Gun Lawyer

Page – 1 – of 13

Gun Lawyer — Episode 316 Transcript

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

Gun rights, Second Amendment, Midterm elections, Gun purchases, Self-defense, Rifles, Shotguns, Handguns, Ammunition, Training, Holster safety, New Jersey law, Political fight, Firearms ownership, Gun safety

SPEAKERS

Speaker 1, Speaker 2, Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen

Evan Nappen 00:18

I’m Evan Nappen.

Teddy Nappen 00:21

And I’m Teddy Nappen.

Evan Nappen 00:23

And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, we are in a very interesting situation right now. The so-called blue wave’s more like a blue wave of sewerage has hit us, and it is not boding particularly well for those of us who love our country, love our Constitution, and particularly those who love our Second Amendment rights. And you need to think about the implications over the next two years. We essentially have one man standing as a wall between those that want to, you know, destroy our country and take away our guns. That is President Trump, and them being able to do so. They’re going to try in so many ways to screw with us, and we’ve got to brace ourselves for that. Not to mention what they’re thinking about doing regarding the Supreme Court, not the least of which is a proposal to defund the Supreme Court. Just defund them, which is technically within the power of Congress to do. So, we have some, as the old Chinese curse goes, you know, may you live in interesting times. Yeah, it’s going to be very interesting, and we’ve got to be prepared for such interesting times.

Evan Nappen 02:01

One of the things that I think we’re going to see as a reaction to this, well, it’s already being predicted by the head of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA). That’s Alan Gottlieb. I’ve known Alan for decades, and what he’s stating, I completely agree with. He says expect a surge in gun purchases following the Democrat election win. And you can see this article on TAG, which is Truth About Guns. It’s written by Mark Chestnut, (https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/gun-sales-surge-2026-midterm-elections/?utm_source=aweber&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=the-truth-about-guns) TAG is another one of the great aggregate news sources and great places to get gun news, which Teddy and I scour to bring to you the important stories. Teddy has the nerve to actually read the opposition, which makes me nauseated to ever do. So, thank you, Teddy, for doing that. Page – 2 – of 13

Teddy Nappen 02:53

It’s more of a strong stomach, and honestly, you just have to treat it as parody because it just shows you how retarded they are.

Evan Nappen 02:58

Oh, they are. Well, this article really raises some very interesting points, and you know, after this midterm fiasco, Citizens’ Committee is basically predicting that with the change, not just federally, but statewide as well. With putting anti-Second Amendment Democrats in charge here, it is very likely to set off a rush of buyers to gun shops and sporting goods stores between now and then, as people prepare for the assaults that are going to take place on our Second Amendment rights. And what’s very interesting is the article points out that the latest NICS background check figures showed that just in October there was an increase. It was up nearly 8% compared to just last October. I’ll read the quote here: “We may be about to witness a surge in gun buying not seen since 2020,” said Citizens Committee Chair Alan Gottlieb. We also anticipate a flood of new anti-Second Amendment legislation designed to further restrict the rights of law-abiding citizens, especially in states controlled by Democrats and from Congress.

Evan Nappen 04:35

The gun prohibition lobby is probably already salivating over various schemes to ratchet down on gun owners, and to get around a string of recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings, which have affirmed the individual right to keep and bear arms. As the article says, in fact, Gottlieb is 100% right, and I would second that. We’re looking at this scenario being ready to unfold. This is, for example, from the opposition, which says votes are still being tallied and races are still being called, but there’s already an incredible news coming out of this year’s midterm elections. We have a gun safety majority. Of course, that’s their euphemism whenever you see “gun safety” for taking away our rights. Anytime you see that, that’s what it means. They’ve hijacked the term “gun safety”.

Evan Nappen 05:40

In the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate, come January (2027), the anti-gun group Giffords wrote in a news release, “This is a really big deal. With control of the House and the Senate, we can make sure bills like National Concealed Carry Mandate never see the light of day. We can investigate the Trump administration’s capitulations to the gun industry. We can even reverse Trump’s rulemakings and advance life-saving technology legislation.” (https://giffords.org/stories/the-results-are-in-gun-safety-wins-the-midterms/) They actually mean killing more innocent victims who are going to be denied the right to defend themselves. That’s actually what they mean. But you see where they’re going. We’re going to be facing this, and it’s going to be bad.

Evan Nappen 06:28

And the question is, what should we do about it? Well, of course, we’re going to continue our political fight, and for that, you need to make sure you’re a member of great organizations, of which there are many that defend our rights. You need to be vigilant, but what about practically speaking? What does the future hold when you have chaos created by the destroy America party? I expect within the next two years that we’re going to be seeing issues and problems. If nothing else, further restrictions upon our Page – 3 – of 13

rights. So, sometimes it’s nice to just take a very micro look at us as individuals and how we prepared, just in terms of our firearm ownership, in case these things do come to pass. Yeah, Teddy?

Teddy Nappen 07:22

I always think of Dad. Your article that you wrote for Blue Book.

Evan Nappen 07:25

True.

Teddy Nappen 07:25

It was during the height of the.

Evan Nappen 07:29

For the 20th. You’re right. For the 20th anniversary edition of Blue Book. (The Blue Book of Gun Values: 20th Anniversary Edition was published in 1999 by Blue Book Publications, Inc. (Minneapolis, MN), authored by S.P. (Steven P.) Fjestad) I would write for the great Blue Book when Steve Fjestad, who’s since deceased, and we miss him terribly. He was a great man. I would write for Blue Book, and one of the articles I wrote that got a lot of play, shall we say, was called “Anti-Gun Investing”. The idea was, and it was written, you know, somewhat satirical, but the idea was, you look at what anti-gun bills they’re proposing, and then you buy guns with anticipation of that. Of course, you get incredible value as the guns skyrocket because of the anti-gun shenanigans. But I’m talking here today.

Evan Nappen 08:15

Let’s talk about for fun and for education some practical aspects of what us as individuals should really be considering when it comes to our own firearms that we own. What should we have, and why. And look, I’m not claiming to be any type of top expert on firearms, but I am still credentialed to the degree that I am a certified instructor from the National Rifle Association. Certified in home firearm safety. I’m also a certified pistol, certified rifle, certified shotgun, personal protection in the home, and personal protection outside the home instructor. So, I do have instructor credentials. I’m not just a gun lawyer, but I do have those credentials as well. And of course, I’ve been an active gun owner, shooter, collector, and everything living the 2A lifestyle for all of my adult life and most of my teenager years as well. And, of course, Teddy, you’ve grown up with guns since the day you were born. You were actually made a Life Member of the NRA on the day you were born, as you know. So, officially, on that day, you were the youngest life member.

Teddy Nappen 09:42

Yeah, it was a birth certificate, then life membership.

Evan Nappen 09:46

Correct, and not necessarily in that order, but yes, it did end up that way. All of my children were made life members the day they were born. This is an interesting topic. So, when we talk about our own firearm ownership, what guns should we have? What guns should you consider owning and why? We’re very much into personal protection, of course. We’re very much into, especially with the revolution in concealed carry, and being able to have our carry guns and what works for us, very Page – 4 – of 13

individualized basis there, of course. But let’s talk in a bigger picture. Essentially, your firearm ownership breaks down into three categories. It breaks down into rifle, shotgun, and handgun. Every gun owner who believes in firearms and such should have at least one of each of those type of firearms. Now, however many you want, no problem. I get it, but you should at least have one of each because they all serve different purposes. They address different needs that may come about for personal self-defense and/or survival, for that matter.

Evan Nappen 11:10

So, where do rifles fit in? Well, rifles, as you know or should know, are for longer ranges. They’re designed to reach out and touch somebody. They can provide accurate, much longer distance fire power, and therefore they serve that role. Now, that is not something that you would necessarily commonly have a routine need for, but should you ever need it, there’s no other substitute for a rifle, and you should have a rifle that you are accurate in shooting. You need a rifle that can perform, and normally when we talk about having a rifle, we’re talking about a center-fire rifle as opposed to having a rimfire. Now, rimfire rifles have their place. Rimfire rifles are great and they’re fun. And yes, they can, of course, be used defensively as well. But the center-fire rifle is going to give you significantly more power, and stopping power, and range.

Evan Nappen 12:31

Of course, that is where the most popular rifle in America, the AR-15, and its platform, becomes something very common and something very useful because it uses a center fire cartridge. Most commonly, the .556, sometimes also called .223, but .556 is the proper military and technically the designation you want. There is a slight difference, although technically they’re very very similar and can even arguably function in the same gun. But .556 is the center-fire cartridge. It’s the current cartridge used by the U.S. military, and it’s a cartridge that’s readily available. The AR platform is out there, and it’s so easy because it’s modular. It is essentially low recoil. It has many advantages. So there are many compliant ARs that New Jerseyeans can own, and you can have a rifle platform. If it comes down to just having one type of center-fire rifle, then it is extremely hard to beat a semi-automatic AR-15 New Jersey legal platform that gives you that rifle capability.

Evan Nappen 13:52

The other long arm that is very important is a shotgun. Now, a shotgun has significantly shorter range than a rifle, but a shotgun has significantly more stopping power, especially in Close Quarter Battle (CQB). In closer situations, and in terms of home defense, nothing beats a shotgun. The shotgun, especially a standard 12 gauge shotgun, particularly loaded with buckshot, has multiple projectiles that are expelled and create a wider pattern. So you have a greater hit probability and getting hit with multiple projectiles has a geometric force to it that is extremely effective. A shotgun is primary if you have your choice and there’s a bump in the night. Your go-to gun should really first be a shotgun. Particularly in New Jersey, where you can have a pump-action shotgun, and none of the assault firearm prohibitive criteria apply to pump-action shotguns. So, for example, you could have a Mossberg 590A1, which is the military spec version of the 590. It has a thicker, stronger receiver and athicker, stronger barrel. It is extremely tough and durable. And look, any pump shotgun is fine. But I’m just just talking about this 590A1 right now. It has a bayonet mount on it. Page – 5 – of 13

Evan Nappen 15:33

You can, in fact, put an M7 type bayonet on it, which is a fascinating thing to have if you have an encounter with a bad guy in your home and you have a shotgun with a bayonet on it. If that person is still stupid enough to make a move against you with a bayoneted shotgun, they really don’t have much upstairs, do they? It also can have a folding stock with a pump-action shotgun. It can have a magazine capacity, which the Mossbergs come standard with nine rounds of shot shell capacity, right? Very good. It can have the ventilation shield on top. You can put any kind of sights you wish on it. It can have a pistol grip. All that. Any whistle and bell you want to put on your pump shotgun, and it does not in any way turn it into an assault firearm because pump shotguns are not included within New Jersey’s definition of assault firearm. And look, I love semi-auto shotguns. But then you start treading into the really best stuff having limitations. Prohibitions on mag capacity, pistol grip, folding stock. All those things that will make it an assault firearm. If you stick with a pump that’s extremely reliable, you can have all those goodies on it, and it is devastating when we’re talking about anything in close range self-defense.

Teddy Nappen 16:59

I’m trying to remember. There’s a terminology for this. For having a shotgun loaded where you’d mix in slugs where the you know the giant.

Evan Nappen 17:07

So, that’s called Dutch loads. Dutch loads. You can also have a shotgun where you have a slug, which is one single projectile, usually in a 12 gauge, about an ounce of lead. When you can fire one ounce of lead at a wrongdoer that is threatening your life and you’re justified in using deadly force, that usually will end a fight when a one ounce of lead impacts its target. But with buckshot, you have a multitude of buckshot sizes. They range from number four buck all the way up to triple O buck. The smaller the number, the smaller the size. Number four buck is roughly 24 caliber. And once you get up to triple O buck, you’re in the 30s in caliber and every size in between. You can look at the different loads that are out there. There are Magnum loads and standard loads. Different manufacturers put a different amount of buckshot of any different size in the load, and you can look at and see what suits your needs best for the amount of buckshot and size that you wish to have. It makes for quite a devastating round when utilized. It is primary, and it is Jersey legal for you to have. You really should also always have a shotgun. And then, of course, we have.

Teddy Nappen 18:40

Well, I was thinking of the 12 PDX one.

Evan Nappen 18:46

Yeah, now the PDX one load is very cool because that has a single projectile slug, and then it has buckshot. It is very much mimicking the classic of the old days, what they called a buck and ball load. It can give you the best of both worlds. Something else to check out. There are a lot of great shotgun defensive loads out there. A shotgun is incredibly versatile, and they are very durable and tough, if you get the models that are known for those very criterias being met. Then, of course, we have handguns. Handguns are something that can be utilized for immediate personal protection. It can be carried concealed on the person, especially with a carry permit, and in a home, a handgun is handy. Now, Page – 6 – of 13

many people say that a handgun is simply a first aid kit, an emergency kit that lets you fight to get to your rifle or shotgun, which then would be your preferred firearm. Whatever your attitude is, whether you think you will only want to rely on a handgun, whether you want to grab that shotgun or you need that rifle, the fact is that those are the three basics. It’s those three types of firearm that every law-abiding, responsible gun owner that wants to adequately be prepared should have, and that is the food for thought on that.

Evan Nappen 20:17

You also need to have a sufficient quantity of ammunition, because there are things known as ammunition shortages. There’s nothing better than ammo cans from the U.S. Government that are surplus sold for storing ammunition. Not only does it store it well, it makes it easy to carry and transport, and protects the ammunition in those wonderful sealed ammunition cans. Hell, it’s almost like it was made to hold ammunition, isn’t it? Maybe we could even call them ammo cans. I mean, how about that? Make sure you have sufficient ammunition and the correct ammunition for your firearms and the purposes that you intend. Then there is another one very important overall factor to this entire situation, and that is training. Make sure you have the training. Make sure you go to the range. Make sure you practice gun safety. Make sure you know how to use your firearms. Make sure you understand the laws of deadly force. Knowledge is a critical component of responsible gun ownership. Reflect on all these things that I’m talking about. Make sure that you have thought about them and you appropriately apply them to what fits in your life.

Evan Nappen 21:34

Let me tell you about our good friends, speaking of training, at WeShoot. If you want to get some of that great training, you can go to weshootusa.com and check out the great folks at WeShoot. WeShoot is an indoor range conveniently located in Lakewood, New Jersey. Easily obtainable to go use that fantastic resource right off the Parkway. When you go there to WeShoot, you can get top training, from basic to advanced. You can get your certificates and training that you need to get carry licensing, not just in New Jersey but many many other states, too. IIt is a resource that you need to take advantage of. A fantastic range and a fantastic pro shop. You can buy these guns that we’re talking about there.

Evan Nappen 22:31

As a matter of fact, this week at WeShoot, they are offering the Q Honey Badger, which is an AOW. It’s compact, unconventional, instantly recognizable, and the honey badger is anything but ordinary. They are offering a tourist PT 92. That’s a timeless double action classic with unmistakable Italian inspired styling and decades of proven heritage. And they have the tandem cross Kraken aluminum lower? That’s a precision machined innovation that gives rimfire enthusiasts something exciting to talk about. And when you go to WeShoot and their website, which has fantastic photography, you can also see Carly Morgan. She takes the many faces of 2A on an adventure. She’s fearless, energetic, and always ready for her next thrill. Carly represents the adventurous spirit of American gun owners, and you can see her picture and the beautiful firearms that she is displaying. From outdoor adventures to embracing our nation’s heritage, she reminds us that freedom isn’t just something we believe in; it’s something we live. So, lots of cool stuff on WeShoot website, weshootusa.com. Great guns you can check out at the WeShoot Pro Shop, great range. You can get your shooting and training and practice in. Make sure you Page – 7 – of 13

check out We Shoot. You’ll be glad you did. It’s where Teddy and I both shoot, and we highly recommend it.

Evan Nappen 24:16

Let me also shamelessly plug my book, which is New Jersey Gun Law, the Bible of New Jersey gun law. You really have to have a copy. And I’ll tell you what: once you get your copy, you get updates for free. You just scan that code on the front, and you’ll get all the updates as they come out. Unfortunately, we may have some important updates down the pike that we may not be real happy with. So, you want to stay on top of those things. Go to EvanNappen.com, EvanNappen.com, and get your copy of the Big Orange Book, New Jersey Gun Law, today. Hey Teddy, what do you have for us in Press Checks?

Teddy Nappen 24:55

Well, as you know, Press Checks are always free. It seems The Trace, basically the anti-gunners, have decided to fund their hit piece of a website known as a SmokingGun.org. It talked about how they put out this entire article just bashing the quote unquote gun tubers. Well, they decided to mark their next target at Halloween. (https://smokinggun.org/gun-makers-mix-assault-weapons-silencers-and-candy-for-halloween/)

Evan Nappen 25:29

Halloween?

Teddy Nappen 25:29

Yeah!

Evan Nappen 25:29

Okay, I can’t wait to hear how they are twisting this.

Teddy Nappen 25:32

Oh, no, no.

Evan Nappen 25:33

I mean, all the antis Left. They constantly try to take every tradition in America and try to destroy it. This is like their their M.O., whatever it is. Destroy American tradition in their quest to destroy the country. Let’s hear about the idea of American.

Teddy Nappen 25:51

Well, they always equivocate saying everything is racist. Halloween is racist. Anything Americana is racist, but particularly pumpkins.

Evan Nappen 26:03

Very anti-pumpkin. Page – 8 – of 13

Teddy Nappen 26:05

But particularly, it’s the fact that

Evan Nappen 26:07

Actually, they’re racist against orange is the Left. Orange Man bad and all that.

Teddy Nappen 26:12

Yeah, of course they always do that. Particularly they were going after the gun makers for doing Happy Halloween social media marketing, social media marketing, in posting an AI image of Happy Halloween. That is the entire article where they just go after each and every gun manufacturer.

Evan Nappen 26:37

Hey, I love it when they carve pumpkins with guns. That is like the best. Yeah, yeah, absolutely. And you can carve a nice pumpkin with a gun, and lots of times it’s a smashing success. I mean, come on.

Teddy Nappen 26:51

I know, right? And you also see this woman Rachel Fedeli. All right, whatever. She pushes.

Evan Nappen 27:00

She’s just another pumpkin head.

Teddy Nappen 27:02

Yeah, I like I like to say retarded, but that works, too. The gun industry has co opted the trick or treating and scary movies to advertise its deadly products. Yeah.

Evan Nappen 27:17

I’ll tell you. Any time a kid comes trick or treating, I give them ammo. Just kidding about that. Don’t give trick or treaters ammo. Oh, my G-d.

Teddy Nappen 27:26

Yeah. Well, that’s what they’re painting it like.

Evan Nappen 27:28

Chocolate, chocolate. They do make the chocolate guns and the chocolate bullets. That would actually be a cool Halloween treat, wouldn’t it?

Teddy Nappen 27:35

Halloween is supposed to be a tradition for costumes and candy. But for the gun industry, it’s an opportunity to market firearms, ammunition, and accessories on social media.

Evan Nappen 27:46

How dare a legitimate business try to market its products? Page – 9 – of 13

Teddy Nappen 27:50

How dare a business just say Happy Halloween? They’re like, oh my G-d, how could they? So, they go down the list here of social media post on various like snapshots. Particularly, they go. First, they go at the fact of silencers. They boohoo and whine and cry at opening the markets up for silencers.

Evan Nappen 28:13

Now, it’s Halloween, isn’t that ghost gun season?

Teddy Nappen 28:17

Oh, it gets better. H & K, the German gun manufacturer that has a subsidiary in Georgia, posted an AI generated video of a skeleton holding an MP 5 with a silencer.

Evan Nappen 28:34

That’s pretty cool.

Teddy Nappen 28:35

Yeah.

Teddy Nappen 28:36

That’ll rattle your bones.

Teddy Nappen 28:39

I know. I know, no bones about it. They were trying to say, you’re marketing silencers to children with a skeleton holding a silencer. Oh, my G-d. Then they go at Barrett Firearms where it shows an image of the ghost ops of floating, of floating ops.

Evan Nappen 29:00

Ghost ops. Cool I like it. It’s a it’s a it’s a Barrett in front of a haunted house. That was it, and they go down to like Eotech having an AI imagery of a haunted house with an AR with the rigged up to the site.

Speaker 1 29:19

Uh huh.

Teddy Nappen 29:20

Yeah, and by the way, it’s very tone deaf with the various mass shootings involving AR 15. Let’s

Evan Nappen 29:26

Clutch our pearls and cry.

Teddy Nappen 29:29

Every time. And then, oh, this one really pissed him off. The force reset trigger manufacturer, rare breed triggers, put out a happy Halloween. Just saying happy Halloween. Just saying happy Halloween Page – 10 – of 13

Evan Nappen 29:46

With a picture of the force.

Teddy Nappen 29:48

reached out trigger. That was it. They they are so

Evan Nappen 29:52

well. They do know one thing that if the idea in Halloween is to be scary, they’ve scared the hell out of the anti-gunners. Haven’t they?

Teddy Nappen 30:01

Yeah. Oh, and then the ultimate to the Hornaday for making a trick or treat where it’s a little box of what looks like candy, but it’s but it’s ammunition. Like, how could you do that? Putting ammunition in a plastic jack o’ lantern. Like, hey, where

Evan Nappen 30:19

do we see the Santa Claus with the sack full of guns, right? I mean, come on, good stuff. Hope Santa listens to me with that hint, Teddy.

Teddy Nappen 30:30

Yeah, I know, right?

Evan Nappen 30:31

Right, good, right, good.

Teddy Nappen 30:33

Yeah, you’re set. But for me, this just comes down to they whine and bitch about anything that even comes close to firearms, where they’re worried about the marketing of children because they want it to be the scary object. They don’t want it to be normalizing children with firearms, getting them to stand.

Evan Nappen 30:52

Well, their angle is always the children, always the children. So, this is part of what they do.

Teddy Nappen 31:02

But when it comes to access to hardcore pornography and adding a 18 year old requirement on that, oh no, no, can’t do that. That’s homophobic. It’s it’s one of those. It’s always comes down to the propagandizing where you have to make the thing scary, make the thing haunting, even though it was literally a happy Halloween aspect to it. But they try to obfuscate it over to say, “Oh, it’s oh, it’s they’re marketing to children.”

Evan Nappen 31:30

Wait, I have guns with skeletal stocks. They have skeletal stocks. Yeah. Uh oh. Page – 11 – of 13

Teddy Nappen 31:38

Bear in mind this comes right out of Giffords. They attack toy guns, and they want to make sure that they need to regulate them like firearms. That is actually a push from their Giffords. (https://giffords.org/lawcenter/gun-laws/policy-areas/child-consumer-safety/non-powder-toy-guns/) Toy guns, the genetic generic terms that encompasses a wide range of non-firing firearm replicas, include cap pistols and water guns, are marketed to children since toy guns can be mistaken for actual firearms. Federal law requires that certain look-alike firearms be visibly different from real firearms. Addition, dangers can occur when non-powdered guns are fired. Both non-powdered and toy guns can be toy

Evan Nappen 32:16

Now, it’s toy guns, no less. Toy guns.

Teddy Nappen 32:18

Yep, yep.

Evan Nappen 32:19

Well, here’s the thing. You know, to any of the witches out there, I would give a public service announcement to all witches. Please practice safe hex.

Teddy Nappen 32:34

And I love the stat they put in it. From 2015 to 2024, police shot 334 people brandishing non-powdered / toy guns. Gee, I wonder what was the group of individuals who were trying to rob convenience stores and thought, oh, let’s use a let’s use a branded tool. They even use that for the crime statistic when they try to make the argument about the number one killer of children is guns. Except they add in 19-year-olds and include gang-related crimes.

Evan Nappen 33:06

Yeah.

Teddy Nappen 33:07

Like instead of just looking at it to where accidents are the number one killer of children. So, but don’t worry. Here’s my counter protest to that. For next Halloween, dress up your in your favorite form of gun attire. For instance, dress up like a bank robber from The Heat, where you dress up as Val Kilmer. For women, actually dress up.

Evan Nappen 33:32

I want to be Doc. I want to be Doc. If I’m going to be anybody, Val Kilmer.

Teddy Nappen 33:35

Doc Holliday, Indiana Jones. They give a recommendation for the men. Oh, that’s a good one. Page – 12 – of 13

Evan Nappen 33:40

Hey, Smith recently came out with the Indiana Jones revolver, very close to what he carried in it. Yeah, with the 1917 type.

Teddy Nappen 33:51

And for women, they have them dress up like Sarah Connor, you know, because back then they could actually write strong female characters that just wasn’t man bashing.

Evan Nappen 34:01

Hey, Tomb Raider.

Teddy Nappen 34:03

Tomb Raider. There’s another one. Ripley in Alien.

Evan Nappen 34:08

Well, you know, all these are part of our gun culture, right? I mean, come on. That’s how it goes. So, we love it, and it should be and remain part of our traditions because it is a tradition. Well, that’s just another bit of absurdity from our dear friends at The Trace. Teddy, thank you for bringing this very entertaining subject to our attention because they never cease to amaze us with their insanity.

Evan Nappen 34:45

Hey, I want to tell you about this week’s GOFU, which, as you know, is the Gun Owner Fuck Up. This is where mistakes made by gun owners that can be costly, and you get to learn them for free. And this week’s GOFU is real simple. Please make sure you have the right holster. Now, when I’m talking about the correct holster, I’m not just talking about the correct holster that fits the gun. But in New Jersey, if you carry, you have to have the holster that meets the standard in the law, and that means a holster that covers the body of the firearm and the trigger. If you don’t have a proper holster, you can be charged with a felony-level offense. So, make sure that your gun, particularly your carry gun, has the correct holster, and you want to make sure that the holster functions and is designed for the firearm that you’re carrying.

Evan Nappen 35:55

I know of a story where a person went to a class being taught, and they didn’t have the right holster. They were going to do weak hand drills, and they didn’t have the proper holster. They’re right-handed and didn’t have a left-hand. So, they took a holster that was a smaller size frame for a Glock than the Glock 20 that the person had, which was 10 millimeter. They took a right-hand, outside the pants and turned it into the left-hand inside the pants, and it was too small to even fit the gun. As this person tried to ridiculously put their too large gun in this holster not being properly used. Bang! There was an accidental discharge, and the round ended up shooting the person literally in the ass and down and out their leg. It was a nightmare. A friend of mine who happened to witness this entire scenario, this person who had done this to themselves, was very much overweight. And what came out the hole at the bottom was a fist-sized ball of fat on the ground. So, what we call that was a Glockosuction. So, please don’t ever give yourself a Glockosuction. Make sure you have the right holster for both safety and legal purposes. Page – 13 – of 13

Evan Nappen 37:38

This is Evan Nappen and Teddy Nappen reminding you that gun laws don’t protect law-abiding citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from law-abiding citizens.

Speaker 2 37:51

Gun Lawyer is a CounterThink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York, New York. Reach us by emailing [email protected]. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state.

Known as “America’s Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it’s no wonder he’s become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets.

Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It’s Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News.

As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists.

He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America.

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)

Page – 1 – of 10

Gun Lawyer — Episode 315 Transcript

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

Jury trial, Gun laws, Legal rights, Jury duty, Fact finding, Bench trial, Acquittal, Criminal charges, Defense attorney, Proof burden, Firearms possession, Collector license, Police encounters, Legal education, Civic duty

SPEAKERS

Teddy Nappen, Speaker 3, Evan Nappen

Evan Nappen 00:19

I’m Evan Nappen.

Teddy Nappen 00:21

And I’m Teddy Nappen.

Evan Nappen 00:23

And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, we got a nice letter. I love getting letters from listeners, and I always read them. And this one is from Joe, and it is entitled “One Minor Complaint.” I’m glad Joe wrote me about this, and I really want to discuss this because I believe there is a lot of importance to the issue here. I want it to be understood by the listeners what is at stake when we talk about jury trials.

Evan Nappen 01:02

So, let me tell you what Joe has to say. He says, “Hello, Evan. Love your podcast. I listen to everyone. Keep up the great work for the people of New Jersey. I do have one little complaint, though. I take offense when you state that a jury is made up of 12 people not smart enough to avoid jury duty. If you were joking, then you should say so. But if not, then you of all people should know that it is a civic duty of all Americans to be available to serve on a jury. I would much rather take my chances with a jury of my peers than most judges. Our jury system in this country may not be perfect, but is the best on the planet. Also, I think every American citizen should serve on a jury at least once in their lifetime, witnessing how the legal system works in real life, as opposed to what most people believe and how it works by watching real crime shows. It is a real eye opener and extremely valuable education. Lastly, I hope that someday I would be on a jury in a gun case where the evidence called for it, I would ask for jury nullification. This is one of the most powerful tools a jury can have. Yet, to my knowledge, few of any judges advise juries of this option prior to their deliberation. Okay, so I got that off my chest. It’s been bothering me for some time. Again, it’s only a complaint. So please keep up the good work. Thanks again, Joe.”

Evan Nappen 02:19

And Joe, I truly appreciate your comments, and I want to talk about this important issue about jury trials. Are juries good or bad? Is it always advisable to want a jury trial or not? Now, let me just say, I Page – 2 – of 10

treasure our Constitution, as all of you know, and I firmly believe in our in our rights. And thankfully, we have a right to a jury trial, and that is a blessing, no question about it. It’s a blessing. However, there are some times where you may not want to exercise that right, and there are other times where you need to understand what we’re dealing with when dealing with a jury, and where the risks of a jury trial have to be understood, or it can become very bad for otherwise law-abiding citizens.

Evan Nappen 03:26

So, let me start with what does a jury have to do? Well, the jury has to judge the facts. The facts have to be judged by a jury. The law is given by the judge, and juries become judges of facts. And many times you have situations where it’s he said /she said, and that kind of deal. You have fact questions where the evidence is what the jury has to consider in determining the facts. The jury has the burden of proof. The jury has to find unanimously that either you are guilty or not guilty. The jury has to acknowledge its role, and in doing so, the burden of the proof is rested upon the State. The jury has to find, by proof beyond a reasonable doubt, as to whether or not you are to be convicted of the alleged offense. And it means proof beyond a reasonable doubt of each and every element of the offense. Was there actually a firearm? Was there actually a permit? Was the behavior, whatever they’re alleging, was it without a lawful purpose or whatever? Every one of the elements of the offense have to be determined by the jury, and the unanimous jury has to find proof beyond a reasonable doubt of those facts, based upon how the law is given to them by the judge. The judge does give the law by way of what’s called charging the jury. The judge will read the law and explain the law in what is supposed to be a neutral fashion to the jury, so they can make their due deliberations. All that is very good, and it is a protection that we have, but it is not always the right choice.

Evan Nappen 05:31

So, let’s talk about that now. Why would I ever say? And, of course, it is a joke. It is a joke where I say, you know, 12 people that aren’t smart enough to avoid jury duty. It’s a jest, but why is it a joke? It’s a joke or a jest because what the point I’m trying to make there is that when the jury has to judge the facts and has to judge, for example, whether you acted reasonably in your behavior, that reasonable behavior judgment is going to be based on what these 12 people know and believe, based on their personal experience and what they’ve heard in the trial as evidence. And remember, many jurors are not gun people. They don’t understand to the depth that we do what went on with you as a lawful gun owner. So, many times you’re dealing with jurors that don’t have a life experience that allows them to have an understanding that we ourselves might have and that can be another very important consideration.

Teddy Nappen 06:40

I’ll give you the best example, Dad. I remember my law professor. He basically said, like, it was very old timer. Just you know, wore a sweater vest, smoked a pipe, classic. He looked like out of “Paper Chase”. But he would say, “I have never served. I’ve never been given the ability to serve on the jury. They’ve always excluded me because they don’t want people who have heavy amounts of knowledge on the law. They don’t want attorneys. Do they really want a defense attorney in the jury pool? People who understand the evidence. Page – 3 – of 10

Evan Nappen 07:14

I can back that up because I was summoned once for jury duty. And as soon as I got there, well, I knew the prosecutors, and I knew the defense attorney. They couldn’t get me off that jury fast enough. They don’t want, and not just over potential conflict, but over that very thing. They want the jurors to just determine the facts, not determine the law. If an attorney’s in there that knows the law, then the jurors are going to turn to that lawyer for legal advice, and that isn’t how it’s supposed to go. Yet, it would be very difficult for me to honestly serve on a jury. Not because of my knowledge of the law, but I am built for defending people. I know I’m not a prosecutor. I don’t think that I would ever be very good at prosecuting anybody. I’m here to defend rights, defend individuals. That is my entire calling in life. So for me to say, “Oh, I’ll be neutral. It would be very difficult because I’m always looking at the person and their defenses. It is just how I’m made. So, that is a factor for sure.

Evan Nappen 08:35

Yet let me tell you about a case recently where the jury was spectacular, where the jury did what is incumbent upon them to do in their duty. It’s where an individual that needs to have the facts determined is blessed to be able to have a jury to understand the facts and circumstances of their particular situation. Just recently, a client of ours, Joe Fitzgerald, was acquitted of all criminal charges. We, my office, represented Joe Fitzgerald. He was a former Middletown Board of Education member. You can read about this in the Patch.com. There’s an article called “Former Middletown BOE Member Joe Fitzgerald Acquitted of All Crimes,” and it’s written by Carly Baldwin. Now, Carly, in her article, explains what happened at this trial and how it got to where it is. It explains in the article itself. And by the way, trials are public as well. So, this is not secret star chamber knowledge. This is out there in the public and reported accordingly in the newspaper, which is also their job.

Evan Nappen 10:01

It states that Fitzgerald was arrested in 2025. He was charged with eight crimes including, you know, illegal possession of items, including a handgun, a kitchen knife, and a taser, and the jury acquitted him of all the charges. Mr. Fitzgerald is quoted in the article as saying, “I am grateful for the not guilty verdict. I am truly happy to finally put this chapter of my life behind me.” He then further stated that it’s been a challenging and emotional experience for me, my family, and everyone who has stood by me throughout this process. I am thankful to those who supported me, believed in me, and allowed the legal process to run its course. I look forward to moving on with my life, and more importantly, my children. So, here you can see the outcome, and with our blessing of having a jury, was able to get to this outcome.

Evan Nappen 11:06

Yet, when you look at the facts of this case, you can see the importance of why a jury was so critical. The prosecutors had claimed that Mr. Fitzgerald was heading to confront the husband of a woman, where there was an allegation that he was having an affair. Now, he absolutely, completely denied that he was having an affair. The prosecutor claimed that he had a loaded handgun and other weapons in his truck, and that before he left that evening, this is all in the article, Mr. Fitzgerald told his wife, whom he’s now separated from, that he was going to take care of this right now. She was claiming that this was referring to the other woman’s husband. And in fact, what was going on, and as the jury heard the Page – 4 – of 10

case and heard the facts, that what happened was Mr. Fitzgerald was simply taking all of his property that was related in this manner out of the house to get away. To get these items out of the house and away.

