough that most of us know what it’s like already. We get it. We understand completely.
In the end, we decided that there is public value in illuminating the profound and repeated devastation left by tragedies that are often covered as isolated news events but rarely considered as part of a broader pattern of violence.
The goal here, however, wasn’t to increase understanding or empathy, let alone illumination. The Post didn’t include photos of the aftermath of the Virginia Tech shooting (32 dead, handguns), an average weekend in Chicago (scores shot, double digit fatalities, also using handguns), or the University of Idaho stabbings, or the Wisconsin parade attack (SUV).
The goal here was to shock people into supporting gun control laws, possibly another “assault weapons” ban. The bloody images were published to get people in a mental state where they suspend their critical thinking skills and are open to the idea that limits on gun rights will solve the problem. It’s an intentionally deceptive, manipulative assault on the human mind and soul designed to create a political opening that statism can exploit.
This Is The Behavior Of Vultures, Not Humans
When a death happens in the desert, it isn’t long at all before the ecosystem gets to work recycling the materials that once enabled life. Why? Because nature is a brutal place. If an animal doesn’t take advantage of every opportunity for sustenance, that animal will themselves be dead before too long. Vultures specialize in this and have excellent vision in order to spot such opportunities from high in the air.
But, as humans, this is not our way. We aren’t made and/or evolved to seek out the dead and take advantage of them. It’s in our nature to care about each other, even after they’re gone. We honor our dead and remember them instead of looking for ways to use and take advantage of them.
The fact of gun control’s failure has driven the so-called journalists at the Washington Post to this kind of ghoulish desperation. They’re behaving more like members of the Donner Party, using the dead to benefit themselves and further their own interests. They’re so invested in civilian disarmament that they’ll do anything to try to revive their cause, no matter the cost to the people who were affected or their own humanity.
Why New York’s Gun Laws Fail Responsible Americans By Gregory Kielma Owner & Lead Instructor, Tactical K Training Parrish, Florida 02/11/26 New York’s gun laws are often praised by politicians as “the model” for the rest of the country. But anyone who understands firearms, safety, and the realities of lawful gun ownership can see the truth: these laws don’t make people safer. They make ordinary, responsible Americans vulnerable to prosecution, confusion, and danger. From my perspective as a firearms instructor, New York’s approach isn’t just misguided, it’s fundamentally broken. Let's Take a LOOK 1. The Laws Are Designed for Confusion, Not Clarity A responsible gun owner should be able to read the law, understand it, and comply with it. New York makes that nearly impossible. The rules change depending on: • Where you are standing • What county you’re in • Whether you’re in a “sensitive location” • Whether a judge feels like issuing a permit • Whether the state decides your training is “good enough” this month This isn’t public safety. It’s a legal trap. When a state’s laws are so convoluted that even attorneys struggle to interpret them, the average traveler or gun owner doesn’t stand a chance. And that’s exactly how New York likes it. 2. The State Treats Law Abiding Citizens Like Criminals New York’s laws don’t target violent offenders—they target the people who follow the rules. We’ve seen countless cases where: • Travelers legally transporting firearms under federal law are arrested anyway • People with no criminal history are charged for simple paperwork mistakes • Visitors who declare firearms at airports (as required by federal law) are handcuffed on the spot Meanwhile, the individuals actually committing violent crimes aren’t walking into airports declaring their guns. They’re not applying for permits. They’re not taking safety classes. They’re not following any law. New York’s system punishes the compliant and ignores the criminal. 3. The Permit System Is Arbitrary and Politicized A constitutional right should never depend on whether a local official “feels” you deserve it. Yet in New York, that’s exactly how it works. Even after the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision, the state continues to drag its feet, invent new restrictions, and create new hoops for citizens to jump through. The message is clear: they’re not interested in safety—they’re interested in control. When a right becomes a privilege granted by the government, it stops being a right at all. 4. The Laws Ignore Reality and Endanger the Public New York lawmakers operate from a fantasy where: • Criminals obey gun free zones • More restrictions equal more safety • A piece of paper stops violence • A permit holder is somehow a threat But in the real world—the world I train people for—violence doesn’t wait for permission slips. Criminals don’t care about signage. And the only people disarmed by these laws are the ones who were never a threat to begin with. By stripping responsible citizens of the ability to defend themselves, New York creates victims, not safety. 