Category Archives: Jeff’s Blog

Jeff's Blog

Hello Gun Lobby!

Much of what you see here you might later see as a the core of a full column in The Knox Report which is a regular feature of Shotgun News and many club and organization newsletters, or featured in our own newsletter, The Hard Corps Report. This area will serve as my notes and brain-storming zone for other writing so you'll see it here first.

Please let me know what you think of the information you find here and the work that we are doing.

Yours for the Second Amendment,

Jeff Knox

NRA Board Election Endorsements for 2021 ~ Including Who NOT to Vote For

If you are a Voting Member of the National Rifle Association, you should have received your ballot for this year’s NRA Director elections. The ballots are primarily distributed as an insert in your NRA magazine (the June/July edition), or for those who don’t receive a physical magazine, your ballot should be mailed as a stand-alone piece.

Only Life Members and Annual Member who have maintained their membership for 5 consecutive years, are eligible to vote.

Due to the pandemic, the schedule got twisted in a way that made it impossible for any petition candidates to qualify for the 2021 ballot. That’s likely to happen again next year. The Nominating Committee could have made accommodations for the unusual circumstances, but moved on in business-as-usual fashion, disregarding the Bylaws and the concerns of the members. I’m particularly disappointed in Bob Barr, who chaired the Nominating Committee last year, as once again, the most important factor in whether someone received a nomination, appears to have been whether they are likely to support Wayne LaPierre and the current leadership.

On your ballot, you have 28 candidates to fill 25 seats. Note that although you can vote for up to 25 names, you are not obligated to vote for that number. Voting for less than 25 amounts to a vote against the other candidates.

Most of the candidates offered are current members of the Board, and almost all of those will be reelected, just because the majority of Voting Members who bother to vote, routinely vote for incumbents first.

I am endorsing only two candidates whose names appear on the ballot:

  • Owen Buz Mills of Paulden, Arizona, and James Tomes of Wadesville, Indiana. Buz Mills is the owner of Gun Site Academy, and has long been active in Arizona politics, including a run for governor.
  • Jim Tomes is the founder of a solid 2A group in Indiana, and served several years in the Indiana Senate. I’ve known him for many years and know him to be a man of humility and integrity.

Those are the only names on the ballot I can endorse. I encourage you to mark your ballot for only those two and no one else, then turn the ballot over and write in the following three names:

  • Frank C. Tait of Wayne, PA
  • R.B. Rocky Marshall of Boerne, TX
  • Duane Liptak, Jr. of Austin, TX

As usual, the ballot includes a share of people whose policy positions have earned my direct opposition. At the top of the Don’t Vote For list is current Board President Carolyn Meadows of Marietta, Georgia who is one of Wayne LaPierre’s biggest enablers. Mrs. Meadows has the support of the American Conservative Union [a hot-bed of RINO Republicans] and historically has easily won her seat, coming in 4th or 5th in the balloting each time she runs. I have no illusions that I can block her reelection, but I want my opposition on the record.

Another American Conservative Union-associated candidate on the ballot is Past President David Keene of Fort Washington, Maryland. Mr. Keene has also been an outspoken supporter of LaPierre and company, and much of the financial chicanery that has put the NRA in such a precarious position happened during his presidency. Since his terms as President, Mr. Keene has been receiving some $50k per year to attend Friends of NRA Banquets. What dedication! By sheer coincidence, an article penned by Mr. Keene happens to be included in the magazines, just after the ballots. Between his support from the ACU and his name and picture being prominently placed next to the ballot in the magazines, it’s again, highly unlikely that we can block his reelection, but tell your friends, he doesn’t deserve your vote.

