According to investigators, the man was attempting to break into a car inside the lot when he was confronted by a civilian contractor working with a towing company. The contractor, who is not a city employee, told police the suspect displayed what appeared to be a firearm.
In response, the contractor fired his own weapon, hitting the suspect in the leg. The man then ran but was later found hiding in a nearby vehicle.
Result of George Floyd Riots in Minneapolis
In 1970, the State of Florida passed sweeping emergency measures laws which conferred enormous powers to Sheriffs and Municipal officials (Mayors and Chiefs of Police). The law was meant to contain and prevent riots and the widespread breakdown of the rule of law. The officials could declare an emergency under the "imminent threat of violence", which gave broad discretion. The emergency could only be in effect for 72 hours, after which time the county commission or the city council would be required to approve of any extension of the emergency.
There were many riots during the Vietnam era, particularly at universities.
Part of the legislation was 870.044, which automatically forbid the exercise of many rights protected by the Second Amendment when an emergency was declared:
Whenever the public official declares that a state of emergency exists, pursuant to s. 870.043, the following acts shall be prohibited during the period of said emergency throughout the jurisdiction:
(1) The sale of, or offer to sell, with or without consideration, any ammunition or gun or other firearm of any size or description.
(2) The intentional display, after the emergency is declared, by or in any store or shop of any ammunition or gun or other firearm of any size or description.
(3) The intentional possession in a public place of a firearm by any person, except a duly authorized law enforcement official or person in military service acting in the official performance of her or his duty.
Later, this exemption was added:
Nothing contained in this chapter shall be construed to authorize the seizure, taking, or confiscation of firearms that are lawfully possessed, unless a person is engaged in a criminal act.
The law is an example of the height of Progressive philosophy: When there is a breakdown in law and order, place all power in the hands of government officials.
The law explicitly forbid ordinary citizens from participating in restoring public order!
Representative Monique Miller (R), District 33, was born the year the bill passed, in 1970. She was elected to the Florida House in 2024. Representative Miller found 870.44 to be in direct conflict with the Second Amendment. From Flhouse.com:
Why Representative Miller filed this bill:
When Floridians most need the ability to defend themselves, their families and their property, Florida statute strictly prohibits it. This bill would repeal section 870.044 of the Florida Statutes, which currently establishes automatic limits on the possession and carrying of firearms and ammunition when an emergency is declared. By removing these automatic restrictions, the bill ensures that lawful gun owners are not preemptively barred from exercising their Second Amendment rights during times of crisis.
Representatives Miller and Mayfield sponsored HB6025.
HB6025 Passed the House on April 16, 2025, with a super majority, 86 -28. The bill passed Senate on April 23, 2025, with another supermajority, 32 - 5. HB 6025 was signed into law by Governor DeSantis on May 28, 2025. The repeal of 870.44 was immediate upon the Governor's signature.
Thus ended 55 years of automatic, official, Florida negation of numerous rights protected by the Second Amendment. One of the major purposes of the Second Amendment is to ensure citizens are armed so as to be able to restore public order during a breakdown of governmental authority. There is a long tradition of armed citizens reinforcing local authorities who do not have sufficient manpower to keep the peace. The United States has a long history of the spontaneous formation of local militias to enforce public order during emergencies such as after hurricanes or tornadoes.
The philosophy behind the automatic negation of a public ability to assist in the restoration of order with the use of force, was a direct assault on the philosophy of self government.
©2025 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.
Gun Watch
Police determined that the victim had fallen asleep while working at Red Eye Smoke Shop when three unidentified suspects broke the front window of the store with a rock and entered the building. Once inside, they fired multiple shots at the victim, striking him in the leg.
The victim returned fire at the suspects who subsequently fled the area.
"He allegedly held one family member at gunpoint and forced another to enter the home to retrieve someone, threatening to shoot the hostage in the head if the demands were not met," the Sumter County Sheriff's Office wrote.
According to detectives, Kirchner said, "I've already killed two people — I'll kill some more."
That's when a family member came out of the house with a firearm, reportedly prompting Kirchner to get into his car and leave.
Around 4 p.m. the same day, Nicholas Kirchner was located and arrested by the Taliaferro County Sheriff's Office in Georgia.