Evan Nappen 12:21

He was lawful in terms of his possession in his home, and what you had was a circumstance that was emergent circumstances. In order to have that considered, you know, the facts were all presented, and the evidence was all presented. The jury understood, understood, that the circumstances here were such that there was never any intent in terms of causing harm or threatening harm, but instead it was something that was done emergent. Yet New Jersey’s gun laws themselves, on the face, are so inflexible on the face of how they’re written, the exemptions for possession are so narrowly construed that simply taking your own property away in an emergent way like that can put you in a position where you can face charges, which is exactly what happened here.

Evan Nappen 13:18

The article further makes it clear that the Government had offered him a plea offer. Their best plea offer was to include one year minimum mandatory. And keep in mind that just on the handgun charge alone, he was looking at up to 10 years, with three and a half years minimum mandatory, under what is called the Graves Act. And that Graves Act applies to charges of handgun possession, and we’ve discussed that on the show. Also, so-called “assault firearm” possession, etc., and minimum mandatory penalties if you’re convicted after a trial. The judge has no discretion whatsoever. They must impose at least the minimum mandatory (three and a half years). But Mr. Fitzgerald believed strongly in his innocence and knew the reason why he did what he did. He did not accept this plea offer and instead went to trial.

Evan Nappen 14:20

He went to trial, and the trial was actually argued by an associate in my firm, and we, of course, work together on strategy and planning as we always do because we’re a team. The Associate was Ali Homayouni, and he did a fantastic job. And what he argued is that all of his firearms and weapons that were found that evening were lawfully owned by Mr. Fitzgerald. It was simply the emergency circumstances that caused him to leave the house that night, and that is what was successfully presented. The article does quote me explaining, and I’ll read it to you. In New Jersey, you need a permit to buy a gun, but then you can have it in your home without a permit as well. There’s an exemption that specifically allows for that. The law allows for possession of firearms in one’s home without a permit or ID card. You can go to the shooting range with a gun and come back home, or take it hunting and come back home. And you can do all of that without having a firearm license. That is New Jersey’s exemptions. You can see them under N.J.S. 2C:39-6 subsection e. and subsection f., by the way.

Evan Nappen 15:39

So, what happened was that he had put everything in his car that night and left, and that is what occurred. After that, and the jury doing its job, hearing all the evidence and understanding these emergent circumstances, he was acquitted of all charges. I’ll further quote the article. Fitzgerald and his lawyers, Fitzgerald and his lawyers, both credited the jury for acquitting him of all charges. He requested a jury trial instead of a bench trial, which is a trial before a judge, and I’m quoted in this very Page – 5 – of 10

article as saying, “This is why we have jury trials.” I say you have a right to a jury trial where your peers, your fellow citizens, are able to hear evidence and weigh the facts. That’s a special right that we all treasure in America, and our Founding Fathers knew this. That’s why they put it in the Bill of Rights because of the injustices people endured in England, where one single judge just did the king’s bidding. You don’t get the privilege of a jury trial in authoritarian or communist countries. So, I firmly believe in the jury trial. I cherish our right to a jury trial. It’s incredibly important, but you need to remember what the meaning of the joke is.

Evan Nappen 17:09

The meaning is that you’re dealing with folks that have to understand you and your circumstances, and in the society that we live, that sometimes is not necessarily what’s going to happen. So, I want to contrast this case, that was absolutely a success, with a full acquittal by Ali and our firm doing a fantastic job. No question about that. I want to talk about when deciding whether or not to get a jury trial is in fact a choice that can become very important and instrumental in whether or not your defense is going to be successful. So, I had a case in which we specifically, specifically, chose not to have a jury trial. I want to tell you how that went down and why, so that you can also have that as a major consideration if you ever face having to make such a choice.

Evan Nappen 18:26

But before we do that, I want to tell you about our friends at WeShoot. Now, WeShoot is a range in Lakewood, and our listeners know that that’s the place where Teddy and I both shoot, and we love it. WeShoot offers all kinds of services. They not only have a fantastic range, but they have a great pro shop, second to none. And they have fantastic trainers that can get you all the certifications you need. Now, we have an important announcement. WeShoot is offering the NRA NJ CCW certification, and that will be Sunday, November 15, from 9 am to 1 pm. This is what you need so that you will be able to get your New Jersey carry permit. You have to pass the CCARE and have the course, and they are offering a new low price of $199 for this course. So, if you need to get certified, if you need that to have and maintain your New Jersey carry permit, WeShoot is the place to go. They’re offering this special deal on Sunday, November 15, from 9 am to 1 pm.

Evan Nappen 19:44

Additionally, they have many other courses for training. You can learn whether you’re a beginner or advanced, and you will be able to increase your skill set and your knowledge. And also be able to get certifications there. They offer not only New Jersey, but other non-resident permits as well. Teddy and I both have taken advantage of that as well, and you should, too. You want to check out WeShoot at weshootusa.com. Become a range member there. They’re a great resource right in Central Jersey, right there, conveniently off the Parkway in Lakewood, New Jersey. Check out their website at weshootusa.com. Beautiful photography. Lots of great information, lots of really cool guns to look at, and other really nice photography. You’ll see what I mean when you go to their website. So, check out WeShoot at weshootusa.com. You’ll get first-rate care and attention. You’ll be able to continue with your training certifications, honing your shooting skills at their beautiful indoor range, and be able to get any of these supplies and gear that you need to be a proficient, law-abiding shooter. Page – 6 – of 10

Evan Nappen 21:10

I also want to mention my book, New Jersey Gun Law. It’s the Bible of New Jersey Gun Law. It’s over 500 pages, all question and answer. It is the book used by all everybody, basically, including State Police Firearms Division. Very shortly, I will be sending out a new comprehensive update to everybody who subscribed, and subscribing is free. All you do is scan the QR code right on the book. Make sure you’re in with your email address and such, and you will receive the updates. And I have a comprehensive one coming very shortly, and you’ll be glad. And this way, your book will always stay updated. So, have no fear. Go to EvanNappen.com and get your copy today.

Evan Nappen 22:07

So, let’s talk about when you might NOT want a jury trial. I have a case that illustrates that very thing, and that’s because juries can sometimes be fooled, literally fooled, by the Government. Now, I understand that they are not going to come right out and say, “I want a jury I can fool,” but we know that there is a severe lack of understanding of the specifics of New Jersey gun law. And even though the judge will read the law and even though we will do our best to educate them, there still is a bias. There is a bias that can be out there with jurors who may not understand the laws. I had a case where my client had a Curio and Relics FFL license, a federal license as a collector. That’s what Curio and Relic license allow for – collecting.

Evan Nappen 23:17

Now my advice to individuals in New Jersey is not to have a Curio and Relic license. It may have plenty of advantages in other states, but in New Jersey, it does present a liability. And this is a case that illustrates how it became such a liability. The State of New Jersey, in those days, would still run the list of Federal Firearms Licensees, which is accessible as a database, and they would compare it to New Jersey Retail Firearm Dealers. And if there were individuals that had a federal license and did not have a New Jersey license, then they were concerned about those individuals possibly being unlicensed dealers. And then, in working with ATF, the ATF would do inspections and such of those licensees. These inspections would then be handed directly over to the State Police, and that is what occurred in this case.

Evan Nappen 24:15

So, my client had been a Curia and Relic holder for about 25 years, and he had acquired a number of firearms via his Cure and Relics license. They brought charges against him, alleging he was an unlicensed dealer, alleging that he unlawfully possessed an assault firearm, that he unlawfully possessed large capacity magazines, that he had unlawfully acquired handguns, etc. They piled all these charges and indicted him for this. I brought a motion before judge in the county that was hearing the case, and in arguing my motion, I explained why to the judge every single one of those charges was legally wrong. Was not correct, was improper. And it was absolutely not justified for the indictment. The judge took my motion to dismiss the indictment, read through it all, read my moving papers, my brief, the state’s brief, and agreed. The judge dismissed all of the charges against my client for the determination by the judge that he was not in violation of the law. Page – 7 – of 10

Evan Nappen 25:36

Well, let me tell you something, folks. You think that would be the end of it? Well, let me first tell you that you may have heard of double jeopardy. Now that’s where you can’t be tried twice for the same offense. Well, you see, double jeopardy only takes effect after the jury is seated. In other words, you have to have the jury. The jury has to be picked, and the jury has to be seated. After that point, if it goes, unless there’s a mistrial, then jeopardy attaches. Short of that, if you knock out charges on a motion to dismiss the indictment, the State is allowed to rebring charges. Now, arguably, it’s supposed to be if there’s new evidence or whatever, but they can bring charges again. And lo and behold, in this case, they brought the exact same set of charges again! Again. After having them dismissed by this judge, we’re now looking at the same charges again. And I’m thinking, how long is this going to happen? Am I just going to keep bringing motions to dismiss, and then keep having superseding indictments. It’s ridiculous.

Evan Nappen 26:45

After discussing it with my client, what we said was, Your Honor, we want a trial, and we want to waive the right to a jury trial. My client waives his right to a jury trial, and we want a trial, a bench trial, solely before your honor. Now think about it. Of course, that’s what we want. We want that because this is the very judge that’s already reviewed our motion to dismiss the indictment and found that none of it was justified. Why would I want a jury to be arguably confused by the State over this, and guess what? When I said that my client waives his right to a jury trial, ready for this, folks, the State objected. They objected to my client waiving their right to a jury trial. It’s not the State’s right to a jury trial; it’s the defendant’s right to a jury trial. The judge looked at the prosecutor with shock, basically, and said, “No, you don’t get to object to that. If the defendant wants a bench trial, he gets a bench trial.” We got a bench trial on it, and we had an actual trial.

Evan Nappen 27:58

And in that trial, their so-called expert was the biggest jerk I’ve ever encountered as an expert. This so-called expert, which now made it clear why the State was getting so misguided over all this, claimed that my client was an unlicensed dealer, which he was not. In 25 years, 25 years, he had only transferred four of his guns. He was a collector, and only gotten rid of four of his guns to other licensees. Not a dealer. They claimed his acquisition of handguns wasn’t lawful. It was not. It was completely lawful. Handguns not acquired in New Jersey do not need a New Jersey permit to acquire. If he went to another show out of state and lawfully acquired a handgun, he’s under the jurisdiction of that state and the federal law. His acquisition is lawful. He acquired black powder handguns. They tried to claim that black powder handgun was somehow unlawfully acquired when acquired out of state and legal.

Evan Nappen 29:09

To the degree that we got into a debate over what is fixed ammunition, and I could not believe this expert. This was absolutely shocking. At some point, the judge asked questions, which the judge is allowed to do. They asked this expert, “Can you tell me how do you define fixed ammunition?” At which time, this expert on the stand, who happened to also be a law enforcement officer for the State, took out his gun on the stand, took out the magazine on the stand, took out a round from magazine on the stand, which of course I’m objecting to this all going on at the same time. By the way, the expert holds Page – 8 – of 10

up a round from his handgun and says to the judge, and I’m ready for him to tell the judge, Your Honor, this is fixed ammunition. And he would be correct in that, even though the protocol of what he just did was pretty outrageous. But instead, he holds up this round and he says, “This, Your Honor, is not fixed ammunition.” And I’m like, “What? That’s exactly what fixed ammunition is.”

Evan Nappen 30:16

So, on cross examination, I asked their so-called expert to read Steindler’s Dictionary of Firearm Terms as to what the definition of fixed ammunition is, and lo and behold, it’s exactly what he held up and told the judge was not fixed ammunition. Then I had him go to Shooter’s Bible’s lexicon and read the definition there. And lo and behold, it’s exactly what he held up to the judge and said was not fixed ammunition. So, the judge, who was rather shocked at this revelation, actually asked this expert, “How come when I asked you how do you define fixed ammunition, you told me the exact opposite?” And he actually said this on the stand, folks. Ready for this? He said, “You asked how I define it.” I kid you not. Insane. You asked how I define it. Unbelievable.

Evan Nappen 31:13

In this case, the magazines that were so-called large capacity were all blocked. They were all blocked. They did not hold over the legal limit, and they were purchased at the time from a store in New Jersey called Sarco. They were blocked accordingly and lawfully acquired. Well, I brought in the person who sold the magazines from Sarco, who knew my client and actually sold him the magazines there. I had him on the stand, and he was former chief of one of the local departments even before he was working for Sarco. He made it clear. No, these are absolutely blocked magazines, and that’s how we sold them to him. I purposely didn’t ask the question because I knew the prosecutor would, and I just set him up for it. I said, “Thank you.” And so the prosecutor, of course, asked right away, “How do you know these are the magazines that you sold him?” And of course, he turns over the magazines and says, “See the black B written in magic marker on it? That’s how we mark our magazines that we blocked.”

Evan Nappen 32:15

Then, believe it or not, one of the guns in there that was a curio and relic. Well, this expert in the grand jury testified.to get the indictment, testified when one of the grand jurors asked, “What is the curio and relic?” And his comment was, “Well, that’s just a gun that you don’t find anywhere.” Like, what? No, that’s not what it is. Well, sometime between that indictment and this trial where he’s on the stand, someone wised him up. I asked him, “What’s a curio and relic?” And then he said, “Oh, well, there’s a list of curio and relics, and there’s a list, and that’s what.” Oh, well, you told the grand jury under oath that it’s just a gun you don’t find anywhere, whatever that means, right? Well, yeah, okay.

Evan Nappen 33:00

Well, let’s take a look now that you know what a curio and relic is and you’ve told the court that, we take out the list of curio and relics. What was the firearm here that you said was not a curio and relic? We pull that exhibit. And what is it? It’s a Walther P.P. Zella Mallis Walther P.P. That’s pre-1946. I asked him to read that right in the list of curio and relics. Then we look at the firearm in question, and guess what it is? It’s Azella Mallis P.P. Pre-1946. At which time he says, “How do I know that it’s pre-1946?” I said, “Can you identify this mark right on the author?” He goes, “Yeah. What is that? “Well, that’s a Nazi Page – 9 – of 10

proof mark. Do you think they were doing that after 1946?” What do you think, huh? Unbelievable. And this is the guy that they used as their so-called expert.

Evan Nappen 33:54

When I asked about the so-called assault firearm, he said, “Oh yeah, it’s an assault firearm.” Well, prior to the expert, the State Police that conducted this examination, you know, when they came in and took his guns, had originally thought that the AK-47 was an assault firearm. However, this gun had been rendered inoperable, and the proper paperwork filed – a Certificate of Inoperability. And I’ll give the State Trooper credit. When I had him on the stand, I asked, “Did you originally think this was an assault firearm?” He said, “Yes, I did.” However, you’ve subsequently learned that it was in fact rendered inoperable and properly registered as inoperable, and showed the document. He said, “Yes, I have learned that.” I said to that trooper, “Do you have any problem with this gun now? He said, “No, absolutely no problem now.” And I give him credit for being honest, and that in fact was the truth.

Evan Nappen 34:48

Well, this expert still gets up and says, “Oh no, it’s still in the assault firearm. It’s still illegal.” No. We just had State Police say it wasn’t. Here’s a document that says it wasn’t, and here’s the law that says it wasn’t. We go through all this, and the judge acquits – not guilty, all counts. But let me just tell you something, folks. That was absolutely the correct choice in that case of not wanting a jury trial, when you had a judge that already understood the law. You could see how the prosecutor would try to present all this, and it would become a problem and not an advantage, in fact, having a jury trial. So, keep in mind that your decision to exercise your rights, whatever your right may be, is your choice. And it is your choice that is important and needs to be thoroughly thought out when any type of important tactical decision like that is being made.

Evan Nappen 35:51

Hey, I want to tell you about this week’s GOFU, and let me just say that the GOFU is extremely important. GOFUs are your ability to not make expensive mistakes that others have made, and you need to learn from them so that you yourself don’t become a GOFU. This week’s GOFU is important. As gun owners, we may in fact end up having encounters with police. I just want to say that is extremely important that you maintain a good attitude with police and that you remain courteous. That doesn’t mean you give up your rights, but you remain respectful. You remain courteous, and don’t become in any way even verbally aggressive, even making threats that I’m going to sue you or whatever. None of that. None of that. Do not go down that path. The officers, they have a job to do, and sometimes you may be very much in disagreement with the job that they are doing. But blowing up on the cops, making their job harder, creating an attitude problem, will not make it any better for you. It will only make it worse for you.

Evan Nappen 37:32

Keep a good attitude and know that we have a system that we can then use. Because that attitude that you may express to that officer is probably going to influence how you, as a person, are looked at. And that can come into play in whether you’re going to get out of the gun owner gulag and be released instead of held if they think you may be some type of danger or problem. It can influence how the officer views you, either sympathetically. Because let me tell you, many times the officers doing their jobs, they Page – 10 – of 10

themselves know what they have to do, but they themselves aren’t real happy with it. And if you act like a jerk, guess what happens? They feel a lot better about having to do their job because you are giving them a hard time and a bad attitude. Look, I understand it’s difficult. I understand the stressors. I get it, but be cool, right? Be cool. Like out of the Quentin Tarantino movies. All right, be cool and respectful. It’ll help you. It doesn’t mean giving up your rights by any means. You can be firm and stand on your rights. Do it respectfully, and then we’ll have the good fight, my friends.

Evan Nappen 38:57

This is Evan Nappen and Teddy Nappen reminding you that gun laws don’t protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens.

Speaker 3 39:07

Gun Lawyer is a CounterThink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York, New York. Reach us by emailing [email protected]. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state.

Known as “America’s Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it’s no wonder he’s become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets.

Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It’s Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News.

As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists.

He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America.

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)

Page – 1 – of 11

Gun Lawyer — Episode 314 Transcript

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

Second Amendment, Gun laws, Private manufacture, War Department, Historical precedent, Colonial gunsmiths, Repeating rifles, Ghost guns, Firearms history, Civil resistance, Voting rights, Republican candidates, Federal law, Self-defense, Constitutional carry

SPEAKERS

Teddy Nappen, Evan Nappen, Speaker 2

Evan Nappen 00:18

I’m Evan Nappen.

Teddy Nappen 00:20

and I’m Teddy Nappen.

Evan Nappen 00:23

And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, you know we are deep in these Second Amendment battles, and we are using the new weapons of choice that the Supreme Court has provided us from the trifecta of Heller, McDonald, and Bruen. Particularly in the test that the great Justice St. Thomas has given us. Part of the battle requires the establishment, if you will, by the other side, our Second Amendment oppressors. If they’re going to justify a law, they have to show that there were historical analogous laws of the past that prohibited or regulated in the same manner as the current whatever gun law we’re challenging is, and that’s become quite a difficult burden for the oppressors to meet. The more that we can find to counter the burden, to be the counter argument to any suggestion that there was any type of law or regulation regarding whatever they’re trying to challenge. We, too, can use historical precedent in our counter argument and in demonstration of whether certain things were in common use, certain practices were even in common use, and really lay the groundwork for the history of the Second Amendment, and that goes directly to how it needs to be interpreted.

Evan Nappen 02:23

And let me tell you, folks. When I first started with the very first firearm law firm in America, back in the ’80s, there was no scholarly body of work that got into the Second Amendment and its genuine history, showing what it meant and what it did for the people. And since then, there’s been a tremendous scholarship input, and that was largely due originally to the NRA, purposely focusing on building this body of scholarship. And that has become very critical in our current battle, freeing ourselves from these infringements that have been placed upon us on our Second Amendment rights.

Evan Nappen 03:22

So, I now see something really great, really great, that fits this so perfectly, and it just makes me so happy to see this. And I want to share it with you. It’s really important. This is from AmmoLand. It’s an Page – 2 – of 11

article by Duncan Johnson, who’s also the editor in chief at AmmoLand, and the title of the article is “War Department Recognizes Revolutionary War Gunsmiths, Highlighting America’s Tradition of Building Firearms. (https://www.ammoland.com/2026/10/revolutionary-war-gunsmiths-second-amendment/?utm_source=Ammoland+Subscribers&utm_campaign=98cf489617-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6f6fac3eaa-98cf489617-21268623)

Evan Nappen 03:56

And you see, this is a beautiful thing. It’s the Government, of course, with President Trump and his administration, and Pete Hegseth, as Secretary of War. It’s now the War Department; not the Department of Defense, because it’s about fricking war. That’s what it’s about, and it’s now the War Department. And what the War Department has done is put forward a historical feature. On May 29, 2026, the War Department put this feature forward, acknowledging the contributions of private gunsmiths who supplied the Continental Army, the Navy, the Marine Corps, and colonial militias with firearms. And you see, those gunsmiths were private gunsmiths, and they privately manufactured firearms. It wasn’t the Government. It wasn’t giant corporations. It was private gunsmiths privately manufacturing.

Evan Nappen 05:18

And, of course, today one of the prongs of the Second Amendment oppressionists is to go after so-called “ghost guns”, which are nothing more than privately made firearms. Challenging the constitutionality of those laws, it is excellent, excellent, to have a document by the Government itself that acknowledges the contributions of private gunsmiths and private manufacture. So, this report highlights this. Americans were manufacturing their own guns long before the Second Amendment was even ratified. Part of the foundation of America is the private manufacture of firearms. It is excellent that the War Department, during America’s celebration of its 250th Anniversary, is recognizing how these great private American gunsmiths helped secure our nation’s independence. The report points out, according to the Department of War, that colonial gunsmiths frequently manufactured complete rifles, pistols, and muskets from scratch. Now, there were some components, of course, the materials that were imported, but many, many craftsmen forged their own barrels, made their own stocks, and hand-fitted mechanisms. All in the creation of privately made firearms in colonial America. And in those days, of course, the guns were not interchangeable necessarily in their parts, at least not readily interchangeable.

Evan Nappen 07:32

And because of that, any time anything broke or got damaged, you needed a professional, a private gunsmith to, in effect, make you an entirely new component and then fit it to the firearm. This became particularly important on the battlefield, where, of course. you had to deal with fouling from black powder and worn flints, moisture and damaged components that rendered operables unable to function. It wasn’t a simple matter for a soldier to replace any of these broken parts. So, the Department of War noted that manufacturing a single rifle could take weeks or even months, and that gunsmiths needed, you know, extensive training. And the contributions by these great American patriots were important enough that the Continental Congress encouraged domestic firearm production to support the war effort. In November of 1775, Congress recommended that colonial governments employ gunsmiths to manufacture firearms fitted with bayonets. You know, the very thing in New Jersey’s so-Page – 3 – of 11

called “assault firearm” law that is an offending feature. Making it as one of the components that can make a gun a so-called “assault firearm” was a recommendation by the Continental Congress that the Government encouraged the manufacturer to take firearms, to make firearms that actually could use bayonets. Now, of course, the American Revolution did utilize and depended heavily on foreign arms as well and military assistance. Yet, still it was domestic gunsmiths, private makers, that played absolutely an indispensable role in keeping our forces equipped.

Evan Nappen 09:57

Now, on the international side, as far as arms coming in, it was critical that, particularly France, with the aid of Beaumarchais, the famous French playwright. He established a secret trading company working with Benjamin Franklin. Beaumarchais had the king’s ear, the French king’s ear, and persuaded the French king to release 12,000 stand of arms of French Charleville muskets to be sent secretly. Smuggled through the British lines, the British naval blockade, etc., to get through to arm the Continentals. And such a shipment did make it to the shores of Portsmouth, New Hampshire, in 1777. And those 12,000 arms, it was a godsend, too, because that was very much needed. To the degree that our private gunsmiths could make guns, it still wasn’t even sufficient.

Evan Nappen 11:11

And these arms, upon arriving, ended up causing a little bit of a kerfuffle between the federal authority, shall we say, and the state authorities. Once New Hampshire had the guns in their possession, they didn’t want to give them up, but Washington wanted and needed them for the Continental Army. So, an armed contingent was actually sent to New Hampshire to literally seize the guns and bring them to the Continentals. But everybody played nice, and it was worked out so that 2,016 of these muskets stayed in New Hampshire, and the other 10,000 went off to Springfield with the Continental to serve the Continental Army.

Evan Nappen 11:59

Now, those New Hampshire muskets that came in then were all marked by a local New Hampshire smith that serial numbered and marked the guns pursuant to the three battalions of New Hampshire and serialized them accordingly. I was able personally to go to the archive in New Hampshire and pull this information and held in my hand the original signed receipt and request for reimbursement to the Committee of Safety, signed by General Enoch Poor, to pay for the markings of 2,016 muskets. That document historically verifies how many of these were kept in New Hampshire, and I personally am extremely proud to own one of those original 2,016 New Hampshire marked Charlevilles that came in in 1777.

Evan Nappen 13:13

And those guns all went and fought with New Hampshire men at Saratoga, giving us the great victory at Saratoga, who was led by of all people Benedict Arnold. He was a great hero for Saratoga. If he had not become a traitor, there would be streets named after him. We’d be celebrating him, of course. Saratoga was critical because that victory was the impetus to France creating the Franco-American alliance and coming in on our side in the revolution. In 1781, this eventually led to De Grasse with the French fleet, bottling in Cornwallis for the surrender at Yorktown. None of that would have happened if Page – 4 – of 11

we hadn’t been successful at Saratoga. We would not have been successful at Saratoga without the French muskets and all those guns supplemented by private gunsmiths, as recognized.

Teddy Nappen 14:34

If I recall, we were so desperate for arms that wasn’t Benjamin Franklin considering issuing basically bows and arrows just because there was still lack of arms.

Evan Nappen 14:45

Yeah, we were gonna have to arm the Continentals. Washington ordered that the countryside be scoured for basically anything that would shoot. Any of the guns that were seized at the time, and these muskets, too, were all surcharged with U.S. on the metal. They were stamped, carved in with U.S., with U.S. surcharge to establish that these were United States’ guns being used to fight in the Revolution. In this article in AmmoLand, which is a great article, really going into this, Duncan Johnson points out that the firearm historian Logan Metesh did another piece for AmmoLand that was called “Fact Check: The Founding Fathers Did Know About Repeating Rifles”. (https://www.ammoland.com/2024/07/fact-check-the-founding-fathers-did-know-about-repeating-rifles/)

Evan Nappen 15:43

So, even as we’re battling so-called “assault firearm” law of repeaters, muskets were known, and there were firearms at that time that were repeaters. One of them particularly was Belton, the Belton gun, Belton’s improvements. Joseph Belton was able to modify firearms so that he claimed his design could discharge 16 to 20 shots, and the firearm was able of discharging eight successive shots within seconds. This is back then in 1777, and the Belton invention was actually endorsed by a number of prominent individuals, including General Horatio Gates and Major General Benedict Arnold, the hero at the time, and scientist David Rittenhouse. So, Belton was a known deal. We didn’t adopt his invention, but nonetheless, he was pursuing firearm technology. Even decades before the revolution was the Lawrence Zoni. The Lawrence Zoni was a repeating mechanism that demonstrated that flintlock firearms could fire multiple shots without individually reloading.

Teddy Nappen 17:12

Also, apply the Girandoni air rifle that was used by Lewis and Clark. It had a detachable mag and took 20 rounds.

Evan Nappen 17:22

Right! And air guns were used militarily by the Austrians, and Napoleon imposed a death penalty for anyone caught with such an air gun. Then in 1756, there’s a Boston gunsmith, John Cookston, who advertised a firearm capable of firing nine successive shots, with the shooter controlling the rate of fire. Another, of course, is the Ferguson rifle. The Ferguson was developed by a British officer, which, unlike the normal conventional muzzle loader, his design incorporated a screw-operated breech loader. This allowed the shooter to load the rifle from the rear of the barrel. At the Museum of the American Revolution, they explain how the Ferguson could achieve approximately six shots per minute. So, essentially mirroring what is semi-automatic fire of today’s guns. Page – 5 – of 11

Evan Nappen 18:30

You can even see that this was created by private inventors, private gunsmiths. Not done by gun companies, per se, and that historical background is there. There’s a really great paper in 2023 called “The American Tradition of Self-Made Arms”. And that’s where attorney and historian Joseph G.S. Greenlee documented this long-standing American practice of manufacturing firearms for personal use. He traces private fire manufacturing throughout colonial America, the Revolutionary War, and the westward expansion. His research establishes that Americans regularly manufactured, assembled, and repaired their own firearms throughout the nation’s history.

Evan Nappen 19:33

And this distinction is critical, of course, under Bruen-type analysis. This has been applied now in current challenges to so-called “ghost gun” laws, and it is very important. This needs to be generally understood and recognized by all. And it’s great to see that the War Department has stepped up to officially acknowledge, recognize, and in essence show their appreciation for the private manufacture of firearms. And by the way, Greenlee’s research was utilized in Montgomery versus Rosenbaum, where the FPC challenged Oregon’s restrictions on privately-made firearms. It also reached the Supreme Court in the Bondi versus Vandersock case regarding whether the Gun Control Act and to what degree it can permit firearm regulation of certain weapon parts kits. So, it’s already playing a major role. Now we have the Department of War doing great service to not only its efforts in war, but in efforts preserving and helping to preserve our Second Amendment rights by acknowledging the importance of private manufacture. It is very very heartening to see this.

Evan Nappen 21:22

Hey, I want to tell you about our good friends at WeShoot, which is an indoor range in Lakewood. It’s where Teddy and I both shoot. We love to WeShoot. It’s where we get our training. But I want to tell you about some exciting things there. The New Jersey concealed carry courses are there and ready for you to take advantage of. You can get your CCARE certificates, so that you can get your New Jersey carry permit easily by getting this requirement handled professionally and efficiently at the great WeShoot range and facility. This training is being offered throughout November and December. There are dates for November 1. That’s Sunday. Friday, November six, Wednesday, November 18, and Sunday, November 22. There are dates in December, too. December 13 and December 17. Go to weshootusa.com and reserve your spot now. You need to have this training to get your carry.

Evan Nappen 22:42

It took a lot of work on the part of the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs, and I helped in this effort of getting the original John Wick training requirements, which were incredibly difficult, reduced to CCARE. As long as you take this course and can shoot, you will be able to achieve your certification. It’s nothing to worry about. You’ll receive excellent training, and you’ll be able to demonstrate the skills necessary to get your carry permit. And just think, there’s over 100,000 carry permits now in New Jersey. Prior to the Bruen decision, there was less than 600. So, it shows you that New Jersey’s roadblock of abusing “justifiable need” had been effective. It finally got killed and met its death by the Bruen decision. Now we no longer have to be victims but can be defenders in New Jersey. And as more and more folks get their carry permit, as there becomes a greater population of it, the necessity to even have a permit will eventually go away. Page – 6 – of 11

Evan Nappen 24:00

I will tell you that, eventually, New Jersey will have constitutional carry. Either by politically changing enough to get it passed itself or by federal preemption of constitutional carry, where the body of permit holders is so large that it just becomes a federal preemptive law anyway. So, get your permit and become one of the numbers of folks that have a permit. Because just by having the permit, you help in the effort to free further our ability to carry a firearm for self-defense outside the home. And you can get this done at WeShoot. You can also do renewals for renewal classes for New Jersey if you need to get that. They’re also offering New Jersey carry certification for seniors. Where you are given a very special price of only $185. It’s set for seniors so they can feel comfortable. And remember, seniors need to be able to defend themselves with a firearm. You know, God didn’t make everybody equal, but Sam Colt did, as they say. Seniors should be able to protect themselves, men and women. Tuesday, November 24 is the N.J. Carry certification for seniors. They’re also offering New York City non-resident carry. That course is available as well, and it’s got a new low price of only $289. You’ll learn everything you need to do.

Evan Nappen 25:54

They’re also offering Maryland wear and carry and Washington D.C. as well. Teddy and I have taken these courses ourselves. We’ve gotten our certification. We’ve gotten it through through WeShoot, and we can absolutely endorse their fantastic training programs and their great instructors. We can personally tell you, you will be able to enjoy fantastic classes at WeShoot with Grant Gallagher, Tony Zolo, and Lance Humby. You’ll be able to take advantage of these. So, check out WeShootusa.com and book your classes. They have plenty of other great training, even advanced training. USCCA and Sig Saur Academy. They have CQP Defense Fundamentals. Just great stuff. And a fantastic pro shop and great service right there in Lakewood, conveniently off the Parkway in Lakewood, New Jersey. WeShoot. You’ll love it. Teddy and I do, and we know you will, too.

Evan Nappen 27:14

Also, want to shamelessly promote my book, New Jersey Gun Law, the Bible of New Jersey Gun Law. Very shortly, I’ll be releasing a new comprehensive update, and those of you who have signed up for free will be getting an email blast about that. And if you need to get a copy of the book, go to EvanNappen.com. You’ll see the big orange book there. Get your copy. Updates are free. We keep the book updated, and you’ll be able to get your updates for free. Just go there and pick up a copy today. You’ll be glad you did. It’ll help you from becoming a GOFU. Teddy, what do you have for us today in Press Checks?

Teddy Nappen 28:00

Well, as you know, Press Checks are always free. This is something that, if you’ve been seeing more and more from how like the gun control activists, the gun rights oppressors, pressures, they’re the ones who always try to find their new avenue. This has kind of hit the splash on just, you know, Blaze and MSN. A 31 year old gun control activist was arrested Tuesday after vandalizing the 911 memorial, where he. (https://www.theblaze.com/news/outrage-mounts-after-gun-control-activists-alleged-vandalism-of-911-memorial-the-mamdani-effect?tpcc=email-breaking) Page – 7 – of 11

Evan Nappen 28:30

Okay, wait a bit, wait a minute. A gun control activist has desecrated the 911 Memorial?

Teddy Nappen 28:42

Correct. And this is Johnathan.

Evan Nappen 28:44

Great!

Teddy Nappen 28:44

Tijerina. I don’t care. I’ve spray. He even admitted it. He had his Instagram open because it was all about to make a statement. My name is John Tijerina, and I’ve spray painted “Just Stop Killing Kids” on the 911 memorial. Foley admits it and does not care. He spray painted it over the names of the victims, too.

Evan Nappen 29:08

Oh, my G-d! These people are disgusting.

Teddy Nappen 29:13

Correct, and this is where my first question is. What is this group? “Just stop killing kids”. We know the usuals, Bloomberg, Giffords, Everytown, Moms Demand Action. Who’s this group?

Evan Nappen 29:30

Soros is behind it all.

Teddy Nappen 29:32

Open Society. Is that the money? I wanted to find out.

Evan Nappen 29:37

And the foundations.

Teddy Nappen 29:39

If we go right to their website, Just stop killing kids. Very little description. Doesn’t even name. There’s no name of a founder. Immediately pushes the false premise. Guns are the now leading cause of death of American children. That’s a false premise. Accidents are, specifically car accidents. That is immediately. Also, they skew the data to include 19-year-olds as children and include crime gang-related killings. But other than that. And other high-income countries don’t have this problem. What’s a high-income nation? Whatever they define it. We are one of the wealthiest nations in the world. The UK is behind in terms of like our lowest state, I believe it’s Alabama in terms of GDP. They are. It’s called a second-world country. So, they try to play that game as well. Again, just just dropping false statement, false premises on that. So their demands. What are their two demands as they try to say? Neither requiring repeal the Second Amendment. They’re trying to. Page – 8 – of 11

Evan Nappen 30:41

At the moment. At the moment.

Teddy Nappen 30:44

Both have major public support. Okay, yeah.

Evan Nappen 30:48

Bullshit.

