I’m Jared, and today I’m diving into a high-stakes explosive story that just dropped. The U.S. Department of Justice under the Trump administration is actively considering barring individuals diagnosed with gender dysphoria from purchasing firearms. This isn’t just about gun policy, this is about mental health, constitutional rights, and identity. And this is very similar to making an executive fiat that bans firearms for any other subset of people in the American society. If the government decided to pass Jim Crow laws to ban firearms for all black people, like they did before, folks would go crazy, just as they would if the Department of Justice or the Trump administration decided to ban guns for all Yankee fans.

Now, Rick, go Red Sox. Without some type of criminal activity that someone was found guilty of, or a legitimate doctor diagnosing them mentally ill or unstable and taking the appropriate course of action there, there is a huge constitutional issue at hand here. Let’s break down what’s happening, what’s at stake, and why it matters, and I really want to hear your opinion on this. But first, I want to thank Patriot Mobile for sponsoring the video. Guys, I realize there are many, many choices when it comes to who you choose for your cell phone service, and there are new ones popping up all the time.

But here’s the truth. There’s only one that boldly stands in the gap for every American that believes that freedom is worth fighting for, and that’s Patriot Mobile. For more than 12 years, Patriot Mobile has been on the front lines fighting for our God-given rights and freedoms, while also providing exceptional nationwide cell phone service with access to all three main networks. Don’t just take my word for it, ask the hundreds of thousands of Americans who’ve made the switch and are now supporting causes that they believe in simply by joining Patriot Mobile. Switching is easier than ever.

You can activate in minutes from the comfort of your own home, you can keep your number, keep your phone, or you can upgrade. Patriot Mobile’s all-US-based support team is standing by to take care of you. Call 972-PATRIOT today, or head over to PatriotMobile.com slash Guns and Gadgets, the letter N, and use promo code gunsandgadgets for a free month of service. Links are down below, and in the pinned comment, that’s PatriotMobile.com slash Guns and Gadgets, or call 972-PATRIOT and make the switch today. Thanks again to Patriot Mobile for the sponsorship of the video. Let’s get to the facts here.

As of today’s date, September 4th, 2025, The Daily Wire has reported that the Trump Justice Department is reviewing options to prevent mentally ill individuals suffering from gender dysphoria, i.e. transgender people, from obtaining firearms while they’re deemed unstable or unwell. Who deems them that? The language used here, mentally ill, is not only inflammatory, it taps into decades of stigma, so who makes that decision? The Department of Justice? I don’t think they’re doctors. Now, this comes right after a deadly school shooting that was committed by a transgender individual in Minneapolis, prompting calls among right-wing voices to scrutinize what they view as transgender-related violence.

And let’s be honest, if you look at the last several school shootings, it’s an issue. It’s a pattern. And no official DOJ comment on the specific measures, as of yet they’re only confirming that a spectrum of options is on the table. And before going further, let’s clarify what gender dysphoria means. Clinically defined, gender dysphoria describes significant emotional distress caused when a person’s biological sex and gender identity do not align. It’s recognized on the DSM-5, and importantly, the condition itself isn’t inherently linked to violence or instability, meaning just because they have it doesn’t mean that they are violent or unstable.

That’s an action they would have to take. Now, transgender and LGBTQ plus individuals are far more often victims of violence than they are perpetrators. For instance, in 2024, an analysis showed that LGBTQ plus people are more than twice as likely to become victims of gun violence compared to straight folks. All that aside, put that all aside, you have a right, and the government doesn’t give you the right. If you didn’t commit some type of violent crime that a court or jury of your peers says you get a right stripped for a period of time, or a doctor says you are unstable for whatever reason, the government doesn’t get their hand to play here.

Tying a medical condition directly to violent risk is kind of misleading and potentially dangerous, and potentially a violation of people’s due process rights. That’s like somebody else in the next administration saying that anybody who has Down syndrome is dangerous, or somebody who has colorblindness is unstable. You can’t just blanketly take people’s rights away. You guys tell me if I’m off base here, but for nearly a century, Jim Crow laws were a set of state and local statutes, mostly here in the South, that enforced radical segregation against Black Americans. So what’s different from this type of rule, policy, or law that’s going to segregate against transgender folks? I don’t know.

Again, constitutional advocate, second amendment activist. Today, a proposal to ban the entire class of people, the individuals that are transgender folks, from carrying firearms feels eerily similar in its function to the Jim Crow laws, using a law to block a specific group from exercising a right. Or a policy, which is even worse, worse, worse, worse. Now the right to bear arms is protected under the second amendment, fundamental to American liberty. It’s, I don’t do, I just, it’s kind of odd that we’re even talking about this. Now, while history doesn’t exactly repeat itself here, between Jim Crow laws and this potential new change of the DOJ, the structural similarities are striking, defining one’s identity as a reason to restrict a constitutional right.

Now, some will say, hey, look, you know, the Trump administration, the president’s already done a couple executive orders related to stuff like this, this dysphoria or, you know, men and women’s bathrooms and locker rooms and transgenders in the military. I understand all that. I get that. But the legal and constitutional issue that I’m talking about here is denying a class of individuals the ability to purchase firearms solely due to a medical diagnosis. And that kind of raises red flags around equal protection under the 14th amendment, let alone the psychological based disability discrimination that could be alleged to.

Now, if the actual intent is to block dangerous individuals, laws already exist regarding mental health holds and in certain cases, the loss of their rights. But targeting a demographic based on identity sets a dangerous discriminatory precedent. And finally, I want you to consider the danger of a government official deciding who gets constitutional rights and who doesn’t at the stroke of a pen. Now, some will argue that this is all about public safety, citing instances like the Minneapolis church attack. Yet it’s critical to note that isolated criminal acts are not grounds for blanket policy bans on a demographic.

Individuals are the issue. It’s not the whole subset of the person, regardless of what subset we’re talking about. Civil right groups, health care professionals and constitutional scholars are likely to strongly oppose this trajectory here, seeing as it’s a dangerous blanket escalation of a policy against a subset of people. And people, this just came out. So this is going to be all over the news. People are going to be going crazy over this. But here’s what to watch in the coming days and weeks. Number one, will the DOJ clarify what they’ve said or will they roll out any formal proposals? And who will be the person in charge taking the brunt of everyone’s ire? And number two, will there be any legal challenges, especially if rulemaking starts targeting identity-based gun restrictions? And three, will there be a magic wand that forces doctors to diagnose their patients with known transgender histories? And will the medical folks follow suit? Now to wrap up, the DOJ’s consideration of a gun ban based on gender dysphoria is a flashpoint reflecting broader policy and constitutional issues.

Let’s keep watching this closely, guys and gals. If you found this breakdown helpful, please hit that like button, subscribe to the channel, and ring the bell notifications so that you don’t miss any future updates. I would love to hear your take on this. What do you think about tying firearm restrictions to identity or medical diagnoses? Let’s discuss this in the comments down below. It’s trying to be a little respectful, but I want you to put your opinion in there. I don’t want you to hold back, but just know that YouTube has their own policies on comments, so we don’t want everybody to be removed.

Thanks for watching. I’m Jared. I’ll see you next time with more breakdowns on the latest Second Amendment headlines. This one got me fired up a little bit. Got me fired up. Our rights, our rights. And we don’t get policy people just making changes to it. Sorry. [tr:trw].

See more of Guns & Gadgets 2nd Amendment News on their Public Channel and the MPN Guns & Gadgets 2nd Amendment News channel.