NodeBB

Legislation moves fast. What's your read on where this is heading? Read the full article in The Handbook → | By Steve Duskett

Legislation moves fast. What's your read on where this is heading? Read the full article in The Handbook → | By Steve Duskett

Maryland just banned Glocks. Not Glock switches — Glocks. The actual pistols, because a third-party illegal device can be attached to them. "Instead of going after criminals and enforcing existing laws, [Moore] has chosen to disarm law-abiding Marylanders and strip them of their constitutional rights." The NRA's point here is obvious, but it still needs saying — Glock switches are already illegal under federal law. Maryland didn't close a loophole. They penalized the firearm for the crime of being convertible by someone who doesn't care about laws. The legal theory being challenged is genuinely strange: that a gun's susceptibility to an illegal modification is grounds to ban the gun itself. As the Second Amendment Foundation framed it, that's the same logic as banning hops and barley because someone might drink and drive. If that argument survives in court, the precedent reaches a lot further than Maryland. This one's worth watching — not just for Maryland residents, but for everyone. Courts ruling on whether a firearm can be banned because of what someone else might illegally do to it will shape how future laws get written. What's the most popular handgun at your local range right now — and does it have any aftermarket modification scene that a legislature could point to as justification for pulling this same move? Read the full article in The Handbook → | By Steve Duskett

Legislation moves fast. What's your read on where this is heading? Read the full article in The Handbook → | By Steve Duskett

Worth keeping an eye on. How do you think this plays out practically? Read the full article in The Handbook → | By Steve Duskett

Worth keeping an eye on. How do you think this plays out practically? Read the full article in The Handbook → | By Steve Duskett

Florida just settled a Second Amendment case that quietly rewrites how waiting periods have to work — and the mechanism matters as much as the outcome. "Every government office, including mine, exists to protect your God-given rights as enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. That's why we're settling a landmark federal case that declares Florida's 3-day firearm purchase waiting period unconstitutional under the Second Amendment." — Florida AG James Uthmeier, June 5, 2026 When the defendant's own AG is saying the law can't survive Bruen scrutiny, there's no point dragging it to trial. The state read the room and took the exit. That's not spin — that's a clean legal signal to every other state with an arbitrary delay on the books. The mechanics here are worth paying attention to. NICS clears in hours on most transfers. If the background check comes back clean and a dealer still has to sit on your firearm for three days, that delay isn't about vetting anymore — it's about inconvenience as policy. Post-Bruen, that doesn't hold up when you can't point to a historical tradition for it. California, Hawaii, and Illinois are the obvious next targets. Litigants in those states now have a settlement, a legal framework, and a state AG's own words on the record. The attorneys who brought Dunn v. Glass basically handed them a template. For those of us who've stood at an LGS counter watching a same-day NICS approval turn into a "come back Thursday" conversation — has your state's waiting period ever actually affected a purchase you were making, and do you think it changed anything about that transaction? Read the full article in The Handbook → | By Steve Duskett

Worth keeping an eye on. How do you think this plays out practically? Read the full article in The Handbook → | By Steve Duskett

Legislation moves fast. What's your read on where this is heading? Read the full article in The Handbook → | By Steve Duskett

New Jersey's AG is subpoenaing a decade of Glock sales records from dealers statewide, and the mechanism matters more than the lawsuit itself. "Subpoenaing law-abiding firearm dealers to help build a state gun registry is unconstitutional and utterly outrageous." — John Commerford, NRA-ILA Executive Director Strong words, but the actual concern here is more specific than a registry — it's court filings becoming public record. A registry you can at least argue about restricting. A court filing is open by default. The New York newspaper comparison the article makes is worth sitting with. A paper published handgun permit holders' names and addresses from a FOIL request, and people lost their minds — rightfully. That was one data dump from one state. What's being built here is a replicable process. Any state running a manufacturer lawsuit gets discovery. Discovery gets filed. Filed documents are public. Name-and-address list follows. "Americans have a long-standing historical tradition of privacy in their status as gun owners, one that holds even against federal disclosure requirements in most circumstances." Most people at the LGS counter have no idea this kind of privacy protection even exists — which means they probably don't realize how quietly it can be eroded either. If this survives challenge, the template is set, and it doesn't stay in New Jersey. Have you ever changed a purchase decision — gun, caliber, anything — because of how your state handles buyer records? Curious whether this kind of thing factors into how people here approach private sales versus going through an FFL. Read the full article in The Handbook → | By Steve Duskett

Legislation moves fast. What's your read on where this is heading? Read the full article in The Handbook → | By Steve Duskett

Legislation moves fast. What's your read on where this is heading? Read the full article in The Handbook → | By Steve Duskett

A Houston gun shop relaunching its website landed in the "legislative" category somehow, but the underlying point is worth talking about regardless. "Customers walk in already knowing what they want because they spent an hour on your site the night before. If that experience is clunky, they spent that hour somewhere else." That's exactly what happens. I've driven past a closer shop to buy from one that had real-time inventory online — saved me two wasted trips and a conversation that ends with "we can order that." "The transfer requirement keeps the physical store in the loop regardless." This is the part that gets lost when people panic about "online gun sales." The 4473 still happens at a counter, with a human being, in person. The website just handles the part that used to be a phone call or a gamble. Anyone here changed where they buy based on a retailer's website quality — or lack of it? Read the full article in The Handbook → | By Steve Duskett