Teddy Nappen 30:48

That’s not true. Both already exist in every other high-income country. What nations have the equivalent of our Second Amendment? Please name me that. Like that’s a lie. Continue. What they push for are universal background checks. Oh, and national UBC.

Evan Nappen 31:08

UBC, which is registration in and of itself, and then they want national registration. So, the idea is we have to first get a list of everybody that has a gun. Now, why do you think they want the list of everybody that has a gun? Why would, why would they want to have such a list? I wonder why.

Teddy Nappen 31:31

Well, if history teaches that in the UK from the 90s and also Germany, where they decided to say, “All right, we need you to register firearms. What came next? Always, it’s amazing.

Evan Nappen 31:44

Teddy, what are the words? Remember the four words?

Teddy Nappen 31:48

It’s legislation . . .

Evan Nappen 31:50

Registration, Confiscation, and then Extermination. And every major Holocaust has been preceded by seizing the guns.

Teddy Nappen 32:02

Yeah, but I wanted to go a little deeper into this group to understand. Okay, fine, they’re a bunch of retarded people just trying to cause mayhem, and they try to keep citing themselves as the non-civil resistance movement. Succeeded at twice the rate.

Evan Nappen 32:21

Non-civil resistance? They are civil resistance.

Teddy Nappen 32:23

Non-violent. Page – 9 – of 11

Evan Nappen 32:24

Oh, non-violent.

Teddy Nappen 32:26

Non-violent civil resistance. Oh, but they try to paint themselves as the non-violent group. They always try to do that. The Left.

Evan Nappen 32:35

Wait, I thought the Left says even speech is violence. I would think desecrating the 911 Memorial is violence. It’s violence.

Teddy Nappen 32:44

Well, here’s the deal, Dad. Because it’s a memorial for the United States, it’s therefore considered racist and therefore bad. You just got to go back to Marxism. It’s oppressor and oppressee, regardless of position and stance. They see us as the oppressor. They see the Second Amendment as oppression, therefore racist, therefore evil. That’s just the logic you have to follow on that end. But they, the one thing they cited to, they cite to “just stop oil”. Do you remember that whole crazy movement in Europe, particularly in the UK, where it was retards gluing themselves to the highway and desecrating paintings? They cite directly towards that group as naming that as a positive influence of civil resistance of non-violent civil resistance. That is their highlighted, and they highlight directly to the head of it, Roger Halem. Yeah, this is the guy who did “just stop oil”. You know, the guy who was arrested and put in prison for five years because of blocking the M 25 motorway. You know, blocking a highway. That’s never a good way. As you saw those trucks plowing into people, it’s ridiculous.

Evan Nappen 34:02

Listen, oil is fundamental to plastics, to energy, to transportation. It’s fundamental to our standard of living. And “just stop oil”? That’s cute. Oh yeah, and this gun, civil rights, so-called resistance, civil resistance, this type of thing. This is just the beginning because as our Second Amendment is winning and we’re gaining freedom like never before, the Left’s response is this kind of garbage. And you know how they escalate. We’ve watched how they escalate. You know what begins as spray painting monuments is next pulling monuments down, and then burning things, and then violence, violence, violence. These people are right out of the playbook for Marxist revolution. That’s what it all comes down to.

Teddy Nappen 35:17

Yeah, and also the fact. Just remember, they try to paint this as grassroots, and they’re accepting donations. I clicked on their Instagram; they have 19 followers. So, yeah, this is about as astroturfed as it gets. I don’t know what they are. They don’t even. You can already mean. Here’s the red flags: no naming of a founder, doesn’t disclose who their funding is, and to give you a perspective, just stop oil. Don’t worry though. They got their funding from the Climate Emergency Fund from groups. However, they did accept large portions of donations from cryptocurrency. Huh? Wonder who was that? So.

Evan Nappen 35:58

How dare you? How dare you! Remember Greta? Page – 10 – of 11

Teddy Nappen 36:02

Yeah, yeah. No, how dare you? Yeah, and by the way, I love how all the climate activists, like Bill Gates and all the others, are like, oh wait, we need this energy for AI and data centers. So, you know what? Yeah, maybe we shouldn’t do the Green New Deal.

Evan Nappen 36:18

Yeah, suddenly that was now not a huge problem anymore because AI needs lots of power, and we ain’t going to get the power it needs.

Teddy Nappen 36:28

It’s right there with the fat pride movement. The Left was pushing all of a sudden, Mounjaro, Ozempic, and all the others got into play. Like, oh wait, no, fat pride is actually bad, and we don’t want to be associated with these crazies.

Evan Nappen 36:44

Oh, G-d. It’ so bad. Well, Teddy, I want to tell you about the most important GOFU that all the listeners need to know. This is a major, major, major GOFU. I mean, it’s hard for me to think of one more important, and this GOFU is real simple. It’s gun owners who do not vote. Failure to vote gun owners is the giant GOFU. If you want to see the difference, because elections have consequences, look what we have gained because of the voting in the election for President. We have wiped out the Biden oppression of the Second Amendment. We have ended, in so many words, 90 years of, 80% of the National Firearms Act. We have Supreme Court justices that understand the Second Amendment. They wouldn’t be there without good people voting in people that stand for and support our Second Amendment rights. And these midterms are critical. You need to get out and vote for the folks that stand for the Second Amendment, and it is essentially only the Republicans.

Evan Nappen 38:26

Because if the Republicans can maintain their power in both houses, they become a force of good for our rights. And if you want to see a direct example right now, while Republicans are in power, both houses, even though they couldn’t beat filibuster, look at the cloture vote. Look at how it got avoided by way of doing a reconciliation bill, and the Republicans passed the Big Beautiful Bill, and President Trump signed it. And what’s in the big beautiful bill? The removal of taxes on suppressors, SBRs, SBSs, AOWs. With the removal of the taxes, the jurisdiction of the National Firearm law collapsed. Now we have a new day in freedom for those items that have been regulated to the point of being a de facto ban. Suddenly back and open and available in all the free states, and of course, New Jersey has its own state laws still criminalizing these things. But federal law has been set back, and why? How did we get there? How did it happen? Because Republicans did it in the Big Beautiful Bill. If Republicans hadn’t enacted the Big Beautiful Bill with the repeal of those taxes, we would not have succeeded. That’s just one example.

Teddy Nappen 39:58

The thing to also remember. And this is what I always hear from the horseshoe ride and the others. He’s not doing enough. He’s not doing enough. Just start with the basics here. The Democrats will do Page – 11 – of 11

everything they can to destroy all the gains, net negative migration, bring back the Biden policies of going after with their jack book thugs the ATF versus what we’re getting right now with suppressors and all the in all the roads.

Teddy Nappen 40:23

We greatly improved ATF. It is actually dealer friendly, working to be a partner, working with great change. I mean, it’s a new dawn and a new day with ATF. And with DOJ bringing civil litigation for violation of Second Amendment rights, just like First Amendment, and why is that? Because of the election of President Trump and getting Republicans in the majority in both houses. This is why this is a giant GOFU if you do not vote.

Teddy Nappen 40:59

So, if I ever hear he’s not doing enough. He is not a king. He is doing everything he can. And do you know how I know this? Because I have to read The Trace every week for this.

Evan Nappen 41:11

You endure the punishment for us.

Teddy Nappen 41:13

I read and I hear them complain about President Trump of all the Second Amendment inroads he is making. So, our enemies are saying he’s doing such a great job for the Second Amendment. Like these, this is what they push because they hate him so much for what he’s done. They’re painting it like a bad thing.

Evan Nappen 41:33

And this is why, as President Trump is stomping throughout the country campaigning for Republican candidates, he said, “Make believe that I’m on the ballot.” Because in essence, it’s like he’s on the ballot. If the Democrats get power in either house, all they’re going to do is waste the next two years trying to impeach President Trump. Sucking all the air out of the room on that nonsense, instead of continuing on our path of greatness and of protecting the Second Amendment. Don’t be a GOFU. Get out and vote. Make sure you vote for those that stand up and support our Second Amendment rights.

Evan Nappen 42:17

This is Evan Nappen and Teddy Nappen reminding you that gun laws don’t protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens.

Speaker 2 42:30

Gun Lawyer is a CounterThink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York, New York. Reach us by emailing [email protected]. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state.

Known as “America’s Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it’s no wonder he’s become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets.

Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It’s Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News.

As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists.

He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America.

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)

Page – 1 – of 14

Gun Lawyer — Episode 313 Transcript

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

Second Amendment, Gun laws, Carry permit, New York, Bureaucracy, Sensitive places, Firearms, Privacy, AI technology, Civil rights, Background checks, Mass shootings, Red flags, Legal advice, Gun ownership

SPEAKERS

Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen, Speaker 3

Evan Nappen 00:18

I’m Evan Nappen.

Teddy Nappen 00:20

and I’m Teddy Nappen.

Evan Nappen 00:23

And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, as we go down the path of Second Amendment victories and as gun bans are falling and will continue to fall, I’m sure, outright bans, and as we see expansion of our rights federally dramatically, with elimination of 90% of NFA registration requirements, and what used to take literally nine months to a year waiting for paperwork, now in free states, you can obtain a silencer or a short-barrel rifle, short-barrel shotgun, or an AOW virtually with an instant check and a 4473. You’re able to, even for your own personal use in free states, make these things, believe it or not, without having to do the forms for your personal use there. It’s amazing what has happened, and the Second Amendment oppression lobby understands this, of course. They’re going to look for alternative methods of screwing with us.

Evan Nappen 01:46

And one of the key ways that they are going to push is by creating unbelievably excessive bureaucracy in permitting systems, and there is no better example than New York’s carry permit application and process. Now, let me tell you, New Jersey is bad. No question. Massachusetts is bad. There’s a number of states. You know, Maryland isn’t a walk in the park either. All right. I mean, there’s a number of states that are just pain in the ass, but nothing comes close to the absurdity that is New York City carry permit. I’m going to go through with you what is involved in getting a New York City carry. Then after you get it, you are restricted because all of Times Square is a is a sensitive place that you can’t carry there, like the heart of New York, where you’d most likely want to go. You can’t have it on a bus. You can’t have it on a subway. You can’t have it on a train. I mean, it’s crazy. It’s virtually useless in the city. It’s so unbelievably restricted, and of course they’re looking to abuse sensitive places to invalidate the validity of permits. his is what New York did. They tried appealing it and going up to the Supreme Court, which did not grant cert on the challenge on New York City’s sensitive places. Page – 2 – of 14

Evan Nappen 03:40

Now we have a nice victory in a number of sensitive place challenges in the Koons decision, and we’re waiting for the Third Circuit in New Jersey to render its en banc opinion, which I’m cautiously optimistic is going to be really great regarding sensitive places. And that may set the stage for that challenge. But nonetheless, the application process will absolutely be the focus to red tape our rights to death. Let me review with you what New York non-resident required documents and what they will require of you in not just answering an unbelievable amount of intrusive questions that really are arguably just completely irrelevant to anything doing with a gun.

Teddy Nappen 04:40

Just to be clear. This is for pretend. You’re an out-of-state individual trying to apply to the state, to the state of New York. This is what is required. What they just, they post it on their website. They make it very clear these are the hoops and pitfalls that they set up to try to get their in.

Evan Nappen 05:00

Right. So, number one, you have to have a valid state or federal photo ID. You’re going to need proof of your date of birth, which keep in mind that’s in addition to your valid state or federal photo ID, and your proof of birth can only be a birth certificate with a raised seal. Keep that in mind. A U.S. passport or a U.S. military card. Then you need to provide your Social Security card. This is a copy of your social security card, not just the number. Then you have to provide proof of citizenship. Now, keep in mind, every one of these documents you’re going to have to have ready to upload. Proof of citizenship. You can have a passport, a birth certificate, naturalization documents, or alien registration card.

Evan Nappen 06:03

If you resided in the U.S. for less than seven years, you must submit a certificate of good conduct or equivalent. Proof of residence in which you must provide either a lease agreement, electric or gas bill, cable or internet, or landline telephone. Keep that in mind. Landline telephone. Who even has them? Then you must provide a DMV, Division of Motor Vehicles, Lifetime Abstract. Every single Motor vehicle traffic ticket you’ve ever received in your life must be provided to New York. What does some speeding ticket from 30 years ago have to do with getting a gun permit? It doesn’t matter. You have to provide that Lifetime Abstract, which, by the way, is $15 from NJ Motor Vehicle. You’ll have to get that and get it sent to you and get it before you do this. All right.

Evan Nappen 07:16

You’re going to need an affidavit of cohabitant form, notarized, unless you live alone, then just sign it. One form per household member. One form if you live alone, and then it has to be notarized. hen you need a New York PD safeguard firearms form where you agree to safeguard your firearms, and a copy of their state ID or driver’s license. And this safeguard firearm form is an individual you have to identify who can take control of your gun if you’re not able to, and they have to provide this form. So, it’s not just dependent on you. You now have to involve all these other people in your application. Then four character reference letters. Each one must be notarized by the person writing the letter. The references must be lawful U.S. residents. No relatives. All this is going to have to be up uploaded now. Copies of all other firearm licenses and permits held from any of the 50 states. You’ll have to list all of the permits you currently hold with the effective dates and issue dates, and include a PDF or image uploaded of all Page – 3 – of 14

licenses. And if you have a New Jersey Firearm ID card, you need to make up an expiration date because there are many of them issued that don’t have an expiration date, as the system requires an expiration date.

Teddy Nappen 09:26

Well, when we were explaining, what you write, what you write is your date, and then the year 2099, effectively, like.

Evan Nappen 09:33

Right, because that’s the max, which is absurd.

Teddy Nappen 09:36

Yes.

Evan Nappen 09:36

Then you need proof of completion of New York’s 18-hour, get a load of that, 18-hour CCW training course. It must be administered by a duly authorized instructor pursuant to New York law. It includes 16 hours of classroom instruction and two hour of live fire, and it must be no less than six months old prior to the submission of your application. Then you have to do an affirmation of understanding of New York Penal Law Article 35 265 and Article 400. Then, military discharge papers, if it’s applicable. If you served with the U.S. Armed Forces, you must submit a separate DD 214 and your discharge papers.

Evan Nappen 10:40

Arrest information. You must submit all of the following for each arrest: criminal court summons, oath summons, or transit adjudication bureau summons. Certificate of Disposition from the court with a raised seal showing the offense and disposition of the charges, certificate of relief from disabilities if your conviction or guilty plea for a felony or serious offense, as defined in New York penal law, has been given relief from disabilities, a detailed written statement describing the circumstances surrounding each arrest or summons, not even just conviction, anything. You must do this even if the case was dismissed and the record sealed, or the case nullified by operation of law. How they can require expunged records is beyond me.

Evan Nappen 11:46

Domestic incident report statement: Submit a statement pertaining to each domestic incident in which you were involved, which was reported to the police. So it’s every report, not just that you got a restraining order and it got dismissed. No. Any report. You’re going to have to know that took place and be able to explain it. You must include a description of the incident, the date of the address, the names of people involved and their relationship to you, order of protection, if applicable. So, if you have a copy of the order protection, all named parties, you’re going to have to do a detailed written statement on that. Processing times: 18-hour CCW course. Keep in mind, it’s valid for six months. The application submitted via the portal, $340 for the privilege of doing this insanity, and you have to get fingerprinted, of course, on top of it. This is a 17-page application, folks. It’s nuts, absolutely. Page – 4 – of 14 Page – 5 – of 14

Teddy Nappen 13:08

There’s one that caught my eye, Dad. That’s probably the worst of it all. You have to take photos of your firearm, photos of the serial number, and photos of the lockbox, and outside receipt showing you own that lockbox, and showing that you own it. And if you bought it on Amazon, you have to type I own the gun box and I purchased it on Amazon and it is in my home.” You have to give photos of where you are putting the firearms. So, you know, anyone who watches Lockpick Lawyer, they’re gonna get your gun. Like that’s ridiculous.

Evan Nappen 13:51

And all this to get it, you can see, folks. This is what they’re going to do, and you can well see them trying to create an application of this magnitude to possess and get a license for a so-called assault firearm. You can see them doing this across the board, particularly in you know anti-gun, anti-Second Amendment oppression states. It’s just outrageously wrong, and we need to be vigilant about this. Because this will get sold to the public as just, oh, we just require a license. It’s reasonable. We just need a license, right? And it’s absolutely an evil rights-crushing process. What you have to supply to New York is essentially worse than becoming a law enforcement officer as to what you’d have to provide. It’s probably more than what’s needed to get Top Secret clearance. I mean, it’s insanity here with this, and yet, they get away with it. That licensing process is the current process. Then when you get it, you face sensitive place restrictions. It’s essentially how to prohibit and ban without officially calling it a ban. And that’s after Bruen.

Teddy Nappen 15:33

Now I want this, and I like your point to it. Imagine applying this to voting.

Evan Nappen 15:41

Imagine. Right! Imagine applying this, imagine applying it to immigration.

Teddy Nappen 15:49

Yeah, yeah.

Teddy Nappen 15:53

New York would vote red for the rest of its life, just for the utterance.

Evan Nappen 15:56

I’ll tell you what. How about how about you know.

Teddy Nappen 16:00

Fair trades?

Evan Nappen 16:01

That states that have legal abortion, you have to do this before you can get an abortion. Think that would be fine with those states? I mean, how about before you can make a post and do anything with freedom of speech? I mean, this is sick. Page – 6 – of 14

Teddy Nappen 16:19

How about apply this to same-sex marriage couples that try to adopt children. Oh, that would maybe avoid a lot of the issues that have been coming out recently with you know that recent couple that adopted the child and they’re running a pedophile ring. Like, they will do this for one thing, the Second Amendment. They will apply it. They’ll never apply this to any, and they’ll never apply the standard. But the damage that is done with voting, with everything else, they’re fine with. But the one thing, because it’s just so Marxist.

Evan Nappen 16:53

Oh, let’s talk about their argument against the Save Act. They claim that you know, hey, minorities can’t somehow produce an ID. Imagine if this process in New York was the requirement to vote? Imagine that. It would be outrageous. I wouldn’t ever want to see that as requirements for voting. I’m fine with an ID, of course. I’m fine with the proposals in the Save Act, but imagine trying to make this the requirement for voting. It’s absolutely unbelievable, and of course, it’s going to take more of Supreme Court work to go at this and be prepared. Our best bet is to vigorously oppose and fight it as we can when opposed legislatively.

Teddy Nappen 17:55

I will say at least they’ve gone so far because it’s so blatant. They just think they can get away with this. I’m glad they do that.

Evan Nappen 18:05

And so far, they are.

Teddy Nappen 18:05

Yeah, it’s very easy for us to show to the court this is unreasonable because of the amount of hoops and leggings you have to go through to obtain this, as opposed to many other states that are even less strict, but still up there.

Evan Nappen 18:21

The problem is not even New York’s federal circuit court is Second Amendment oppression. I mean, to uphold sensitive places in New York where an entire geographic section of a city, the entire geographic section of Times Square and etc., is a sensitive place. I mean, that is crazy that that could be. They could just take a swath of land and make it a gun-free, you know, zone.

Teddy Nappen 19:04

Yeah, and by the way, it that also covers public transport and transit. So, good luck getting on a subway, all forms of that. Parks, playground, entertainment gatherings, licensed alcohol and cannabis establishments, libraries, polling, shelters. So, if there’s a homeless guy with a tent out there, can’t carry around that spot. Like, it’s this is just they’re legislating. They’re trying to add every single. Okay, fine. You can have your carry. You just can’t use it. It’s right up there with whenever someone is in a self-defense shooting in these blue states, they will go after you tooth and nail and try to get you for murder. They’re like, fine, you can have your carry, but we’re gonna put you through the ringer and make sure we can put you in jail for the rest of your life. So, if you ever use that gun, it’s disgusting. Page – 7 – of 14

Evan Nappen 19:57

Absolutely, and the New York Times Square gun-free sensitive zone, is 34 to 36 city blocks. That’s how big it is. 34 to 36 city blocks in the heart of Midtown Manhattan. It stretches 13 blocks north to south. From West 40th up to West 53rd, and spans two to three long avenues east to west. From Sixth Avenue to Eighth or Ninth Avenue. It creates a perimeter covering approximately 150 to 160 acres of land in New York City. Outrageous! And at one point, it extended to the Diamond District. They took so much heat over that that they pulled it back. So, at least in the Diamond District, folks there could still have a firearm. You know, they’re only protecting diamonds. I mean, come on, right? But still, this is nuts. So, you go through this entire thing, still prohibited from that, still prohibited on other sensitive places, which

Teddy Nappen 21:35

which is

Evan Nappen 21:38

yeah,

Teddy Nappen 21:39

I’ll even go a step further. That okay, cool. The diamond walkers are good for that one street line, except can’t use any public transport, can’t use any form of vehicle. Like, it’s ridiculous. Well, here.

Evan Nappen 21:52

Not only you blocked geographically, you’re blocked from government buildings, administrative offices, and courthouses, education, and child care. So, all the schools, healthcare facilities, all hospitals, mental health facilities, and other licensed medical care, places of worship, churches, synagogues, mosques, other houses of worship, public transit infrastructure, subways, subway cars, busses, and related public transit facilities, public parks, playgrounds, zoos, and public libraries, entertainment and gathering venues, right? All that in Times Square, sporting arenas, gaming entertainment venues, substance and assemblies-you know, alcohol, cannabis-consuming places, polling places, shelters-all the, all this. So, their idea is make it unbelievably difficult to get, and then when you get it, virtually useless. And so, hey, we’re not banning the issuance of it. We’re just making it impossible to have any value in use, and this is where the courts are going to have to step in and go after them. We’re seeing even the DOJ taking on New Jersey. As we talked about, going after Pennsauken’s’ egregious procedures, and others are, I’m sure within their sights for misbehavior, and making examples is important. But this is what we have to be very much aware of in the future.

Teddy Nappen 23:35

The other thing is, and I always hear the Left talk about, you know, oh, you’re just trying to make a poll tax. Like whenever they do it, like try to state going on that front. What do you call this? Where let’s just say for the poor minorities that they are always so much about wanting to defend, how are they ever going to get a way to defend themselves? Page – 8 – of 14

Evan Nappen 23:55

I’ll tell you what. I’ll tell you what. Here’s the deal. Just with voting alone in New York, we won’t even require any of this insane application process. We’re just going to charge $340 to vote. That’s the only thing we’re going to do. How about that? Would they be okay with that? $340 to vote. Fair enough? You do it on guns, on the right to carry. I guess we could do it on voting, too, right? $340 bucks. Why not? Oh, oh. Who would that discourage from voting? I’m sorry. Who might that discourage? So, when you really look at it, just the fee alone makes this as elitist as can be. This is an elitist license. Even if you’re willing to go through all of the insanity to get it.

Teddy Nappen 24:51

Prior to Bruin, what was the amount you could pay for the super elites? It was like five grand to get the carry, and it would just be well.

Evan Nappen 25:00

That was the alleged bribe that it took back in the old days, but that was that was money that was worth more to you know in those days than even today. There was a whole big scandal over there about licensing and corruption, and you can check on that and how that all went down.

Evan Nappen 25:20

But I also want to mention another quasi-concern as we get more amazing in technology. In so many ways, it can be beneficial. In other ways, it becomes quite controversial. So, they have been able to train AI now to detect concealed handguns using Wi-Fi signals. (https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/researchers-train-ai-to-detect-concealed-handguns-using-wi-fi-signals-open-source-wifirenet-achieves-precision-detection-on-older-802-11a-standard-by-analyzing-how-weapons-distort-wireless-signals) This open-source WifireNet achieves precision detection on older 802.11A standard by analyzing how weapons distort wireless signals.

Evan Nappen 26:01

So, the Wi-Fi that’s everywhere can now be used as a tool to identify weapons being carried. Now, of course, if it’s legal, which it is, and you have permits in permit areas and constitutional carry in other areas, are they still going to use this type of thing to stop, question, target just individuals that are carrying? Or is it only going to be you know focused in terms of providing security to a building or something where firearms are not allowed? No, I mean this looks like it’s taking on the same dimension, if you will, as flock cameras are for privacy. And so, as we see the advance of AI and we see the advance of these technologies, flock, face recognition, Wi-Fi identification, you start to see our privacy and personal security being challenged and subjected to immense intrusion by way of these emerging technologies. So, this is another thing we’ve got to balance. And I’m sure these Second Amendment oppressionists are cooking up schemes to utilize this and create abilities to do automatic stop and frisk to make sure anyone who’s identified carrying can immediately prove that they’re lawfully carrying. You know where you have to immediately disclose, and the officer stops you, and you have to immediately tell them and show them. Now you’re being harassed just for carrying, and these are all kinds of games that we could imagine they’re going to play, and we’re going to need to get laws in place across the board protecting our privacy from these intrusions. Page – 9 – of 14

Teddy Nappen 28:01

I guess, in my view, and this would be a question to Dad regarding, because you we have when it comes out in the public, where you have the you know this will be private businesses, will it be people that are wanting to put up these you know gun-free zone? They’ll have the little camera tracking and determining that. Is there a way to stop that access because this would be up there with someone having just.

Evan Nappen 28:25

Well we’re gonna have to, we’re gonna have to get guns treated the same as other civil rights, where discrimination based on race also is the same for discrimination based on somebody lawfully carrying a gun. Until we get it established in that same regard, establishments will exercise their property rights to you know public establishments where they can say no guns as a private property whole possessor, in the same way they can say, “Hey, we don’t want any dogs in here, or we don’t want anyone with bare feet”, or whatever. They use that and say no guns. But if they put up a sign that said “No blacks allowed, that would be completely illegal, and it would be civil rights as well. It should be, and that would be no go. We need to get our Second Amendment rights in that same category of protection. Until that happens, we’re subject to these other restrictions from private parties like that.

Teddy Nappen 29:36

Here’s the other dangerous thing, just to give you an example. I remember it was the previous AG for New Jersey where they were ran a program that would basically give them the “no guns allowed” signs. They would just hand them out to businesses and you would. So, now take it a step further. I’m New Jersey. I tell my AG, hey, we’re going to run a program where, we’re gonna pay businesses to have this camera with this AI to track and monitor, looking for anyone who’s carrying.

Evan Nappen 30:08

It could happen.

Teddy Nappen 30:09

On that front, and it’s just a free stipend. We’ll pay you to have this thing.

Evan Nappen 30:15

I can see it happen.

Teddy Nappen 30:17

This is where, what comes next?

Evan Nappen 30:19

Or just Wi-Fi and a flock camera right outside the door. It’s a public street that they’re watching. And Wi-Fi, and AI does a detection, and all it takes is that to be regarded as probable cause to at least conduct a search and pat down and prove lawful possession. You can see this.

Teddy Nappen 30:43

Would have to be expanded? Page – 10 – of 14

Teddy Nappen 30:46

Could we take it? I guess it would be a Supreme Court on the Fourth Amendment, like search and seizure.

Evan Nappen 30:50

Well, the Fourth Amendment would come into play as well as the Second Amendment. Both would come into play, and how that gets sorted out. You know, these are the pathways, and if you think about it, the Second Amendment oppressors look for every angle. They abused consumer protection laws to try to sue, you know, Glock and Sig out of existence, and others. So, they abuse that. They abuse domestic violence in terms of completely relating it to gun seizures, gun searches, taking guns. Even though guns are not involved in the vast majority of DV incidents. It doesn’t matter. They got on board with that. So, every angle they can see to tie in. Healthcare. It’s a healthcare cost. Get doctors questioning about it. We get them. You know, they look for every angle, and the new technologies are going to give them their future gambits at harming our rights. They are essentially the enemy. They’re the enemy of our rights. They’re the enemy of the Second Amendment, and our enemies are very clever. They’re going to take advantage in every way they can. We have to be ready for it, and not be taken by ambush or surprise. And when we see these things being proposed, we fight them and jump on it. Be ready to litigate if necessary and fight legislatively. Very, very important.

Evan Nappen 32:36

Hey, let me tell you about our friends at WeShoot. This week at WeShoot, they have some really cool stuff. They have the Orthos Arms Joker, the Joker Other. It’s bold, aggressive, and anything but ordinary. This Joker isn’t playing around. Check out the Joker Other. They have the Ruger RXM, where Ruger has teamed up with Magpul to bring fresh innovation, modularity, and impressive value to this striker-fired pistol world, and the Bull Armory Cherokee, Israeli engineering, proven design and craftsmanship that helped build Bull Armory’s reputation. You can check out all these at We Shoot, which is an indoor range conveniently located in Lakewood, New Jersey. Simple to get to, right from the Parkway. It is a great resource for Central Jersey, to have a great place to shoot with a great pro shop and fantastic folks for training. Like we said, Teddy and I got our training. We got our New York State, Maryland, New Jersey, all certificates for carry all there. You can get yours as well, and so much more. They offer tremendous courses and training.

Evan Nappen 34:00

Also, you can check out Shannon Leo, who joins the Many Faces of 2A. They have great photography, professional photography at WeShoot. You can check them out online at WeShootUSA.com, and you can see Shannon there, always smiling, always positive, spreading good vibes wherever she goes. She is there to remind us that the 2A community is about much more than firearms. It’s about wonderful people, lasting friendships, and families, and that’s what helps make WeShoot special. It really does. And with Shannon around, even the targets can’t keep a straight face. And I will tell you, check out that WeShoot website. weshootusa.com You’ll be impressed. These Jokers are really cool. I’m liking what I’m seeing. There’s also an Ortho Arms Joker 12 gauge platform. Looks took kind of a tactical shotgun and gave it an AR-inspired makeover. They have the Joker Gray with an 11-inch barrel. The Joker Holt works Elite. It’s a custom finish, contrasting tones, and a Joker woodland camo elite. They’re classified Page – 11 – of 14

as others, rather than conventional shoulder stock shotguns. These are three jokers, three personalities, but one seriously unusual family, that’s for sure, of 12 gage firearms. So, check them out at WeShoot. Go to weshootusa.com. Make sure you visit. You’ll be glad you did. This is the range for Central Jersey, and it can be your range as well. Make sure you pay a visit.

Evan Nappen 35:50

Let me also shamelessly promote my book, New Jersey Gun Law. The Bible of New Jersey Gun Law. I was just talking with a fellow who gave me a call. He was thanking me for what he read in the book and how it saved him. he book saves a lot of people. That’s why I wrote it. It’ll help you from becoming a GOFU when you really need it. So, go to EvanNappen.com and get your copy of New Jersey Gun Law, the Bible of Jersey Gun Law. It’s over 500 pages, 120 topics, all question and answer. Scan the QR on the front cover and get your updates. We do the updates for free. Also, make sure you read it and never lend it because if you do, you won’t get it back. I hear that all the time.

Evan Nappen 36:51

Hey, Teddy, what do you have for us in Press Checks?

Teddy Nappen 36:58

Well, as you know, Press Checks are always free. I always love how much the Left have to justify themselves, even when reality sets in. I remember hearing this term: it’s affirming the delusion. The idea of like no, it’s that meme of the of the guy from Simpsons, the principal who’s like, “Have I lost touch?” And then he thinks about, “No, no, it’s the children, not me.” And it always comes back to that whenever, for like whenever it’s shown to be like. No, no, actually, gun control doesn’t actually stop mass shootings, and all these things that we do actually don’t stop crime. Cut to The Trace. Everyone’s favorite local propagandist talking about why mass shootings happen in states with the strictest gun laws. (https://www.thetrace.org/2026/10/strict-gun-laws-prevent-gun-violence/) Dad, I was wondering about this question for so long. Why does that happen? All these things that they have. These wonderful things. These Red Flags.

Evan Nappen 38:07

How come all these great gun laws and all this, and yet, for some reason, they don’t stop killers. They don’t stop people bent on committing violent assaults, murder, and rape. So why? Why? Why? Why are the? Why don’t the gun laws work? Well, I’m sure the reason is pro-gun states, right? Pro-Second Amendment states, right? They’re to blame.

Teddy Nappen 38:31

It’s one of those, but I love how. So, it starts off with the shooting that happened in Oregon, where one of the strictest gun control states. They get like an A plus rating from their whole anti-gun groups. They have the toughest, strictest gun laws out there, and of course the shooting took place. It was a 16-year old who open fired on an elementary school. Killed three children, critically wounded two others. I love how the article completely ignores the fact that a good guy with a gun, who violated the gun-free zone, went out with his 40 and took him out. They don’t even mention that. It says 40. They don’t. I looked on line. So, everyone buy their 40s. But the point being, I love the propaganda. They’re telling on themselves right there by avoiding the one critical bit. Oh, wait. A good guy with a gun, with a carry, Page – 12 – of 14

who went on to a gun free zone. Oh, man. I really hope they prosecute him for violating that gun free zone and stopping a mass shooter.

Evan Nappen 39:37

Unbelievable. Their argument, though, about the free states causing the problem for the unfree communist states is absurd. Because if that’s the case, how come the free states aren’t the ones with the problems? Because there’s so many guns wouldn’t there’ll be way more gun problems? But that’s not how it plays out, is it?

Teddy Nappen 40:05

This has already been disproven by the fact that the guns that they use ones on that end that they say the iron pipeline. That was the whole push that they tried to make where even.

Evan Nappen 40:15

Always make up some type of catchphrase.

Teddy Nappen 40:18

Crowder even disproved that when they were trying to go to like saying like you could go to Arizona and buy the gun. He would go to shops and then say, oh, can I? I need to buy this gun now. Well, no, you can’t do that. And it goes the whole thing. So, the argument of just going to some shop in another state is ridiculous. You have to get it transferred. All that.

Evan Nappen 40:41

You have to pass the NICS check, too.

Teddy Nappen 40:43

Yeah, all these things they ignore.

Evan Nappen 40:46

And you have to be a resident for a handgun.

Teddy Nappen 40:49

Yeah, but continuing on.

Evan Nappen 40:53

And they have to follow. And even if without, if they finally get rid of the residency requirement, the dealer would still have to obey the law of both the home state and the resident state. So, all the brouhaha about NFA and you know the pearl clutching going on by the anti-Second Amendment crowd, the truth of it is, all that’s being eliminated is excess bureaucracy. I mean, really, when you boil it down. Because you’re still getting a NICS check, and it’s still being done on a 4473. So, what is the big deal? Why have NFA essentially became obsolete with the NICS check and the ’68 Gun Control Act creating the 4473 system on firearms. So, what is even the point of NFA? Other than to be a roadblocking hassle to make it more difficult? And that’s why that should not apply to something that is our right. Page – 13 – of 14

Teddy Nappen 42:01

Yeah, and the thing that always. love how they write this article. It’s like many gun rights advocates meanwhile argue that states strong gun laws, including universal background check, red flag law, ghost gun bans, didn’t prevent the shooting. Do gun rights advocates have a point? First thing, while research has shown the states with loosest gun laws and the highest and the highest rates of gun ownership have the highest rates of gun death, pause right there. All these states that they always cut to the red states. Where’s the mass shooting and all the big shootings happening from? Oh, it’s the blue and on cities that are Democrat strongholds that run with the wait with the open door policy of letting criminals out on the street and with yeah the no cash bail. This they always love to throw that line in of like loose gun laws of these, and then you highlight to like, oh, where did all the shootings happen? Oh, these blue controlled areas, amazing.