On April 24, 2024, Gary R. Sanchez filed a lawsuit against Attorney General Rob Bonta as representing the State of California. The suit alleges California banned firearms suppressors in violation of the Second Amendment. Sanchez acted as his own attorney in the case. The district judge granted AG Bonta's motion to dismiss the case, finding suppressors were not covered by the Second Amendment, because they were "only" accessories, not "arms".
Sanchez appealed the case to the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on September 6, 2024. The Ninth Circuit has historically been one of the circuits most openly defying Supreme Court rulings on the Second Amendment. The California Rifle and Pistol Association asked Michel & Associates, as well as Cooper & Kirk, to offer assistance to Gary Sanchez. Mr. Sanchez has accepted the offer and the Ninth Circuit has agreed to accept both Michel &Associates and Cooper & Kirk as representing Sanchez in this case.
As of April 10, 2025, both parties have filed Replacement Opening and Replacement Answering Briefs from the Plaintiff-Appellant (Sanchez) and the Appellee (AG Bonta's office) in the case. The arguments have become predictable.
Sanchez argues silencers are arms covered by the Second Amendment as accessories which make firearms more useful for self defense, training, and for general safety of firearms users and others. They are in common use, the standard put forward in Heller, McDonald, and Bruen. From the brief:
Firearm suppressors—which reduce but do not eliminate the noise emitted from a firearm—support the safe and effective use of a firearm and are commonly used for lawful purposes in the United States. They are legal to possess in the vast majority of states, and millions are possessed by law-abiding Americans for lawful purposes, including to prevent irreversible hearing damage from firearm use in training, self-defense, and hunting. Indeed, the Federal Government has described suppressors as the only truly effective means of preventing hearing damage while using a firearm. The hearing protection of a firearm outfitted with a suppressor serves critical self-defense functions, ensuring that an individual defending self, family, and home can prevent the temporary deafness or disorientation caused by a firearm blast. This allows an individual exercising the constitutional right to self-defense to hear an intruder and communicate effectively with family members and the authorities. Suppressors also facilitate training with firearms by reducing the sound of firearms and therefore protecting the hearing of everyone in a training facility.
Bonta argues silencers are not arms, are not useful for self defense, are not commonly used for self defense, but are particularly dangerous. From the brief:
Silencers are neither bearable “Arms” nor integral components that are necessary for the operation of a firearm. They have no intrinsic self-defense purpose or utility in the case of confrontation. The district court’s dismissal fits squarely within a uniform consensus of the federal courts that silencers are not presumptively protected by the text of the Second Amendment. Indeed, this Court recently observed as much, noting that “a silencer” is an “optional accessor[y]” that “may be attached to a firearm without necessarily falling within the scope of the text of the Second Amendment.”
The brief for the State of California attempts to redefine what Heller, McDonald and Bruen have already established as the framework for determining if an arm is presumptively covered by the text of the Second Amendment. They seek to change the standard from "in common use for lawful purposes" to "commonly used for ordinary self-defense". Under this newly created "standard" the plaintiff (Sanchez) would need to prove an arm is commonly used in self-defense by police reports, a nearly impossible standard. The gambit is to define the Second Amendment out of significance.
The State of California has a difficult task in proving both that silencers are not useful for self-defense, are not arms, are not in common use, but are also exceedingly dangerous. The Court of appeals for the Ninth Circuit has been willing to contradict itself, the rule of law, and to defy the Supreme Court in order to prevent enforcement of a vigorous Second Amendment in California.
The Trump department of Justice has recently filed a brief in the Fifth Circuit, USA v Peterson, declaring silencers are arms protected by the Second Amendment.
Analysis:
The two briefs represent two different visions of reality. The State of California vision is the government is the source of all that is good, and the government should be all powerful. There should not be any limitation to government power. Most people cannot make good decisions, so weapons in the hands of the people are a significant danger. In short, in the hands of ordinary people, guns are bad.
The plaintiff, Sanchez, represents the vision of a limited government bound by the limits of the Constitution and dependent on the consent of the people for its existence. Guns in the hands of the people are a positive good to act as a limit on governmental abuse of power. More power in the hands of more people is a positive good.
This case may result in a circuit split on whether silencers are arms protected by the Second Amendment.
©2025 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.
Gun Watch
Detectives with DPD’s Criminal Investigation Division responded to investigate. According to court documents, the victim reported that a coworker, believed to be 22-year-old Jamison Gladney, “snuck up on him” and hit him on his face while he was sitting in his vehicle at work.