5. The State Refuses to Respect Federal Protections Federal law—specifically the Firearm Owners’ Protection Act—was designed to protect travelers transporting firearms legally. New York routinely ignores it. This creates a dangerous precedent: • A state can nullify federal protections • A traveler can be arrested for following federal rules • A constitutional right can vanish at a state line No American should have to fear arrest simply for traveling with legally owned property. 6. The Laws Create a False Sense of Security Politicians love to point to strict gun laws as proof they’re “doing something.” But the data doesn’t support the idea that New York’s approach reduces violent crime. What these laws actually do is: • Give the public a false sense of safety • Allow politicians to claim victory without solving real problems • Divert attention from the actual causes of violence Safety comes from education, responsibility, and accountability—not from punishing the people who already follow the rules. Kielma’s Parting Shot New York’s gun laws aren’t just bad policy—they’re dangerous policy. They criminalize responsible Americans, ignore constitutional protections, and leave good people defenseless while doing nothing to deter violent criminals. As an instructor, I see every day how much effort responsible gun owners put into safety, training, and compliance. These are not the people New York should be targeting. Yet they are the ones paying the price. Until New York stops treating the Second Amendment as optional, its laws will continue to fail the very citizens they claim to protect. Gregg Kielma
What Is a Straw Firearm Purchase? From the Perspective of Gregg Kielma, FFL at Tactical K Training & Firearms 02/06/2026 As a firearms instructor, I spend a great deal of time teaching responsible gun ownership. Most people who walk into a gun shop or a training class genuinely want to do things the right way. But there’s one topic that still causes confusion—and sometimes lands otherwise well-meaning people in serious legal trouble. That topic is the straw purchase. A straw purchase isn’t complicated, but the consequences absolutely are. Understanding it is part of being a responsible, ethical gun owner. Please treat the ATF 4473 like your tax return, be truthful. If you don't, the consequences can be devastating. Please do not put me or my business in a poor situation. "Don't lie for the other guy" Let's Take a LOOK What a Straw Purchase Really Is A straw purchase happens when one person buys a firearm on behalf of someone else—especially someone who cannot legally buy or possess a firearm. It doesn’t matter if the buyer is legally allowed to own a gun. It doesn’t matter if the person they’re buying it for is a friend, a family member, or “just helping someone out.” If the intent is to acquire a firearm for another individual, it becomes a straw purchase. The key issue is the ATF Form 4473. When you buy a firearm from a licensed dealer, you must answer a very specific question: “Are you the actual transferee/buyer of the firearm?” If you are purchasing the gun for someone else, the truthful answer is no. If you check yes anyway, you’ve just committed a federal felony. Why Straw Purchases Are Illegal The law exists for one reason: to prevent firearms from being funneled to people who shouldn’t have them. That includes: • Convicted felons • Individuals with domestic violence convictions • People prohibited due to mental health adjudications • Drug traffickers • Individuals under restraining orders • Anyone attempting to avoid background checks When someone uses a “clean” buyer to get a gun, they’re bypassing the safeguards designed to keep firearms out of dangerous hands. That’s why federal prosecutors take these cases seriously. The Consequences Are No Joke A straw purchase can lead to: • Up to 15 years in federal prison • Massive fines • Permanent loss of firearm rights • Federal felony record And here’s the part many people don’t realize: Even if the person you bought the gun for never commits a crime with it, the act of lying on the 4473 is enough to be charged. I’ve seen cases where someone thought they were “just helping” a boyfriend, girlfriend, or friend who didn’t want to deal with the background check. That one decision changed their life forever. Gifts vs. Straw Purchases People often ask me: “Gregg, what about buying a gun as a gift?” A legitimate gift is perfectly legal. The difference is intent. • Legal: You buy a firearm with your own money, for yourself, and later decide to gift it. • Legal: You buy a firearm as a genuine gift, with no reimbursement, and the recipient is legally allowed to own it. • Illegal: Someone gives you money and tells you what to buy. • Illegal: You buy a gun because someone else cannot pass a background check. If money changes hands, or if the other person is directing the purchase, it’s no longer a gift—it’s a straw purchase. Why This Matters to Me as an Instructor My mission at Tactical K Training and Firearms is simple: Educate, empower, and protect responsible gun owners. That means teaching more than marksmanship. It means teaching the law, ethics, and the responsibilities that come with firearm ownership. A firearm is a tool that demands maturity and integrity. Straw purchases undermine both. When you understand the law, you protect yourself, your family, and your community. You also help ensure that firearms remain in the hands of responsible citizens—not criminals. Kielma’s Parting Shot: MY Final Thoughts A straw purchase isn’t a loophole. It’s a felony. And it’s one of the fastest ways for a good person to end up in serious legal trouble. If you’re ever unsure about a firearm transaction, ask questions. Seek guidance. Talk to a qualified instructor or a knowledgeable dealer. Responsible ownership starts with informed decisions.