Teddy Nappen 43:05

But continue, as however, and this is where they tell themselves: eight of the deadly mass shootings have included California, Oregon, Washington, according to the gun violence archives. States routinely earning top scores. How could this be? And then I love how this they tell on themselves immediately with public mass shootings represent less than 1% of gun violence in this country, said New Jersey’s Gun Violence Research Center. Oh, so gun mass shootings aren’t that big of a deal, and it’s not that.

Evan Nappen 43:36

Less than one percent.

Teddy Nappen 43:37

Mass problem that the.

Evan Nappen 43:39

Yeah, and that’s with them expanding their definition of what is a mass shooting. Remember their definition is not hundreds and hundreds of people. What is it? Two, three, or more?

Teddy Nappen 43:50

Three, three. I believe it’s three people.

Evan Nappen 43:52

Three people. Which look, by the way, is a concern. But calling three people a mass shooting? You know, it envisions crowds of people being mowed down, you know.

Teddy Nappen 44:03

Yeah and separate out the gang-related crimes which they incorporate in. When it comes to the deadly killing of children.

Evan Nappen 44:12

And suicide. Page – 14 – of 14

Teddy Nappen 44:14

More people die by the Canadian maid program than the.

Evan Nappen 44:19

You know, you’re not kidding. They just said over 100,000 euthanasia killings by Canada. Over 100,000 people put to death by their Government in allowing them, what they’re calling assisted suicide. But in fact, it just is essentially saving medical costs where the people are virtually convinced to take their life.

Teddy Nappen 44:49

Well, take it a step further. It’s how we clear the residents and the natural born people, and we import the third world into the country. We get them to vote our way, and that’s the game.

Evan Nappen 45:01

Yeah, we don’t want older people that remember how it used to be. How it used to be free. How it used to be really good. You don’t want that. We’ve got to stomp that out, and if we can convince them to kill themselves, all the better. I mean it’s about as evil as it gets.

Teddy Nappen 45:16

Yeah. Well, I mean, it goes back to the Soviet style.

Evan Nappen 45:20

You know, we’re talking about. No, it’s the Soviet style exactly. But I want to say, with all the technology and things going on with these advances, that is really what this week’s GOFU is. Because the GOFU is the Gun Owner Fuck Up, and you don’t want to be a GOFU. So, you can learn expensive lessons of others for free. And here’s where I want to make it clear. Do NOT post online what you have acquired. Avoid doing that. Because all that gets data-based, memory hold. It becomes something that can be brought up later by all kinds of individuals. They want to make allegations, make false claims. Avoid posting your newest prized guns. Avoid doing that because this can be used against you in a multitude of ways legally. We see it invoked in terms of Red Flags. They’ll say, “oh, look, he posted a picture of this gun, and Red Flag. He posted a picture of the gun, and then they’ll say, “he pointed that gun, and they describe it from the picture. Then they claim that they saw you with it, and they can describe it because it’s posted. Or it leads to registration of confiscation and different Government activities. So, please, folks, keep your purchases as private as you can. Never show serial numbers. Never let that go into the internet. There’s crawlers that grab all that info and secure it and store it.

Evan Nappen 47:08

This is Evan Nappen and Teddy Nappen reminding you that gun laws don’t protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens.

Speaker 3 47:17

Gun Lawyer is a CounterThink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York, New York. Reach us by emailing [email protected]. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state.

Known as “America’s Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it’s no wonder he’s become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets.

Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It’s Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News.

As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists.

He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America.

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)

Page – 1 – of 12

Gun Lawyer — Episode 312 Transcript

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

DOJ investigation, firearm permits, civil rights, Second Amendment, New Jersey, dual residency, Florida law, NFA items, corporate politics, consumer backlash, Ruger production, revolver market, debanking, gun ownership, legal advice

SPEAKERS

Speaker 2, Teddy Nappen, Evan Nappen

Evan Nappen 00:18

I’m Evan Nappen.

Teddy Nappen 00:20

And I’m Teddy Nappen.

Evan Nappen 00:22

And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has opened an investigation into Pennsauken, New Jersey, for egregious firearm permit delays. That’s right. By the way, I’m gleaning this great information from our friends at AmmoLand from an article by Duncan Johnson, who’s the Editor in Chief. Excellent article entitled “DOJ Opens Investigation Into Pennsauken, NJ for Egregious Firearm Permit Delays”. (https://www.ammoland.com/2026/10/doj-probes-pennsauken-nj-gun-permit-delays/?utm_source=Ammoland+Subscribers&utm_campaign=ce3dc59f49-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6f6fac3eaa-ce3dc59f49-21268623)

Evan Nappen 01:03

And let me tell you, this is a new day and a new dawn for the nonsense that we’ve been putting up with in New Jersey for decades. It so happens that on October 14th, the Department of Justice opened a Civil Rights investigation into Pennsauken, New Jersey, PD regarding the deprivation of citizens’ rights through egregious and unjust delays in issuing firearm licenses. This investigation here is focusing on Pennsauken Township Police’s permitting system and seeing about the shenanigans that have been taken on there. The Assistant Attorney General (Harmeet K.) Dhillon of the Justice Department Civil Rights Division issued a press release. (https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-opens-investigation-pennsauken-new-jerseys-allegedly-unconstitutional) Because remember now, folks, under President Trump, the United States Department of Justice, which you know for decades has had a Civil Rights Division to investigate civil rights violations, such as freedom of speech, freedom of religion. Well, now they have a full section dedicated to the Second Amendment because the Second Amendment is not a second class right.

Evan Nappen 02:38 Page – 2 – of 12

And what the AAG said is, “I have directed the Civil Rights Division, through our Second Amendment Section, to defend law-abiding citizens from local authorities who infringe on the right to safely carry legal firearms. Our investigation aims to discover if allegations of unconstitutional delays in firearm permitting are true, and if so, to fix it.” So, the DOJ is really stepping up here. And let’s be clear: Pennsauken is an example that is going to be made. That is exactly what is happening here. They are looking at ending permitting processes toward ending abusive ends when lengthy wait times in processing license applications or exorbitant fees deny ordinary citizens their right to public carry.

Evan Nappen 03:42

The DOJ release stated that Pennsauken, through the Pennsauken Police Department, is alleged to use just such abusive ends” to improperly limit Second Amendment rights. The days of being able to do whatever you want in New Jersey to trample over our Second Amendment rights is no longer okay, folks. This is important. No longer. The Civil Rights Division enforces the Second Amendment. The Civil Rights Division has taken on this issue with this New Jersey town, and it is not limited in any way to them only being forced to pick one town. If you live in a town, if you are subjected to an abuse of your rights through the permitting process, in which there is exorbitant delays, in which there is additional requirements that go beyond the law, if the fees are exorbitant, if there is any shenanigans that New Jersey has in the past routinely given us multiple examples via town after town, there now is a solution.

Evan Nappen 05:34

And let me tell you something. This investigation and this effort by the DOJ are extremely significant. It shows you what President Trump, and his administration are willing to do. But here’s something that is directly a tool at hand that you have as an individual. You can go to the Department of Justice website, and they have one whole page dedicated. (https://www.justice.gov/crt/second-amendment-section) We’ll put the link on the website for Gun Lawyer for the show. We’ll even give you the link here, but you can just Google it.

Evan Nappen 06:15

The heading of the website is Contact the Department of Justice to report a civil rights violation. (https://civilrights.justice.gov/report/?utm_campaign=0557c203-eeef-45b8-9f87-213a4523741a) What it says: If you believe you or someone else has experienced a civil rights violation, tell us what happened. And there, right on the web, is a contact form. You give your name, your address, and your information for contact, and then it says it asks, “Have you ever been an active duty service member?” Then as you go through the form, you’ll see that it clicks you through a very simple process, and then it asks, “What’s your primary reason for contacting the civil rights division?” And then it lists choices, and the choices are workplace discrimination, housing discrimination, discrimination at school, mistreatment by police, correctional staff, or inmates, which talks about being denied rights while incarcerated.

Evan Nappen 07:35

So, if you’re subject to the Gun Owner Gulag or are being unjustly abused in the enforcement of gun rights, you can go there. If you’re discriminated against in commercial location or public housing, or something else has happened, you can click these. You can file and pick what fits your matter, and then worst case, something else happened. You can just list where it happened, what it is, and you can see that it’s very simple. It asks location, personal characteristics, date, description. Then boom, it goes Page – 3 – of 12

off to the DOJ. You can trigger investigations, and you could get the DOJ to look at your situation. The fact that this is out there and is so simple to use that anyone can file this. I want you to do this if you have been subject to a problem. If your Second Amendment rights have been abused by any agency with exorbitant delays or other issues that are utterly unfair and you believe is a violation of your civil rights, report them to the DOJ. Report them. We now have this ability and enforcement mechanism that is superior to the State of New Jersey, superior to any police department, and the old boy network of the county covering up for the town and the state covering up for the county and the entire New Jersey anti-second amendment agenda. There now is a legal force that is above all that that you can invoke. Take advantage of this.

Teddy Nappen 09:52

There’s a little bit of a beautiful irony because the Left have done their damnedest to find different ways of going after gun owners. Where oh, try to get them reported, try to get extremist protection orders, doing everything they can. To the point where you had, who was it, Tim Walz, who was creating that whole whisper network of informing on your neighbors. I love the beautiful irony of where we can call on the federal government to go after the anti-gunners and go after these groups that are trying to destroy and take away people’s rights and deny people their right.

Evan Nappen 10:28

Absolutely, this is an amazing opportunity. Never before, never before in American history has this been available to us as gun owners, as those that want to see our Second Amendment rights enforced and protected. This now exists, and it exists because of President Trump’s administration making it exist. There is a Second Amendment Division of the DOJ, and it’s not just something that you can file and goes into oblivion. They are taking action, as demonstrated for a fact by their public announcement of the investigation of Pennsauken over this nonsense.

Evan Nappen 11:24

So, if you or anyone you know has suffered in any of these ways, let the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division know about it. Let them know about it. You can go easily on the website to get that done. Doesn’t take long. You don’t need an attorney. You don’t need to pay anything. You don’t need to go crazy finding where, who, what, or even wondering if anyone will pay attention to you. This is now there as a function on the DOJ website via the internet that all of us have access to bring to the attention of the Department of Justice the abuse of our Second Amendment rights by these agencies, and these agencies need to know that this is out there.

Evan Nappen 12:26

f you’re from an agency and you hear this, you better know that you can be reported and will be reported to the Department of Justice. So, if you want to be their next news release, just keep doing what you’re doing, because that’s what’s going to happen. And then you can be subject to the penalties that exist within the enforcement mechanism of our civil rights, that for years have been utilized on those other important issues in civil rights. The Second Amendment section is finally there to give us those protections. This is a great thing and a great day. President Trump and his administration deserve a lot of credit for so many things involving the Second Amendment. I mean, the list is enormous, but this is amazing. This is amazing. This never existed before, and now we have something Page – 4 – of 12

that can actually take on New Jersey’s oppression of Second Amendment rights. So, don’t hesitate to use it, folks. Don’t hesitate to alert the DOJ about what’s going on in New Jersey? I know I’m not.

Evan Nappen 13:44

Hey, I also want to bring up some interesting news bits that I think you’ll appreciate that you may not have been aware of because you know Teddy and I spend a lot of time. Teddy does all the oppo research. He has an iron stomach because he can read The Trace and he can read the god awful BS that the Second Amendment oppressionists put out there. So, we all appreciate that Teddy suffers through that and gives us the press checks and finds other fascinating things in the news. But I have some stuff that’s encouraging out there, and some things that you need to know.

Evan Nappen 14:34

One of the things that I thought was very interesting, and this is also, by the way, from AmmoLand and another great article from Duncan Johnson. This is about “Corporate Gun Control Gets a Reality Check in new Gallup Poll”. (https://www.ammoland.com/2026/10/corporate-gun-control-gallup-poll/?utm_source=Ammoland+Subscribers&utm_campaign=2fad32571a-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6f6fac3eaa-2fad32571a-21268623)

Evan Nappen 14:53

And yeah, polls are interesting. You know polls are showing different things. Here they’re showing how in this recent 2026 Bentley Gallup business poll showed that 47% of adults support it, support businesses taking public positions on current events. And that’s down four points from 2025. But 53% oppose it, and I think it’s even more significant that 53% oppose when corporations start going political. And here’s a big shocker. The support splits sharply by party. 62% of the Destroy America party-oh, I’m sorry, the Democrats, favor corporate statements, compared with 45% of independents, and only 28% of Republicans want to see corporations going political. And you know a lot of this flows to DEI insanity and climate change and all their favorite little issues.

Evan Nappen 15:53

But when it comes to gun control, one of the key things pointed out, and this was pointed out by NSSF, National Shooting Sports Foundation, and in this article, and it’s a great example, and that is Dick’s Sporting Goods. You know, Dick’s Sporting Goods is an example of commercial consequences when you pull this, especially on Second Amendment. So, after Parkland, Dick’s took it upon themselves. Dicks, you know, became a dick and stopped selling modern sporting rifles. You know, ARs. The most popular rifle in America. They stopped selling those, and on its own volition, raised the firearm purchase age to 21, even though you can buy a long arm at 18.

Evan Nappen 16:42

They also hired a Washington lobbyist to advocate for additional gun restrictions. NSSF board unanimously expelled the retailer from their board, and what happened was, and here’s the takeaway, man. NSSF cited that approximately $300 million in lost sales occurred following customers’ departures. The backlash showed that customers could reject its agenda with their wallets by shopping elsewhere. I want to tell you that ever since then, me personally, I’ve never stepped foot in another Dick’s after that. I refuse. I will never. Page – 5 – of 12

Teddy Nappen 17:35

Evan Nappen doesn’t like Dicks.

Evan Nappen 17:38

Thank you, except one very special one. Anyway, the fact is mine. That is no. The thing is that this is critical. This is critical that you live the two-way lifestyle, that you spend your money and don’t spend your money on corporations that take up politics. Vote with your wallet, and it can be very effective and send an important message. I think the more that that occurs, the less we’ll see these companies jumping in to being political themselves and with their sponsors. You know, we’ve seen products just get destroyed. You know, Dylan Mulvaney is a great example. How Bud Light just shot itself in the foot, right? And this is what can happen. So, the lessons these corporations need to learn by costing them money, and it is important when it comes to defending our Second Amendment rights that simple thing. If you don’t know a company’s stance, if you want to know a company stance before you do business, just ask. Ask AI. Just go on the internet. You can learn in two minutes what is the position of such and such a company on firearms, and if such a position is out there, it’ll tell you. And if there isn’t, fine. And if there is and it’s against our rights, don’t shop there. It’s similar to any place that has a sign on it that says no guns when guns could otherwise be allowed. If there’s a sign that says “no firearms permitted”, when they perfectly well could have firearms permitted, they don’t get my business either, and that’s the way we have to live. It’s a way we have to keep using our wallets to help defend the Second Amendment.

Evan Nappen 19:43

I have another little news bit here that I think is really great, and it has to do with Florida. You know, a lot of people in New Jersey also have places in Florida. Under federal law, during the time that you reside in a certain state, you can have dual residency. You can be both a resident, for firearm law purposes, of both Florida and New Jersey. So, if you own a house in Florida and a house in New Jersey during the time that you actually reside, let’s say you reside in Florida during the winter months, you know you snowbird it. Then during that time, under federal law, you’re deemed a resident of Florida, and New Jersey’s laws no longer apply to you. It’s Florida state law and federal law. That’s what applies to you. So, you can purchase firearms in Florida as a Florida resident. You can enjoy your gun rights in the same manner as a Florida resident because you are a Florida resident. You have dual residency under federal law, which explicitly recognizes this scenario that I just told you.

Evan Nappen 20:48

Florida just announced that you do not need ATF approval for silencers, short barrel shotguns, short barrel rifles, etc. (https://thereload.com/florida-announces-residents-dont-need-atf-approval-for-silencers-short-barrel-shotguns/) Because recently, again, under the Trump administration, great job with the Big Beautiful Lawsuit that killed NFA taxes, and then its implication of the NFA itself on the items that had the tax removed to zero. ATF, as we had discussed previously, it came out and said that this now applies for everybody. You no longer have to do the forms, the NFA forms. If you want to acquire a silencer, and that’s literally what it’s defined as, and the name given silencer, even though we would today call it a suppressor, but under NFA it’s called a silencer. For a short-barrel rifle, short-barrel Page – 6 – of 12

shotgun, or any other weapon, you do not have to do NFA paperwork. Simply 4473s are done, and it’s treated the same as any other firearm.

Evan Nappen 21:49

Well, Florida has now taken the very same approach on its state laws. They have interpreted its provisions that in which you used to need NFA paperwork that that is not needed anymore because Florida’s law “Section 790.221” does not prohibit a firearm that is lawfully owned and possessed under federal law. So that ambiguity right there is clear that now, since you don’t need NFA paperwork and you don’t need NFA registration, you don’t need any of that. That you’re legal under federal law. You can operate in Florida in the same manner, and if you have dual residency, then you’re able to acquire these items in Florida.

Evan Nappen 22:41

Now, be warned: do NOT bring them back to New Jersey! New Jersey has state law that prohibits silencers and prohibits short-barrel rifles and prohibits short-barrel shotguns. So, if you lawfully acquire, as a resident in Florida, those items, you do NOT transport them back to New Jersey. You’re going to have to leave them in Florida for when you live in the free state of Florida during that time, the time periods that you reside there. Now, when it comes to firearms that are just handguns, rifles, and shotguns, etc., you can purchase those guns in Florida again as a Florida resident under dual residency under the federal firearm law that is recognized. Those firearms that you acquire there, because remember you don’t need a handgun permit in Florida to get your handgun, you don’t need a Firearm ID card to get your long arm, you can buy those. And if those guns are not prohibited firearms in New Jersey, if what you’re buying in Florida would not otherwise be banned in New Jersey, then you’re able to bring those guns back to New Jersey, and keep them in your home in New Jersey. There’s no registration required or anything like that. You’re able to make your purchases in Florida permit free, just following federal law and Florida’s laws. So, understanding dual residency is a good thing, especially for those who snowbird. And Florida has just sealed the deal concerning even those formerly NFA items. So, cool stuff to know.

Evan Nappen 24:18

Hey, let me tell you about our good friends at WeShoot. Teddy and I were just at WeShoot, and we took the fantastic course there, getting our New York carry permit course and getting our Maryland carry course. And, of course, in the past, we’ve taken other permit courses, including New Jersey. We had a great instructor there. Anthony Zallo did a great job, and it is fantastic that WeShoot offers this training. And now I’ll be able to get the remaining carry permits that Teddy and I, that we need. We’ll be able to travel the entire coast, east coast of America, from Maine to Florida, and never have to unload. We can carry the entire way! And I’m sure, folks, as soon as we get the actual permits to us from New York and Maryland, I’m confident that as soon as that happens, they’ll pass national reciprocity. Just kidding about that. But you know, as those that live the 2A lifestyle and want to have coverage from as many states as we can, WeShoot offers great courses just like we just took, and you can do the same.

Evan Nappen 25:51

And WeShoot has some cool products that they’re offering. Let me give you some of the latest toys that are there for you. This includes the Sig Sauer MPX K AOW. Now, what’s nice about particular AOW is Page – 7 – of 12

that it is a New Jersey legal, and even though it’s AOW NFA no longer would require said forms, but you can still do the forms if you wanted to. Believe it or not, and WeShoot will be able to help you with that. But you could pick up one of these at WeShoot. It’s pretty cool. It’s black & coyote, and it is very hot. If you want to see how these look, the very guns that WeShoot has for sale, you can go to their website at weshootusa.com. You can see these really cool Sigs. They are sweet.

Evan Nappen 26:54

They’re also offering the entire Sig Sauer P365 Fuse. The P365 fuse family, stretching its legs and it’s pretty cool looking handguns there that Sig has put out in the fuse. I really like the look, very sweet. I think you will, too. They are you know, full size, if you will, as opposed to the classic, in the compact style of the 365, and they have a lot of neat features. So, check that out. They also have the Daniel Defense DDM4 PDW AOW, and you can check out that Daniel Defense, which of course beautiful high-end platformed Daniel Defense firearm. All these great goodies and so much more is at WeShoot, right in Lakewood, conveniently located in Lakewood, New Jersey, right off the Parkway. Go to WeShootUSA.com.

Evan Nappen 28:04

You can also check out their . You know, WeShoot does a lot of cool stuff for the community. They’re not just you know a range, which is a fantastic range. They’re not just a great gun shop, pro shop, which they are. They don’t just have great instructors. They also do very important things for the community. One of the things is the many faces of 2A, and it’s a very interesting photo shoot of many different folks. Some with disabilities and other things, shooting even in wheelchairs and other disabilities, and WeShoot will bend over backwards so that everybody. Remember 2A is for everybody. They have put together here an amazing group of friends who, despite their different backgrounds and abilities, are united by one powerful bond, and that is their love of freedom and their love of the Second Amendment. You should check it out because this is what our community is. Our community is diverse, 100%. Our community welcomes everybody. If you want to be a law-abiding gun owner, then we welcome you, and so does WeShoot. And WeShoot is an ideal place where you will feel comfortable and welcome, regardless of who you are. Not a problem, as long as you’re a law-abiding gun owner that wants to enjoy their rights. You can shoot at WeShoot, and with welcome arms. So, check out WeShoot. As a matter of fact, if you’d like to join the WeShoot community, they are having a membership sale. You can save $100 on a yearly individual or family membership, or save 250 on the signature VIP membership. And these are valid until today’s show. So get there today. Today’s show will be the last day for you to take advantage of these great sales. So check out weshootusa.com and pay a visit to that range. You’ll be glad you did.

Evan Nappen 29:18

If you want to be a law-abiding gun owner, then we welcome you, and so does WeShoot. And WeShoot is an ideal place where you will feel comfortable and welcome, regardless of who you are. Not a problem, as long as you’re a law-abiding gun owner that wants to enjoy their rights. You can shoot at WeShoot, and with welcome arms. So, check out WeShoot. As a matter of fact, if you’d like to join the WeShoot community, they are having a membership sale. You can save $100 on a yearly individual or family membership, or save $250 on the signature VIP membership. These are valid until today’s show. Page – 8 – of 12

So, get there today. Today’s show will be the last day for you to take advantage of these great sales. So, check out weshootusa.com and pay a visit to that range. You’ll be glad you did.

Evan Nappen 30:25

Let me also mention my book, New Jersey Gun Law, the Bible of New Jersey Gun Law. Of course, you folks know that’s the book you got to have. It’s over 500 pages, 120 topics. We explain the insanity that is New Jersey gun laws, so you don’t become a GOFU. You need the book to help you navigate these matrix, these matrices of insanity that New Jersey has put forward with glee to try to take away our gun rights. But you can do it. You can do it successfully, as so many do. And my book’s there to help you do that very thing. Go to EvanNappen.com. Go to EvanNappen.com today, and you can buy a book right there. You’ll have it shipped right to your door, and you’ll be glad you did. Also, Teddy, what do you have for us today in Press Checks?

Teddy Nappen 31:28

Well, as you know, Press Checks are always free. This one, this one kind of tugs at more of the market and industry of what’s been going on. One thing that caught my eye in this and just made me kind of think for a little bit was the.

Evan Nappen 31:45

Wait a minute. For a minute you somehow broke away from not throwing.

Teddy Nappen 31:50

I know I put down The Trace. I put down The Trace.

Evan Nappen 31:53

I guess everyone deserves, everyone deserves a break at some point.

Teddy Nappen 31:57

I had to had to, had to get off Reddit. Had to do all that, you know.

Evan Nappen 32:01

Wow, wow. Okay, and what did you discover here?

Teddy Nappen 32:05

Well, I saw that, and this came from American Rifleman. Ruger suspends several major models. (https://www.americanrifleman.org/content/ruger-to-discontinue-several-major-models/) Ruger has announced their changes and eliminating several generation products, including and not limited to the LCR, the SP 101, the GP 100. We’ll get back to that, and the Bearcat revolvers.

Evan Nappen 32:28

Wait, they’re just getting rid of these guns. They’re no longer going to make them.

Teddy Nappen 32:30

They’re ending the production lines. They’re ending the production. Page – 9 – of 12

Evan Nappen 32:32

Wow. Well, if anybody has any of these guns, you know they’re going sky high.

Teddy Nappen 32:38

Yep, along with the SR 1911, the LC carbine, the PC charger, the PC carbine, the LC charger, the Red Hawk, the Super Red Hawk, the Black Hawk, the Super Black Hawk, the single series revolvers, the Vaquero.

Evan Nappen 32:53

Great single actions.

Teddy Nappen 32:55

Yes. Wow. The number one, the 77 series rifle, the Hawkeye and Ruger precision rifle.

Evan Nappen 33:02

All of them are just gone.

Teddy Nappen 33:02

top right there. Dad, my first revolver was a GP 100. Yes, that was my first. It is the yeah.

Evan Nappen 33:12

And that’s funny because my first revolver was a Ruger Security Six. So, your first revolver was like the son of Security Six, which was the GP 100. And now neither of those guns will be in production.

Teddy Nappen 33:30

It’s also a good introduction to new people. Just saying on revolvers. I know people are like, you know, every semi-automatic, everything goes well. They all have their place, but revolvers have a place, too. They’re good for the person. Just say I pick it up, pull the trigger. Don’t need to mess with anything. I’ve never once had a problem with a revolver on that front in terms of loading, and it makes it simple to introduce people to guns.

Evan Nappen 33:59

Well, Ruger revolvers are tough. They’re strong, tough, great performers, and I love revolvers. I’ve always loved revolvers. Look, I have to strictly limit myself. It has to cut or shoot for me to like it. However, with that being said, I’ve always had a soft spot for revolvers. Yes. I mean Smith & Wesson revolvers, Colt revolvers, Ruger revolvers. I just love revolvers. And the thing that we’ve seen is that the amount of cost to making a good revolver has gone up dramatically, whereas you can make semi-automatic pistols for substantially less production cost than you can a revolver. Yet the beauty, grace, and handling, and tradition of a revolver is always going to be there. It’s just special.

Evan Nappen 34:56

So, folks, if you have revolvers, treasure them, you know, like all our guns, but particularly revolvers. And I’ve got to say that Ruger revolvers are great workhorses, fantastic shooters, but their single Page – 10 – of 12

actions are kind of in a class of their own. I mean, the Vaqueros. Oh, I have yeah my vaqueros and my Blackhawks and all. They’re awesome single actions. Look, the Colt, you know, single action army is a beautiful classic of American history. d they’re phenomenal guns for sure. But if you just want the revolver that is affordable, that is super well made, super strong. Just wonderful to shoot. I mean, it was hard to beat a Ruger Vaquera, a Ruger Blackhawk revolver. You know, they’re just great, and yet to think that they are going to be gone, that the production will end on all their single-action revolvers. I think, with the only exception being the Wrangler .22 pistol, which is fine, but the Wrangler is kind of in a more introductory level of a firearm.

Teddy Nappen 36:16

Don’t forget the Super Wrangler.

Evan Nappen 36:19

Well, yeah, and the thing is, I mean, look, for the money, they’re fantastic gun. I mean, no question. For the money, what a great gun! But once you’re in the Vaquero and Black Hawk land of single actions, you know they’re just special. And to think that they’re not going to be made anymore, boy, that’s heartbreaking. Hopefully, maybe they’re going to come out with new generations down the road of something else that’s like a single action army or somewhere along those lines. But wow, that’s pretty incredible.

Teddy Nappen 36:53

For me, this definitely touched on and looking back and like what were some other companies? This going to be another like blunder where we see this like going down a path where we don’t see Ruger. I was thinking of like Remington. Remington was a household name, and they and I kind of wanted to pull an article on this.

Evan Nappen 37:12

No. Remington ended up, you know. They litigated Remington essentially out of existence. Plus they were you know in New York, which was not a very friendly place to even be, and there was other issues, management, and what have you. Business decision wise, I think Ruger is strong. These are apparently business decisions that they’re making. I don’t see Ruger going under by any, far from it. I think Ruger is strong and great.

Teddy Nappen 37:48

I get that, but cut to.

Evan Nappen 37:49

And we’ll probably see these lines reintroduced in some other newer versions, which Ruger has done in the past. We’ll see different. Just like my Security Six was discontinued, and then the GP 100 came out. Well, your GP 100 is now discontinued, but there’ll probably be some other revolver. At least I’m hopeful there’ll be some other generation of a solid double-action revolver. Maybe we’ll have a lot of interesting new features and development because Ruger is very innovative, and they do put a lot of great things, a lot of great features. I will just say, Page – 11 – of 12

Teddy Nappen 38:25

I will just say. Just like one of the biggest markets in like just highly competitive would be the gun industry. Just from there, so many ways going at hand. Another example is Colt. Colt, where they lost a lot, was the fact that they focused heavily on military and law enforcement markets, but neglected the civilian market. That’s where Daniel Defense and Bravo Company took over, and that’s his record on Gunzone.

Evan Nappen 38:52

Yeah, well, it’s true. Colt then divided into Colt Defense, and you still have a new a new Colt, you know, that’s out there. Colt’s making the classic snake guns again. They’re not the same as the old snake guns, but they’re still snake guns. They still have the flavor and a lot of the features. And some things are even improvements that are there, and a lot of people are fans of those. At least they’re out there for folks to experience and own and enjoy. But yeah, Colt went through rough times. Look, at one point Smith & Wesson, we wondered if they were going to survive after being owned by non-Americans and did some boneheaded moves. You know, this happens in the industry. It’ll be interesting to watch what happens with Ruger. And of course, you and I, Teddy, have a lot of love for Ruger, as we do many other guns, and we’ll keep an eye on one. That’s something to think about.

Teddy Nappen 39:49

We always have to remember, though. I think if we’re to go to like places that are publicly traded, you’ve got to factor in BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street. That’s the political influences that can alter and change those decisions for a lot of those companies. Also, factor in that this just came out on this on the debanking, where the OCC published a full debanking report (https://www.usa-gun-shop.com/occ-debanking-report/) It was nine of the largest banks: Citibank, J.P. Morgan, TD, BMO, all going after firearm business. Turning them away because you have to pay for debt and put on take a lot of debt for inventory. You can’t get the money. How are you going to run your business? So.

Evan Nappen 40:29

Yeah, that is another way they exert politics. It’s true. Well, Teddy, thank you for a really cool topic and finally something where you don’t have to be nauseated over some BS from The Trace. That’s great. We look forward to hearing that because we got to stay aware of our enemies. So, it’s very important that you do. Actually, remember one of the guys at our seminars came up and thanked you, thanked you particularly for doing that because he said he can’t handle doing it. So, I thought that was pretty good. Yeah, I like that.

Teddy Nappen 41:00

Yeah, it’s one. It’s definitely one of those when you’re reading through. My first thought is reading the GLP-1 lowers gun violence. This had to pass through an editor. This had to pass through multiple writing people, and this went from one to the next. And being like, yeah, this is a good idea, and this is why echo chambers don’t work. Like no one thought.

Evan Nappen 41:22

I can’t wait. Page – 12 – of 12

Teddy Nappen 41:23

Good job!

Evan Nappen 41:24

To see like a Ro commercial or a Mounjaro commercial or a Ozempic commercial sponsored by The Trace. Right, talking about that.

Evan Nappen 41:34

Hey, I’ve got to tell you about this week’s GOFU, which is of course, the Gun Owner Fuck Up. These are mistakes made by gun owners that can be quite costly, and you get to learn them for free. This one is real simple. Do not store your firearms in another person’s safe. Do not store your guns at your friend’s house just because he has a gun safe. You can’t do that. It’ll be looked at as a transfer. You no longer have possession and control of your own firearm. You’re breaking the law doing that, folks.

Evan Nappen 42:11

And what happens is it can come back and bite you if there is a gun seizure at your friend’s house, and all guns get taken, even due to nothing having to do with your friend, but a third party, and you get the classic New Jersey gun seizure. Suddenly, your guns are seized at his house, and now, how do you explain that without admitting to breaking the law? And maybe facing criminal charges. Keep your guns in your possession, in your gun safe, that only you have access to. Do not store them anywhere else unless it’s with a licensed dealer. If it’s not with a licensed dealer, I do not recommend storing your guns anywhere else, but in your home and under your control, under your domain. Make sure you are responsible and only you have access.

Evan Nappen 43:17

This is Evan Nappen and Teddy Nappen reminding you that gun laws don’t protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens.

Speaker 2 43:29

Gun Lawyer is a CounterThink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York, New York. Reach us by emailing [email protected]. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state.

Known as “America’s Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it’s no wonder he’s become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets.

Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It’s Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News.

As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists.

He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America.

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)

Page – 1 – of 11

Gun Lawyer — Episode 311 Transcript

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

Second Amendment, Mental health, Gun laws, ERPO, Red flag, Due process, Search warrant, Wellness check, Confiscation, Civil rights, Firearms license, Arrive Together, Police intervention, Privacy rights, Judicial bias

SPEAKERS

Teddy Nappen, Speaker 3, Evan Nappen

Evan Nappen 00:19

I’m Evan Nappen.

Teddy Nappen 00:20

And I’m Teddy Nappen.

Evan Nappen 00:23

And welcome to Gun Lawyer. Today we are going to take an in-depth look at how the Second Amendment oppressionists are weaponizing, literally weaponizing, mental health against our rights. Yu know, with the expansion of the Second Amendment as our tool to dismantle gun laws and end the oppression that we’ve been suffering under these traditional gun laws, beginning with the National Firearms Act (NFA) and all through up until you know ’60s and ’70s, we’re seeing these laws fall by the wayside. The opponents of our constitutional rights are scrambling to find avenues, other avenues to exploit, to weaponize, to continue to try to disarm us, take away our rights, and take our guns.

Evan Nappen 01:43

One of the rich veins that they have been tapping into is the weaponization of mental health, and using mental health as the vehicle to seize guns and disarm people at a record pace, frankly. They’re doing it by a number of different tactics that they’re tying into one another. And what we have going on, particularly in New Jersey, is they’re building on their base confiscation. Their base confiscation is ERPOs, which are Extreme Risk Protection Orders, sometimes called Red Flag. Now, New Jersey’s Extreme Risk Protection Order system is the absolute worst ever created or imagined. New Jersey has it because there is zero due process up front when it comes to the utilization of and implementation of an ERPO.

Evan Nappen 02:57

So, what happens with an ERPO is an individual or even just law enforcement themselves, without the individual being a participant, can then file the ERPO with the court. Of which, the person who’s going to be subjected to it has no say and has no knowledge of it even taking place. That ERPO restrains that person immediately from possessing firearms. Then built into the ERPO is a search warrant in which Page – 2 – of 11

the individual’s Fourth Amendment rights get weaponized against them to have the search take place and guns seized. The person’s house, you know, is tossed looking for weapons. After the damage is done, after the Order is put forward and the privacy of one’s home is invaded, and your property is taken, then and only then do you get a chance to go to court, which they put in the law has to take place within 10 days.