The final candidate I’m actively opposing is Scott Bach of Newfoundland, New Jersey. I have endorsed Mr. Bach in the past, but his dogged defense of LaPierre has earned my opposition. Mr. Bach was one of the first members of the Board to publicly come out in support of LaPierre after the revelations that were published in the New Yorker in early 2019. In an article in Ammoland Shooting Sports News, he explained that it was LaPierre who discovered the “problems” in the NRA, and made the necessary “course corrections” to “right the ship.” What Mr. Bach failed to explain is why it took LaPierre over 20 years to notice the exact “problems” that he went to war with Neal Knox to preserve in 1997, but has supposedly corrected now, and that well after the “course corrections,” LaPierre and others, including scandal-ridden former Treasurer Woody Phillips, and shameless self-promoter Marion Hammer, received massive “golden parachute” contracts promising them millions in future “consulting” payments. He also failed to explain why the NRA has continued to pay Democrat attorney William Brewer over $2 million per month, after LaPierre repeatedly declared that Brewer was “the only one who can keep me out of jail.”

NRA Board Election Ballot 2021
NRA Board Election Ballot 2021

There are several others on the ballot who I really don’t think belong on the NRA Board of Directors, but the truth is, the seats are going to be filled. For the sake of ease of sharing, I’ll leave the Don’t Vote For list at just these three: Meadows, Keene, and Bach.

The candidates elected in this election will be seated at the Members’ Meeting in Houston on September 4 2021. They will then join the other 50 Directors at a Board of Directors meeting in Houston on Monday September 6, at which time the President, 1st VP, 2nd VP, and Executive Vice President will all be elected. Historically, the Nominating Committee simply puts forward a slate of the incumbents, and no one else is nominated, so the slate is “elected by acclamation.” That’s what happened in Indianapolis in 2019, and in Tucson in 2020, and that’s what they want to happen in Houston in 2021.

This year, we intend to offer a full slate of alternative candidates to challenge the incumbents, but we need your help to make those efforts successful.

We need you to be actively lobbying every current and potential future member of the Board, demanding that they stop the lies and corruption, and return the Association to the members. There are only about 15 Directors who are completely in the tank for LaPierre and company, and about an equal number who are very troubled by the current regime and the situation they’ve created. The rest just sort of follow the path of least resistance, so it’s critical that you pressure them to stop spending the NRA’s resources on protection of LaPierre, and start focusing on protection of the NRA.

Here are some questions to ask current NRA Board Members:

  1. Do you believe Wayne LaPierre’s continued employment by NRA helps or hurts the organization and its mission?
  2. Do you believe Wayne LaPierre’s continued employment by NRA helps or hurts the NRA’s case in NY?
  3. Who do you think would make a reasonable candidate for Interim EVP, to realign the NRA, if LaPierre were to resign tomorrow? Give two options please.
  4. Can you suggest two names of current Directors who you could/would support for President of the Board?
  5. Can you suggest two names of Directors who you could/would support for 1st VP of the Board?
  6. Can you suggest two names of Directors who you could/would support for 2nd VP of the Board?

Don’t let them skirt around these simple questions – get answers.

Remind these Directors that their first loyalty is supposed to be to the Association and its members, not any one man or leadership team. If Wayne LaPierre really cared about the Association, he’d have resigned, just to avoid being any sort of obstacle to NRA’s future success, whether he had done anything wrong or not. If Directors were thinking about the good of the Association first, they’d have demanded LaPierre’s resignation, and elected someone to replace him in Indianapolis in 2019, rather than circling the wagons around him and spending tens of millions defending him over the best interests of the Association for the past two years.

The final lobbying effort comes in Houston at the Members’ Meeting, where we need to turn out in droves to demand that the Board do what they should have done over two years ago, and elect someone with an untarnished record to lead the Association’s defense in the New York case, and on to restoration of the Association.

It’s up to you. I’m just a gnat buzzing around the Board’s ears. You’re who they’re supposed to be working for. If you don’t push them between now and September to do what’s right, then show up in Houston on September 4, to demand that they take action, then the battle is lost – possibly forever, as Letitia James has said she intends to resume the case against NRA and LaPierre early next year.

Houston in September could very well be our last opportunity to right the ship and save the NRA, so now is the time to lobby your Directors and stand up for your Association.

Please share this article with all of your NRA member friends. We need everyone working together on this.