The victim said he “presented his pistol” at Gladney after being hit, but that Gladney “disarmed him of the pistol and shot him,” court records say. Gladney then fled the scene after the shooting, the victim told police. The victim was then taken from Decatur Fire Station 2 and taken to Huntsville Hospital by Decatur-Morgan EMS to be treated for an “apparent penetrating gunshot wound,” after the victim said he had physical injury to the groin area.
The incident was confirmed through multiple witness interviews and surveillance footage from various angles.
Detectives said the incident happened when a 19-year-old approached a group of young men with a gun in his hand and was subsequently shot in the face by one of the teens.
The 17-year-old alleged shooter is charged with possession of a firearm by a minor and carrying a concealed weapon, authorities said.
The victim's brother, also 17, allegedly hid the 19-year-old’s gun in a wooded area. He faces charges of firearm possession by a minor, tampering with evidence, and probation violation.
The Trump administration has reconsidered what state and territory firearms permits qualify as substitutes for National Instant background Check system checks, or more generally for Brady Law checks, when purchasing a firearm. Two more states, Michigan and Alabama, have been added to the current list. As of present, 29 states and Puerto Rico have permits which qualify. Not all permits in a particular state may qualify. In Alabama, both the Concealed Carry Permit and the Lifetime Concealed Carry Permit qualify. In Michigan, both the Permit to Purchase, Carry, Possess or Transport a handgun and the license to conceal carry qualify.
Missouri has five types of carry permits. The Lifetime Concealed Carry Permit, The Extended Concealed Carry Permit and the Concealed Carry Permit all qualify. The Provisional Lifetime Concealed Carry Permit, The Provisional Extended Concealed Carry Permit, and the Provisional Concealed Carry Permit do not qualify.
None of the California permits qualify. Surprisingly, both Hawaii permits qualify.
Here is a list of states where no permits qualify. Some of these states are surprising.
California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Virginia and Washington State.
Vermont does not issue a permit, but has Constitutional Carry.
These non-state territories and the District of Columbia do not have permits which qualify:
American Samoa, District of Columbia, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands and U.S. Virgin Islands.
To see exactly which permits qualify and which do not, examine the Brady Permit Chart at the ATF website. The ATF lists limitations on the substitutions of these permits for a Brady Law (NICS) system check. From the ATF:
Prior to transferring a firearm utilizing the exception in § 922(t)(3)(A), an FFL must ensure the following:
- the permit is valid and unexpired;
- the permit was issued not more than five years earlier by the state in which the transfer is to take place;
- the laws of the state provide that such permit
was to be issued only after the state conducted a background check in
accordance with the Brady law.Please note: Permits issued more than five years before the date of transfer may not be used, even if those permits remain valid and unexpired under state law.
This correspondent routinely uses the Arizona permit for transfers from an FFL. The licensee of the FFL used gives a discount for use of the permit because it reduces paperwork and time for the dealer.
Analysis:
The use of state permits for a Brady Law or NICS check (Some Brady Checks are done under state authority) is a good step in the right direction. Noted researcher John Lott notes many NICS checks are false positives which wrongly deprive innocent people of the right, protected by the Second Amendment, of purchasing firearms. The waiting periods in some states, such as California, are being challenged in the courts as an infringement on rights protected by the Second Amendment. There is at least one challenge against the federal prohibition on purchasing handguns across state lines, even if both states would approve the purchase. The NICS system needs a serious overhaul. It is designed to deny purchases. It uses broad criteria. Much better commercial systems are in place which allow quicker, more positive identifications. The biggest problem with NICS is it is a solution in search of a problem. There is very little indication the NICS system is anywhere near cost effect. It costs dealers and citizens millions of hours of lost time each year. It costs a minimum of tens of millions of dollars to operate. There is no reason to believe it has any significant effect on crime rates. The premise: "Guns are Bad", has not been demonstrated to be true. Eliminating the NICS system will take Congressional action.
©2025 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.
Gun Watch
There have been few studies of how effective firearms are in defense against bears. This may be because the early experience of people using modern firearms against bears showed them to be incredibly effective compared to muzzleloading firearms. Muzzleloaders were far superior to bows and spears.
Before Christopher Columbus pioneered a regular and profitable way to travel to the Caribbean and the New World, Amerindians had a difficult time defending themselves and their food against grizzly bears.