Evan Nappen 04:16

So now, with all the damage done, you’re railroaded into a hearing within 10 days to try to fight to get your guns and your gun rights back. And if this TERPO, which is the initial ERPO, which is a Temporary Extreme Risk Protection Order, becomes a FERPO, which is a Final Extreme Risk Protection Order, all under the banner of ERPO. Any of those protection orders operate as a bar to you having firearms, and you can then be prosecuted for possession of any guns if you are subject to an ERPO. You’re prosecuted in the same manner as a felon in possession would be. This is the foundation of the psychological mental health weaponization because the TERPO is based upon some allegation that you’re an extreme risk.

Evan Nappen 05:19

The extreme risk is painted often in terms of some mental health issue, some mental health concern. The person’s angry. The person’s upset. The person is acting oddly in a way that they somehow can put at the most minimal amount of accusation forward without anything countering it to have this happen, and these Red Flag / ERPOs are now combined. Okay, now you have to take this base of confiscation mechanism. So, you have this basic mechanism in place, and then it gets combined with the wellness check, so-called. Where somebody has a concern, whether valid or not, and says to the police, “Well, I think that this person might be a danger to themselves.” At which time, the police coordinate to try to get the person either to agree to go to be evaluated for mental health, or forced into it. Forced into a so-called wellness check, a mental health evaluation. Then you have springing up the mental health commitment gun prohibitions, which are standalone prohibitions where an individual is prohibited because they’ve had a voluntary or involuntary mental health commitment. And that, too, was put forward by Murphy in the Carry Killer Law.

Evan Nappen 07:11

By the way, that changing of mental health commitment to not just be involuntary but even voluntary, creating a standalone separate bar to getting a firearm license and being able to even arguably continue to possess firearms. So, this is built into the abuse system. You have the mechanism for search and seizure that’s done with no due process. Then you have the wellness check mechanism there to have this take place. Then you have the mental health commitment denial in this weaponization effort. And then you have another couple of fronts, including the question that you’ll find on a firearm application: Have you ever been treated or observed by any doctor or psychiatrist or any mental condition, etc., etc.? Now, if you’ve even been treated or observed, then you then are going to have to overcome that to get a firearm license, to have a gun, to keep your permit, to avoid a revocation, and that requires a doctor at best. If this will even cut the mustard, so to speak, a doctor to say that you’re safe for firearms. And, of course, most doctors are cowards. They don’t want to say anybody’s good for guns, even though they know you are, you are good for guns. Because they’re afraid that if there’s a problem with you and your gun, they’re going to get sued. So, good luck finding a Page – 3 – of 11

doctor willing to even do the letters. And if you have a mental health commitment itself, then you’re going to need to get a mental health expungement before you can even get your rights restored. And apart from the amount of legal time, which is a lot to get a mental health expunge done, you’re going to need a doctor’s report there saying you’re safe for guns. So, you see, they’ve built this whole weaponization.

Evan Nappen 09:20

Now, on top of everything that I’ve just said there, the Attorney General Jennifer Davenport has recently announced the expansion of the ARRIVE Together program. (https://www.njoag.gov/attorney-general-davenport-announces-expansion-of-the-arrive-together-program/) Oh my! What is the ARRIVE Together program? Well, that’s the Alternative Responses to Reduce Instances of Violence and Escalation. You know that’s right out of “1984” there. You know, it’s Big Brother labeling.

Evan Nappen 09:52

And what is this? What is this? Well, this is where you see municipal police departments partner with mental health professionals and resources to do what I just said. The basis for this announcement, this September 29 news release, is that the Attorney General in New Jersey is proud to announce that every municipality in Mercer County is now covered by this ARRIVE program. Every municipality can now be fully weaponized with the operational personnel to make happen what I just said by a mere phone call. Even an anonymous phone call. We’ve seen that happen. And Mercer County, by the way, isn’t the only county. They’re bragging, first of all, that since they’ve put the ARRIVE program together, there have been 21,500 successful interventions. That means anybody there with guns, you know, has had them seized. ‘s built and baked right into the cake. They now say that 81% of New Jerseyeans have access to the ARRIVE program. It’s covering 700 municipalities just in Mercer County, and that’s even prior to its full county-wide expansion.

Evan Nappen 11:57

It is now fully operational in every municipality in the following counties, folks. Every municipality in the following counties has this mechanism for weaponization of mental health to confiscate guns, utilizing everything I just talked about, and this is how it gets initiated. One of any number of ways, but this is one of their favorite ways. he counties that have full coverage now: Cape May, Cumberland, Gloucester, Hudson, Hunterdon, Monmouth, Morris, Sussex, and Union counties have ARRIVE in every one of their municipalities. in all, more than 81% of New Jersey residents are covered by this. And it goes on to say, anyone experiencing a mental health crisis, in addition to struggling with substance abuse or having thoughts of suicide, can call the crisis numbers, and lo and behold, this is invoked.

Evan Nappen 13:18

And it’s not just only by that, because you have that entire Red Flag / ERPO mechanism ready to roll. In addition to that, you have what is called Duty to Warn, where any medical professional is required in New Jersey, nurses, therapists, doctors, if a person makes any statement that they want to harm others or harm themselves in any way, they are required to contact police over it. And boom, this invokes. I mean, if you just go and you tell your therapist, “Man, I had such a rotten day, I could kill myself”, even though it’s just a hyperbolic statement. It doesn’t matter. Or that guy got me so mad, I could kill him. Page – 4 – of 11

Doesn’t matter. It’s like making a bomb joke at the airport. This complete picture, as we see growing. This is what they want to spread throughout the United States. This is their inroad to having this banner of mental health assistance and doing good under this banner of this to oppress and disarm and take away guns and gun rights. And this is how it actually is getting used. This is not anything new. Historically, politically, this has been a mainstay. You’ve seen it happen throughout oppressive governments taken to very various extremes. I mean, this is doing it this way, but in communist countries.

Teddy Nappen 15:08

Yeah.

Evan Nappen 15:08

Like, tell me, Teddy, in Soviet Union, what did they do?

Teddy Nappen 15:12

So, in the Soviet Union, one of their preferred techniques for oppression was to declare the political dissidents were insane, and they would be later incarcerated in hospitals. his is actually from an whole article from Fee.org (https://fee.org/articles/zhores-medvedevs-life-a-chilling-reminder-of-how-the-soviets-weaponized-psychiatry-against-dissidents/) Interviewing these various victims, and particularly they highlight the fact this goes right to Karl Marx. Marx’s influence. It’s a warped process in belief that your mental your it’s the mental state of the structures of mind and believing in their political mindset. It’s so insane. Where Marx profound the spurring doctrine known as polylogicism, justifying stifling dissidence. There are different classes of people in different structures of the mind. Therefore, declaring the bourgeois the mentally defective because they are inherently unable to comprehend Marx. Because you can’t understand the logic of communism, you must be locked up. That is insane, without other choice of the words. But that is what they are applying. Why would you own a gun? That’s crazy! Oh, it’s so dangerous. Why would you do that? It’s that level of mindset. It always goes to Marxism for these people. All these actions.

Evan Nappen 16:33

And, fundamentally, it’s where they get this idea. So, they’ve extrapolated it and are now applying it to their efforts at oppression of the Second Amendment. You see the mechanisms they’ve created to do it New Jersey-style. And I’ll tell you what, folks. If you want to see blatant proof of their bias, their absolute bias that what they’re really about is banning guns. There’s no. The simplest, greatest statement of it. You can go to Jennifer Davenport’s website for the State of New Jersey Department of Public Safety. Go right to the website, and you’ll see their headline: “Preventing and Combating Gun Violence. (https://www.njoag.gov/priorities/preventing-and-combating-gun-violence/)

Evan Nappen 17:23

So, you know, “gun violence” is always their catchphrase. “Gun violence”. Even though there’s plenty of gun violence that is actually quite good. Like when it comes to defending yourself. What do you think you’re going to use to defend yourself? Gun violence, right? But it puts it in the negative. But nonetheless, go right to the preventing gun violence combat, preventing combating gun violence, right on the state of New Jersey Department of Law and Public Safety website, and you will see a huge Page – 5 – of 11

picture right up top, a picture, and it’s a picture of a hand holding a sign, like at a protest. So, obviously, this is somebody pushing a political position of some sort with a sign, and this is on the official State of New Jersey website. A sign that says “Stop Gun Violence”, and what is on that sign? A handgun with the red ban symbol through it. Ah, ban guns. So, if you want the proof of what their motive and what their reality, what they’re really about, just look at their giant picture of a protester holding up a sign. You see the hand with the sign, and what’s on it? Ban guns. That’s what they’re doing, and you can see it for yourself. his entire program, foundationally, is all about that.

Teddy Nappen 19:13

They also brag about it on their website. You can go to the program. They go into far details, talking about the specifics of what it will do. They say traditionally an officer interaction of individual in crisis was either call the screener and wait for them to arrive. To consist of the law and make a decision for transportation for individual voluntary or involuntary. Under our co-response program, the screeners are seen near the beginning of the response, saving the officer time waiting for the ultimate decision. Basically, here now we have a doctor on standby to railroad you into being committed or checked involuntarily, screwing you out of your rights way faster and avoiding all that legal drama and your rights. Don’t you love that?

Evan Nappen 19:58

Oh, and here’s a thing that we don’t see talked about, but this is something I find to be important. You know, you can go to what is the World Psychiatric Association, and we’ll have the link on the website for the show, where there is a “Code of Ethics for Psychiatry”. (https://www.wpanet.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/WPA-Code-of-Ethics-2020.final2_.pdf) Literally, the Code of Ethics by the World Psychiatric Association.

Evan Nappen 20:26

In their Code of Ethics, they put forward the principles that are expected to be followed by psychiatric professionals. Let’s take a look, folks, at some of the principles that they talk about. Principle number two: “Respect for patients’ autonomy. Psychiatrists build relationships with patients that are based on mutual trust, acknowledging patients’ role as partners in the process of diagnosis, treatment, rehabilitation. These must take into account all local regulatory matters. Number two, psychiatrists seek the informed consent of their patients whenever possible. However, they recognize that the nature of psychiatric disorders will require exceptions, including when patients are unable to make informed decisions about treatment when considerations of patients’ health, safety, or public safety call for non-consensual interventions. Look at that. Already laying the groundwork where it’s perfectly fine and ethical to have this system in place of ratting you out, no matter what or benign your statement may have been. So that you get thrust into the weaponization of mental health to lose your gun rights. Look at this.

Evan Nappen 22:04

Part five: Psychiatrists keep in confidence information concerning their patients. Well, that sounds good. They inform patients at the inception of treatment of relevant limitations on confidentiality of communicated Information really, except in emergencies, including imminent threat to harm other people, or under proper legal compulsion, they do not reveal information. Oh, look at the exemptions. Page – 6 – of 11

Look at how New Jersey wrote their law. See that. There’s limitations. See that confidentiality that you thought you had? Well, you know, if there’s a threat to harm other people, you know, and that’s just your verbalization. No matter how much you didn’t really mean it, and you really didn’t. It was just a hyperbolic. Oh, doesn’t matter, and you’re not going to. Do you think you have confidentiality? What a joke! You don’t have confidentiality. Anything you say, it’s like you’re talking to the Government operative, essentially, because that’s what they’re mandated under law to be. Number 11: Psychiatrists respect patients’ culture, ethnicity, language, and religion. They do not discriminate against patients on any grounds, including age, sex, gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, disability, language, religious, or political affiliation, or socioeconomic status. Neither they attempt to impose their own values on patients and patients’ families. Really? Except when it comes to guns and your political affiliation.

Teddy Nappen 23:55

Except for guns, gender, feminism, transgenderism. All the tenets of the Leftist arguments and ideology. And also following their degree that follows the logic of postmodernism. Other than that, don’t impose your logic.

Evan Nappen 24:10

Well, wait, Teddy. Here’s number 12 on their ethics. Psychiatrists should oppose requests to detect and/or report on the presence of anti-government ideas or radicalization of their patients in religious or political matters. So, if they’re actually terrorists promoting, well, that you got to keep quiet. You better shut up about that. If it’s anti-government and radicalization, you’ve been radicalized. Oh, okay. Wow, well, we’re not gonna bring that up at all.

Teddy Nappen 24:47

No. Their definition of radicalism is men can’t become women. Oh, that’s radical. I always love how they use that terminology and they just twisting of words and the softening and hardening of language that they always like to pull. Oh, it’s gun safety. Ooh, gun violence. We’re trying to fight that.

Evan Nappen 25:08

Well, here’s one of their ethics. Here, try this. Psychiatrists avoid taking part in governmental, societal, or personal activities that are aimed at discriminating against an ethnic, racial, religious, sexual, or other group. But you see, gun owners don’t fall under that, Teddy. I think we may discuss this further about that. That is not, of course, what they’re talking about.

Teddy Nappen 25:37

So, if you attend a rally, basically wanting to stand for Americans and not allow a bunch of illegals coming into your country, oh, you’ve committed racism and therefore an insanity.

Evan Nappen 25:49

Now, continuing this, because it’s this important. Not only are they bringing in police, not only are they bringing in mental health professionals, not only do they weaponize this entire mental health front, but now they are also bringing in the clergy. That’s right. This is right from the NRA-ILA article from October 5. “Bad faith: Gun Controllers Seek to Enlist Clergy in Firearm Confiscation Efforts. Page – 7 – of 11

(https://www.nraila.org/articles/20261005/bad-faith-gun-controllers-seek-to-enlist-clergy-in-firearm-confiscation-efforts) That’s right. You think you’re confidentially talking with your pastor, or your rabbi, or your priest? Well, guess what? They are now pushing clergy to report, to go and invoke and use what fundamental mechanism? I bet you can guess. Red Flag / ERPO. That’s right. Slam it home, even to the degree that where you thought you had a relationship of confidentiality and ability to talk to your religious persons in whatever faith you may be. Well, no, no, no. You see, the anti-Second Amendment crowd has now focused on getting clergy, clergy, to promote and continue with their agenda against our rights. This is their gambit. This is their avenue as we win and win and win in knocking out old laws. This is how they’re mechanizing their attempts, and you need to be aware of this.

Evan Nappen 27:47

I’m going to tell you right now, folks. Let’s just be clear. This is the GOFU. The GOFU is talking to any medical professional about whether you own guns or ever verbalizing any type of threat about yourself or to others. The GOFU is talking to clergymen of any sort that you’re involved with about your firearm, firearm ownership, etc. about what you’re going through. All these are conduits to the weaponization of mental health and the ERPO / Red Flag. Zero due process system being invoked and slammed on you as an individual. This is what the anti-Second Amendment, the Second Amendment oppressionists are building this machine, and they’re looking for every cog and every piece that they can put into it. You need to be aware, and don’t be the GOFU.

Teddy Nappen 28:55

That was the doctor that I did my interview with here, where we were talking about, and even said like, actually, that and it goes against your insurance, and he goes into details on how to counter that question because you are like you know you go in for a physical and they say, hey, do you own firearms? Why are you asking me that? Just throw it back at him. Why are you asking me that? Why do I need to answer that? Why am I and just throw it back? Should I report this and just scare the living crap out of them? Because it’s disgusting. We need to push back on that. Hey,

Evan Nappen 29:28

I’ve even seen it now automatic where they hand you the tablet where you answer questions and they ask about whether you have guns. I mean, just forget it. You know, they have no business asking about that has nothing to do with medical professional. Yet, if they know you have guns and you wrote yes to that, then they can invoke the weaponization machine at any point, and this is why they’re gathering that information. This is all part of it. You better see the writing on the wall and don’t fall for it.

Evan Nappen 30:04

Hey, let me tell you about our good friends at WeShoot this week. WeShoot has some really cool guns that they are offering and putting out that you can go and see for yourself at WeShoot, right in Lakewood. A fantastic indoor range and facility. Great resource. That’s where Teddy and I both shoot. Where we both get our training. We love it. WeShoot, and so will you. They have the Sig Sauer MPX K AOW – Black and Coyote. They’re really cool. You’ve got to check out that. They have the Sig Sauer P365 Fuse, the 365 platform stretched its legs, and the Fuse family continues to turn heads. It’s a really cool piece there. Check out that Fuse. They have the Daniel Defense DDM4 PDW AOW. You know Daniel Defense is quality. It’s fantastic, and WeShoot’s got them. You can check them out there as well. Page – 8 – of 11

Evan Nappen 31:14

WeShoot has a membership sale going on. This is your great opportunity to save $100 a year on individual or family membership, and you can save $250 on the new Signature VIP membership. These sales are only valid till October 18. So, make your move now. Go to WeShoot, conveniently located in Lakewood, New Jersey. This is the place to be. The place to shoot. Teddy and I will be there. Actually, this weekend, we’re going to be there and getting another great training. So, check it out. We know you’ll love WeShoot. We love WeShoot. You’ll love it. Go to weshootusa.com. Right on the web. Top of line photography. Great information. Tremendous community outreach. They’re not just a gun range. They are a community. They are a community, and they believe in our Second Amendment rights. They believe in your ability to defend yourself, to have the best training, the best equipment, and the most fun. Go to weshootusa.com.

Evan Nappen 32:31

Let me shamelessly promote my book, New Jersey Gun Law: The Bible of Jersey Gun Law. It’s over 500 pages, 120 topics, all question and answer. And if you don’t want to be a GOFU, you need to understand New Jersey’s insane matrix of gun laws. You need a copy of my book. Go to EvanNappen.com. EvanNappen.com. Pick up your copy today. And we are growing. Our firm is growing, and we need to hire another attorney. We need people. In New Jersey, the fight never ends. If you or someone you know is an attorney that would like to fight for Second Amendment rights, and join the Nappen Law Firm, get in touch. Give me a call. Go to EvanNappen.com. We’re looking for good people that believe in 2A and want to fight for it. To defend law-abiding citizens that New Jersey tries to turn into criminals, or weaponizing the system against them. We come in and turn the system back around, so that rights are protected and people are saved. It’s what we do. Teddy, what do you have for us today in Press Checks?

Teddy Nappen 33:56

Well, as you know, Press Checks are always free. Again, I always keep hearing the what is what is the Trump what has Trump done for the Second Amendment? And it keeps coming up every single time. I always hear people say like he hasn’t done enough. The fact is that having the Civil Rights Division fighting for our rights and pushing. We’ve never. Thanks to Bruen, all the changes you can see coming down the pipeline. Where now that we are able to carry in New Jersey, to where now we may even see the death of the assault firearm laws, and now we’re talking about machine guns and all these other things coming down the line. I mean, this could not have happened, and I know this because it’s good to always check with our buddies at The Trace because they never steer us wrong at how pissed they are. This is how you know they can tell on themselves because of how incredibly racist they are. The Justice Department has treated gun owners as an oppressed minority for a year. (https://www.thetrace.org/2026/09/doj-civil-rights-gun-2a-lawsuits/) Here’s what that looks like.

Evan Nappen 35:06

Well, we are oppressed minority because what they’ve been doing to us for a long time. Page – 9 – of 11

Teddy Nappen 35:09

They’ve yeah uh huh they what the legislating everything being a felony turning law-abiding gun owners into criminals while ruining their lives?

Evan Nappen 35:20

Imprisoning gun owners, incarcerating.

Teddy Nappen 35:22

ATF cracking down your door and assassinate you. Multiple times. I mean, what more do you need? But okay, continue. One year ago, the Justice Department of Civil Rights Division sued the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department over the alleged, wasn’t alleged, proven true, delays to issuing permits to carry under concealed guns. It was a first in flurry of litigation brought by the Trump administration challenging gun restriction caused championed by the President’s political base. I love this is where they always start. Here’s the false premise. They always paint the previous administration in the best regard. The Civil Rights Division traditionally battled discrimination against marginalized groups based on race, sex, disability, and religion. But under the Trump administration, the units turned to gun owners, including them as an oppressed minority. The Division opened a Second Amendment Section in December to handle the caseload. Over the past year, the Civil Rights Division – Second Amendment Section has filed 10 lawsuits, launched one investigation, and reached settlements according to analysis of The Trace. Pause. So, right there, they go with the false premise that thinking the Second Amendment is not a civil right. You hear that in the words.

Evan Nappen 36:45

Well, the whole thing that was First Amendment enforcement was what they just reviewed. This is Second Amendment. Both are constitutional rights and deserve absolute enforcement instead of opposition by our Government. For once, finally, the DOJ is defending and fighting for the Second Amendment in the same way that they fought for and defended First Amendment. Now they’re consistent.

Teddy Nappen 37:15

Yeah, and let’s go a step further. They’re saying it always fought for the civil rights. Okay, cut to 2021 under the same department, under the Biden administration. They were suing Texas, trying to force them to redistrict their maps because it was apparently voter suppression because they said their maps were racist. Till later, they redrew their maps, completely removing the groups and undoing the gerrymandering that the Left was trying to push. So, when you say defending and helping oppress minorities, what you’re really saying is rigging elections in the favor of the left. That’s the civil rights division in their eyes, because they say, “Oh, but that’s not fair. It’s very fair. And also, here’s another way to tell on yourself. Remember who the head of the U.S. Department of Justice under Civil Rights Division under Biden, Kristen Clark, who has now been appointed the General Counsel to the NAACP. Yeah, real fighting of civil rights under the double the NAACP when they’re not too when they’re not too busy funneling money to Klansmen.

Evan Nappen 38:24

Well, I don’t know. Did they do it or just Southern Poverty Law? Page – 10 – of 11

Teddy Nappen 38:28

The Southern Poverty Law Center were the ones that were funneling the money to there, but it’s the interchanging of the NAACP on that end. But just the fact that they, just for the fact that they are the ones saying, “Oh, it was never political going after blue states and trying to fight for rights. It’s always about fighting for minorities. Cut to the political bias groups that are just weaponization of the administration to win votes. That that was it. That was the civil division, and now it’s actually using to fight for rights.

Teddy Nappen 39:03

Well and that is where they are shining and making progress, tremendous progress. It’s great to see it, and it’s just something where it makes so much sense that the trace can’t deal with it, and instead they’re couching it to try to make it a lie. Yet they’re promoting, as usual, their spin, their lies. When the DOJ is finally doing what’s right, defending the entire Constitution, and the Second Amendment is not a second-class right. It’s the same class as the First Amendment. Our founding fathers knew what they were doing. There’s a reason the Second Amendment is second to none. It is that critical, and that’s that. Vital, and that’s what distinguishes us from the rest of the world.

Teddy Nappen 40:05

Yeah, and it was the Southern Poverty Law Center, the ones that were funding Klansmen.

Evan Nappen 40:11

Yeah, not the NAACP.

Teddy Nappen 40:13

But yeah they didn’t fund them, but they are political and fund and right there of course it doesn’t mean they’re not political but so it’s the point still remains like it’s ridiculous,

Evan Nappen 40:23

But the Southern Poverty Law Center, yeah, they’re actually being criminally prosecuted over those things. The NAACP is not. But they are. The NAACP has become extremely, you know, they’re Left. Whereas there, there are other plenty of other civil rights. Well, there are civil rights organizations that try to be even pro-gun. As a matter of fact, Roy Innis and CORE, they supported Second Amendment because they realized the importance of it, particularly for minorities, particularly for minorities.

Teddy Nappen 41:00

The only time the ACLU gets involved is involves marijuana.

Evan Nappen 41:04

Well, that’s a whole other difference. Well, they got involved with marijuana as a disqualifier, right? They don’t want to.

Teddy Nappen 41:11

That was why. Page – 11 – of 11

Evan Nappen 41:12

And you know, it’s funny how they say politics makes strange bedfellows, and it does. So, this is where we’re at. But okay, Teddy, thanks for that valuable information.

Evan Nappen 41:26

I just want to say that this is Evan Nappen and Teddy Nappen reminding you that gun laws don’t protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens.

Speaker 3 41:40

Gun Lawyer is a CounterThink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York, New York. Reach us by emailing [email protected]. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state.

Known as “America’s Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it’s no wonder he’s become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets.

Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It’s Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News.

As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists.

He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America.

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)

Page – 1 – of 12

Gun Lawyer — Episode 310 Transcript

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

Second Amendment, SCOTUS, gun laws, case law, firearm cases, felon possession, machine guns, sensitive places, age restrictions, licensing reciprocity, domestic violence, short barrels, free speech, due process, gun deserts

SPEAKERS

Speaker 3, Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen

Evan Nappen 00:18

I’m Evan Nappen.

Teddy Nappen 00:20

And I’m Teddy Nappen.

Evan Nappen 00:22

Yes, you are. And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, this is very exciting because I’ve been involved, basically dedicated my entire life and career to Second Amendment, and proud of it. I’ve loved and still do love fighting for our rights and helping good people. And when I see the following, it is very, very exciting because the turnaround is just amazing. SCOTUS, which is our anacronym for the Supreme Court of the United States, SCOTUS, currently has, as we speak right now, 57 firearm-related cases. Now that doesn’t mean they’re going to hear all 57 cases, but it’s very encouraging.

Evan Nappen 01:29

They have 57 gun cases that are getting conferenced by the United States Supreme Court, in which they may take who knows how many, if any, but they may take that will again put the Second Amendment to the forefront and create more case law that we get to use in further challenges and seeing the death of various gun laws. Now remember, the Supreme Court has accepted already Viramontes and Grant, and that is the assault fireman. You know, and maybe magazines. It seems like they might also be considering mags, maybe, maybe not, as part of that. That remains to be seen. But it’s definitely the assault, so-called assault weapon, assault firearm ban that the Supreme Court is going to see whether it is in fact a violation of the Second Amendment or not. That’s going to most likely we’ll see that decision itself in June (2027).

Evan Nappen 02:40

But what we have right now are 57 cases where the Supreme Court is conferencing them. When the Supreme Court conferences cases, it’s where the judges discuss the cases and decide whether or not to grant certiorari, in other words, whether or not to grant the hearing on their appeal to the Supreme Court. If the vote gets four of the judges to say, “Yeah, we want to consider this case”, that means there will be a formal Supreme Court appeal that takes place on that case, where briefs will be done and a Page – 2 – of 12

written Supreme Court opinion will come from it, and that will create more Supreme Court case law, which will apply to the entire United States. So this is why it’s so exciting because there’s 57 Firearm cases, and I’ve taken this, by the way, from an article from Bearing Arms, which is titled “SCOTUS Has Plate Full With Gun-Related Cases for Conference”, and it’s by Tom Knighton. (https://bearingarms.com/tomknighton/2026/09/28/scotus-has-plate-full-with-gun-related-cases-for-conference-n1233951?fbclid=IwY2xjawUoGBNleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBwZG9mA3NydGMGYXBwX2lkDzQwOTk2MjYyMzA4NTYwOQABHhaeKYFggEs5knGWTHaq7j9dad_ILCqEs6y-KXBm7XBe9xpW7PJed09DlZ6u_aem_FvBLjsHNAHM3unLAGvxz9Q)

Evan Nappen 03:54

And listen to what these cases are that they may or may not take. It’s exciting. Thirty-nine of the cases are challenging the felon in possession ban, or the state equivalent of felons possessing guns. Three of the cases regarding the constitutional protection of machine guns. That’s interesting. Three going at the federal law banning possession by unlawful drug users. One of them going at the federal ban on possession of firearms by aliens lawfully present in the United States. So, they’re talking about legal, not illegal, aliens in the U.S. and their ability to possess. There’s one that goes at Washington State’s civil protection order statute, which is, I guess, similar to, you know, the domestic violence restraining order type. There’s a challenge to Maryland’s sensitive place restrictions. So, we got a sensitive place restriction case that possibly the Supreme Court will take, which could be very helpful to us in New Jersey.

Evan Nappen 05:12

An age restriction case regarding 18 to 20 year olds being denied their constitutional rights. A commerce clause challenge to 922(g)(1). So, they’re claiming how the federal law on the regulation of firearms violates commerce. There’s one to a shall issue licensing regimes. I thought most of these shall issues were dead, particularly after Bruen. But we probably have some rogue state trying something. Here’s a really, really good one. Boy, I’d love for them to take this one, too. Interstate licensing reciprocity. Maybe we can get national reciprocity accomplished judicially if we can get the Supreme Court to take this case and decide that one permit is valid everywhere in the U.S. or something else along those lines, and why.

Teddy Nappen 06:15

Would that also, I don’t know, if that goes even further. Where, say, for example, go to a different state and wanting to buy a gun, you don’t have to transfer it to a dealer instead.

Evan Nappen 06:24

Well, that’s different. This is about licensing.

Evan Nappen 06:27

Why they would explore that. Well, maybe, maybe, maybe. Depending on what they’re, how they’re viewing licensing as permitting. I think they mean by carrying. Page – 3 – of 12 Page – 4 – of 12

Teddy Nappen 06:35

Like this basic example. New Jersey has their like FPIC. If another state recognizes that, would that be a way? That would I guess that would be kind of a way. Well we have a

Evan Nappen 06:43

Well, we have it to a certain degree. You can buy out-of-state, just not handguns. The Fifth Circuit, I believe it was, recently said that’s unconstitutional. So, we should be able to buy guns since it’s a constitutional right anywhere in the U. S. Why are you restricted where you can only buy your handgun in your resident state? There’s no reason for that, so that’s being challenged. It was successfully challenged in the Fifth Circuit. We’re probably going to see that make its way up to SCOTUS. Then there’s another case on banning possession, the ban on possession by anyone who has a domestic violence misdemeanor. Remember, originally misdemeanors were never disqualifiers for guns. But because of the political correctness surrounding domestic violence, they get a special status of being a disqualifier. So, if you’re convicted, for example, of committing simple assault on your spouse, even at a misdemeanor level, then you’re barred from owning firearms anywhere in the United States. But if you go around beating up complete strangers all day long and get conviction after conviction for simple assault, but it’s not domestic violence, you’re not a prohibited person, okay? So that.

Teddy Nappen 07:52

And also that’s the equivalent of “he threw pretzels at me”. So, that it can be just yeah.

Evan Nappen 08:08

And we’ve had it just so extreme. There’s another one challenging the federal ban on short barrel shotguns. You know all the NFA stuff is making its way up to the court. One on military courts’ ability to impose firearm restrictions as part of court-martial sentencing. And then a challenge to New York’s prohibition on tasers and stun guns.

Evan Nappen 08:35

As far as that goes, this is a heck of a pile. It’s really great to see the massive amount of litigation that is now taking place to try to free our Second Amendment rights from the chains that they’ve been bound by for all these years by these oppressive laws. One of the key cases here, yeah, well, one of them that I think might be really important, just so you know, is the short barrel shotgun case, which are considering whether they’re arms under the Second Amendment. That may be very important because remember we had the Big Beautiful Bill, which led to the Big Beautiful Lawsuit, but that’s just going at the jurisdiction of taxation. If we get a case that finally declares them to actually just be flat out protected under the Second Amendment, then that will kill it dead permanently.

Teddy Nappen 09:36

I remember, Dad, weren’t you in that whole fight with Stryker? You were there to help fight against that at the time, if I recall.

Evan Nappen 09:43

Yeah, the Striker 12. New Jersey made it an assault firearm, and the federal government then made it NFA as a destructive device. We tried to fight and challenge it, and that was when the 1994 Crime Bill, I Page – 5 – of 12

like to. The 1994 bill that was a crime had the assault weapon federal law in it. It included the strikers. So as a preemptive publicity stunt, the ATF declared that so-called Striker 12s and street sweepers-they weren’t shotguns; they are destructive devices, and you had to register them NFA. Now you could do it at no charge, but this was really an abuse. And yet, to this day, the Stryker 12 still falls in this category of DD. Not even short barrel rifle or any of that, a short barrel shotgun, but actually destructive device. So, it may, though, ultimately prove to be the undoing of even the destructive device federal statute.

Evan Nappen 10:55

Really, all the Stryker 12 is and a street sweeper is a 12-gauge shotgun that feeds from a drum, and yet even though the drum-fed Stryker 12 street sweeper, which is a fixed magazine, it’s a fixed revolving drum. You don’t remove it. You have to very much similar to a single action army Colt, like the old cowboy revolver. You got to pop out each shell and reload a new shell into that drum, right? Yet you can get a semi-automatic shotgun that is magazine-fed that uses drums that hold more rounds than even the Stryker 12, and it’s a detachable magazine, and they’re just shotguns, which is fine. That’s exactly what they should be, but tell me why the slower to load 12 gauge drum-fed 12-shot magazine shotgun is a destructive device, but the semi-automatic shotgun that uses detachable drum magazines and fires faster and fires semi-automatically, which the Stryker 12 is mechanical, like a revolver that has a spring behind it that helps turn the drum. That those semi-autos are fine, those drum magazines are fine, but somehow the Striker and the Street Sweeper are destructive devices falling under the NFA. Again, it makes absolutely no sense, and we see that quite often when it comes to what’s declared in vain.

Teddy Nappen 12:47

I think you saw the photo, Dad, where they had the one Stryker that had like was it a huge, like it was a 12 inch. It was a huge barrel, like.

Evan Nappen 12:55

Yeah. So, they had done up a trap shooting version that we took to the Grand American and shot trap with, and the last version of the Striker 12 was really quite cool. It could, you could. It had a button. You could have the cylinder roll past one chamber and go to another. So, you could have what they call a Dutch load, where you could have maybe slugs or buckshot or whatever, and then you could push the button and you could immediately change to the load you want to use. That’s kind of cool. And then the later model did self-eject, very ingenious. After you fired it, the next shot would use gas pressure to at least expel the other shell. You still have to manually put the reload in, but it would expel automatically. hey were very cool, and they were very strong. They were, the Stryker 12s were military-spec shotguns. The Street Sweepers were, well, let’s put it this way: not military spec, okay? hey even warned you with the Street Sweepers to just use low brass. How’s that? Just use low brass. I guess they weren’t real confident in anyone using high brass. But on the Striker 12s, they were strong. They could handle anything, and they were extremely well built. But anyway, fun with NFA.

Evan Nappen 14:31

Hey, I also want to mention here about the challenge to New Jersey’s gun permits. While we’re talking about all these great cases that are proceeding in the SCOTUS federal court on challenges, there are Page – 6 – of 12

some challenges trying to take place, and I say trying, to the New Jersey Supreme Court. One of the important challenges to the New Jersey Supreme Court that we’re trying to get the court to move on. Recently, SAF, Second Amendment Foundation, has brought a challenge to New Jersey’s gun permit denial over protected speech. Now, this is an article from our good friend John Petrolino, out of Ammoland, another great aggregate news service on our gun rights. (https://www.ammoland.com/2026/09/new-jersey-gun-permit-denial-protected-speech/?utm_source=Ammoland+Subscribers&utm_campaign=b1b09229ed-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6f6fac3eaa-b1b09229ed-21268623)

Evan Nappen 15:17

f you go there, you’ll see the title is “SAF Challenges New Jersey Gun Permit Denial Over Protected Speech”. This is the case of A.A.R., which was decided in New Jersey and in the appellate division. This is where a person was exercising their First Amendment rights, freedom of speech, and they were saying things that some people wouldn’t like, but nothing dangerous. Not making threats. But things that, you know, you might take issue with over this person’s opinions. Such as remarks online that support white supremacy, misogyny, violence, rape fantasies, use of racial slurs, and more-all allegations, none of which, from all accounts, were criminal. So, apart from sounding like a Democrat, he was targeted and denied and upheld, but none of that has to do with really what is otherwise just free speech.