The Gun Rights Movement is Not Violent

Neither violence nor advocacy through Intimidation are condoned by leaders in the Gun Rights Movement.

On the eve of a Presidential inauguration that will take place behind unprecedented security after our Nation’s Capitol Building was attacked by a small band of violent and destructive rioters, we feel it is important to make this clear.

Since the incursion that temporarily interrupted the certification of the Presidential Election on January 6th, some journalists, media pundits, anti-gun activists and even a small number of elected officials have attempted to tie the Gun Rights Movement to the reprehensible acts that lead to deaths that day and fear of further violence this week. These claims are unfounded.

No gun rights organization or recognized leader called for violence on January 6th.

Political Violence goes against the heart of the gun rights movement. The Second Amendment protects gun rights in order to provide for defense. The gun community has denounced violence tied to protests throughout 2020, as we also condemn the violence and destruction of property at the US Capitol in January 6th without equivocation.

As early as the afternoon of January 6th, the President of the Second Amendment Institute International, Tyler Yzaguirre, who lives in Washington, DC, posted publicly:

Today there was an illegal and unprecedented charge on the U.S. Capitol.

You have the right to “peacefully” protest. Not to put the lives of Members, police officers, and your fellow Americans in danger.”

Second Amendment Organization’s Executive Vice President, Rob Pincus, has vehemently denounced the violence and posted early during the gathering at the Capitol:

I’m sincerely hoping that this protest remains peacefully disruptive.”

Alan Gottlieb, Founder of the Second Amendment Foundation, stated that the small band becoming violent at the US Capitol “…disturbed me greatly.”

The list of gun rights movement leaders who have shared similar thoughts is extensive. There are an estimated 100 Million Gun Owners in the United States with over 400 Million Guns. Less than 1000 rioters entered the US Capitol and not one of them fired a single shot. As David Yamane, a Professor at Wake Forest who studies Gun Culture, observed in his rebuke of a recent article in The Atlantic attacking our movement:

As easy as domestic terrorism is to commit, few gun owners turn to insurrectionist violence.”

It should also be noted that there is only one political cause that unites all gun owners: Gun Rights. No action being undertaken that day at the Capitol was specifically related to gun rights. The violent mob were only a very small percentage of the people gathered in DC for political purposes that day. They were certainly not us.

Members of every political party and position are Gun Owners in the US. Organizations in our community represent gun owners of various faiths, lifestyles, races and interests. Every State has a gun rights organization representing its residents, most have several. The Second Amendment protects the rights of all Americans, regardless of political party, vote or position on any issue… and we respect everyone’s right to hold differing opinions and express them peacefully. At this time of great division in our country, we call for unity amongst all gun owners in the fight to protect our gun rights in the future, regardless of who you voted for or how you feel about the 2020 Election.

 A crowd of thousands of US Gun Owners gathered on the west lawn of the US Capitol Building just 14 months ago to Peacefully Rally in Defense of Gun Rights.

A Statement this week from the 2A Rally group, which held a peaceful 4 hour event at the US Capitol in 2019, by working with the US Capitol Police Special Events Division, included the following:

Responsible Gun Owners know that violence is an act of last resort, not to be engaged in out of anger or frustration.

All Gun Owners should consider how their actions might negatively affect our movement. Anyone who feels compelled to protest over the course of the next week should take advantage of their First Amendment Rights lawfully and respectfully. We believe that peaceful protest should be focused on demonstrating strong support for a cause and educational advocacy, not intimidation, towards those one hopes to influence.”

We agree fully.

-Second Amendment Organization

-Guns For Everyone National

-Liberal Gun Owners

-National Association of Sporting Goods Wholesalers

-The Firearms Coalition

-Walk The Talk America

Second Amendment Organization 2AO (Second Amendment Organization) is a nonprofit, non-political, grassroots organization with a focus on engaging, educating, and equipping all shooters, firearms owners and pro-Second Amendment businesses in order to protect and preserve the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Guns For Everyone National is a national non-profit organization that certifies firearms
instructors, operate national & local firearms competitions, and provide training, including courses in personal protection, in small arms safety, use, and marksmanship.