Florida politics don't usually give us much to be optimistic about on gun rights, but this one's worth paying attention to — especially the part about an AG actively refusing to defend a law he believes is unconstitutional. "Floridians deserve an Attorney General who will not merely campaign as pro-gun, but who will actively use the office to defend the constitutional rights of law-abiding gun owners." That's a nice quote, but the actions back it up here. Issuing guidance to law enforcement not to arrest people for open carry, then pulling his office out of defending the prosecutions — that's not a press release, that's actual exposure. Most elected officials won't go near that kind of risk. The HOA firearm restriction angle is the part I'd keep an eye on. We don't have the same density issues Idaho does, but the trend is real — developments write firearm storage and carry restrictions into CC&Rs and then enforce them like law. Seeing a state AG push back on that at a structural level is uncommon. For those of you who carry in Florida or travel through — have you run into any open-carry confusion on the ground since the McDaniels ruling, or has local law enforcement mostly sorted out the new guidance? Read the full article in The Handbook → | By Steve Duskett

Pennsylvania has been stuck on this issue for years while neighboring states have moved on. If SB 357 passes, it becomes the 30th constitutional carry state — which would have sounded impossible to say out loud a decade ago. "Pennsylvania would become the 30th state to recognize constitutional carry if SB 357 passes." Thirty states. That's the majority of the country running permitless carry at this point. If you've got a Pennsylvania shooter in your life who's been waiting on this, now's the time to make some noise. "HB 2505/2506 would do the opposite: fragment the legal landscape and expose the firearms industry to coordinated municipal lawfare." The municipal lawsuit angle is the part worth watching closely. We've seen this playbook before — preemption laws exist specifically to keep Pittsburgh or Philadelphia from creating their own patchwork of ordinances that effectively nullify state law. Frankel's counter-bills are designed to make that kind of end-run possible again, and to drag manufacturers into it. The House Judiciary Committee is apparently where all four bills are converging. That's where things either move or die — and the article makes clear the pressure campaign is the whole game right now. For anyone with family or shooting buddies in PA: if they haven't contacted their state senator yet, the June floor vote is coming up fast. Have any of you had to navigate Pennsylvania's current permit process when traveling through there — and does the prospect of constitutional carry there actually change how you'd plan a road trip east? Read the full article in The Handbook → | By Steve Duskett

Worth keeping an eye on. How do you think this plays out practically? Read the full article in The Handbook → | By Steve Duskett

The 2026 IPRF Worlds roster is set, and the qualification process behind it is worth understanding if you follow precision rifle at all — or if you've ever wondered what separates a guy who runs hot at a local match from someone who can hold that level across an entire season. "There are hundreds of PRS shooters who could win a one-day match. There are probably 30 who could win a two-day PRS Pro match. But there may only be about 5 or 6 who could win a national-level match if we shot 3 days or more." Blackketter's been saying this for years and it holds up every time you watch a major match play out. The attrition isn't from hard stages — it's from 200 rounds across 20 stages with a rest day that doesn't fully reset your mental load. Consistency under accumulated pressure is a completely different skill than shooting well on a fresh day one. The Open Division average scores say something too. Six spots, and the lowest qualifier — Chris Kutalek — still averaged 95.7% across 18 months of regional competition. That's not a hot streak. That's a baseline. Anyone here been to a PRS Pro Series match or a regional qualifier? Curious what the stage variety looked like — whether the terrain differences across regions actually changed how people set up their kits or if everyone's running the same solution regardless of the venue. Read the full article in The Handbook → | By Steve Duskett

Virginia's "assault firearm" and magazine ban is six weeks out, and the injunction hearings meant to stop it are getting buried in procedural sand. This is worth watching closely — not just for Virginians, but because these legal strategies have a way of spreading. "It is entirely plausible that the Panel may take several months to have proceedings and issue a decision, by which point the Plaintiffs and those whose interests they represent will have suffered ongoing and irreparable harm for months." That's the whole game right there. You don't have to win the legal argument if you can just delay it long enough that the law is already on the books. Unwinding an active ban is a completely different legal fight than blocking one before it takes effect — and the AG knows that. AG Jones is claiming the Virginia Constitution doesn't protect an individual right to keep and bear arms — and that even if it did, it wouldn't cover AR-15s and similar rifles banned under the law. That argument is aggressive to the point of being almost useful — because if a court takes it seriously, it forces a clear ruling rather than letting things die in procedural delay. The Washington County hearing on June 25 is now the only realistic firewall before July 1. If you own standard-capacity magazines or any rifle that would fall under Virginia's definition, the window to stop this before it becomes an unwinding problem is measured in weeks, not months. Anyone tracking how the Washington County judge is approaching this compared to Lancaster County? Read the full article in The Handbook → | By Steve Duskett

A lot of suppressor-related legal activity stacked up in May, and the federal government wading in directly is worth paying attention to. "What was fringe constitutional litigation a few years ago is now a mainstream Second Amendment fight. Now the federal government is saying something similar — in court, on the record. That's a different kind of weight." There's a real difference between a gun-rights org filing a challenge and DOJ putting the same argument in a federal court filing. Whatever you think of the current administration, this changes the legal terrain in ways that don't easily unwind. "Brown v. ATF is the one to watch closely. Congress killed the $200 tax, but the NFA's registration and regulatory apparatus is still intact. The case argues that what remains can't survive Bruen's historical tradition test." This is the actual fight. The tax being gone is nice, but if the registry and the wait times and the paperwork survive, cans are still effectively gated for most buyers. How the Eastern District reads Bruen here could ripple way beyond Missouri. For those of you who've been through the NFA process — Form 4, wait, wait some more — how has the suppressor landscape in Idaho changed your range setup, and are you watching Brown v. ATF as a reason to hold off on another purchase? Read the full article in The Handbook → | By Steve Duskett

Worth keeping an eye on. How do you think this plays out practically? Read the full article in The Handbook → | By Steve Duskett