Evan Nappen 16:34

And you know whatever happened to the old that they the old expression that is often accredited to Voltaire, but I’m-I don’t think Voltaire actually said it, but it’s often accredited to him. It’s something along the lines of, I may disagree with what you’re saying, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it. You see, New Jersey doesn’t take that approach at all. They apply it to take away gun rights. And as John points out in his article, the court’s opinion in this A.A.R. case that is seeking New Jersey Supreme Court certification, so that the New Jersey Supreme Court will have to rule on it, that A.A.R. case, the appellate opinion, relied upon in upholding the constitutionality, the M.U. case.

Evan Nappen 17:28

Now, the M.U. case is my case, from my firm, and as John points out, we asked the New Jersey Supreme Court to hear M.U. over three years ago. The court still hasn’t decided yes or no to hear M.U. So, here you have the appellate division in New Jersey deciding against gun rights, relying upon an appellate decision that went against gun rights. All of this involving the abuse of Second Amendment being taken out by First Amendment restrictions, unlawful in our view, 100% restricting free speech. Yet we’ve been trying to get the Supreme Court to hear it for over three years, and now another case is trying to get the Supreme Court to hear it.

Evan Nappen 18:29

And yet, this newest case is even relying on the older case that the Supreme Court refuses to even say yes or no to hearing. This is the tactic in the judiciary to simply say, “Hey, we’re just not going to decide it. And as New Jersey continues to sit on M.U., it prevents us from going to the United States Supreme Court to ask the U.S. Supreme Court for relief because you have to exhaust your state remedies first. So, this is essentially a roadblock, and now it’s going to be a chain roadblock where M.U. for three Page – 7 – of 12

years is pending. Now A.A.R. is asking on essentially the same issue because of reliance on M.U. and A.A.R. When is the New Jersey Supreme Court going to get off its butt and say, “Hey, we’ll consider it, and then whatever they decide, fine. You want to go totally against it? Great. Now we’ll go to the U.S. Supreme Court to see if they think you’re right. Do you want to do what’s right and say, “Hey, we actually defend free speech, and whether we agree with it, whether it’s reprehensible, we’re going to carve out the boundaries here for what does create a genuine danger or threat.” Or what isn’t. And maybe that’s a test that’ll fly, and maybe even that wouldn’t fly. I don’t know, but just don’t be a roadblock like this. That’s wrong. That’s denial of due process to everybody. Make your decision one way or another. That’s not asking too much. That’s why we have a court system, but it’s not happening in New Jersey, folks. Hopefully, this case that SAF brought will help push us along.

Teddy Nappen 20:29

I don’t know if this would be a thing, but could they, for what the court is doing? I know there’s like the judicial ethics of basically stalling a case because not wanting it to go forward. I don’t even know if that would be even a thing. But could you?

Evan Nappen 20:43

Well, yeah, who are we going to complain to? Who? The Supreme Court that’s delaying it?

Teddy Nappen 20:49

That’s what I’m curious about. Okay, yeah, yeah, no, no, there must be like right. No, there’s no there’s no oversight beyond it.

Evan Nappen 20:57

The oversight is the legislature, which I’m sure is going to just be all completely mad and upset that that New Jersey is delaying due process on gun rights, right? Yeah. So, I mean, where are we going with it? This is the tactic that we’re currently going through here. So, hey, the Trump administration, Second Amendment.

Teddy Nappen 21:24

Yes.

Evan Nappen 21:24

What we can do about it, honestly, is what we’re doing about it right now. Shining the light of public attention. John Petrilino gets credit for his article, putting it out there. Gun Lawyer is here, telling listeners about it. I want every other outlet, media voice out there, because that is our recourse. It’s the public hearing about it, seeing it, and that kind of pressure can make a difference in our society, okay. So, this is why we’re talking about it, man. We need to see action. Like I said, I would love for them to go in our favor, but even if they don’t go in our favor, I’ll still accept that, and we can then take it further in the due process that our system affords. But not allowing that-that’s where it’s absolutely wrong. You’re denying due process. Page – 8 – of 12

Teddy Nappen 22:22

This is one of those times, again, where the I love these states people, states powers rights groups. They always go with that. Like, no. Here’s an exact thing of the abuse of power of the state, where they are literally keeping you in a holding pattern because they want to play politics. They know where the winds is blowing. Like this is disgusting.

Evan Nappen 22:42

A right delayed is a right denied, and we live that in New Jersey. Whether it’s licensing procedures, trying to get through the court system when you’ve been wrongfully denied, all these kind of things. It is fraught with abuse. But the day of reckoning is coming, folks, because we now have a federal Department of Justice Civil Rights Division under President Trump that is actually suing and holding, even to some degree, personally responsible the wrongdoers that have long abused Second Amendment rights. Our Second Amendment rights are the same as our First Amendment rights. It’s the same as our right to free speech and our right to religion, and the practice thereof. It’s in the same category of rights. It’s not a second-class right, the Second Amendment, and it cannot be treated that way. he DOJ is actively pursuing it in the way it should be, and that’s another possibility that New Jersey may be playing with fire on by playing these shenanigans on our rights.

Evan Nappen 23:57

Hey, I want to tell you the latest about our good friends at WeShoot, that is the range where literally Teddy and I, that’s where we shoot. We shoot at WeShoot, and you can shoot at WeShoot, too. And I would highly recommend it. That’s where Teddy and I got our certifications. We get our training. We’ll be taking courses there very shortly, and we’re looking forward to it. We love it there. Great range, great pro shop. Let me tell you about some cool stuff that We Shoot has going on this week. They have the Sig Sauer MPX K AOW, folks. It’s an AOW. It’s there. You can check it out at WeShoot. They have a Century Arms VSKA. It’s a U.S. Draco AOW. That’s right, another AOW, right there at WeShoot. They have Smith & Wesson Bodyguard 2.0 “Gold Nugget”. It’s a little bit of. A bling on the Smith bodyguard, and you can also check out Christina Fernacola. We have a nice photo shoot of Christina, and you’ll find her accessorized very nicely with a lot of great 2A materials, you will see her as a very classy, casual, sporty, or tactical, in which that freedom never goes out of style.

Evan Nappen 25:36

That’s one of the fun things about WeShoot. They have what’s called the many faces of 2A, and it’s important they are doing the community outreach and showing that the stereotype that the oppressionists of our rights always try to paint gun owners as is the furthest thing from the truth. WeShoot reaches into the various communities that want to exercise their Second Amendment rights that break the mold of the stereotype that the other side tries to present, I would highly recommend checking out WeShoot. Their membership sale is still on. You can save $100 to $250 off memberships. So, check out WeShoot and jump on the membership sale.

Evan Nappen 26:32

And let me give you one other little tidbit here that’s very interesting. If you’re familiar with the super high-end Phoenix Trinity, the Phoenix Trinity model. Well, guess what? They’re having a huge sale on the Phoenix Trinity with $2,000 off all models that they have in store. So, if you want a $2,000 savings Page – 9 – of 12

on a Phoenix Trinity, check out WeShoot. You can check out WeShoot online at weshootusa.com. Great website, beautiful photography, but make sure you go there. They’re so conveniently located right off of the Parkway in Lakewood, New Jersey, Central Jersey. They are a great resource and a lot of fun. Go to WeShoot today; you’ll be glad you did. Teddy, what do you have for us in Press Checks?

Teddy Nappen 27:39

Well, as you know, Press Checks are always free. From all the great victories and all the cases that are going through, the Left are already trying to move to the. They’ve already lost. They already know they’re losing the ground, so they have to roll back and move to the, where things are going. They’re trying to cut a stop at the pass, and right now we see the biggest push is shipping guns directly to your doorstep. That is the end all be all of the Left when it comes to. If you look at a lot of the victories, it’s common use, and I am of the opinion, and this is something I’ve stolen from the Left. I rip it off. They had the whole stupid “food deserts”, which is ridiculous because you can order food on Amazon.

Evan Nappen 28:04

What is a “food desert”?

Teddy Nappen 28:15

You can order food wherever and get it delivered. They try to argue, they try to argue about grocery stores being closed after they’re being robbed into oblivion.

Evan Nappen 28:35

They want the shoplifting thing and all that. All the shoplifting. As long as it’s under $1000, shoplifters is no big thing.

Teddy Nappen 28:41

Correct. Correct. So, then they leave those areas. Then the groups, the Left, accuse them of being racist, of leaving areas that have minority populated, and it is basically robbed out of oblivion. So, they call it “food deserts, even though you can order almost everything online. You can order freaking caviar on Amazon. Like you can get any food whatsoever.

Evan Nappen 29:05

But you have to be literate and have internet and a computer. I know you got. I know. Well, maybe you get the free phone, right? So, I guess with the free phone, you could do it. Well, it’s yeah, I know credit card.

Teddy Nappen 29:18

Yeah, cut to Kathy Hochul who tried to argue, saying, “Oh, we gotta allow these computers because they don’t know how to operate them. She was referring to minorities. I love that from the Left. But that’s stunning.

Evan Nappen 29:29

Apparently, they have that view when it comes even to being able to provide an ID to vote. That somehow, yeah, of course, yeah, too incompetent to even be able to produce an ID to vote. Page – 10 – of 12

Teddy Nappen 29:41

Which the polling from even CNN had to admit that. From the very polling that like 90% of blacks and then like I think the number was like 95 have spent crazy number high number showing it yeah that’s ridiculous you need to show ID for everything. But they just have to paint it like oh the poor minority they’re not smart enough like. That is such a racist argument the Left makes, and they’re allowed to get away with it. But anyways, they use that term “food desert”. Well, I’ve stolen that term and turned it into “gun desert”. Where you see this. They’re suing gun dealers into oblivion. Doing their best. From like just ordinances they can’t operate their business, to anything they can to destroy the storefront of gun stores.

Evan Nappen 30:06

So, that is to get rid of gun shops and stores.

Teddy Nappen 30:25

and making it impossible to get firearms.

Evan Nappen 30:30

I like this. So, they’re creating “gun deserts” by intense bureaucracy. Aggressive over enforcement of every minor thing they can come up with. Of making as many bureaucratic hurdles and problems as they possibly can to create. I really like that, Teddy. “Gun deserts” is exactly what they’re trying to do, and they’re doing it also through the tort system of trying to sue out of existence, gun makers and sellers.

Teddy Nappen 31:04

The way that would kill that immediately is online. You can do all the Gun Broker and stuff, but it all has to go through a dealer. This is what they are trying to push and hear in the article from The Trace. Our friends at The Trace that we always love to talk about.

Teddy Nappen 31:20

Heh, you’ve got to do Oppo Research. Oppo Research.

Teddy Nappen 31:22

Always. “House Democrats Say Direct-to-Door Gun Sales Rule Would Endanger Americans”. (https://www.thetrace.org/2026/07/atf-direct-to-door-gun-rule-raskin/) I love the false premise. Immediately logical fallacy. They assuming that it would cause danger, just to say assuming that. Lawmakers warn proposal would make gun trafficking easier while enriching President Donald Trump’s family. Okay. I love how they try to throw that in as a red herring because Don Jr. has his grab a gun. He’s trying to do the online gun sellers on that front, and they’re saying he’s trying to enrich the business. I’m like, here’s the truth of the matter. I don’t care. I want it so that people have accessibility to firearms by any means on that front. Online. Get it shipped directly to your house. I want it. I want an Amazon Prime delivery, one day delivery. That level. I don’t care. But they try to throw that in to create this whole. Page – 11 – of 12

Evan Nappen 32:20

And that’s what it really should be because it’s a constitutionally protected right. It shouldn’t be regarded as anything else other than that. And remember, America for the majority of its existence-that’s exactly what it was. t’s exactly how it was. Didn’t have any. This is all essentially the modern development of the modern Second Amendment oppression movement that basically began in the ’30s. It came out of after World War One, where the foundation got laid after bringing it over from the UK. That’s where it’s really in terms of that. That’s where we’ve seen this occur.

Teddy Nappen 33:14

What’s funny enough? I actually was able to pull the original Sears catalog from 1897, and you just scroll down the page. Oh, nice selection of shotguns, Dad. If you want to order, it’s only be about oh $10, or if you want to save a little bit, 8.99 for a nice quality shotgun.

Evan Nappen 33:40

Well, yeah. I mean, you could order, you could buy a machine gun. I don’t know if Sears sold them, but you could just get a machine gun sent to you. No problem.

Teddy Nappen 33:48

There were ads for pistols.

Evan Nappen 33:52

Yeah, because it was. That’s what it was. No, I’m just saying that’s exactly how it was for most of that entire period of great American freedom. But the good news is we’re making headway in gaining our rights back. So much so that I believe we can get back to virtual complete freedom. We really can get there. And why? Because if you think about it, what did the Bruen decision do? It set a time marker, if you will, for what laws are constitutional or not by what having to show historical analog, a historical analog to the current law. And if you can’t do that, then essentially the law is unconstitutional. So, if you boil it down, what St. Thomas did in Bruen was the great reset of the Second Amendment to what it originally was and how it operated. Because that is what the test boils down to: the Great Reset. Go back. What has been forced upon us, violating our rights, isn’t valid is contrary to the guarantee of our Second Amendment rights, and so this is why so many cases, so much winning. This is extremely exciting because of those things, and I want to mention that this has Been quite a period of time here where we’re gaining so much, and yet New Jersey keeps digging their heels in, kicking and screaming, and trying to stop law-abiding citizens and all these ways of abuse.

Evan Nappen 35:59

I also want to mention that I am hiring again. I am looking for an attorney to hire. We need more manpower with what we’re doing. If you’re an attorney or know someone who is that wants to fight for Second Amendment rights, get a hold of me because we’re looking to add another great Second Amendment attorney to our team. Just go to evannappen.com and let me know.

Evan Nappen 36:27

Also, I want to mention my book, New Jersey Gun Law: The Bible of Jersey Gun Law. If you want to see how many of these gun laws we got to deal with, well, my book’s over 500 pages, 120 topics, all Page – 12 – of 12

question and answer. That book is quite large, and it can in itself be used as a weapon, though I don’t recommend it. But it’s heavy enough, and this will help you not be a GOFU, my friends. And you sure don’t want to be a GOFU, which is something that we deal with all the time. GOFUs, in case you didn’t know, are Gun Owner Fuck Ups, where gun owners make mistakes that can cost them. And let me tell you about this show’s GOFU. Every show we like to have a GOFU where you get to learn for free an expensive lesson. And this GOFU is about knowing what’s in your car, if you’re going to travel, for example, to Canada. I’ve gotten calls, and I’ve gotten people that don’t realize that what they have in their car in terms of firearms, even though it’s legal in the United States, they’re going to have a problem going into Canada. It’s not just guns; it can also be ammo.

Evan Nappen 37:49

I personally almost became a GOFU going into Canada. I was going bear hunting in Canada, and I brought my gun. In those days, you had to check in and do a quasi registration before you were to bring it in. I had a Marlin guide gun, 4570. I love that gun for bear. When I went to do what was needed, suddenly Canadian folks said, “Well, the barrel length has to be over 18 inches on a rifle, and suddenly I was like, “Oh my God! Because in America, you know, it’s 16 for carbines. Now, I honestly was not sure whether a Marlin guide gun had that 16 or 18 inch barrel on. Now, luckily, it was the 18 Canada legal barrel. But man, you had better check and make sure. Don’t even assume that the gun law, even for your hunting gun that is legal in the U.S., is legal if you’re crossing that border. You want to make sure you know what’s in your car before you cross that border, or you can get jammed up and really have a problem. So don’t be a GOFU.

Evan Nappen 39:13

And given Canada’s attitude about guns and everything else, your best bet is not to go to Canada at all if you can avoid it. But if you do, make sure you do a once-over and note in the same way that you check your bags before you travel on an airplane. The same way. Before I go through any metal detector, I do a personal pat down to myself to make sure I don’t have something else on me. You’ve got to do this. You’ve got to be careful. Anytime you’re walking through any checkpoint, you’re vulnerable to becoming a GOFU.

Evan Nappen 39:53

This is Evan Nappen and Teddy Nappen reminding you that gun laws don’t protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens.

Speaker 3 40:06

Gun Lawyer is a CounterThink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York, New York. Reach us by emailing [email protected]. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state.

Known as “America’s Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it’s no wonder he’s become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets.

Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It’s Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News.

As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists.

He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America.

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)

Page – 1 – of 10

Gun Lawyer — Episode 309 Transcript

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

Gun rights, Lawsuit, Self-defense, Second Amendment, New Jersey, Weapon ban, Case law, Bruen case, Legal litigation, Arms ban, Knife rights, Stun guns, Slingshots, Media censorship, Expungement

SPEAKERS

Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen, Speaker 3

Evan Nappen 00:17

I’m Evan Nappen.

Teddy Nappen 00:20

And I’m Teddy Nappen.

Evan Nappen 00:21

And welcome to Gun Lawyer. Well, I have some very exciting news. There is an extremely important lawsuit that has just recently been brought by the Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs, and with Knife Rights, joining in to sue New Jersey. (https://www.anjrpc.org/page/LawsuitToOverturnNJsSelfDefenseBan) Of course, when you do that, you name the Attorney General (Jennifer) Davenport, and also we have the Superintendent of State Police (Jeanne) Hengemuhle. I don’t know. I’m probably butchering that name up pretty good, but anyway, it’s the Superintendent of State Police.

Evan Nappen 01:16

In this case, this Association case, what is being challenged, and it is something that has been begging to be challenged, is New Jersey’s ban on self-defense. It is a part of, specifically, and I’ll explain why, New Jersey’s ban on everything other than guns. Their garbage can clause of weapons prohibition. The insanity of New Jersey’s weapons ban has, in its foundation, really, what I know you, as our great listeners, will find shocking as to the case law as it currently stands in New Jersey, that we are looking to absolutely put into the garbage can of history, and that’s where it belongs.

Evan Nappen 02:25

Let me go through with you the actual complaint. You know, lots of times when you hear about lawsuits and litigation and these things, you usually hear about it in general terms. You hear about, you know, kind of a summary of what it is. We’re going to get a little more into the weeds here, and I think you’re going to find it interesting and why. I’ll expand your horizons to understanding how incredibly significant this litigation is, and how the stars have actually lined up for us, so we’re of course moving under. When I say we, I mean our side. I did help with this litigation. I’m not counsel of record, of course. That’s my good friend and colleague Dan Schmutter. He does the federal litigation for our state Association, and it’s a fantastic job here that has really laid it out well. Page – 2 – of 10

Evan Nappen 03:43

So, we’re coming from, of course, the Second Amendment, and the Second Amendment, as noted in the Bruen case specifically, of the trifecta, the Bruen case, that the Second Amendment’s plain text presumptively guarantees a right to bear arms in public for self-defense. e all know that in our hearts, and we know this as case law. We know that that is what the Second Amendment does, and Bruen established that self-defense outside the home is a protected right. So, in the New York State Rifle versus Pistol Association, I mean New York State Rifle and Pistol versus Bruen, the court also there found that courts should not be in the business of demanding that citizens use more force for self-defense than they are comfortable wielding.

Evan Nappen 04:55

What does this all mean, and how does this apply to New Jersey? Well, it’s very simple. Let’s accept the initial premise, the Second Amendment is not the right to keep and bear guns. It’s the right to keep and bear arms, and arms are a lot more than guns. Arms are essentially any tool of self-defense, and we have the right for that. And what New Jersey is now going to have to defend is the insanity of where New Jersey wants to keep us defenseless. Absolutely wants to keep us defenseless, and the case law proves it. So, the key case that we’re going to talk about in just a little bit of the existing case law is a case of State v. Kelly.

Evan Nappen 05:58

But before we get to Kelly, let me talk about the specific statute, the specific laws, so you get an understanding of what New Jersey does. New Jersey defines “weapon” as anything readily capable of lethal use or of inflicting serious bodily injury. Then it says the term includes, but is not limited to, and they do a laundry list of weapons, and of the weapons that they list, a lot of them are pretty good ideas. But anyway, it’s all part of it. So, you find that definition under N.J.S. 2C:39-1(r). So, in other words, under New Jersey’s definition of “weapon”, anything can be prohibited as a weapon. Aa baseball bat, a hammer, a screwdriver, a knife, a box cutter, bear spray, a stick, anything, and if you use it as a weapon, even your shoe, then it’s a weapon.

Evan Nappen 07:10

A good example: if you happen to have a baseball bat in your car, but you’re not on the way to a baseball game, you can be arrested, prosecuted, imprisoned for weapon possession. Here’s how it works. Because New Jersey’s prohibition-remember, weapon is just what we talked about in definition-but the prohibition, which you find under N.J.S. 2C:39-5(d), prohibits the possession of any weapon. In other words, any object can be used as a weapon. And here’s right from the statute quote: Under circumstances not manifestly appropriate for such lawful uses as it may have, and here’s the kicker: you might think to yourself, “Okay, as long as you have a manifest appropriate use, right, a lawful use, then you should be okay.” Well, here’s a shocker, folks. In State v. Kelly, the court found that preemptively arming yourself for self-defense, to have a weapon for self-defense, is not a lawful use. Let that sink in. You can be prosecuted because you had the nerve to arm yourself with a weapon for self-defense, which is our constitutionally protected right to be able to do. And where do you hear the facts? Page – 3 – of 10

Teddy Nappen 09:01

Go ahead, Teddy. In the complaint, demonstrating that the biggest. I love how they pepper, and you can when you’re reading it, you see they always hammer this point back. Versus State v. Kelly, the single mother.

Evan Nappen 09:15

Well, yeah, I want. Let’s talk. I want to talk about the facts of Kelly. Here’s the facts of Kelly. 1990, Kelly case. A single mother of a young child was convicted of possessing a box cutter after successfully fending off her violent boyfriend, who was in the process of beating her to death. Did you hear that? As far as the charges for her use of the box cutter to save her life and defend herself, child, etc. that was all fine. But she’s convicted of possessing the knife under 39:5(d) because the court makes this decision that essentially finds, back in 1990, and it still, you know, that law is still on the books as case law. It’s been modified slightly, and we’ll get to that in a moment. That having a weapon for self-defense doesn’t fit that “manifest lawful purpose”. It’s crazy. Then from there, a subsequent case, after the decision in Heller and McDonald applying the Second Amendment to back to the state of New Jersey, the courts decided another case called Montalvo. In Montalvo, in that case, a person comes to the door with a machete. Somebody’s banging on the door. He doesn’t know who it is, and it’s law enforcement. Well, he didn’t know that, and he wasn’t threatening them. But when he came to the door with the machete, he’s like, “oh, it’s officers, not a problem. He’s not. Well, there’s like, “Hey, you just preemptively armed yourself with a weapon for self-defense. They charge him in the same manner that Kelly had been charged, but the court here distinguished because they realized they had to under Heller, where you were allowed to have in your home weapons for self-defense. The court there said, well, if you preemptively arm yourself in your home, that’s okay, but not outside your home. So, the current law right now is you can’t preemptively arm yourself with any of these other weapons outside your home.

Evan Nappen 11:53

Now, when it comes to a gun, that’s different. If you have a handgun and that’s a carry permit, and that’s where you’re allowed to, but only a handgun with a carry permit, right? Short of that, with the minor exception of less than three quarters of an ounce of pepper spray, you cannot preemptively arm yourself with any of these things. And if you have something like that, and it’s a weapon, you’re subject to prosecution for a felony level offense, and New Jersey is now going to be put to the mat on this law. The full definition under 39- 1(r) of non-firearm weapon means anything readily capable of lethal use or inflicting serious bodily injury. The term includes, but is not limited to, and of course, it includes firearms. But with firearm licensing, you have the exception.

Evan Nappen 12:55

Then, gravity knives, switchblade knives, daggers, dirks, stilettos, other dangerous knives, whatever the hell that means, billies, which are similar to nightsticks and trudgens, and they’re impact weapons, right? Blackjacks, bludgeons, metal knuckles, sand clubs, slingshots. Oh, slingshots! Cesti or similar leather bands studded with metal filings or razor blades embedded in wood. Like I said, has a lot of good ideas here, but all these weapons, cesti leather wrap, that was famous. You know, the Roman gladiators would wrap their hands in leather wrap, etc. Well, that’s just a list of what it includes, but isn’t limited to. And by the way, in the list of weapon is stun guns and other devices which project, release, Page – 4 – of 10

or emit tear gas. So, the exemption for tear gas or other, you know, pepper spray and all that is less than three quarters of an ounce.

Evan Nappen 14:07

Well, this lawsuit will make it so you can have any size of pepper spray, etc. Stun guns, even though you may have heard about New Jersey saying stun guns are lawful. They’re lawful for possession, but not carrying outside your home. So, winning this lawsuit will make it legal to carry your stun gun or your taser outside the home, and any of these other weapons that you may want to use as a tool of self-defense. This is where it becomes very critical because the 39-5(d) weapon possession charge. Remember, 39-five is where you have the handgun prohibition under B and rifles and shotguns under C. Well, D is “other weapons”, and that says any person who knowingly has possession any other weapon, right?

Evan Nappen 15:11

All the stuff we’ve been talking about, under circumstances not manifestly appropriate for such lawful uses as it may have, is guilty of a crime of the fourth decree carries a year and a half in state’s prison, and the case law is insane, saying that self-defense doesn’t fit the lawful use, and so this is once and for all going to address and end this. And we have, of course, Bruen making it clear we have a right to self-defense even outside the home. The third and final modification, to or second, depending I want to look at it, where Kelly went, where you couldn’t do it at all, and then Montalvo limited to the home. We now need to make it inside and outside the home. You can have weapons, and by doing this, all of these will be freed up to be used as a tool of self-defense. And we will make it clear. Wait, okay. Let me just finish it. We’ll make it clear That self-defense is a lawful purpose permitted by law, and that will have even further implications down the road to other unconstitutional acts that New Jersey forces us to suffer under. Go ahead, Ted.

Teddy Nappen 16:44

Well, in the complaint as well, they take it a step further. They go after the per se ban on specific arms, where they go through that entire list. But look at the thing they hammer home: common use. That is the tool that wins the day for the assault weapon ban, wins the day on the suppressors. That is the key language that we need to show and hammer through the idea of all this is commonly used. So people continue to having it so we’re you know possession of knives. How many people own knives? How many people own these various things? Tasers.

Evan Nappen 17:18

Well, throughout free America, most of just about all these are legal. They’re utilized by different people. They’re out there. I mean, from a nightstick to a billy club, blackjack, etc. These are all the impact weapons. I mean, generally they’re just impact weapons. So, the impact weapon, a club, you know, is probably man’s first weapon, right? I mean, just watch, you know, Space Odyssey, right? What’s the first, you know, the bone as a club, right? Right. So impact weapons are probably the first and most fundamental of all human weapons, and yet Jersey, no, no, you can’t have that for self-defense outside. Well, talk about primary. This is primary, original weapon, we also know that many of these weapons, as in Kelly, are utilized even by domestic violence victims to protect themselves. And interestingly, about Kelly is that was 1990, and you might say the great awakening and awareness of Page – 5 – of 10

domestic violence didn’t occur until after that, somewhat after that, when you saw the ability of in an understanding where domestic violence victims need protection, like restraining orders and other things. It was until 1994 that a domestic violence restraining order even became a gun prohibitor itself on the violent offenders, and so it seems really shocking today that that a bona fide victim of domestic violence would end up being even charged in a situation where they defend themselves, but leave it to New Jersey to turn defenders into victims, and then double down on their victimization with the insane weapon laws that New Jersey has.

Teddy Nappen 19:44

We’ve seen that before, Dad. With Shaneen Allen. They don’t care. Oh, weapon, gun, bad. Doesn’t matter to its oppressor and oppressee. You used a weapon, so obviously you’re an oppressor. That’s just the logic of Marxists. That’s what they always do. Even if it’s a victim of a domestic violence or a single black mom with two kids who only crime was going over the Benjamin Bridge, like these are, it always goes back to that.

Evan Nappen 20:10

Well, let me let me make it clear: whether anybody listening has any desire to carry a blackjack or to carry a knife or do any of that? That’s not what really matters here. Although that’s very important, what really matters here is forcing the State to recognize self-defense as a lawful purpose. That’s really the key to what this case is going to establish, and we’re very happy to have Knife Rights joining in with lawsuit as well. This will also, hopefully it will, put New Jersey with the ranks of the overwhelming majority. There’s only maybe a handful, five or six states left that even prohibit so-called switchblades, what we call automatic knives anymore.

Evan Nappen 21:13

And then, of course, the silliest of the silly, the craziest of the crazy, is the ban on slingshots. I mean, New Jersey makes possession of a slingshot a felony level offense, and so this is there. And yet, the slingshot is even used by the Boy Scouts in their current curriculum for Cub Scouts as an introduction to shooting. So there are Cub Scout camps where slingshots are part of the curriculum, you know, and it’s a good entry even before archery, even before shooting of air guns or any of that, is learning the discipline, and slingshots can play that role. Plus, there are competitive, highly competitive slingshot events that take place all through the nation, but not in New Jersey because they ban slingshots. And so, this is going to be addressed. You know, going to finally get stun guns handled. All these things that become nuisance laws that I also believe go to a bigger agenda, and that agenda is if they can turn us into criminals in any way, even over a slingshot, then they’ve disenfranchised another gun owner from voting and from being able to exercise their Second Amendment rights because if you become convicted of slingshot possession in Jersey, you become, which is essentially felony level offense. Well, you’ve just lost your gun rights for the entire United States because you’re now a convicted felon. So, this is really good work by the state association and Knife Rights, and very excited to see this progress. We’ll be keeping you informed as it does progress.

Evan Nappen 23:14

Hey, I want to tell you all about WeShoot because WeShoot, which is the range where Teddy and I both shoot. Teddy and I both shoot at WeShoot, hence we can say We Shoot there. At WeShoot, they Page – 6 – of 10

have a special deal running on membership. That’s right. WeShoot membership is on sale. You can save $100 on a yearly individual or family membership, and you can save $250 on the signature VIP membership. Check out WeShootUSA. WeShoot memberships are great. This sale is going on until October 18th, so you should move on it now while you can. Let me tell you some of the benefits of membership include unlimited range time, priority lane assignment, 3% instant cash back on all in-store purchases, 5% off accessories, special pricing on ammo and targets, five free guest passes, okay, 50% off rentals, and even more member benefits. So, you can buy it online, or you can go it to the store. The sale ends October 18. Make sure you take advantage of this great sale by WeShoot, and then you’ll have the advantage of being able to shoot there and train there, and you’ll love We Shoot. Teddy and I sure do. Go to WeShootUSA.com.

Evan Nappen 25:02

Let me also shamelessly plug my book, New Jersey Gun Law, the Bible of Jersey Gun Law. It’s over 500 pages and 120 topics, all question and answer. Make sure you get your copy today so you don’t become a GOFU. And given the size and weight of my book, it would qualify as a weapon if used as such under New Jersey law. So, maybe that’s the way they would try to ban books, especially gun law books, to try to keep you from being a GOFU. And if you have that in your car, oh boy, yeah. So, watch out for anything that can be a weapon, but the best weaponization of my book is that you become protected from New Jersey’s insanity that they call gun control laws. Go to EvanNappen.com and get your copy today. Just click on the big orange book and order a copy. You can do that.

Evan Nappen 26:05

Also, I’d like to point out that Nappen Law is always growing. We’re busy, busy, and we’re looking to hire. So, if you know, or if you are an attorney that wants to work in the fascinating area of New Jersey gun law, give me a call. Jump on. Go to EvanNappen.com. Get in touch with me. We’re looking to hire. Teddy, what do you have for us today in Press Checks, which we all know are free?

Teddy Nappen 26:40

Yes, of course. You stole my line. Anyways.

Evan Nappen 26:43

I try.

Teddy Nappen 26:45

No, it’s all right. But doing a little bit more research again, always keeping on the opposition, to see what they’re pushing. I love how desperate they’ve gotten now to where you know we have The Trace. But, of course, Everytown had to create their math mouthpiece as well. So, they’ve created a website called the Smoking Gun. (https://smokinggun.org/report/loaded-content/) The very thing that caught fire on the internet over it was they put out a hit piece on gun tubers. Don’t you know, Dad, that influencers are the problem in the gun and are the pushing for gun violence. It’s the influencers, Dad. That’s the problem. Page – 7 – of 10

Evan Nappen 26:45

Oh, yeah. That’s what we do every day on this show, right? Push for gun violence. As long as the gun violence is proper, because you know there’s good gun violence where you’re using gun violence to save your life or that of a loved one, and so gun violence. They try to make it a pejorative, which is of course their plan.

Teddy Nappen 27:48

Well, that’s from after seeing the last conversation. They don’t care that it’s violence. Oh, therefore bad oppressor, oppressee. It’s always that route. But the thing particularly they are focused on was YouTube, where typically the gun tubers is their term used. The fact that there there’s a huge amounts of sponsorships, a lot of influencers promote a lot of different stuff, a lot of some of the tactical areas, some more political breaking down firearm news, and they’re upset with the fact that YouTube has allowed these guys to grow to massive heights, so I love this whole article that they wrote up from the smoking gun on there. YouTube has provided a long platform for firearm contact videos that the mass shooter in Buffalo and is often referred to as Gun Tube. I love how they always tie that. I want every article to start with the mass shooter who owned a copy of Rage written by Stephen King. I want that to open up. Yeah, continue. Video on GunTube frequently depict dangerous activities and hateful rhetoric, and often sponsored by firearm companies. Oh no, sponsors into 1000s of videos glorifying military.

Evan Nappen 29:04

Well, there’s no other, there’s no other YouTubers that get sponsored by anyone, right?

Teddy Nappen 29:10

I know, right? Not that kind of thing, but they go through this entire article just bashing the various like massive explosiveness of the when it came to YouTube because they point out purchasing banner ads and television spots the organic factors retailers embedded themselves directly in content. Oh, gee, I wonder why? Because they left control most of that media and they wouldn’t allow them to market stuff on the mainstream, so they were forced to go to the internet and YouTube, and then now.

Evan Nappen 29:42

But also, they’re reaching their target market with that. You’re reaching a target market where the people that are listening and watching these shows are people that would have a strong propensity to be interested in the in the. Products, as opposed to some general approach on some general TV show, where so many of the people, if they’re even watching, don’t necessarily have any interest in what you’re selling.