Liberal Gun Owners is a 501c4 Non-Profit Organization which has a two-pronged mission. Our first prong is to provide continued support for the reasonable, center-to-left firearms owner with constructive community platforms for enjoyment, education, business support and specialized training. Our second prong is to operate under what we call “simultaneous proponency”: which gives American society a substantial example of an innovative organization that works to strengthen both firearms ownership rights and improvements to public safety.

The Firearms Coalition is, as the name suggests, a coalition of gun clubs, state and local rights organizations, and individuals committed to preserving and restoring the right to arms. Since 1984, The Firearms Coalition has provided timely news, analysis, and assistance with political and legislative strategy, to our members and the public.

National Association of Sporting Goods was organized in 1953 and incorporated in 1954. The NASGW is the organizer and sponsor of the NASGW Annual Meeting/Expo Event. This annual event provides an unmatched educational, marketing and communications opportunity for the hunting and shooting sports wholesaler, manufacturer and sales professional. The NASGW annually recognizes manufacturers with Manufacturer of the Year Awards and works to Promote the common interest of the sporting goods industry.

Walk The Talk America is a 501c3 formed in 2018 by firearms industry professionals with a goal is to raise awareness and create a change in the misunderstandings regarding mental illness and firearms by bringing together industry leaders to reduce gun violence, negligence, suicide, and the trauma created by these events. WTTA Develops programs to reduce firearms involved suicide, prevent firearms negligence, mitigation of trauma in the aftermath of violence and increase child safety around firearms.

Prediction on NRA’s Folly

NRA’s Folly Growing

When the Supreme Court overturned another major section of the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform Law, Democrats were indignant.  How dare the Court suggest that the Constitution overrules the will of the Congress?  As a result, Democrats in the House and Senate immediately introduced new language intended to slip past the Court’s ruling and they were determined to pass the measure before the November elections primarily so conservative groups like the TEA Party would have difficulty holding individual politicians responsible for their votes on pork, spending, and taxes.  The bill, like its predecessor, is mainly an incumbent protection act designed to make it harder for special interest groups to target particular politicians over votes or other actions.

One major obstacle proponents of the bill faced was strong opposition from one of the most powerful lobbies in Washington – the NRA.  In an unprecedented maneuver, sponsors of the measure – at NRA’s suggestion – added language exempting certain large, established organizations from the provisions of the bill.  The description of who was exempted fit only a small handful of organizations, including NRA.  Once the legislation no longer applied to them, NRA withdrew their opposition to the bill – much to the dismay of their state affiliates, individual members, conservative organizations, and other gun groups – and the bill subsequently squeaked by in the House by a vote of 219 – 206.

Now the measure goes to the Senate where it is championed by avowed NRA hater and consummate dirty political schemer Chuck Schumer.  Early reports suggested that opposition to the NRA deal from several Democrat politicians might scuttle the bill.  I postulated on that idea myself, but that was before I had a chance to think the matter through.  Upon reflection, here is what I expect to happen next:

Schumer – who heads the Democrat Senatorial Election Committee and is a very likely successor to Harry Reid as Democrat Leader if Reid is defeated as expected in November – will push the measure and quickly capitulate to “pressure” from Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) to remove the language exempting NRA from the bill.  The Senate will pass the measure without the NRA exemption.  That will take the bill to a conference committee made up of representatives from the House and Senate – all hand-picked by Schumer and Nancy Pelosi.  The Committee will agree to the Senate version, or a slightly different version which does not exempt NRA, and the bill will be pushed back to the House for an up or down vote.  It will pass by a narrow margin and be signed by President Obama.

The other possibility is that Schumer will convince Feinstein and Lautenberg to support the version with all of the exemptions.  The advantage of the “compromise version is that the only way the act could be effectively stopped after passage is with a lawsuit.  Since all of the largest organizations are exempted from the bill, there are few organizations who would be constrained by the law who also have the resources to fund an aggressive lawsuit.