Grizzly bears migrated into the area occupied by the 48 contiguous states a bit after humans, about 12,000 to 16,000 years ago. The bears originated Europe and Asia, and had colonized what is now Alaska and some of far north Canada. Glaciers prevented them from migrating further south. They had co-developed with men in Europe and Asia, and had evolved strategies to deal with humans. In the Americas, Amerindians did not have firearms, or horses. They had a difficult time dealing with grizzly bears. Grizzly bears are much more aggressive than black bears and tend to be larger. A closely coordinated group of men could kill a grizzly with bows and spears, but were likely to suffer casualties.
This changed when firearms and horses were brought to the Americas.
Grizzly bears were encountered early in Canada. Henry Kelsey, a British Explorer, made a name for himself in 1691, by killing two grizzly bears in what is now Canada. Kelsey was accompanied by an Indian companion. In 1691, Kelsey would have been armed with a flintlock musket. From The Great Company, 1667- 1871:
His companion made his escape up a tree, while Kelsey, his retreat cut off, hid himself in a clump of high willows. The bears perceiving the Indian in the branches made directly for him, but Kelsey, observing their action, leveled his gun and killed one of the animals. The other bear bounded towards the place from which the shots came, and not finding the explorer, returned to the tree, when he was brought down by Kelsey's second shot. Good fortune attended this exploit, for it attained for the young man the name among the tribes of Miss-top-ashish, or "Little Giant".
The large bears became a serious problem as the Spanish colonized California, starting in 1769. From A Description of Distant Roads Original Journals of the First Expedition into California, 1769-1770, by Juan Crespi, p. 485:
The scouts had reported to us that they had come upon a great many large bears in this level. With this in mind, our Captain and five or six soldiers were riding their horses. On coming down to the plain we at once spied some seven of them in two or three different spots. They fired at one, which it took seven or more shots for them to kill, each shot wounding it in the body. They slew it finally, and the rest went galloping off.
Six or seven mounted men, armed with muzzleloaders, were able to kill a large grizzly bear, without a casualty. In 1769, these would be flintlock muskets of 71 caliber. Horses were an essential element. They negated the speed of the bears, at least in open terrain. In California, as large ranches developed, bears were killed to prevent depredation on cows. Groups of Californian cowboys were able to capture bears with horses and lassos. The horses made the difference.
In the Journals of the Lewis and Clark expedition, in 1806, Clark noted the Indians were able to kill bears in the open with horses and bows.
The Indians of this Country Seldom kill the bear they are very much afraid of them and the killing of a white or Grzley bear, is as great a feet as two of their enimy. the fiew of those Animals which they Chance to kill is found in the leavel open lands and pursued on horses & killed with their Arrows.
Lewis noted that competent riflemen could kill grizzly bears, but the grizzly bears had a serious reputation for ferocity and tenacity. After numerous encounters with grizzly bears, Lewis noted how difficult they were to kill.
I must confess that I do not like the gentlemen and had reather fight two Indians than one bear; there is no other chance to conquer them by a single shot but by shooting them through the brains, and this becomes difficult in consequence of two large muscles which cover the sides of the forehead and the sharp projection of the center of the frontal bone, which is also of a pretty good thickness.
The Lewis and Clark expedition varied from about 50 to 30 members. Members of the expedition killed about 33 grizzly bears, along with at least 10 grizzly bears which were wounded and escaped. In spite of the number of bears taken and wounded, not one person of the expedition was killed by a bear. Reading the journals, many of the men shot bears, and had to run, jump into water, climb trees, ride horses or otherwise escape the bears, but none were mauled by a bear.
With cartridge firearms a single man could reliably kill grizzly bears. Sir Samuel Baker noted the combination of a cartridge pistol and a horse in the killing of a grizzly bear, in Wild Beasts and Their Ways, in 1881. The cowboy chased the bear, on a moonless night, keeping it in the open. Both bear and horse became exhausted. The cowboy fired eight shots; two to turn the bear from heading toward a forest, and six shots at the bear after it was exhausted. On examining the bear, Baker found the cowboy had hit it with one shot which went through the heart from the back to the front. From the account:
Eight shots had been fired from the commencement, to the termination by the last fatal bullet; but, although Texas Bill was an excellent shot with his revolver, he had missed seven times, and the eighth was the only bullet that struck the bear. This had entered between the shoulders vertically, proving the correctness of his description, as he must have shot directly downwards. The bullet had passed through the centre of the heart, and had escaped near the brisket, having penetrated completely through this formidable animal.