Lake County Florida Man Pleads Guilty to Firearms Trafficking Thursday, January 29, 2026 U.S. Attorney's Office, Middle District of Florida Ocala, Florida – Fernando Munguia, Jr. (24, Leesburg) has pleaded guilty to nine counts of making a materially false statement in connection with the acquisition of a firearm and nine counts of causing a federal firearm licensee (FFL) to maintain false information in its official records. Munguia faces up to 10 years in federal prison for each false statement count and up to five years’ imprisonment for each count of causing an FFL to maintain false information in its official records. As part of his plea, Munguia has agreed to forfeit the nine firearms related to these offenses. U.S. Attorney Gregory W. Kehoe made the announcement. According to court records, between January 1 and December 31, 2023, Munguia illegally straw-purchased multiple firearms. During the purchases, Munguia indicated on the mandatory background paperwork that he was the actual transferee/buyer of the firearms. Those statements were false since Munguia was being paid to purchase the firearms on behalf of someone else. Nine of the firearms purchased by Munguia—along with other guns—subsequently were intercepted by U.S. Customs and Border Protection on May 27, 2023, when another individual attempted to transport them from Eagle Pass, Texas across the United States’ border and into Mexico. Authorities intercepted Munguia’s firearms less than a month after he had purchased them. Court Exhibit The firearms and ammunition seized at the U.S. border on May 27, 2023. A subsequent records check by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives showed that between January and November 2023, Munguia had purchased 44 firearms for a total of $23,334.25—an amount representing approximately two-thirds of his reported annual income. The records also showed that his purchases frequently involved multiple, identical firearms of the same model and caliber. This case was investigated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Homeland Security Investigations, and U.S. Custom and Border Protection. It is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Hannah Nowalk Watson. This case is part of Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN), a program bringing together all levels of law enforcement and the communities they serve to reduce violent crime and gun violence, and to make our neighborhoods safer for everyone. On May 26, 2021, the Department launched a violent crime reduction strategy strengthening PSN based on these core principles: fostering trust and legitimacy in our communities, supporting community-based organizations that help prevent violence from occurring in the first place, setting focused and strategic enforcement priorities, and measuring the results. Updated January 29, 2026
Ohio Man Indicted for Firearms Offenses Wednesday, February 4, 2026 U.S. Attorney's Office, District of Massachusetts AR-style pistol loaded with 100 rounds of ammunition; a loaded rifle with 100 rounds of ammunition; and two additional loaded pistols recovered BOSTON – An Ohio man has been indicted by a federal grand jury in Massachusetts in connection with multiple sales of firearms transported from Ohio to Massachusetts. Ruben Joel Sanchez Jr., 31, of Youngstown, Ohio, was indicted on one count of engaging in the business of dealing in firearms without a license and two counts of being a felon in possession of firearms and ammunition. Sanchez was arrested on Jan. 8, 2026, and remains in federal custody. According to the charging documents, beginning at least as early as June 2025 through January 2026, Sanchez engaged in the business of unlawful trafficking in firearms. Specifically, in June 2025, Sanchez, who is not licensed to deal in firearms, allegedly sold three firearms to an individual in exchange for $4,000. It is further alleged that, on Jan. 8, 2026, Sanchez was recorded and observed selling four additional firearms to the same individual in return for $8,500. Sanchez was arrested at the scene where an AR-style pistol equipped with a loaded, 100-round drum; a rifle equipped with a loaded, 100-round drum; a loaded pistol equipped with an extended magazine; and an additional loaded pistol were allegedly recovered. The charge of felon in possession of firearms and ammunition provides for a sentence of up to 15 years in prison, three years of supervised release and a fine of up to $250,000. The charge of unlawful trafficking in firearms