The bill is written to go into effect immediately upon the President signing it and, since it will be next year before the specific regulations implementing the law will be completed, political groups will be taking an enormous risk if they do any electioneering that might be covered in the law.  That means that unless this can be stopped in the Senate or blocked by a lawsuit, all new, small, or midsized groups will be effectively muzzled leading into the all-important November elections.

The NRA’s management made a huge mistake backing away from their opposition to the DISCLOSE Act and its passage will do serious harm to the Republic and to NRA.

Right now the primary focus must be on stopping this bill in the Senate.  Readers are urged to contact their Senators and let them know that they consider a vote for this bill a vote against the First Amendment.  NRA members should also contact members of the NRA Board of Directors and tell them that they want NRA to step up and fight this legislation.

If this fight goes badly as I expect it will, we are going to need as many angry NRA members as possible to try to make some changes at NRA.  Quitting the NRA in protest does nothing but reduce the clout of those of us who want to try to make changes in the organization.  You can’t fix it if you’re not a member.

A Gun to a Snowball Fight?

Don’t Bring a Gun to a Snowball Fight

A plainclothes D.C. police officer driving his personal Hummer during the big snowstorm this weekend came under attack from a large group in the midst of a community snowball fight.  After the officer’s Hummer was struck by snowballs, he exited his vehicle, drew a handgun, and began an “dialog” with the young people throwing the snowballs.  The crowd was not impressed by the gun and responded by throwing more snowballs and chanting “Don’t bring a gun to a snowball fight.”

I can’t imagine any way that this guy could be justified in deploying his gun in this circumstance.

What would happen if you or I drew our legally carried handgun in such a circumstance?

While the police do have broader leeway in deploying deadly force – not that much leeway.

The full story hasn’t been told yet and we must reserve judgment until all of the facts are known, but so far there is little to support the officer’s actions.  The fact that this turned into a direct assault on a police officer, albeit a snowball assault, does not justify it because it only reached that point after the officer escalated and exacerbated the situation by exiting his vehicle and waving his gun around.

I’m a big supporter of the police.  I’ve even considered a law enforcement career myself, but I do not believe the police should receive a pass when they do something stupid – particularly if the stupidity involves firearms.  So far this looks like pure stupidity to me.

Back from GRPC

          I got back from GRPC last night and just fell over.  The combination of early mornings, long days, and late, late nights really takes its toll, but it is definitely worth it.  Nowhere else do I have the opportunity to meet and talk with so many committed activists and leaders of the movement.  At the SHOT Show every year I am focused on meeting with members of the industry and some of the "gun media."  At the NRA Convention I get to see some of the rights leaders, but there is always so much going on and there are so many demands on all of our time that it is difficult to find a moment to really sit down and discuss the important issues of the day and work out strategies for cooperative efforts.  At GRPC though, I get to hear ideas from dozens of the best and the brightest minds in the gun rights movement and am able to follow up on those ideas during breaks and at the evening receptions.  Each night there are small groups of people scattered about the conference area quietly scheming, jovially sharing stories, and boisterously arguing into the wee hours.  This networking and idea sharing is absolutely invaluable and the discussions, arguments and friendships often continue via the internet and telephone long after the conference ends.

         I was a little disappointed with my presentation this year.  I served on a panel focused on the expansion of carry rights and chose to discuss the importance of taking the high ground in the language we use to promote our rights.  Those who have followed my writing know that I have long advocated that we, as a movement, must be more aware of the words we choose to use in arguing our cause, avoiding saying things like "we should be allowed to carry guns" in this place or that.  We need to talk about repealing laws which disarm us in these places rather than conceding the authority and giving our opponents the upper hand with the word allow.  Similarly we need to avoid phrases like "arming teachers," and "guns on campus."  These are important issues and need to be couched in terms of "disarming" the law-abiding and creating safe working environments for criminals.  We have the moral authority and must argue from the position of demanding the recognition of our rights.  We should never allow our words to paint us as supplicants begging for permission to exercise our natural rights.  The point I is that if we wish to win the fight for recognition of our right to carry arms when we choose, we must argue from our strength, not beg from our knees, and the words we choose are what determines that position.