Teddy Nappen 30:15

Yeah, and also it goes back to the fact that they’re upset that the media their grasp on controlling the narrative and controlling where information flows, because YouTube was heavy, heavy amounts of censorship. People are getting demonetized, losing videos, and now they’ve lost that grip, and now they’re crying, wham, wham, that they don’t have the power to control and to subvert the dangerous, violent rhetoric of gun tubers, so and they even highlight the fact that ABC, CBS don’t allow firearm advertising. Google and Meta itself all but prohibited paid gun ads. So that’s their big. That was their big push in that argument. And then you go deeper into the article, and they go into the oh dad, don’t you Page – 8 – of 10

know it’s all Astroturf by the insidious relationship between the gun industry and gun tubers with this group known as Leviathan. It’s literally a it’s an advertising agency where they bring you have a product you want to market said product we have influencers who will market said product.

Teddy Nappen 31:23

You know who also did that? Dylan Mulvaney. That’s how you ended up with him on the Bud Light can because it was a group that promoted transgenders. Like they’re acting like this whole thing is great. No, it’s just a simple market. Oh, we have products that maybe interest these people who watch these tubers? Would you would these tubers be interested in that? And they try to paint it up like it’s a whole like mafia esque where a few like Ian McCollum who does Forgotten Weapons he didn’t want to be he broke off the relationship with Leviathan and then Grand Thumb another big tuber he was one who didn’t want to do the relationship because he wanted to be independent. Which people can do that if they want to talk to their own sponsors and not be beholden to a group. That’s fine. That’s just normal capitalism, not this insidious nature. But they paint it up like it’s the combining of that, and I love this. They combine that with attacking the Gundies, where they act like the Gundies is this recruitment operation to promote and then bring them into the insidious network of the gun lobby and gun manufacturers.

Evan Nappen 32:38

Oh, my G-d! There’s conspiracy around every corner. But of course they’re reaching because they’re losing so badly in the courts. They’re losing so badly under the Trump administration and the changes that have been implemented by regulation and a complete change in attitude by our federal government, even the DOJ prosecuting for violating Second Amendment rights. I mean, it’s a complete, total new day and turnaround. And they know that their days are numbered on their pet issues, especially assault, firearm, and magazines. Come June, when that goes away, what are they going to have? All they have is this kind of stuff, where they have to try to contrive out of you know First Amendment attack because that’s what this is. You know, since the Second Amendment is harder to go at, they’re trying to go at it from go at First Amendment, but they’re going to just be left with ultimately their entire mission will be trying to repeal the Second Amendment. We’ve got to be ready for that fight. Of course, that’s a very difficult road for them to do. But that’s where they’ll end up. That’s the only thing they’ll have left. We just got to repeal that darn Second Amendment and fight for it, and we’ll be fighting against them over that, and that’ll be a great day when the fight has just finally only become that, where the Second Amendment has freed us from all these oppressive gun laws that we’ve suffered under for all these years, turning law-abiding citizens into criminals.

Teddy Nappen 34:22

Yep, and I love how they just like to throw every single word at all the influencers. Like they attack Grand Thumb, like call him, like using transphobic slurs online and decorating his firearms, like in white supremacist not monikers. Like it’s.

Evan Nappen 34:37

Oh, of course, and then just put every. Page – 9 – of 10

Teddy Nappen 34:39

Go after Brandon Herrera, too. You know, the famous gun tuber, the AK guy currently running, where

Evan Nappen 34:47

Yeah, he’s political now.

Teddy Nappen 34:48

Assassinations. Even though he’s showing how the guns work and showing how that works, and then they go after like Colin Noir as well. They going after like part of a like conspiracy. Theorists, all this front, like everything they do on this front, just to go at that. And guess what? The final ending of it. Here are recommend recommendations for YouTube, and you go right to it as YouTube must enforce all firearm policies that are not consistent with community guidelines. YouTube must enforce child safety policies. YouTube must amend its community guidelines, prohibit content that shows viewers maximize their lethality, and demonstrate violence or unsafe firearm handling. What does all that mean? Whatever YouTube decides, what they decide. And they, by the way, they hire these people, these essentially like sensitivity readers from these organizations to come into YouTube, and that’s how people get demonetized and banned. Go back to 2018. That’s how they got. That’s how they banned Crowder. They banned all conservatives through YouTube and demonizing Facebook.

Evan Nappen 35:51

But now there’s competition to YouTube, right? Specifically, Rumble.

Teddy Nappen 35:55

Rumble, Rumble. You have, now you have Kik. You have so many now avenues that because YouTube was losing such of its market share due to censorship, they’ve rolled back a crap. They still will censor people and they’ll still demonetize things, but they knew and saw it, so now they have to.

Evan Nappen 36:13

But it’s a different dynamic because they still have their business interests. If they want to lose, they can go down the road of censorship and oppression, and they’ll lose their market shares. So, that’s what’s at play that makes it a little different today. I understand why the Second Amendment haters are trying to put this out there. You know what’s what they. But this is luckily a somewhat different environment because of competition, which is great. Well, Teddy, I want to thank you for highlighting the attacks on First Amendment gun speech, as well as what we’re dealing with every day on our Second Amendment violations.

Evan Nappen 37:02

I want to tell you about this week’s GOFU, which is the Gun Owner Fuck Up. It’s where gun owners make expensive, costly mistakes that you get to learn for free, so you don’t make them. Let me make this clear. This is about expungement. Now, more than ever, you know, we do lots of expungement where we clear your prior mistakes. You know you get a second chance where you can get a clean slate, and it’s really great to see rights restored for people. Well, if you’ve gotten a New Jersey expungement, the law makes it clear. It says, with an expungement, it is deemed not to have occurred, and you may answer accordingly. Page – 10 – of 10

Evan Nappen 37:52

So, if you’re asked about something that you were expunged, you have a bona fide expungement, then the answer you give is accordingly. In other words, have you ever been convicted of a crime? If that crime has been expunged, your answer is no, legally no, because that’s what expungement does. It restores the rights. It removes the conviction, and it restores you. So, don’t volunteer. Don’t. As a matter of fact, if you’re asked, “Have you ever been convicted of a crime? and can answer accordingly, you’re almost falsifying by saying yes, because it’s been expunged. It’s deemed not to have occurred. Of course, it doesn’t mean you can’t reveal it, but it’s really foolish. And then what happens is that leads to a knowledge where they try to then open expungement, use it on your gun application. Try to mess with you over it, folks. Know your rights. When you get an expungement, make sure if you have any question, talk to your attorney that did the expungement. They will be able to advise you on how you can answer the question. There are some exceptions to expungement law, more about if you’re working in law enforcement or in the judiciary, but there are not that many exceptions at all. It’s pretty much a solid rights restoration and clean slate, and that’s the idea and that’s the purpose behind it. So, make sure that when you get these things, and that you know your rights when it comes to what you’ve just gotten.

Evan Nappen 39:50

This is Evan Nappen and Teddy Nappen reminding you that gun laws do not protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens.

Speaker 3 40:02

Gun Lawyer is a CounterThink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York, New York. Reach us by emailing [email protected]. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state.

Known as “America’s Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it’s no wonder he’s become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets.

Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It’s Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News.

As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists.

He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America.

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)

Gun Lawyer Transcript – Episode 308

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

Gun Law, Handgun Ban, Second Amendment, Summary Judgment, New Jersey, Constitutional Rights, Firearms Regulation, Licensing, Civil Rights, Derivative Disarmament, Public Safety, Legal Advice, Gun Ownership, Criminal Law, Court Case

SPEAKERS

Speaker 2, Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen

Evan Nappen  00:17

I’m Evan Nappen.

Teddy Nappen  00:19

And I’m Teddy Nappen.

Evan Nappen  00:22

Yes, you are, and welcome to Gun Lawyer. We have a lot of interesting things to discuss at this time. You’re going to want to know. Very important. New Jersey’s one-handgun-a-month law is on the chopping block. I believe, on its deathbed. We have a fascinating situation that has developed here, and that is regarding the challenges. There are multiple challenges to New Jersey’s one-handgun-a-month ban. Now, this is also from a great article in AmmoLand, one of our favorite two-way news sources, and this is article by Duncan Johnson, which you can read. (https://www.ammoland.com/2026/09/new-jersey-one-handgun-a-month-ban-challenge/?utm_source=Ammoland+Subscribers&utm_campaign=f650d620f6-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6f6fac3eaa-f650d620f6-21268623)

Evan Nappen  01:15

It says, “New Jersey’s One-Handgun-a-Month Ban Faces Summary-Judgment Challenge”. And what we’re talking about here is this. There were, I guess, at least two cases challenging the one-handgun-a-month New Jersey ban, where you can’t buy more than one handgun in 30 days. Now, I’ve always tried to look at New Jersey’s one gun a month law as a requirement that you buy at least one handgun a month, but that, of course, is not the intent of the law. And you have FPC, which is Foreign Policy Coalition, NRA, GOA, you know, Gun Owners America, and other gun rights plaintiffs. They’re in federal court, and they’re looking to have New Jersey’s one handgun a month restriction shot down, so that you can buy as many handguns as you wish without being restricted in a time frame.

Evan Nappen  02:16

New Jersey has had this one handgun a month law since 2009. You can find it under N.J.S. 2C:58-3.(i), and what it states there is that only one handgun may be purchased or delivered on each permit, and no more than one handgun shall be purchased within a 30-day period. So, this statute restricts the number of handguns. There’s no restriction, by the way, on long arms. This has been just another outrage of the salami tactics used by the gun rights oppressionists, and we have these two cases that are challenging it. Now, what makes this really fascinating is the power of Bruen and the trifecta that we’ve seen of the empowerment of the Second Amendment. The test of constitutionality has now led to us being the good guys, able to file what is known as a Summary Judgment brief, meaning that there’s no need for a trial, and the court can simply rule on the issue as a matter of law, which does very much expedite the process. The reason that that is now being able to be done, and it’s what is being attempted here in knocking out this infringement on our Second Amendment rights, is as follows. Now, New Jersey, the Second Amendment, the text of the Second Amendment, which now applies to states, you know, began with Heller, then you had McDonald that incorporated it to the states. So, New Jersey regained Second Amendment protection, which did not exist prior to the 1960s, when the court actually found, believe it or not, the New Jersey court at the time that the Second Amendment didn’t apply to New Jersey. Well, too bad it does. Big shock.

Evan Nappen  04:28

And now that it does. The Second Amendment and the way you test laws today on that, the question first becomes: Does the Second Amendment cover the proposed conduct that the State is attempting to regulate? In this case, does the Second Amendment apply to the purchase of handguns and possession of handguns, and it plainly does. There’s no question it does. And once that happens, once that’s acknowledged and it’s readily apparent, the burden then shifts. This is critical. The burden of proof then shifts to New Jersey in this case, or to the Government to establish that its restriction is consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearms regulations, what we call text, tradition, history, etc. You have to show a historical analog, in other words, an old gun law from when the Second Amendment was enacted, or maybe at best from the 1860s, that had a law that said you can’t buy more than one gun within a month, or some analogous law to that.

Evan Nappen  06:12

And what makes this really great is that New Jersey, the State of, retained two historians, Brennan Rivera and Robert Spitzer, and both of their experts acknowledge the central historical problem that laws like New Jersey’s handgun rationing mandate did not exist in the early days of our country’s history. It didn’t exist. And because they cannot meet this burden, it is a matter for summary judgment that the law is unconstitutional. Because if the State can’t meet the burden, then the law falls as unconstitutional. That is the power of the Bruen constitutionality test. Most interesting, there’s a recent precedent in Bonita, the Bonita case, out of the Ninth Circuit in California, which struck down California’s one firearm per 30-day law, so there’s even precedent where the same problem. And in California, they tried to argue so-called historical analog, including gunpowder regulation. They tried everything: licensing schemes, taxes, dealer records, Native American trade restrictions. I mean, they always fall back to the, you know, racist arguments. The Left always tries to claim they’re the champions for race, and yet they happily rely on racist gun laws of the past, which don’t cut it anymore. And none of them could establish a historical cousin for the law.

Evan Nappen  08:10

Therefore, you know, New Jersey now is extremely well positioned, especially considering that we’re dealing with the Third Circuit that recently put forward the fantastic decision in which the semi-automatic ban and the magazine ban were found unconstitutional in the full court en banc decision finding the unconstitutionality of those laws, so the stars have aligned quite nicely here. I am optimistic here that we will finally see the death of New Jersey’s one gun a month as the continuous pounding of the power of the newly, relatively speaking, newly empowered Second Amendment does its job, destroying infringement after infringement.

Teddy Nappen  09:18

When they were bringing in that law, the one gun a month. What was the Left’s key argument at the time? What was the thing they always try to push in that?

Evan Nappen  09:28

Well, one of the absurdities they tried to push is that individuals would put in for a whole bunch of New Jersey pistol purchase permits. I mean, we’re talking individual paper, right? You know what it takes to buy a handgun in New Jersey. You have to put a full application process. Then the permit registers the gun, and the form of register is to the purchaser who acquired. Then it goes to the local authorities. It’s on file with the dealer, and it goes to the State Police, and it’s entered into a state police database. Okay, that someone’s going to go and get all these permits, buy a whole bunch of handguns so they can sell them on the streets. This is the absurdity. No one does that. Nobody done that, which is itself an offense anyway. That was the best they could do. Best they could do. There is no, there is no even reasonable reason for this, other than to try to create various burdens on those that want to exercise their Second Amendment rights. It’s what the oppressors do. This is what they do. So the law is ridiculous.

Evan Nappen  10:56

Now there is ability, supposedly, if you want to acquire a collection or something else. You could then file a separate application for permission to acquire more than one gun within 30 days. But it is absolutely nowhere to be found in our historical text history and tradition. The burden is on New Jersey, and their own experts acknowledge that it doesn’t exist. It makes it ripe for summary judgment, and with a summary judgment giving us hopefully a victory on eliminating this. So that yeah, at the moment, you still need to get permits for any handgun you want to get, but you won’t be limited to one in 30 days.

Teddy Nappen  11:44

It’s kind of it’s very if you kind of think of the logic behind it, where they’re trying to okay, what is this actually accomplishing in their eyes? Because they’re saying, oh, they’re gonna someone’s gonna sell industry. Okay, that’s already a crime. You’re not curtailing the person’s still buying the gun. They still have to go through the paperwork. Still getting rid. Still meeting all the criteria. So, in what scenario is this curtailing crime?

Evan Nappen  12:10

Teddy, you can’t. The problem with your question is that the premise is that you’re somehow giving the benefit of the doubt, for no reason, by the way, to those that want to oppress our rights, as having any real reason based in public safety or any kind of actual logical argument for doing this. The reason they’re doing it is to oppress us. Period. End of story. There is no other logical, rational, statistical nothing that backs their claims. Nothing. It’s just well, the legal term is bullshit. That’s all they have, and this is going to go. It’s got to go. There’s no rational reason, even in terms of the old constitutional question of, you know, is there a rational basis? And because that was so broad in the old days, you know, if you said, well, because if the aliens from outer space attacked, we need this or some insanity, well, okay, you know it was so. Those days are dead and gone. There’s no reason for this. They can’t justify it.

Evan Nappen  13:27

And one thing for sure, they can’t meet this burden that has now empowered the Second Amendment, and they couldn’t even come up with a lie, you know, even lies to support why this is necessary. Let’s face it. Once you’re qualified to have one handgun, you’re now a handgun owner. So, what does getting another handgun have to do with anything? And look, the most guns you can hold at one time in your hands, assuming you have two arms and two hands, is two guns. So, what difference does it make how many firearms a person owns once they’re approved? And that’s the other underlying problem they have. Every person with a handgun purchase permit is approved to purchase a handgun. Why are they now suddenly prohibited on buying another one in 30 days? What does that have to do with anything other than some bizarre argument of which nobody has ever done this that decides? Yeah, we’re going to have a whole bunch of papered guns that’ll go right back to my name, go out into the street because I’m going to sell them illegally, right? Which is already a crime anyway, so it’s nonsense. That’s why, Teddy.

Teddy Nappen  14:47

Okay, yeah. It’s the the logical fallacy is false premise. By the way, that’s the I was trying to get at is they start with a false premise and there you fall false logical trails.

Evan Nappen  14:57

You’re absolutely right. It is false, logical fallacy, and they specialize. Their party should be called the logical fallacy party. I think that would be very fitting. You know, there’s another term I want our beloved listeners to know, and it really applies. I haven’t seen the term used before, but it is really right on point. It’s called “derivative disarmament”. It’s a no-fault loss of gun rights. Now ,this is directly from NRA-ILA, where they’re talking about derivative disarmament, and it’s a word that we, as defenders of our Second Amendment rights, need to know. Because New Jersey partakes in derivative disarmament and having the correct language that explains it is very important. Derivative disarmament is when somebody else in a household may be disqualified from having a firearm, possessing a gun, and then they say everyone in the household is disqualified. It’s a derivative disarmament that somehow you forfeit your individual rights because somebody else in the household has lost their rights. And New York is all over this, by the way, and they even have built into their laws where they look into the status of persons other than licensees, but you know this happens in New Jersey as well.

Evan Nappen  16:48

We see derivative disarmament happening where there is attempts by New Jersey to say that a person loses their Second Amendment rights, because somebody else in the household is prohibited, and they use the public health, safety, welfare disqualifier, which is so vague and so broad. I call it the all-inclusive, miscellaneous weasel clause. This is an area of major abuse, and New Jersey attempts to abuse public health, safety, welfare by creating derivative disarmament. So, beware of that. We fight these battles not infrequently. Let me tell you, where they try to stop individuals, and some counties are just notorious on pursuing derivative disarmament. So, it’s something to know. And now we have a label that actually gives power in our fight over that.

Evan Nappen  18:01

I want to tell you. You know, we deal all the time with such insanity and prejudice and hype and nonsense that just is astounding. And when I see an example of it, I just want to bring it to everybody’s attention because it just illustrates the absurdity. So, Fox News, you know, they have a website where they put headlines. You know Fox News has many different ways of broadcasting their news. They do podcast. They have, of course, the cable channel and Fox Business, and there are so many Foxings. But one of the things they have is they have Fox News on their website, where you can see various stories, articles. Here is the headline from Fox News. Ready, folks? This is the actual headline from Fox News by Kelly McGreal. Here’s the headline: Airport X-ray shows terrifying object taped in carry-on to skip checked baggage fee. (https://www.foxnews.com/travel/airport-x-ray-shows-terrifying-object-taped-carry-on-skip-checked-baggage-fee) What terrifying object, my friends? What terrifying object? Wait, wait, wait, wait, no. Was it a, was it a, was it a picture of Kamala maybe?

Teddy Nappen  19:32

No, no, no. It was a picture, it was a picture of Woody and Buzz because he has a holster on the side. Not a gun.

Evan Nappen  19:39

I don’t know No, no, no! Brace yourself! And if anyone is easily terrified, don’t say I didn’t warn you. The terrifying object, and you can go to Fox News and you can see an actual picture of this horrific thing, and what it is. No joke. Brace yourself. It is a Chinese-made pocket knife that is a knockoff, essentially, of a Swiss Army Classic, in which the blade on the terrifying object, because they actually show the knife on a ruler, on a ruler, and the blade length is about one inch, and even being generous, one inch three quarters, not even a two inch blade. It’s that super small, little Classic that so many people have on their keyring. Only this is the cheapo Chinese version with the silver handle. This terrifying object is so terrifying that not only does it have that blade under two inches on it, but it also has a scissors. It has a mini scissors, and really terrifying, a nail file. A nail file is in that little keyring Chinese knockoff Swiss Army knife. I kid you not. What a terrifying object?

Teddy Nappen  21:24

Does it have, does it have the toothpick?

Evan Nappen  21:26

No, because that would be more expensive, and it’s a Chinese knockoff. It doesn’t even have the toothpick. If you at least went with the Swiss version, I mean, at least the Swiss know what they’re doing. That one has that you know toothpick and tweezer, which is actually quite handy. You know that stuff. But this one is a cheapo Chinese. It’s even they say less than a $5 knife. She was going camping and wanted to bring a knife. Why you’d bring that silly knife for camping? I mean, I’d have a hell of a lot better camping knife than that. She did not want to pay $100 baggage fee, so she could bring her little inch and three quarter bladed keyring knife. And TSA, thank God for TSA, caught it before that weapon, that terrifying weapon made it onto an airplane. Can you imagine the fear and just panic? I can’t even phantom the mayhem that could have occurred with such a terrifying weapon, being able to make it onto the plane. And what TSA did here, given the severity of it, is she had to surrender it. They let her board. So, that is the article on Fox News, by the way.

Teddy Nappen  22:59

So, check your local surplus stores for a tiny little knife that may have been bought.

Evan Nappen  23:04

Oh yeah, but I wouldn’t. I wouldn’t even want to have that one. I mean, it’s a piece of junk, that garbage. I mean, if you’re going to do it, at least have the Swiss Army Classic. I mean, they’re a classic for a reason. Now they’re good, and they’re handy.

Teddy Nappen  23:17

Think of the what is probably the most expensive knife you’ve ever heard the TSA steal? What would you say from what you?

Evan Nappen  23:24

Well, I’ve seen the TSA surplus where they let various states sell knives that they’ve confiscated. I’ve hit those bins where the knives have been sold, and I found some phenomenal, you know, Benchmades, Microtech, high-end customs. You name it. They’ve seized all kinds of knives. And if you get, you lose your knife, if you plan to catch your flight. It’s basically that’s how it rolls. So, you know, and by the way, you know, being that we recently passed 9/11, if you’ve ever gone to the memorial in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, it’s very moving. (https://www.nps.gov/flni/index.htm) I’d highly recommend going there. It’s definitely worth a trip.

Evan Nappen  24:19

And on those sacred grounds, there’s a museum type setup with displays, and I want to tell you.I looked at those displays, and you can see this too. You know how we all say, “Oh, they went on with “box cutters”, supposedly, right? Remember, you probably heard that, “box cutters”. Well, on the displays at the Flight 93 Museum, they say here are recovered knives. Recovered knives that they believe the terrorists used, and guess what? It’s a Benchmade folder, a lock blade, a lock blade, not a box cutter. I don’t know where this box cutter thing came from, or why they’re displaying and claiming that it was those knives. But either way, since then we’ve secured the cabin. We’ve secured it. You can’t get to the pilots, right? I mean, what is any of these, particularly these smaller blades, going to accomplish. I would never, you know, even attempt to use my Swiss Army classic for defense. It would actually be more of a problem. It doesn’t lock. The blade folds. It’s small. I’d sooner use my fists than that stupid little thing. It just makes no sense, and you know knives on planes today should not be even an issue. It should just be allowed. They can’t even accomplish, for many reasons, what happened back then, and they need to lighten up on this. I mean, come on, it’s stupid.

Evan Nappen  26:05

Hey, I want to also real quick point out that the House has now unanimously voted. This is federal government unanimous vote in the House to eliminate the penny, the one cent penny. This bill already had one passed in the Senate, and now unanimous in the House. I guess they’re going to conference committee or do whatever they’ve got to do, and that’s going to be law real soon. But the reason I’m mentioning this, folks, is not because we’re going to no longer have the the one cent coin. It’s technically not a penny. It’s technically considered called the one cent coin. It’s a one cent. We call them pennies, but we actually don’t have pennies. England had pennies. They were large copper coins. We don’t have pennies. As a matter of fact, I know years and years years ago where they had penny parking meters, where it said, you know, insert a penny. I know of a case years and years ago where the person got a parking ticket for not paying the meter. He went to court and argued that the penny meter was requiring a penny, and he said, why am I required to have English currency in America? Because it didn’t say one cent, it said penny, and they tossed the ticket. Anyway, the bottom line is, it’s the one cent coin. We’re no longer. We’re getting rid of them. The last one cents were out last year. If you even wanted to get a sample of a 2026 so- called penny, you’d have to buy it via the proof sets. They did do them in proof sets, but they’re not out in circulation, and that’ll probably be the end. We won’t even see pennies probably at all after this year.

Evan Nappen  27:54

But that’s not the point here. The point of this law is what else is in the law, and what else is in the law is the elimination of the current way nickels are made. Currently, nickels are 75% copper and 25% nickel, and you can go now to the bank, and you can get nickels. The nickels are worth way more as metal value than the value of a nickel. So, for example, if you right now today, if you were to buy $100 in nickels, when you go to the bank and they sell a brick of rolls of nickels, okay, $100 are all in rolls and they’re in this cardboard little brick. It’s kind of heavy, but not crazy. That $100 of nickels will cost you $100 because it’s face value is $100. The metal value of $100 in nickels today, as we do this show, is $146.70. Forty-six dollars and seventy cents.  Almost $47 more in metal value, just metal value, in nickels than the face value of nickels.

Evan Nappen  29:38

I suggest that you stack and save nickels now, because this law, which is on fast track now to pass, and they will change the composition of nickels to junk metal. You know, zinc junk. All the nickels that were made prior are going to have high metallurgical value. This is an opportunity similar to pre-64 silver, where in 1963 you could go to the bank and get hundreds, thousands of dollars in quarters, in dimes, in half dollars, even dollars, and they were 90% silver. Do you know what all that pre-64 silver is worth today in the value of silver, at what is it almost $70 an ounce? Well, those days on silver are gone, but the days now on nickels are here. So, buy and save your nickels now. You’ll be glad you did. Because after the metallurgical change, trying to sort out the difference between old nickels and new nickels will be a giant pain in the neck. You’re going to have to look at dates and go crazy. Whereas right now, you’re guaranteed metallurgical valued nickels at that incredible ratio of money. So, that’s just a tip here from Gun Lawyer. And if those of you that are preppers, those kind of nickels are awesome for prepping, because at some point, if the stuff hits the fan, well, guess what? You can barter with real nickels instead of busting up your gold and silver, what are you going to do? Give a full silver dollar so you can have a loaf of bread, but a real copper and nickel nickel might do the trick. These are all considerations. Think about it. Anyway, if you buy nickels today, well, here’s and lead-that’s other precious metals. But here’s the deal: I guarantee you, you won’t lose a dime if you buy nickels, because it’s always worth 100 bucks that you’re paying. It’s always worth that, so you can’t lose. There you go.

Evan Nappen  31:51

All right, so I want to talk about our really good friends at WeShoot. We love WeShoot. WeShoot is a fantastic gun range in Lakewood, New Jersey. It’s where Teddy and I both shoot. And we get our training. We’re going to be getting even more training soon, and we love it there. You’ll love it too. They are running some fantastic training programs that I want you to know about. They have the New Jersey CCARE, where they’re doing full course on that. They’re running them on Friday the 18th of of September. They just did that one, but you have October coming up on October 8 and 16th and 18th. You can get in on these and get your NJ carry, if you don’t have it. It’s really great. Even if you need it for your renewal, they’re the greatest place to get certified. Excellent instructors. They’re doing certification for seniors as well. They do courses strictly for seniors. If you feel more comfortable, if you are a senior, what’s really great is they’re offering New York City non-resident carry. This is the non-resident course, my friends. You can get your New York carry. Also, you can get your Maryland non-resident, and you can get DC. All three, all being offered at WeShoot, greatest place to get your certifications. They’re offering these courses. Of course, slots are filling up quick. They’re offering these in October. October 8th is one of the dates. Go to the website. Their website has fantastic photography – first rate. Go to weshootusa.com, weshootusa.com.

Evan Nappen  34:01

You can see all the courses, and you can sign up to get your certifications. You can get your carries. You can get advanced training, basic training. They also offer first aid in terms of stop the bleed, Adult CPR, AED, and ACS-all courses offered by top instructors that know their stuff. They’ve got new shooter courses. WeShoot is your place for training. It’s your resource. A fantastic range. A super pro shop. Great deals, and most importantly, great people. You’ll love WeShoot. We love WeShoot. They just treat their customers like gold. No joke. Conveniently off the Parkway in Lakewood, New Jersey.

Evan Nappen  34:58

Let me also shamelessly promote my book, New Jersey Gun Law, the Bible of New Jersey gun law. If you don’t have your copy, you better get it. You don’t want to be a go foo. You don’t want to be a go foo, and this book will help you not to be a GOFU. It’s over 500 pages, 120 topics, and it is the Bible of Jersey Gun Law. It’s the key book everybody uses. You need to get your copy. Go to EvanNappen.com today. EvanNappen.com, and get your copy.

Evan Nappen  35:28

Also, if you’re interested in getting your rights restored, if you need an expungement, if you qualify for federal rights relief, if you have anything in your background that may be stopping you from exercising your gun rights? Contact me. This is something we do. We help 1000s of folks get their rights back, and now more than ever are the opportunities to get that done. Go to EvanNappen.com and give us a call. Contact us. I’ll be happy to speak with you, and see what will fit your particular needs. We speak in confidence, attorney-client, and it is an opportunity. So, you can explore your options, of which there are many great things out there today, many of which have not existed for decades. For decades. So, check that out.

Evan Nappen  36:22

Also, I want to mention that I’m proud to say our firm is hiring. We’re looking to hire another Associate Attorney. As you can tell, New Jersey is extremely busy with their attempts to take our gun rights and oppress us and turn law-abiding citizens into criminals. If you love the Second Amendment, if you are a New Jersey attorney, get a hold of me. Go to EvanNappen.com or give me a call. Let’s talk. We’re always looking for folks that want to fight for our rights, that believe in the cause, and folks that are on my team have to be believers. Okay, you got to be believers. You got to know. You got to be wanting to fight the oppressors. And if that’s something you’d be interested in, get a hold of me. Teddy, what do you have for us in Press Checks?

Teddy Nappen  37:15

Well, as you know, Press Checks are always free. So, if any of you have been following just in general on the issues of that the Left have been trying to push. They’ve been trying to argue that President Trump is  trying to, is attacking free speech, which isn’t true. The argument was about Jimmy Kimmel, which he actually was not trying to censor him. It was the whole issue of you know the equal time rules, but he’s fully allowed to critique even being wrong and all the other fronts. But the left are trying to do the classic accuse your opponent of what you are already doing, which is censorship. And this is a censorship that I think needs to be highlighted specifically for New Jersey, where this is an abuse on not just the first but the Second Amendment as well. Where right out of our friends at Bearing Arms, the article reads as follows: Too offensive to own a gun. SAF challenges New Jersey’s subjective permit law. (https://bearingarms.com/camedwards/2026/09/09/too-offensive-to-own-a-gun-saf-challenges-new-jerseys-subjective-permit-law-n1233747) This is by Cam Edwards.

Teddy Nappen  38:20

So, it has been four years since the Supreme Court struck down the concealed carry. This is from the article, but states are still using the subjective standards of suitability. From here comes to a latest lawsuit from AAR, possessing carry permits issued from 10 other states, but was denied in New Jersey’s firearm purchase ID card, saying that his licensing authority said would not be in the interest of public health, safety, welfare because this person is found to be lacking essential character of temperament necessary to be entrusted with a firearm. What does all that mean? I have no idea, but it is the abuse of whatever they want to make it up to be, and this is I love this quote though because this sets the tone for the entire amicus that was filed. His racist, sexist views are despicable, and if that speech leads him to be a social ostracize, perhaps it would be deserved, but for a constitutional perspective, what is more disturbing than anything is the petitioner has said what the court below have ruled, which is that speech is protected by the First Amendment can be grounds to deny someone their constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

Evan Nappen  39:41

Outrageous. So, they’re using the First Amendment to try to stop you from exercising your Second Amendment. Then when you talk on the opposite about Second Amendment, then they’ll try to you know cancel you, ban you, take you out of media. To your First Amendment, so it works both ways to oppress us. They use the First Amendment here to oppress the Second Amendment. They use Second Amendment to oppress the First Amendment. This is the game plan of the communist left. That’s what they do, and you can see it in full form. If you’re not, if your speech is something they don’t like, then let’s see if we can use it to oppress you. And look, I don’t want to be in favor of disgusting racist or any of the. I know I’m not, and Teddy you’re not. But you know what? You have a right. It’s a classic of, I may not agree with what you’re saying, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.

Teddy Nappen  40:49

But here’s the worst of that aspect, Dad. The Left. What is racism? Oh, you know what racism is? Exercising. Know what racism is? Math. Know what racism is? Whatever falls into the category of racism also silences violence. The only thing you can logically do in  their mindset is just agree wholeheartedly. Everything else is racism or sexism. They apply a video game sexism. They apply just coffee. It’s the level of whatever they want to name them the

Evan Nappen  41:21

Right. So, they’re using the public health, safety, welfare disqualifier under New Jersey law, which is found under N.J.S. 2C?58-3C. Under that is a subjective criteria. You know, we all know about the objective criteria. If you’re a convicted felon, you’re barred. You know, if you’ve had a mental health commitment, you’re barred. That’s objective. But this subjective public health, safety, welfare is what I call the all-inclusive, miscellaneous weasel clause, and that’s where you see the abuse. You see that abuse actually in racist action by the institutionalized racism of the Government, and that’s been demonstrated by our good friend John Petrolino. Yeah, of course, Petrolino, who has put forward the actual data, and this has been proven that there is more than a two-to-one denial of Second Amendment rights to blacks than whites over that subjective, ridiculous criteria. It is institutionalized racism on that. Yet here we see an abuse of it, where First Amendment is used to stop Second Amendment, and that clause, public health, safety, welfare. In this case, Teddy, didn’t they also cite to the MU case?

Teddy Nappen  43:00

Correct. So, what they were pointing to was the denial that was upheld by the New Jersey courts based on M.U., where they argued legislature has the authority and discretion to exclude even nonviolent offenders from the people entitled to keep and bear harm.

Evan Nappen  43:15

So, let me give you and the listeners some very much inside suppressed information that isn’t being revealed there about M.U. M.U. is our firm’s case. We brought that and we fought that and we’re still fighting it. Listen to this, folks. The M.U. case is very important. It actually consisted of two legal issues, one issue that we won and is not being challenged is licensing. If you’re prohibited from having a license, that is distinguishable from being prohibited from possession. A lot of people have a hard time wrapping their heads around it. If you are denied a firearms ID card for subjective reasons such as public health, safety, welfare, that does not make you gun prohibited. Because there’s no mirroring criminal law that creates that as a disqualifier, as compared with if you’re a convicted felon, you’re denied a license. But there’s also a law in New Jersey called “certain persons not to possess firearms”, that says if you’re a convicted felon, you can’t possess guns.

Evan Nappen  44:33

But when it comes to the subjective criteria of public health, safety, welfare, New Jersey does not have a law that says, “Oh, if you’re denied a license due to public health, safety, welfare, you can’t possess a gun. No, that doesn’t exist. So we won on that, and that’s very important because if you get denied a license for this all-inclusive miscellaneous weasel clause, and they want to. Take your license away. If your guns are still in your possession, you can still keep your guns. You’re not prohibited as a gun owner. You’re just prohibited having a license. It’s a very important legal distinction.

Evan Nappen  45:15

The second part of M.U., however, was a challenge to the constitutionality of public health, safety, welfare. We brought that to the Appellate Division, which Teddy, as you just said, they cite that decision, which on that part at that time went against us. We then petitioned the New Jersey Supreme Court to take up this issue. When you ask the Court to take the issue, just like similar to the federal court, they either grant, in essence, certification or in federal court, certiorari, and they say, “Yeah, we’re going to hear the issue and we’re going to decide it, or they say, “No, we’re not going to hear it. And if they say, “No, we’re not going to hear it. Then, at that point, you’re allowed to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the constitutional challenge. And if the New Jersey Supreme Court said yes, we’ll hear it, and they decide against you, then you can ask the U.S. Supreme Court to hear it.