Baker was so impressed with the Colt revolver and cartridge combination he ordered one for himself when he returned to England.
©2025 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.
Gun Watch
According to the Monroe County Sheriff’s Office, a resident contacted law enforcement to report that an individual had broken into the home armed with an axe. The homeowner shot the invader, striking the suspect once in the torso, officials said.
The MCSO said emergency medical personnel provided immediate care to the suspect at the scene before transporting him to a nearby hospital. The suspect’s condition was not available.
According to the sheriff, the homeowner is not expected to face charges related to this incident.
6-year-old Gary Edwards and his wife Anna were leaving the Cracker Barrell on Delk Road Monday evening when they heard a woman screaming at a gas station across the street and saw a man trying to carjack her.
“I ran out, basically tackle the guy and knock him down. There’s a little scuffle there. He starts running back towards Delk Road.”
Police say the suspect, 32-year-old Rico Riley, then tried to carjack a family at the intersection, but Edwards, now armed with his wife’s gun, stops him.
“I draw the gun on him. Tell him to step away from the car and get down. I yell out, ‘hey get off of her and start running,” Edwards said.
Edwards held Riley at gunpoint until police officers arrived.
The suspect rear-ended the car in front of him on the 215 in what Homicide Lt. Robert Price called a “minor traffic incident.” He then got out of his car to render aid to the car in front of him, Price said. When he approached the car in front of him, the driver of the other car “jumped out” with a knife in his hand and began chasing the other driver, Price said.
The driver who was the victim of the rear-ending chased the driver around his car multiple times, Price said. When the driver who originally rear-ended the other car then got back into his car to get his gun, Price said the other driver stabbed the car and the tires with a knife.
The first driver then got out of his car with a gun and told the other to get away, Price said. The man with a knife “lunged forward,” and the first driver shot him, Price said.
In Texas statutes, Section 46.05(a) lists some items which are forbidden to knowingly possess, manufacture, repair or sell. The statute includes short barreled firearms, which have been heavily regulated by the federal government since 1934. SB1596 strikes short barreled firearms from the list of prohibited items. From SB1596:
any of the following items, unless the item is registered in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record maintained by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms andExplosives or otherwise not subject to that registration requirement or unless the item is classified as a curio or relic by the United States Department of Justice:
(A) an explosive weapon; or
(B) a machine gun; [
or
(C)a short-barrel firearm;
Short barreled firearms were in common use before 1934. Most people will immediately see the silliness of this rule. Handguns are protected by the Second Amendment. Handguns are short barreled firearms.
How is it handguns are not regulated by the law regulating short barreled rifles and shot guns?
The answer goes back to 1934. Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) was President. He had appointed Montana Senator Thomas Walsh as Attorney General. Senator Walsh had uncovered the Teapot Dome Scandal. Senator Walsh died on a train en route to DC. Then President Roosevelt appointed Homer Cummings, from Connecticut, as Attorney General.
Cummings was the man who came up with the scheme to pack the Supreme Court. Cummings, essentially, created the FBI. Cummings was a gun control advocate. Cummings put forward the idea to circumvent the Second Amendment by using the taxing power of the federal government to regulate the ownership and possession of firearms, especially handguns.
Originally, the 1934 bill required all handguns to be registered and licensed by the federal government. Firearms enthusiasts rebelled against the idea. The NRA agreed to a compromise: allow sawed off shotguns, machine guns, and silencers to be banned by extortionist taxes, but remove handguns from the bill. At the time, there were few machineguns or silencers in private hands. The taxes imposed on silencers, short barreled shotguns and short barreled rifles were 10-20 times the cost of the items, about six months worth of wages. The NFA was an effective ban on formerly legal items, using federal taxes as the tool.
In a curious twist, short barreled rifles, were never meant to be included by the Cummings Department of Justice. They were included in the bill at the insistence of Harold Knutson, a representative from Minnesota on the Ways and Means committee. Knutson's comments did not make any sense, but the DOJ agreed to add short barreled rifles to the bill.
FDR went on to be elected to four terms. He appointed numerous federal judges, transforming the federal court system into a Progressive court system. Progressive judges were more interested in finding ways to subvert Constitution limits than in enforcing the Constitution. Multiple states endorsed the federal prohibitions, under the realization of how weak the federal "ban through taxes" was under the Constitution. Texas was one of those states. The Supreme Court has since ruled taxes, aimed at an enumerated right, protected by in the Bill of Rights, are not an allowed work-around.