          Chris gave a presentation about the threats to our rights  being generated by the drug violence in Mexico and now crossing the border into border states.  This was Chris’ first time presenting at GRPC and I think he did a good job. 

         Now we need to do the follow-up work from the conference; adding all of those who requested it to our email list and mailing list, and making sure that the ideas and discussions started there continue and are turned into productive actions.  No time to rest.  The ’09 elections are just weeks away and the 2010 campaigns are already starting.  

Marching On

Marching on Washington

A small group of us went into DC on Saturday to participate in the 9/12 March on Washington and we had a great time.  Even though planning for the event was almost completely ignored by the major media, the turnout was incredible.  For some reason the organizers kept suggesting that the crowd numbered near 1.5 million, but it didn’t come close to that.  My personal guess is that there were somewhere between 150,000 and 200,000 people in attendance, but the numbers aren’t really important.  What is important is that there were a lot of angry people trying to get their voices heard and while they were drawn to the protest by their opposition to government growth, bail-outs, the health care bill, taxes, and other issues, they were almost unanimously pro-gun.  Some of the strongest reactions from the crowd came when speakers commented about the Second Amendment, and everyone we met was enthusiastically in support of gun rights.  There were many NRA and pro-rights ball caps and T-shirts visible and people eagerly snapped up the information we were offering about The Firearms Coalition and

If Obama, Pelosi, and company had any sense, they would make a big show of "hearing" the complaints of this crowd and slowing their agenda some in response.  I don’t think they’re smart enough for that though so I expect they will continue to try to run right over the millions of Americans who are upset about what is going on and in so doing they will alienate millions more, fueling the anger and frustration and making a dramatic turnover in Congress in 2010 much more likely.

So far this administration and congress have shied away from gun control schemes, but that will change the moment they believe they can get away with something – or the moment they realize that they are going to lose their control.  Either way we must remain vigilant and keep building our ranks and the "Tea Parties" and health care protests are very fertile ground for recruiting support for our cause.  If you get a chance, get involved and make it a point to invite everyone you meet to join our fight.  Point them to and and we’ll take it from there.

Fewer Guns in Cockpits?

Washington Times Going Off Halfcocked

     The Washington Times reported in a scathing editorial on Tuesday that the Obama administration has quietly diverted some 2 million dollars away from the armed pilot, Federal Flight Deck Officer program, and into a new program of inspectors to investigate existing FFDOs.  TSA says the criticism is unfounded as they have a strong commitment to the success and growth of the FFDO program and that the $2 million shift is to provide administrative support for the program which they say has outgrown the current structure.

    The real truth of the matter probably lies somewhere between the Times’ editorial and TSA’s claim.  While the program has been steadily growing and probably is becoming difficult to effectively supervise, any time a bureaucracy adds more bureaucracy to improve “oversight” of a program, the result is almost always going to be more red tape and less progress.  TSA has consistently drug their feet on the FFDO program; making the application and training process ridiculously complicated and intrusive and placing the only training facility in the most out of the way location possible.  There are also issues of pilots not being reimbursed for many of the expenses that they must pay out-of-pocket.  If ensuring adherence to the rules is becoming too difficult, rather than expanding the supervisory and compliance staff, the better solution would be to simply reduce the number of hoops FFDOs are required to jump through.

    Airline pilots are highly trained professionals.  Most of them have military experience and many continue service in the National Guard and Reserves.  As Neal Knox said when he proposed creating an armed pilot program back in 1988;  "If a captain can be entrusted with a $30-million aircraft and 300 passengers, he can be trusted with a firearm."  Unfortunately the politicians and "experts" didn’t listen to Neal in 1988 when he pointed out that without the "last resort" of an armed pilot to protect an aircraft, commercial airliners are "sitting ducks" because no ammount of screening is ever going to be perfect. Since the attacks of 9/11/01 the options have narrowed even further because if the pilot and crew can’t maintain control of their aircraft, the next alternative is a missile from a fighter jet – a fighter jet which is very likely to e piloted by a current or future airline pilot.  Does anyone question the wisdom of that pilot being armed?