provides for a sentence of up to five years in prison, three years of supervised release, and a fine of up to $250,000. Sentences are imposed by a federal district court judge based upon the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and statutes which govern the determination of a sentence in a criminal case. United States Attorney Leah B. Foley and Thomas Greco, Special Agent in Charge of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Boston Field Division made the announcement today. Assistant U.S. Attorney Julissa Walsh of the Major Crimes Unit is prosecuting the case. The details contained in the charging documents are allegations. The defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. Updated February 4, 2026
Montgomery Man Pleads Guilty to Federal Firearms and Machinegun Charges Thursday, February 5, 2026 U.S. Attorney's Office, Middle District of Alabama MONTGOMERY, Ala. – On February 4, 2026, Ladarius Lamar Knight, 25, of Montgomery, Alabama, pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm and to the unlawful possession of a machinegun, announced Acting United States Attorney Kevin Davidson. According to court records, on January 7, 2025, units with the Montgomery Police Department and Alabama Law Enforcement Agency (ALEA) were on Zelda Road in Montgomery when they heard gunshots coming from a nearby gas station. Responding officers observed three individuals fleeing the area. ALEA troopers pursued one of the suspects into a fast-food restaurant across the street from the gas station. The suspect, later identified as Knight, was found hiding in the restaurant’s back storage area and was taken into custody. Troopers recovered a handgun Knight was attempting to conceal inside a box. Further examination revealed that the handgun was equipped with a machinegun conversion device, commonly referred to as a “switch.” When installed, such a device enables the firearm to fire continuously with a single pull of the trigger, resulting in an extremely high rate of fire that allows the weapon to discharge an entire magazine in a matter of seconds . Knight has prior felony convictions and is legally prohibited from possessing firearms or ammunition. A sentencing hearing will be scheduled at a later date. At sentencing, Knight faces a maximum sentence of 15 years in prison. There is no parole in the federal system. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF); the Alabama Law Enforcement Agency (ALEA), including its Metro Area Crime Suppression (MACS) Unit; and the Montgomery Police Department investigated this case. Assistant United States Attorneys John J. Geer, III and Christine Levi are prosecuting the case. Updated February 5, 2026
Two Individuals Charged in Scheme to “Straw Purchase” Firearms Friday, February 6, 2026 U.S. Attorney's Office, Northern District of Alabama HUNTSVILLE, Ala. – A federal grand jury has indicted two individuals in a scheme to “straw purchase” firearms, announced U.S. Attorney Prim F. Escalona. A three-count indictment filed in U.S. District Court charges Habonisun Mynez Chaverst, 28, of Center Point, Alabama, and Keonna Daniella Cephus, 38, of Birmingham, Alabama, with conspiracy to straw purchase firearms and submit false ATF forms 4473. Cephus was also charged with making a false statement during the purchase of a firearm. According to the indictment, between October 2024 and November 2024, Chaverst partnered with co-defendant Cephus to purchase six firearms from a Federal Firearms Licensee. Cephus, the straw purchaser, falsified documents by specifically stating that she was the actual buyer when in fact she was buying the firearms for Chaverst. On two separate occasions in November 2024, Cephus purchased two .40 caliber Glock 22 pistols, two .40 caliber Glock 23 pistols, and two 9mm Glock 17 pistols from Hoover Tactical Firearms. Cephus used money provided by Chaverst to purchase the firearms. The ATF investigated the case. Assistant U.S. Attorney Carson R. Gilbert is prosecuting the case. An indictment contains only charges. A defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty. Updated February 6, 2026
