So today is the day. Today is the big day that the parliamentarian in the Senate is going to get to the NFA portion of this bill. Hey everybody! Welcome back to the channel. I’ve taken a couple days off, but I have huge updates for you, two of them. One on the status of the NFA destruction in the big beautiful bill. Today is the day. I’ll tell you more about that in a second. And I’m also going to give you a big update on a big win by Second Amendment Foundation and Firearms Policy Coalition on a case that other anti-gun states were slowly starting to adopt and employ as a backdoor gun control method.

First off, thank you for, you know, understanding. I’ve been off a couple days. Once a year, a couple of my friends come down from Massachusetts here. Now it’s the second annual trip, and we just take off through the Blue Ridge Mountains on the motorcycles for a couple days to just unwind, unplug, which is tough for me to do. But it was needed. I am scorched. Yes, I had on sunscreen. Noah didn’t reapply throughout the day. Yes, I learned hard that riding two days in 98 to 100 degree heat, direct sun, not much shade will scorch you.

So I’m recovering. But quick shout out to SDI for sponsoring the video. Check them out. Link is down below. If you are interested in learning more about how to become a gunsmith and taking online classes from an accredited college, SDI.edu slash gng. Check them out. They have all kinds of options, including drone classes. You want to learn how to fly drones. All right, so I’m just going to give you the quick lowdown details here so you can get your day going. The first one I want to hit on is the big win in the Second Amendment Foundation and Firearms Policy Coalition case out of California.

And that was the one gun a month rule, the gun rationing law that anti-gunners were starting to not only adopt following what California did, but employ. Other states are actually actively looking to have this law on their books as well. The decision came down Friday evening and it was three to nothing in the Court of Appeals, in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. I’m going to give you a couple of quick quotes on this. Our friends over at Second Amendment Foundation reached out to me and they told me this quote, in a three to nothing panel decision, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld Second Amendment Foundation’s summary judgment win, in win v.

Bonta, our challenge to California’s one gun per month gun rationing law. The panel held that California’s law is facially unconstitutional because the plain text of the Second Amendment protects the possession of multiple firearms and protects against meaningful constraints on the acquisition of firearms through purchase and that the nation’s history and tradition of firearm regulation do not support such constraints on acquisition. This is a huge win for the Second Amendment Foundation and the people of California. Stay tuned here for further developments. And this is a big win coming off the case I just told you about Thursday, actually I think it might have been Friday morning, where a judge said that young adults don’t get to purchase firearms and that it’s not a restriction of the Second Amendment right because it just affects their right to purchase it.

And then you have the Ninth Circuit in the three to nothing ruling saying, yeah, the Second Amendment protects your right to purchase it as well. So interesting to see how these two courts are at odds with each other. And this is where the Supreme Court is supposed to kick in. But we have a Supreme Court that takes half the cases of their predecessors and says they’re overworked. Yeah. And some of them, if it was up to me, seven out of the nine would be replaced today. And the two that I would keep are Alito and Thomas and they’re on their way out.

So we need to take advantage of what we have right now. But Firehouse Policy Coalition also gave me a quote, Brandon Combs over there as the president. He said, as this decision shows, the right to keep and bear arms cannot be limited by an arbitrary cap on the number of guns that can be acquired at one time. We have a right to buy more than one gun at a time, just as we have a right to buy more than one Bible at a time. FPC is proud to have secured the rights of peaceable people and will continue to fight forward until we eliminate immoral laws like this everywhere.

And I’m going to give you, I’ll put this on the screen here. This is right from the opinion. This is phenomenal here. This is off of page 10. It says California suggests that the Second Amendment only guarantees a right to possess a single firearm and that plaintiff’s rights have not been infringed because they already possess at least one firearm. California is wrong. The Second Amendment protects the right of the people to keep and bear arms, plural. The U.S. Constitution, Second Amendment, emphasis added. This guarantees the individual right to possess and carry weapons. That’s right from the Heller decision with emphasis added.

And not only is arms stated in the plural, but this term refers to more than just guns. It includes other weapons and instruments used for defense. California’s interpretation would mean that the Second Amendment only protects possession of a single weapon of any kind. There is no basis for interpreting the constitutional text in that way. For these reasons, we easily conclude that the plain text of the Second Amendment protects the right to possess multiple firearms, and we are not alone. The D.C. Circuit has held that limiting the number of firearms an individual can purchase or register within a 30-day period interferes with an individual’s undoubted constitutional right to keep arms, plural, in his or her home.