Continue reading Fewer Guns in Cockpits?

Knox on Roth Show

Listen to Jeff Knox on the Dr. Laurie Roth Show

I spent an hour this evening speaking on the air with Dr. Laurie Roth on her syndicated radio program.  The discussion covered a lot of ground and the hour was gone before I knew it.  The show was done on short notice and while I don't think it was my best work, I think you'll find it interesting.  You can listen to the program by clicking here or go to

Ammo Tax?

Two rumors keep popping up and making the rounds through the viral e-mail circuit:

1. Obama is planning a 500% tax on ammo

2. All the ammo you currently have is going to become illegal in July and only ammo with serial numbers will be legal.

Both of these rumors are bogus.

The ammo tax idea has been a fantasy of the gun banners for decades, but I have seen no recent attempt to implement any such thing.  Such a tax would require an act of Congress and while there has been a bill introduced which addresses gun and ammo excise tax issues, it is a pro-gun bill trying to fix some problems in the system.  There has not been a serious proposal put forward to dramatically increase taxes on ammunition.

Part of the source of the resurgence of the ammo tax rumor could be the ammo serialization rumor.  While ammo serialization is a real issue, it is not an imminent threat.  There is a company that built a machine that can engrave tiny serial numbers on bullets and cases and they have established a fake organization promoting the technology as a crime solving tool.  They have also convinced legislators in about 18 states to introduce model legislation they have written.  So far not even California or Massachusetts has come close to actually adopting the legislation.

So while the threat of mandating serialization and registration of all ammo – and the destruction of all non-serialized and registered ammo – is real, it is not gaining any traction and is unlikely to do so in the near future.  This idea should be carefully watched, but not panicked over.

There is another rumor that I'm a bit more concerned about.  Sources say that some in the State Department are moving to block the importation of "military caliber" ammunition.  While this is still just a rumor at this point, it is something I warned about during the effort to block the Holder nomination.  Hillary Clinton at State, Eric Holder at Justice, Rahm Emanuel as White House Chief of Staff, not to mention Obama himself… We definitely have enemies in high places and there are things which can be done to harass the firearms community without involving Congress.  Restricting, delaying, and generally interfering with imports of ammunition, guns, and gun parts are all very real possibilities.  It is also very possible that Eric Holder might change regulations on firearms manufacturers, dealers, and importers to make it much more difficult for them to do business and make them more vulnerable to criminal charges for technical errors.

None of these things is anything more than rumor and speculation at this point, but they are likely possibilities and require careful watching and an immediate response if any of them begins to come to life.  In the mean time, we all need to be careful about raising false alarms that could dull the response when a real alarm is sounded.

On that note, if you have not signed up for the Knox FC Alerts e-mail alert list, now would be a great time to rectify that.  We won't bury you in spam or fill up your in-box.  We only send alerts when there is something to report – or occasionally when things have been slow for a month or two I'll send out a little update just to remind you we're here and to make sure the system still works.

To sign up for the Knox FC Alert e-mail alerts list, just click here.

Latest “Page 9”

Alan Korwin, author of a number of books on gun laws and rights related matters, writes a review of the news which he calls "Page 9."  If you don't subscribe to this clever and thought provoking e-newsletter (it's free) I would encourage you to do so, or you can read it here as we plan to post each new eddition.  Here is the table of contents for the current eddition.  Just click the "Read More" link to read the entire newsletter.


PAGE NINE — No. 59

The Uninvited Ombudsman Report, No. 59, Feb. 10, 2009

by Alan Korwin, Author
Gun Laws of America


(searchable by item number)

1- Million Gun March
2- State Sovereignty Bills
3- No-Fly Gun Ban
4- Gun Rights Commerce
5- Pork Free Stimulus
6- Kelo's Empty Lot
7- NewsBull Continues Unabated

(Click "Read More" for the full report)

Continue reading Latest “Page 9”