Evan Nappen  46:17

But what New Jersey has done, we filed the request for the New Jersey Supreme Court to decide this issue one way or another. Take the issue, don’t take the issue, take the issue and decide it against us. Whatever. Get a load of this, folks. Ready? The New Jersey Supreme Court has not decided whether or not to hear this issue for three and a half years. Three and a half years. The New Jersey Supreme Court has sat on a petition. I don’t know of anything that has ever gone to the New Jersey Supreme Court requesting review to either take the issue or not-that’s gone three and a half years for them just to decide whether or not they want to hear this issue.

Evan Nappen  47:16

And think about it, folks. This now is part of this case that Teddy, that you’re talking about, and they’re relying on the appellate decision below in attempting to justify this. Right, if the New Jersey Supreme Court were to say yes, we’re going to take this case, then they would have to decide it, and then they’d have to it either be a win or a loss, of which we could ask the Supreme Court. If they said no, then we can immediately ask the Supreme Court. But they’ve taken no action. Doesn’t it seem that somebody doesn’t want us asking the United States Supreme Court to look at the all-inclusive miscellaneous weasel clause.

Teddy Nappen  48:07

Out of curiosity, in terms of the procedures, is there a time limit? Because usually, when the court responds or not, there’s no.

Evan Nappen  48:16

You can’t force a time. So, this has now become essentially a judicial block. It appears on its face to just be exactly how I’ve described it. So.

Teddy Nappen  48:32

Could you? Is there a way to bring it to the Supreme Court?

Evan Nappen  48:36

Nope. Because you have to exhaust your state procedures first. The Supreme Court will say no. You got to wait. You got to have your court do it. Yep, isn’t that cute? Isn’t that cute? So, that’s the inside on M.U.

Teddy Nappen  48:52

The Trump administration, I want you to sue the Supreme Court for choosing to.Who knows that

Evan Nappen  48:57

Who knows? Maybe the DOJ might, might look at that maybe. Because they do have a civil rights division and maybe

Teddy Nappen  49:04

I don’t know. I don’t know if that would be would it be.

Evan Nappen  49:07

I don’t know if it qualifies. I don’t know, but.

Teddy Nappen  49:10

Wouldn’t that be lack of.

Evan Nappen  49:11

I don’t believe judges have immunity under under civil rights.

Teddy Nappen  49:15

But wouldn’t that be lack of procedure because they’re denying it by sitting on something?

Evan Nappen  49:20

It’s this incredible delay that is, I think, unprecedented in delay.

Teddy Nappen  49:25

Because there’s also like timeliness. Because there’s also like time institutes.

Evan Nappen  49:30

Sure is, and that’s where we’re at. This is what we deal with in the Democratic People’s Republic of New Jersey, the DPRNJ. Hey, let me tell you, Teddy, about this week’s GOFU. I see this a lot, and it actually relates to exactly what we’re saying. A GOFU is a Gun Owner Fuck Up. This is where expensive mistakes are made by gun owners, and you can avoid them by listening to the show. One of them that I see is surrendering your guns, and this is exactly in tune with M.U. If you ever get a licensing denial and you can appeal that licensing denial, you’ll find that at times police may say, “oh, we’d like you to turn in your guns. We want you to surrender your guns. If law enforcement ever wants you to just give up your guns without a court order, without a warrant, searching and seizing, without you know any kind of judicial ordering or process where they say, “Hey, how about, you know, be a good guy and turn in your guns, or you’re denied the rights, so you need to surrender.

Evan Nappen  50:37

Well, without any court ordering it, do not surrender your guns. Once you give up your guns, getting them back is tremendously more difficult. It’s one thing if you have your guns and are keeping them, even if you are denied your license. It’s another thing if the guns are taken, and the license is then denied. Then, for you to get them back, they say, “Well, we can’t do a transfer because you don’t have a license. Isn’t that cute? So, the GOFU is don’t surrender voluntarily unless there’s judicial process ordering it. If you ever run into that situation, immediately call your attorney. Call me, contact me. Call an attorney that knows gun law, so you can be properly advised. So, that you don’t become a GOFU.

Evan Nappen  51:35

This is Evan Nappen and Teddy Nappen reminding you that gun laws don’t protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens.

Speaker 2  51:48

Gun Lawyer is a CounterThink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York, New York. Reach us by emailing [email protected]. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state.

Known as “America’s Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it’s no wonder he’s become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets.

Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It’s Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News.

As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists.

He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America.

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)

Page – 1 – of 11

Gun Lawyer — Episode 307 Transcript

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

Gun ownership, firearm data, Second Amendment, gun rights, common use, New Jersey, legal standing, NSSF, voter turnout, political elections, gun training, self-defense, intersectionality, police interaction, legal advice

SPEAKERS

Speaker 2, Teddy Nappen, Evan Nappen

Evan Nappen 00:18

I’m Evan Nappen.

Teddy Nappen 00:20

And I’m Teddy Nappen.

Evan Nappen 00:22

And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, here’s a number I want you to keep in mind. The number is 461 – 461 Million guns are in private hands in the U.S. That’s roughly 100 million more guns than people in the U.S. Now, where is this number coming from? Is this just speculation? Is it just good guessing? Is it? No, no, no, no, no, no, no. This number is one of the strongest, most data-based numbers that I’ve seen. Now, this is from an article in AmmoLand by one of my favorite writers, Dean Weingarten. The article is titled “461 Million Guns? Survey’s Firearm Numbers Nearly Matches 125 Years of Federal Data.” (https://www.ammoland.com/2026/09/461-million-guns-survey-federal-data/?utm_source=Ammoland+Subscribers&utm_campaign=5d24fd0d04-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6f6fac3eaa-5d24fd0d04-21268623)

Evan Nappen 01:41

That’s how strong this figure is. And why is this important to know? It’s important to know the number of guns to illustrate the absolute absurdity and futility of the gun rights oppressors’ dream of banning, confiscating, and removing all guns from the United States. You know ultimately that’s their wet dream, right? o get rid of every gun, you know. Ultimately. In the meanwhile, they come up with every possible way of trying to diminish and extinguish our rights. And what makes this survey and this data combo so fascinating as to its force, strength, and validity is that the survey, William English did a survey of gun owners. It was done in mid 2026, and these ratios of the survey methods,, and numbers of firearm findings. This is mirroring the federal data. So, the survey paper, which was released in August 2026, was is and is considered the best designed and executed survey to date. The 2026 survey has been designed to overcome minor defects in the original survey that was done in 2021. The questions were sharpened and clarified, and ownership has been limited to the individual questioned. Page – 2 – of 11

Evan Nappen 03:38

The survey’s respondents were represented in 50 states and the District of Columbia, and the participants were not volunteers for this particular survey. So, the first national representative survey of 51,398 individuals over 18 were chosen, and the screening questions that they used identified over 18,000 individuals as potential gun owners. Then almost 17,000, a little under, of the individuals were validated as gun owners, and in the middle of the survey, a question was used to validate the responses. Only people who read the entire question could answer it correctly, and 98.2% of the respondents passed the internal checks. This roughly 17,000, a little lower, respondents were found to average 5.2 firearms per owner. About 87,000 firearms. And this is a very large sample. The smallest sample was in Vermont with 28 respondents. California had 1,549, and Texas had 1,686.

Evan Nappen 05:18

So, based on this, it’s calculated that there were 461 million firearms in the United States. his is very interesting in and of itself. Then they took these survey results and they compared them to the numbers of ATF. ATF. They were placed into a spreadsheet. By the way, that’s provided online by The Trace. (https://datahub.thetrace.org/dataset/firearm-production/) This is by our, you know, key group of Second Amendment oppressors. Using the numbers in the data from the ATF, The Trace found that 513 million in the end of 2024, including 231 million and change handguns, 171 million and change of rifles, and 110 million and change of shotguns. The numbers show that the agreement in both databases is astounding. The ratios are nearly identical, as shown in the graphic. The largest difference is shotguns, in which the difference is only 0.1 percent. That’s how close these two different databases are. And as the article points out, skeptics may say in a large sample of 87,000 firearms selected at random, you’d expect resulting ratios to be extremely close. That is exactly what you would expect of a very large sample selected by random. That is the point. It is validation of the sample methodology, and it’s validation of the accuracy of the reporting by respondents. So, folks, the number to use when discussing, arguing, debating, and slamming those that want to oppress our rights is that you’re talking about 461 million privately held firearms in the United States.

Teddy Nappen 08:04

There’s another factor to this that I think was highlighted in the Cheeseman case. The thing that won the day about ending the assault weapon ban and ending various basically the strong arm of the Left’s gun control is common use. 400 million guns all across the nation. I want to make sure. I want that number going up because that’s how we win the argument. Where common use, if they ever try to make any claim on anything from the argument with suppressors, right now we have that up in the air. Over 6 million, yeah. This needs to continue.

Evan Nappen 08:42

The numbers are there, and common use, and just even the impossibility of the anti-Second Amendment dream is so clear. We are a country that has essentially 100 million more guns, give or take, more than we have people. So, we are strong in gun ownership, and the Second Amendment is strong. It is something that is absolutely a fixture in our culture, and these folks that want to take away our rights and remove this are in a dreamland. Yet, they’ll still try, and they try various methods. Page – 3 – of 11

Evan Nappen 09:37

As a matter of fact, New Jersey’s latest one of their gambits is, of course, abusing consumer protection and trying to sue the firearm industry out of existence. We just had a really great case out of the Third Circuit, which is allowing the gun industry to challenge New Jersey’s reasonable controls laws”. (thereload.com/third-circuit-allows-gun-industry-challenge-to-new-jerseys-reasonable-controls-law/) So, New Jersey put this forward to lay a foundation to attempt to litigate and sue out of existence gun makers and guns they don’t like and all that. Originally the federal court did not allow NSSF, the National Shooting Sports Foundation, to assert a legal standing to challenge this law, And the federal court said, “Oh no, no! Yes, they do have standing, and the challenge can continue. And that’s really great news. Because while the state tries to enforce their, you know, lawsuit to kill firearms in state courts, which of course lean toward always toward favoring the state and their anti-second amendment oppression agenda, the federal court takes a much fairer view, as we’ve seen. It now allows the PLCAA (Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act) law, the federal law, which was designed to stop this tort lawfare taking place, to go at the our Second Amendment rights through abusing, you know, the civil system. It allows the PLCAA arguments to be asserted by NSSF and the other plaintiffs in federal court and to have their day. So, this is great news. It is very important because it is going at, for example, New Jersey’s attempt going at Sig and going at Glock and others. The district court has essentially reopened the case. They’ve accepted the complaint, and they now found that NSSF has standing to bring the suit. So, this is good stuff. We’re seeing tremendous wins and victories stacking up in the federal courts. You know, not the least of which was the fantastic so-called assault firearm and large capacity magazine ban being found unconstitutional.

Teddy Nappen 12:46

Would there be a way to? I’d be curious. What would be the best method in kind of strengthening PLCAA to stop the amount of litigation? Because they continue to try to carve their way out. Some narrow loophole around PLCAA.

Evan Nappen 13:05

Exactly what NSSF is doing by bringing these federal suits is establishing the case law precedent, which is at the moment the best plan. But if we, as Americans now, if we decide that we would rather get $5,000 from having Republicans win the midterms, that not only do we stand to gain a lot of gun money out of that victory, you know, I’m sure we could use five grand to buy some really fine weapons. It will also further strengthen our ability in a Trump administration to improve and add to laws that protect Second Amendment rights, and in getting rid of laws that harm our rights, and continue with the various funding and removal of other NFA taxes. Let’s say that will make other things still out there on NFA good to go, and there’s just tremendous change that I see just in two years of President Trump’s administration and Republican control. It is critical that everyone you know get out and vote. Tell them get out and vote, and get our liberties secured further. Our Second Amendment freedoms, and maybe even pocket an extra 5K of our own money anyway, which I’d rather see go to American citizens than to illegals or funding USAID or all the other Left-wing mega NGOs and all this stuff, where the money circulates back so that the Democrats can continue to use it politically. No, you know what? Instead, let’s just see the money go to us, back to us, and see our freedom increase. How’s that? Page – 4 – of 11

Teddy Nappen 15:27

My only issue with the aspect is you can never beat the Left in terms of just giving away free stuff because they that’s always been their platform of everything when it comes to programs, welfare, and so I understand the value in this, like trying to make a tone for that. I think what was smarter was the 9K for essentially stay-at-home moms or taking care of the kids, because that it was a good argument. I think it was with either Mark Levin and it was a few others talking about the whole discussion of the 9K because we don’t like government welfare programs, but it now we’re putting it more towards the moving it to the window of, hey, let’s do the right thing and parents in the home. instead of using the welfare

Evan Nappen 16:09

Instead of using the welfare system to destroy the family and eliminate two parent homes and to create you know 5, 6, 7, 8 generations of welfare families. If we use the money as incentive, that’s good. And also, you know, the so-called Trump dividend of $5000, it could also be done in the form of tax rebate. It could be done in terms of the tariffs that that were collected, and we get a reimbursement. It can be done in terms of war reparations, once Iran bites the dust, which will happen shortly, and then with oil and these great oil deals we’ve cut with Venezuela. There’s all kinds of ways for this money to be accredited back to American citizens, and I’ll tell you what, Teddy. Here’s the bottom line: if you vote for Democrats and Democrats gain power, you’re not going to see a dime. You’re going to lose money. You’re going to lose freedom. You’re going to see it spent. So, you know what? That’s the stark choice. The Dems are freaking out about it because, oh, it won’t happen. He won’t pay. Doesn’t have it. Yeah why do they say that? Well I’ll tell you one thing. If you want to guarantee no money, if you want to guarantee it, vote Democrat, and you’ll only lose money and freedom. That’s the guarantee on the other side.

Teddy Nappen 17:37

I understand that they just oh they’re the Left’s entire thing is programs, and that’s always their shtick when it comes to expanding welfare programs, expanding more government spending. So, it’s enough to say I think the wording would have been better tie it back to something conservative, like $5,000 to homeowners or $5,000 to small business. Tie it to something to the ties and pillars of concern, and I think it would have been better messaging. I understand the value in sending that as a method. Like, look, he throws stuff out there, he tests the waters on stuff. Trump is who he is. He fires from the hip.

Evan Nappen 18:15

Well, I think this can actually work. And if it encourages more people to vote for freedom and for America to be even greater, and to do all and look at the progress, my friends, that we’ve made just in our arena, thanks to President Trump. And listen, you better thank President Trump. There’s a reason we’re getting Supreme Court decisions that are going our way, and that’s because three justices were appointed by President Trump. There’s a reason for the change in attitude of ATF completely, and that’s because of President Trump and his administration. There’s a reason for 34 administrative codes changes, federal code changes to the CFR, and for the elimination of all the anti-Second Amendment clampdown that Biden and company put forward, and for the removal of all that. There’s a reason why the Department of Justice is pursuing federal civil rights actions for Second Amendment violations. There’s a reason for all this, and that reason is President Trump and Republicans in control. Face it. If Page – 5 – of 11

you care about Second Amendment rights, that is the only way for you to vote, for you to maintain and continue on this path, which is so exciting to see this night and day change with our rights.

Teddy Nappen 19:53

And that’s one of the things that is very disgusting. You have the woke Right who completely discount all the victories, and they just complain and say it’s not enough moving the goalposts. We’ve had some of the greatest Second Amendment victories, and we had some of the greatest net negative migration. They cannot discount that and close the border. You have all these wins that would have any other president. It would have been a re-election victory lap all over. Here, you know, is unfortunately Trump was right. We got tired of winning.

Evan Nappen 20:24

Well, hopefully not. And there’s winning that can still happen that will possibly directly benefit every one of us monetarily and in terms of increased liberty. I mean, look, we wouldn’t have the Rights Relief Program back and running after 33 years of people that are qualified people to get their Second Amendment rights back. It took President Trump, 33 years of Democrat oppression. Okay? There’s a great example: Chuck Schumer and company. They’re the ones that stopped that program, and President Trump reinvigorated that program. It’s just item after item that we look down the list and see the advantages. Wake up, see the difference.

Evan Nappen 21:15

It doesn’t mean you have to agree with everything Republicans stand for, everything President Trump stands for. Just look at the full picture in a general term. What will Democrats do? What will Republicans do? And man, it is staggeringly stark the difference. Midterm elections critical. Let’s make history because normally the opposing party wins in the midterms. Let’s make history and see that not happen. he next two years are going to be even more glorious, more victorious. Absolutely fantastic. But our adversaries are going to do everything they can to stop it.

Evan Nappen 22:08

And Giffords. So, you know you have the anti-gun Bloomturd group of, you know, The Trace. But then you also have Giffords, right? Another one they like to call a “gun safety group”. Of course, it has nothing to do with gun safety. Gun safety to them is elimination of all guns. But the gun safety group founded by Gabby Giffords is now putting $10 million into a midterm blitz. This is coming from an article in Semafor, which is “Intelligence for a New World Economy”. (https://www.semafor.com/article/09/09/2026/giffords-launched-10-million-midterm-blitz) The interesting thing here that directly impacts New Jersey, and frankly, 10 million is not a lot in the big picture, but it is still significant. What they’re doing is kind of a money ball approach. They’re focusing their monies on very key, specific handful of races. Particularly three. They’re focused on Mike Rogers in Michigan and Jen Kiggins in Virginia, both Republicans. But they’re giving, Giffords is giving, $350,000 against Tom Kean. Tom Kean, Jr.. They’re desperately trying to stop Tom Kean from winning, and, of course, he’s the Republican in New Jersey. They’re running ads against him, and the article claims the ads knock GOP candidates as soft on gun crime. Oh, get it, soft on gun crime. No, no, no, no. What it is is they’re defending Second Amendment rights. That’s not gun crime, okay? The soft on crime is, of course, Democrats. They’re completely soft on crime, unless you happen to be a gun owner, particularly white Page – 6 – of 11

male gun owner. Well, then that’s a different story for you, of course. But they’re knocking them on that, and they’re going after particularly Tom Kean as “putting our police in danger”. So they make that amazing leap that somehow protecting Second Amendment rights puts police in danger. No, actually, it’s the opposite.

Teddy Nappen 24:37

Yeah, you know what puts police in danger? When they force the police to not have stronger tasers, and it can’t take down the suspect. So, all of them have to open fire into a knife-wielding maniac.

Evan Nappen 24:49

Right! Crazy. And, you know, you add into this that, and we keep picking it up how absolutely freaked out The Trace is in knowing that their demise is coming. They just put out pieces about, you know, they’re trying to brace their folks for this tremendous loss that they know is going to hit, and they’re belly aching about why there’s you know over 3000 court challenges and Second Amendment victories happening all over the place. They’re blaming, of course, the Bruen decision and Justice Thomas with his test of constitutionality of the laws for the encouragement and success, and they know that their bellwether issue that they love is, you know, assault firearms and mags. Come June, they’ve essentially all but thrown in the towel, knowing that that entire gambit is going to die, and that we are going to regain our Second Amendment liberties when it comes to that. It’s really actually heartwarming to watch their losses, not just us winning, but these sanctimonious aholes finally getting their butts handed to them. It’s good times, and we want to see that continue. Make sure you vote and get everyone you can out there to vote. It’s critical, and it has already. If you just step back and see the tremendous change in the two years we’ve been blessed with having already with the Trump administration.

Evan Nappen 26:44

Hey, let me tell you about our good friends at WeShoot. WeShoot is an indoor range in Lakewood, conveniently located right off the Parkway. It’s where Teddy and I both shoot. Where we both train. We love WeShoot. Now they’ve got New Jersey concealed carry course that they’re offering, and you can get your New Jersey carry. I think we’re well over 100,000 permitted carry holders right now, and you want to join in with that. If you need to get your renewal, you can get that great training at WeShoot. It’s where Teddy and I got ours, and you can get yours. They’re offering the New Jersey CCARE courses. So, check out WeShoot at www.weshootusa.com.

Evan Nappen 27:36

They’re also offering the New Jersey carry course for seniors. That’s right. You can get your New Jersey CCARE and get certified as seniors. And you know, seniors are particularly vulnerable. Many not having the same strength they had in their youth and being able to have the need. They have a need to defend themselves, and the great equalizer, of course, is a firearm. And you want to learn how to use it right. You want to be able to get your license, and they are offering Tuesday, September 22, is the NJ Carry Certification for seniors course. So, if you’re a senior, you could take care of that.

Evan Nappen 28:25

Plus, they’re offering New York non-resident carry. They have a new low price of only $289. You can get your New York resident and non-resident carry. They’re offering Maryland carry as well as Page – 7 – of 11

Washington D.C. carry, and they’ll be doing that on Saturday, October 10. They’re offering the ability for you to get your non-resident and/or resident carries with certified instructors to do that. Every course to meet your needs, WeShoot has it. They have great offerings in Adult CPR /AED, and at a and the and the ACS Stop The Bleed, knowing how to deal with gunshot wounds and other very important emergent health issues that can arise. They have courses for that, too. They have new shooters courses, etc. They have weekend classes. Listen, folks, WeShoot is your place for great training, for a great range, for a great experience. They will treat you like family. Check out weshootusa.com. weshootusa.com. Get your training, get your guns, get your ammo, and get a wonderful experience at WeShoot. weshootusa.com.

Evan Nappen 30:02

Let me also mention and shamelessly promote my book, New Jersey Gun Law: The Bible of Jersey gun law. It is your key to not becoming a GOFU and understanding New Jersey Gun Law. It’s done in question and answer format. It’s a book used by everybody, and you will love it, and it will help you to understand the insanity that is New Jersey’s gun laws. Let me just warn you: don’t loan your book out because you won’t get it back. I hear that all the time. If you want to get your copy, go to EvanNappen.com today and get your copy.

Evan Nappen 30:39

And let me also mention, as we talked about, the Relief from Disabilities Federal program is now beginning. If you or someone you know would like to inquire about getting their rights restored, we’re happy to talk for free consultation to figure out the pathways to regaining your Second Amendment rights, particularly if necessary, with New Jersey expungement procedures, with federal relief from disabilities. We’re looking to find out what’s best for you. Go to evannappen.com today and give us a call. Hey, Teddy, what do you have for us today in Press Checks?

Teddy Nappen 31:25

Well, as you know, Press Checks are always free. This is something that I think is coming up more and more as we’ve talked about previously about the from the previous one of the socialist dilemma of gun rights and gun control, where the Left cannot find their position on the issue. The one thing that’s been on the rise for a lot of them. This article is from a woman who wrote “My Gun and Me”, as an LGBTQ advocate’s view on owning a firearm. (https://slate.com/life/2026/02/gun-range-safety-gay-lesbian-lgbtq-trump.html)

Teddy Nappen 32:03

starts with, if you had told me an urban progressive lesbian 10 years ago that I would own a gun, I would have laughed in your face. Now I can’t let my weapon go, and I’m far from alone. So, it’s definitely, and you know, goes into this whole thing where she, you know, two moms have a child. They were talking about hopefully wanting to protect themselves. There’s been various break it, you know, worrying about oh, you know, normal crime. Almost like there’s an aspect of wanting to carry for self defense. Oh my God, what a concept! But it’s this shock and awe of like the intersectionality of gun control. They’ve tried to merge that into the progressive wing, and then they come to the point of the minorities that they claim they want to protect, but also don’t want to disarm, and then the quote unquote oppressed group like LGBTQA plus blacks Hispanics they want to make sure their rights are Page – 8 – of 11

protected so it falls into this narrow threaded they cannot thread this needle whatsoever and this woman talks about you know where she.

Evan Nappen 33:12

It’s almost like you know “Gays for Palestine”, right? I mean, you know.

Teddy Nappen 33:23

Yeah. Well, yeah, and that’s just Marxism. Again, it comes back to Marxism. You have to know it’s in the Communist Manifesto. Marx wrote the idea of to be a communist, you must know your enemy and know who is the oppressor and who is the oppressed, and you keep to those terms regardless of ideology. That’s how you end up with “Queers for Palestine”. That’s how you end up with LGBTQAI plus, where you now have gays and lesbians coming out against the trans movement. It’s the failure of their intersectionality trying to merge everything over. Cut to right here, where now they’re taking the position of well, we want self-defense. We want to have carry for these groups, not for the oppressor. You know, the straight white men and women. That’s the that’s the oppressor in their mindset. So that’s how they have to shake it.

Evan Nappen 34:13

Well, I’ve got to say though that the 2A is for everybody, and I don’t care what a person’s sexuality is. As a matter of fact, I’m an honorary life member of the Pink Pistols, the gay gun rights group, and I’m proud to be an honorary member of their group. I want everybody and anybody who is a law-abiding citizen to be able to exercise their Second Amendment rights. Even though politically this is exactly what you’re saying, you know this intersectionality is very hard. How do they thread the needle and all that? The bottom line is, once we get folks that have a vested interest in Second Amendment rights, and the way you have that vested interest is by being an actual gun owner. Then you will find that what actually happens is their politics start to change because they see that one group is trying to prohibit them from having the firearm that they now know, love, and respect and want because they’ve learned the difference of when that thing goes bump in the night and you don’t have a gun versus when that thing goes bump in the night and you do have a gun, and that becomes very important. And you can actually see, and I’ve seen it in individuals that were left, that were you know folks that you would never just like this woman you’re talking about here. That what happens is they come around, and their politics change even more, and it becomes gun ownership that starts them on the path to enlightenment. Believe it or not. Now I understand, Teddy, what you’re saying that that’s a you know hard here. They’re trying to still keep it, stay eft, and have a gun, and they have other motivations. But not in the big picture, it does help tremendously.

Teddy Nappen 36:09

My only critique, and this comes with the big tent. We saw this with MAGA, where there were groups of voices who now abuse, who abuse and tried to break it up, who became like if these people want to come in and support the Second Amendment and want to sit and learn and understand, great. Sit in the pews. You do not become a preacher because here’s why. I do not want the progressive to then say, “Oh, I’m for carry, but I don’t like AR-15s. Also, we should do Universal Background Check, you know, and they become not they become the voices, and then try to shift the Overton window back to their “common use”, “common sense gun laws”. No, we shift the Overton window as far as we can to get it Page – 9 – of 11

to where we cover it. Are we push it as far in the politics? Because this is the other issue: joining hands with these groups, that is fine, but you have to remember they still stand on the views of LGBTQ, AI plus, transient kids, abortion up until nine months, and pushing every other aspect of the left wing communist agenda. So this is the difference of the big tent motive. Good, they’re for Second Amendment. Absolutely, we found common ground, and maybe just maybe we can convince them. But unfortunately, a lot of it is a death cult for a lot of them. So unless they’re willing to sit in the pews and listen and learn, we gotta be mindful of who we live.

Evan Nappen 36:33

Well, that’s our challenge on our side here to take folks that are finally even acknowledging, hey, you know, maybe having a gun is actually good, and I actually like it. And guess what? I don’t want to get rid of my gun. And slowly, getting them further to see the light about that right and its universal importance. And so, hey, I’d rather see them being gun owners and hopefully on a path where we can further enlighten than to just be stubbornly against it and stupid. But you’re right, Teddy. There’s risk. There is risk on the politics end of it, and I get it. So we got to be smart about it.

Teddy Nappen 38:15

To the point, even in the article, she’s talking about ICE protesting and filming ICE and having the carry. So, it’s literally conflating the idea of carry versus wanting to fight the death squads and battle.

Evan Nappen 38:29

But that can really backfire on them. Because once these people have firearms, that second part of it doesn’t necessarily have to follow. It might be what initially gets them, but then once they start seeing, wait a minute, now. I can’t wait for them to go through the process. Let’s say in California of getting the gun and seeing everything they have to go through. It’s quite an eye opener for them. And then once they’re gun owners like, wait a minute, now they hear about people in their own party wanting to restrict, take away all this thing. So, it can actually help us, but we do have to be careful. And you’re absolutely right. Hey, cool, cool issue. That’s for sure and important. But let me tell you about this week’s GOFU, which is the gun owner f up, and this is where gun owners make expensive mistakes that you get to learn for free. And I want to talk to you about a police trick that I see done, and you may have heard about it. and I see cases like this that come up. Now, you know, in Jersey, we do have that duty to disclose. So, if you are carrying and you have a carry permit, you must immediately tell the officer that you’re carrying your gun, and you have to have your permit on you about that. But let’s say you’re not carrying your gun, or you’re not transporting handgun. It’s just long arms, or whatever it is, or you know the duty to disclose is still there. And although that’s constitutionally questionable, and. Whatever, but you need to obey the law for now. But in the general sense, this is the question to watch out for. Now you’re going to have to reveal. But assuming you’re not in that position, and the police come up and they ask, they ask, “Do you have anything I should be concerned about in the car? Do you have anything illegal in the car? You know, do you have anything illegal in the? You know, and you say no, right? Now you’ve answered no. Oh, then you wouldn’t mind if I search your vehicle. So it’s a setup of since you told me you have nothing illegal, why would you have anything to hide? So that’s the gambit, and if you fall for it now, you’re subjecting yourself to a warrantless search because you consented to it, and you fell for the trap. So the answer is, even with a duty to disclose, you disclose you have your handgun, and you show your permit. If they ask beyond it, you know, do you have Page – 10 – of 11

anything illegal in the car that I should know about? Okay, I mean I’ve seen this over and over again, and you say no. Well, now that you’ve engaged, then then you wouldn’t mind if I search your vehicle. Of course you mind. So what’s the answer? The answer is very simple. You disclosed because you immediately had to disclose. You didn’t disclose because you were asked a question. You disclosed because you had to immediately disclose, which is what you have to do. But when a question is asked, okay, do you have anything illegal in the car? You say, I don’t answer any questions without my attorney. And guess what happens then? The questions have to stop. Okay, it’s that simple. I don’t answer any questions without my attorney. I don’t do it. Do not answer any questions. Anything you do, you can be set up and become the next GOFU. Now I know you’re thinking I don’t have anything illegal in the car. When I said no, I meant it. Well, except for your daughter’s boyfriend, who left his jacket in the car that you didn’t even know when you picked him up, and in it is some kind of contraband you weren’t even aware of, or some other who knows what that happened to be in the vehicle, or some other thing because you don’t know every law, etc. Do not open yourself up for a fishing expedition.

Evan Nappen 39:10

But let me tell you about this week’s GOFU, which is the Gun Owner Fuck Up. This is where gun owners make expensive mistakes that you get to learn for free. I want to talk to you about a police trick that I see done, and you may have heard about it. I see cases like this that come up. Now, you know, in New Jersey, we do have that Duty to Disclose. So, if you are carrying and you have a carry permit, you must immediately tell the officer that you’re carrying your gun, and you have to have your permit on you. But let’s say you’re not carrying your gun or you’re not transporting handguns. It’s just long arms, or whatever it is. The Duty to Disclose is still there. And although that’s constitutionally questionable, and whatever, you need to obey the law for now.

Evan Nappen 40:03

But in the general sense, this is the question to watch out for. Now you’re going to have to reveal. But assuming you’re not in that position and the police come up and they ask, “Do you have anything I should be concerned about in the car? Do you have anything illegal in the car?” You know, do you have anything illegal in the vehicle? And you say no, right? Now you’ve answered no. Oh, then you wouldn’t mind if I search your vehicle. It’s a setup of since you told me you have nothing illegal. Why would you have anything to hide? So, that’s the gambit. If you fall for it now, you’re subjecting yourself to a warrantless search because you consented to it, and you fell for the trap. he answer is, even with a Duty to Disclose where you disclose you have your handgun, and you show your permit. If they ask beyond it, you know, do you have anything illegal in the car that I should know about? I mean I’ve seen this over and over again. You say no. Well, now that you’ve engaged, then you wouldn’t mind if I search your vehicle. Of course you mind. So what’s the answer? The answer is very simple. You disclosed because you immediately had to disclose. You didn’t disclose because you were asked a question. You disclosed because you had to immediately disclose, which is what you have to do. But when a question is asked, okay, do you have anything illegal in the car? You say, I don’t answer any questions without my attorney. And guess what happens then? The questions have to stop. Okay, it’s that simple. I don’t answer any questions without my attorney. I don’t do it. Do not answer any questions. Anything you do, you can be set up and become the next GOFU. Now, I know you’re thinking I don’t have anything illegal in the car. When I said no, I meant it. Well, except for your daughter’s boyfriend, who left his jacket in the car that you didn’t even know when you picked him up, and in it is some kind of contraband you Page – 11 – of 11

weren’t even aware of, or some other who knows what that happened to be in the vehicle, or some other thing because you don’t know every law, etc. Do not open yourself up for a fishing expedition.

Evan Nappen 42:21

So, what’s the answer? The answer is very simple. You disclosed because you immediately had to disclose. You didn’t disclose because you were asked a question. You disclosed because you had to immediately disclose, which is what you have to do. But when a question is asked, do you have anything illegal in the car? You say, “I don’t answer any questions without my attorney.” And guess what happens then? The questions have to stop. It’s that simple. “I don’t answer any questions without my attorney.” I don’t do it. Do not answer any questions. Anything you do, you can be set up and become the next GOFU. Now, I know you’re thinking I don’t have anything illegal in the car. When I said no, I meant it. Well, except for your daughter’s boyfriend, who left his jacket in the car that you didn’t even know when you picked him up, and in it is some kind of contraband you weren’t even aware of. Or some other thing, who knows, what that happened to be in the vehicle, or some other thing because you don’t know every law, etc. Do not open yourself up for a fishing expedition.

Evan Nappen 42:28

Don’t fall for the trap or trick of “Do you have anything illegal in the car or anything I should know about?” And then engaging by saying “no”. And of course, don’t say “yes”. That’s about as idiotic as you could be, right? The answer is, “I don’t answer any questions without my lawyer”. And that’s it. hat’s what you have to do.

Evan Nappen 42:54

This is Evan Nappen and Teddy Nappen reminding you that gun laws don’t protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens.

Speaker 2 43:05

Gun Lawyer is a CounterThink Media production. The music used in this broadcast was managed by Cosmo Music, New York, New York. Reach us by emailing Evan@gunlawyer. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state.

Known as “America’s Gun Lawyer,” Evan Nappen is above all a tireless defender of justice. Author of eight bestselling books and countless articles on firearms, knives, and weapons history and the law, a certified Firearms Instructor, and avid weapons collector and historian with a vast collection that spans almost five decades — it’s no wonder he’s become the trusted, go-to expert for local, industry and national media outlets.

Regularly called on by radio, television and online news media for his commentary and expertise on breaking news Evan has appeared countless shows including Fox News – Judge Jeanine, CNN – Lou Dobbs, Court TV, Real Talk on WOR, It’s Your Call with Lyn Doyle, Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk, and Cam & Company/NRA News.

As a creative arts consultant, he also lends his weapons law and historical expertise to an elite, discerning cadre of movie and television producers and directors, and novelists.

He also provides expert testimony and consultations for defense attorneys across America.

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)