And that’s right from the Heller case. Okay, so that’s big. That’s two, two of the most liberal circuit courts in the nation, the Ninth Circuit, which is out west, California side, and the D.C. Circuit. And they are saying, you know what, yeah, the Second Amendment says you can protect, you can own multiple and buy multiple firearms and shucks, the Constitution. So when you have the two most anti-gun liberal circuits saying it, that’s momentum. It’s shifting. It’s shifting. Yes, this is just a three-judge panel. Yes, California can seek an en banc review. Doesn’t mean they’ll get it.

They probably will. And the Ninth Circuit is undefeated, undefeated, in destroying challenges when it comes to en banc review for Second Amendment cases. So if they do get it, they will rule against it, and then it will be petitioned to the United States Supreme Court. We’ll see what happens. Now, here is what you have been waiting for, the big update. Where do we stand right now, Monday morning at 7.20, as I’m recording this, enjoying a coffee on my deck with the big beautiful bill, specifically the National Firearms Act destruction to wit, the Hearing Protection Act, the full version, and the Short Act, the full version.

I’m going to give you the breakdown. And this is a fluid situation we have here. So today is the day. Today is the big day that the parliamentarian in the Senate is going to get to the NFA portion of this bill. The parliamentarian has already gone through several other portions of the bill, and today we’re expected our version. We were told it was probably going to be yesterday, but it came out midday that it was going to be today. So today is the day. Where do we stand right now? Everything’s still in the bill, and the parliamentarian is going through what’s called the bird bath.

There’s a rule in the Senate that’s called the bird rule. The low down and dirty for you is any senator can look at any portion of the bill and challenge it on the bird rule stuff. So the parliamentarian goes through to try to, it’s a process to try to eliminate all that. They go through it, and the parliamentarian will look at each section, and either yay or nay, is it a tax-related issue or not? If it’s a tax-related issue, it stays in. If it’s not, it’s marked for removal. This process the parliamentarian does is a suggestive process, if you will.

The Senate can overrule the parliamentarian. It hasn’t really happened since the 70s, but it can be done. But as of right now, we anticipate everything remaining in the bill, but I will keep you in the loop today. It is the day. You need to stay on top of it. Make your calls again today. It’s area code 202-224-3121. Get a hold of your senators. Tell them to, yes, vote for and keep the Hearing Protection Act and the Short Act in this bill. But guys and gals, I want you to know that this is not an all or nothing scenario.

I get a lot of people who voice their opinions on other portions of the bill, and that’s all well and dandy. That’s fine. If you disagree with a portion of the bill, I do, and when I call my senators, I let them know that. So I say, hey, I want you to support the Hearing Protection Act because I don’t want to go deaf if I ever have to protect my children. I don’t want them to go deaf. I don’t want them to have to live in fear and shock for the rest of their life because I had to defend them.

And you’re forcing me to do this because we know evil can come out anywhere at any time. Tell them, I always say, I want you to support the Short Act. Why? Because the barrel length doesn’t matter. The shorter the barrel length, the easier it is for weak people or disabled people or some small-statured people or some women who are small-statured to utilize a tool to defend themselves or others. The Constitution doesn’t say only long items. It says all items. So those are the things I say. And I also say, hey, also, I want you to not support this sale of public lands.

I want you to not support this AI thing where the government’s telling states that they can’t do anything about AI for five years. The feds will have the rule. I also will say, I do not want you to support anything related to this bond scenario. So basically, it’s a different subject, but there’s a thing in there that if you want to petition the government to redress your grievances, you have to pay a bond, put money up front to sue the government. No. So that’s currently in the Senate version. It was taken out of the House version because it was unpopular.

I anticipate the same happening here through the process. But back to the gun stuff. It’s all still in. It’s on us to put the pressure on. We’ve never been this close. Each day that goes by, we’re getting closer and closer. The goal is to have the full Senate vote on this bill by the end of the week. And it can happen in the next day or two. If they really move fast, which they’re trying to do because they want to get this to President Trump by July 4th, then there’s a possibility it could get out today and tonight, and they could act on it.

So make your calls. Again, 202-224-3121. I just want to check my notes, make sure I got everything that I wanted to tell you this morning. Yeah, just get on it. Remember, it’s not an all or nothing. There are people who have been chirping at me about other sections of the bill, and that’s fine. But that doesn’t mean we say to hell with the NFA section. We want to destroy the NFA. We need to destroy the NFA. And we’re about to destroy the NFA, but we need to keep these elected representatives in Congress on focus and let them know that we’re paying attention, and they will be held to pay.

Appreciate y’all. Get it done. Get on them. Stay on them. And then once the Senate votes on it, we’re not done. We’re not out of the woods. It’s going to have to go back to the House for reconciliation because the Senate’s made some changes. So I will keep you up to date on that. I’ll educate you on that process. But no, today is the day. Get on them. I love y’all. Stay safe. Stay armed. And stay free, my fellow Americans. Take care. Thank you. [tr:trw].

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