Why SB1596 is relevant today
Inflation wore away the extortionist taxes imposed by AG Cummings 1934 bill. More people experienced using silencers and short barreled firearms. They saw the obvious stupidity of the 1934 law. Texas lawmakers removed the state prohibition on silencers. Now Texas lawmakers are moving to do the same with short barreled firearms. The Texas bill will not effect the federal law, except to showcase the stupidity of the federal regulation. Ridicule is a powerful political tool. The fundamental assumption behind the 1934 law is: Guns are bad. More guns are worse. It is a false assumption.
©2025 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.
Gun Watch
The two arrived at the house on Fern Avenue with two guns and an AR-style pistol. The automatic pistol was given to Gordon, while the other two handguns were placed on a counter, the affidavit states.
Vaughn took one of the guns, held it against Stafford’s head, and told him to leave, while 18-year-old Jaylin McNairy held Gowani at gunpoint, according to the affidavit.
Once Stafford and Gowani were outside, they called 911, and told officers that’s when Vaughn and McNairy began firing shots at them. They fished a 9mm handgun out of Gowani’s purse and returned fire, striking Vaughn in the leg, police said.
Bryan confirmed to the Ledger-Enquirer that Ortiz-Ocasio was shot and is believed to be the person who was committing the home invasion. The Columbus Police Department said its Violent Crimes Unit is conducting a death investigation, according to a post on the department’s X page.
Image from Barrett press release
The U.S. Army has announced that the MARS Inc, Barrett team has been selected as the winner of the xTech Soldier Lethality competition on May 22, 2025. The competition was done on an highly accelerated basis over six months. MARS Inc. and Barrett team was selected over an entry by Fabric National (FN). Compared to FN, the MARS Inc, Barrett team is an upstart, even though Barrett has been fielding rifles to many countries military organizations for decades. The system of semi-automatic launcher, optic, and projectiles is the be known as the Precision Grenadier System or PG22.
The rifled grenade launcher prototype is to fire a 30x42mm sophisticated grenade cartridge. The projectile will be capable of being programed while loaded in the rifle. The rifle is semi-automatic with a five round magazine. The rifle weighs just short of 14 lbs, without the optics. The weight of the XM 157 optics was not announced, but is probably in the 2-3 lb range. The optic system is sophisticated. It is said to include atmospheric sensors. It includes a laser rangefinder and ballistic calculators. This correspondent would not be surprised if included an integrating crosswind system. If you look carefully at the rail on the image of the rifle, you can see it is at a 1.4 degree angle to the bore. This allows the optic to be more centered on the probable trajectory of these relatively low velocity projectiles. From turdef.com:
The grenade launcher is also seen to be fitted with the XM157 optic, which is also used on the XM7 rifle, which is planned to become the U.S. Army's new infantry rifle. The optic capable of 1-8x zoom incorporates a ballistic computer and laser range finder to improve practical accuracy at extended ranges.
The 30x42 mm grenades are being developed to be capable of reaching a range of 500 m in less than three seconds, suggesting a muzzle velocity far higher than 40x51 mm Medium Velocity grenades used on hand-held grenade launchers at 166+ m/s.
The Vietnam era M79 grenade launcher uses a 40x46 mm grenade at 77 mps or 250 fps. It is a fun weapon to shoot, with the recoil of a 20 gauge shotgun. The low velocity allows the shooter to see the grenade in flight, in many conditions. The 30x42 cartridges shown in pictures with the MARS/Barrett semi-automatic rifle appear to be about 80mm long, a bit shorter than the M79 40mm cartridges. The velocity is supposed to be more than 167 m/s. This correspondent expects it to be about 180 m/s or 550 fps. The projectiles are likely to be about the same weight, so the recoil on the MARS/Barrett will be more than twice as much. The recoil is compensated for because the new precision semi-automatic grenade launcher weighs over 15 lbs with the optic mounted. The M79 weighs a bit less than 6 lbs.
Ammunition for the PG22 will be highly sophisticated. It is to be programmable when loaded, obtaining data directly from the XM157. The ammunition types include Programmable Air Bursting High Explosive (HE), Proximity Fuzed and Point Detonating HE, as well as a Close Quarter Battle Round. The proximity fused ammunition is expected to be useful as an anti-drone round, obvious limited to relatively low altitudes, because of the low velocity of the cartridge. It is not clear what sort of projectiles will be used in the close quarter battle round. It is expected to be effective to 50 meters, about the same range as an ordinary shotgun with buckshot. As a shotgun, the bore would be roughly a 3 gauge. In speculation, the projectiles may be tungsten spheres or steel flechetes.