Why Being Nice Matters. A True Story by-Gregg Kielma A small town sat tucked between two quiet rivers, the kind of place where everyone waved from their porch and news traveled faster than the wind. In that town lived a man named Paul, known for one simple thing—he was nice. Not loud, not flashy, not the center of attention. Just consistently, quietly kind. Every morning, he held the door for strangers at the café. He helped Mr. Hanghouer carry his groceries without being asked. He checked on the mechanic’s dog when the shop got busy. Nothing heroic. Nothing grand. Just small acts that most people barely noticed. One summer, a storm rolled through the town, knocking out power and flooding the roads. People were stuck, hot, and frustrated. But something unexpected happened. Folks began showing up at Paul’s house—not because he had air conditioning or supplies, but because they remembered how he made them feel. Safe. Seen. Valued. Neighbors brought blankets, food, lanterns, and tools. They worked together, fixing what they could and comforting each other through what they couldn’t. And when someone asked why everyone had gathered there, the answer was simple: “Because Paul's always been good to us.” The storm passed, the lights came back on, and life returned to normal. But the town never forgot that moment. They realized kindness isn’t just polite—it’s powerful. It builds bridges long before you need to cross them. It turns strangers into allies. It makes a community stronger than any storm. And Paul? He just kept being nice. Not for praise, not for reward, but because he understood something many people overlook: Being nice matters because you never know when a small act of kindness becomes the reason someone else finds hope again. Gregg Kielma
What’s Going On With Glock — From My Perspective as a Firearms Instructor/Gunsmith By Gregg Kielma-Tactical K Training and Firearms As someone who’s spent years teaching responsible gun ownership and watching this industry evolve from the inside, I can tell you this: Glock is in the middle of one of the biggest transitions we’ve seen from them in decades. And it’s not chaos — it’s strategy. A Company That Rarely Changes Is Changing Fast Glock has always been known for slow, deliberate evolution. They don’t chase trends. They don’t flood the market with gimmicks. They build tools that work, and they stick to that formula. But right now, they’re shifting gears. With the rollout of the Gen 6 pistols — the G17, G19, and G45 — Glock is signaling that they’re ready to modernize in ways they’ve resisted for years. Optics-ready slides, improved ergonomics, ambidextrous controls, and a flat-faced trigger aren’t just upgrades; they’re acknowledgments that the market has changed and Glock intends to stay on top. A Strategic Realignment, Not a Retreat There’s been a lot of chatter — especially online — about Glock discontinuing certain full-size commercial models or shifting production priorities. From where I stand, this isn’t a sign of trouble. It’s a sign of tightening focus. Glock is trimming the fat, consolidating SKUs, and putting their energy into the platforms that define their future. When a company as conservative as Glock starts making bold moves, it’s because they’ve run the numbers and know exactly where the market is heading. The Gen 6 Line Is Their Statement Piece I’ve handled enough firearms to know when a company is phoning it in — and this isn’t that. The Gen 6 pistols feel like Glock finally listened to years of user feedback without compromising the reliability they’re known for. Early reviews and hands-on impressions back that up: • Better ergonomics • Cleaner trigger • Optics-ready from the factory • Compatibility with existing holsters and magazines • Same price point as Gen 5 MOS models That last point matters. Glock isn’t trying to cash-grab. They’re trying to future-proof. From My Instructor’s Viewpoint At Tactical K Training and Firearms, I see what students gravitate toward, what they shoot well with, and what they trust. Glock has always been a top choice because of its simplicity and reliability. With the Gen 6 updates, they’re making the platform even more accessible for new shooters while giving experienced shooters the refinements they’ve been asking for. This is Glock doubling down on what works — not reinventing themselves but sharpening the edges. K ielma’s Parting Shot: Where I Think Glock Is Heading If you ask me, Glock is positioning itself for the next decade of civilian and law enforcement use. They’re modernizing without abandoning their identity. They’re tightening their product line to strengthen their core offerings. And they’re doing it at a pace that’s fast for Glock but measured for everyone else. In short: Glock isn’t in trouble — they’re evolving. And from where I stand, that’s good for the industry and great for the shooters, like me, who rely on them.