This contract is a major win for MARS Inc. and Barrett. In this highly accelerated competition, smaller companies sometimes outperform giants such as FN.
The PG22 Precision Grenadier System is expected to be fielded in two to three years. The XM157 is already in use.
©2025 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.
Gun Watch
According to the Charleston Police Department, it all happened along the 1800 block of 7th Avenue around 1:30 a.m. Sunday. Police say one man was attempting to rob the other and both shot each other.
They say one man was shot in the collarbone and the other was shot in the abdomen.
A man told officers that he, his brother, and several children were outside of a home when two children, around the ages of 13 or 14, began shooting at them. That man said his brother ran to grab one of the children and protect them when he was shot in the back of the neck.
The brother suffered critical injuries. The man said he returned fire and shot back at the teenage gunmen. Officers gave the brother a city ordinance for discharging firearms within city limits.
There are about 533 million firearms in private hands in the United States of America in 2025. The current population is estimated at 343 million people. This gives a record number of 1.55 firearms for every person in the United States. The number of privately owned firearms in the United States is growing by 15-20 million firearms a year.
The number of firearms which are privately owned in the United States is not clear and obvious or easily measured. There has never been a registry of firearms for the United States. A national firearms registry is forbidden by law. There are partial state registration systems in a few states. Data on manufacture, importation, and exportation of firearm was not kept as a matter of record until after World War II.
Researchers Newton and Zimring pioneered the estimation of private firearms numbers in the United States. They researched the number of firearms manufactured, imported and exported in the United States from 1899 through 1945 and estimated a total of 46.9 million modern firearms as of 1945. For the years 1946 to 1972 individual figures were calculated for each year. Shipments of firearms to the military were not included.
Gary Kleck, in his seminal work: Point Blank Guns and Violence in America, extended the work of Newton and Zimring through 1987, using data from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF). As of 1987, the total was 198 million and change. This correspondent has used the ATF numbers from 1988 to 2023 to reach a figure of over 530 million firearms in the private stock in the USA in 2025. The work was previously done through 2015. In the decade from 2015 to 2024, a combination of ATF numbers and estimates from the National Instant background Check System (NICS) were used. This resulted in an estimate of 516 million firearms in the private stock as of the end of 2024, with another three million added in the first three months of 2025.
Recent publication of Firearms Commerce in the United States Statistical Update 2024, gave access to the official numbers of firearms manufactured, imported and exported in the United States for the last decade, through 2023. These are definitive numbers reported as required by law, to the ATF. These numbers were used to update the estimate of the firearms in the private stock given in March of 2024. The official ATF numbers were calculated and added to the previous work done through 2015. The change in the estimate is a few million. As of the end of 2023, the estimate was 513 million firearms. An estimate of firearm sales calculated by the National Shooting Sports Foundation, based on the NICS data, reported by the FBI, adds another 16.5 million in 2024. NICS data for the first four months of 2025 adds another five million.
The estimated total, as of the end of May, 2025, is 533 million firearms in private hands in the United States of America.
The number is the cumulative addition of imports minus exports plus domestic manufacture. The number does not account for reduction of the gun stock through illegal exportation, destruction, loss, or wear and tear. The numbers do not include illegal importation, military surplus sales to the public, or individual manufacture of firearms for private use. As many as 17 million firearms may have been sold as surplus to the American public. Such surplus arms are commonly seen at gun shows. Private manufacture of firearms for personal use is in a boom stage. It is impossible to know how many firearms are lost and gained from these sources. The unknown losses and gains offset each other to some extent.
The numbers are necessarily imprecise. The method of calculation was pioneered by Newton and Zimring in 1969, updated by Gary Kleck through 1987, and extended to 2023 by this correspondent, using official numbers as reported by the ATF. The Small Arms Survey in Switzerland uses essentially the same method when estimating the number of privately owned firearms in the United States. The Small Arms Survey has not updated its estimates since 2017. Published in 2018, the Small Arms Survey estimate for the United States as of 2017 was 393.3 million privately owned firearms.
©2025 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.
Gun Watch
Posts
All Comments