Firearm Suppressors: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly By Gregg Kielma-Tactical K Training and Firearms My Thoughts; The Good-The Bad and The Ugly Kielma says, "Let's Take a LOOK Suppressors — or “silencers,” as Hollywood insists on calling them — are one of the most misunderstood pieces of firearms equipment in America. Depending on who you ask, they’re either tactical magic wands or tools of villains. The truth, as usual, sits somewhere in the middle. As an instructor who spends his days teaching responsible gun owners how to stay safe, legal, and effective, I look at suppressors through a practical lens: what they help with, what they don’t, and what every shooter needs to understand before deciding if one belongs in their kit. The Good: What Suppressors Actually Do Well 1. Hearing Protection That Matters A suppressor doesn’t make a firearm “quiet.” It makes it safer. Even with a suppressor, most centerfire firearms still exceed safe hearing thresholds — but the reduction is enough to prevent permanent damage in many situations. For home-defense scenarios, where you won’t have time to put on ear pro, that matters. 2. Better Control and Faster Follow Up Shots By reducing recoil impulse and muzzle blast, suppressors help shooters maintain control. For new shooters, that means confidence. For experienced shooters, that means tighter strings and faster, more accurate follow ups. 3. Reduced Signature A suppressor cuts down on muzzle flash and blast — not to hide anything, but to help you maintain vision and awareness, especially in low light environments. It’s a tool for control, not concealment. The Bad: What Suppressors Don’t Do 1. They Don’t Make Guns Silent Despite the movies, there’s no “pfft” sound. A suppressed 9mm pistol still sounds like a loud nail gun. A suppressed rifle still cracks because of supersonic ammo. If someone buys a suppressor expecting Hollywood results, they’re setting themselves up for disappointment. 2. They Add Weight and Length A suppressor changes the balance of your firearm. On a rifle, that extra length can affect maneuverability. On a pistol, it can make holstering impossible without specialized gear. 3. They Require Maintenance Carbon buildup is real. Some suppressors need to be disassembled and cleaned; others need careful handling to avoid seizing. Neglecting a suppressor is no different than neglecting a firearm — it will eventually fail you. The Ugly: The Legal and Practical Realities 1. The NFA Process Suppressors are legal in most states, but the federal process is slow, expensive, and bureaucratic. You’re looking at: • A background check • A long wait • Registration with the federal government For many people, the process is more intimidating than the device itself. 2. Misconceptions Create Problems Because suppressors are misunderstood, owners sometimes face judgment or misinformation from people who assume the worst. Part of responsible ownership is being prepared to educate others — calmly, factually, and without feeding into Hollywood myths. 3. Not Always Ideal for Defense While suppressors help with hearing and control, they also add bulk. In tight spaces, that can be a disadvantage. Like any tool, they’re not universally perfect — they’re situational. Kielma’s Parting Shot Suppressors are neither miracle devices nor sinister tools. They’re simply equipment — equipment that can make shooting safer, more controlled, and more enjoyable when used responsibly. As with any firearm accessory, the key is education. Understand what a suppressor does, what it doesn’t, and how it fits into your personal training, environment, and goals. Responsible gun owners don’t chase trends. We make informed decisions. And suppressors, when chosen for the right reasons, can be a smart, practical addition to a well-rounded firearm setup.
Are Democrats Trying to Stop Online Ammo Sales? By Gregory Kielma-Tactical K Training and Firearms As a firearms instructor and someone who works every day to promote responsible, law-abiding gun ownership, I pay close attention to legislation that affects my students and my community. One trend I’ve noticed is a growing push among many Democratic lawmakers to restrict or even eliminate online ammunition sales. From my perspective, this isn’t happening by accident—it’s part of a broader pattern of policies aimed at making firearm ownership more difficult, not for criminals, but for the very people who follow the law. Why Online Ammo Sales Matter to Law Abiding Citizens For millions of responsible gun owners, online ammunition sales are: • A legal, convenient way to purchase ammo • Often more affordable than local options • Essential for training, competition, and maintaining proficiency • A lifeline for rural areas with limited retail availability Cutting off online sales doesn’t stop criminals—they don’t buy ammo legally. It only burdens the people who already comply with the law. What Some Democratic Lawmakers Are Proposing Several Democratic-sponsored bills in recent years and months have attempted to: • Ban online ammunition sales entirely • Require all ammo purchases to be face to face • Force buyers to undergo background checks for every ammo purchase • Create federal tracking or licensing systems for ammunition Supporters claim these measures would reduce crime. But as someone who trains real people in real world safety, I see the opposite: these proposals target the wrong group. Criminals don’t order ammo online with their credit cards and home addresses. Law abiding citizens do. The Real Impact of These Proposals If these restrictions were passed, the people affected would be: • New gun owners trying to train safely • Competitive shooters • Hunters • Everyday citizens who want to stay proficient • Small businesses and instructors like me who rely on consistent access to ammunition Meanwhile, criminals would continue to obtain ammunition the same way they obtain illegal firearms—through theft, the black market, or straw purchases. Kielma’s Parting Shot My mission at Tactical K Training and Firearms is simple : teach people how to be safe, responsible, and legally informed. When lawmakers propose policies that punish responsible citizens instead of criminals, I believe it’s important to call attention to it. Stopping online ammo sales doesn’t make America safer. It just makes it harder for good people to exercise constitutional rights and maintain the skills that keep themselves and their families safe. Gregg Kielma
