The most played episodes among Podcast App listeners.

1. 1
   Number 1: Episode 308-One Gun A Month… On The Chopping Block

   Episode 308-One Gun A Month… On The Chopping Block Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode Transcript 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. Downloadable PDF TranscriptGun Lawyer S5 E308_transcript About The HostEvan Nappen, Esq.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 Evan Your Comments and Questions [email protected] Join Evan’s InnerCircleHere’s your chance to join an elite group of the Savviest gun and knife owners in America. Membership is totally FREE and Strictly CONFIDENTIAL. Just enter your email to start receiving insider news, tips, and other valuable membership benefits. Email (required) *First Name *Select list(s) to subscribe toInnerCircle Membership Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)Constant Contact Use. Please leave this field blank.var ajaxurl = "https://gun.lawyer/wp-admin/admin-ajax.php";

   September 20, 2026·53min
   Play
2. 2
   Number 2: Episode 307- How Many Guns are in the US?

   Episode 307- How Many Guns are in the US? Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode Transcript 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. Downloadable PDF TranscriptGun Lawyer S5 E307_transcript About The HostEvan Nappen, Esq.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 Evan Your Comments and Questions [email protected] Join Evan’s InnerCircleHere’s your chance to join an elite group of the Savviest gun and knife owners in America. Membership is totally FREE and Strictly CONFIDENTIAL. Just enter your email to start receiving insider news, tips, and other valuable membership benefits. Email (required) *First Name *Select list(s) to subscribe toInnerCircle Membership Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)Constant Contact Use. Please leave this field blank.var ajaxurl = "https://gun.lawyer/wp-admin/admin-ajax.php";

   September 13, 2026·44min
   Play
3. 3
   Number 3: Episode 306- Big Brother’s Eye on Guns

   Episode 306- Big Brother’s Eye on Guns Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode Transcript Page – 1 – of 15 Gun Lawyer — Episode 306 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Gun laws, Second Amendment, Ninth Circuit, California law, Surveillance, FFL, Self defense, Firearm storage, Heller decision, New Jersey, Guillotine, Weapon definition, Propaganda, CDC data, Gun training SPEAKERS Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen, Speaker 2 Evan Nappen 00:18 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:20 and I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:21 and welcome to Gun Lawyer. Teddy, welcome back, you new father, you. And I’m the new grandfather. Teddy Nappen 00:29 Yes, I know, and don’t worry, all is good. Just sleep is for the weak. Evan Nappen 00:34 Ah, right, exactly, exactly. Oh my! And how is beautiful, Aliyana, doing? That cute little peanut that she is. Teddy Nappen 00:45 Aliyana is doing quite well. She is. Evan Nappen 00:47 And your lovely wife? How is she? Teddy Nappen 00:50 She’s doing also well. It’s definitely one of those moments when you see your wife holding your newborn child. Definitely that kind of spark. Oh yeah, very special, Evan Nappen 01:01 Oh yeah, very special, special. Teddy Nappen 01:02 Yeah, but they’re both doing quite well, and I’m eternally blessed for that. Page – 2 – of 15 Evan Nappen 01:08 That’s right. And we got the baby to the range. She did great on her first shooting experience there. Teddy Nappen 01:15 I know we took out. Evan Nappen 01:17 She got her CCARE. She’s good. She took out a Charter Arms .22. The trick was the range officer allowed us to just put up balloons to make it easier. It worked. Evan Nappen 01:19 She took out a Charter Arms .22. The trick was the range officer allowed us to just put up balloons to make it easier, and it worked. Evan Nappen 01:28 It was good. It was good. We start them young in the Nappen family. You know, you have to give one day of birth, and then you’re at the range. Teddy Nappen 01:40 There’s two things. Evan Nappen 01:41 Training begins. Teddy Nappen 01:42 The two things Aliyana will grow up with having. Number one, I want to teach her to be a critical thinker, and number two, all I can show her for self-defense. Everything I can for her to be a critical thinker. Evan Nappen 01:56 That’s right. And you do that for all kids. It’s a way of not being a victim, not being a victim. Critical thinking and knowing how to defend yourself – two very important things. Well, I’ve got to tell you, the Ninth Circuit in California had a very interesting decision. The reason I want to discuss it is, I believe this decision may give us hints as to what may be coming in New Jersey and other places. As we see the power of the newly, relatively speaking, empowered Second Amendment crushing gun laws that are literally over a century old, the anti-Second Amendment crowd, the Second Amendment oppressors, are, of course, looking for avenues to oppress our rights, and they have to work within this new framework. This decision out of the Ninth Circuit, I find of great concern because of its potential to possibly be utilized as a mechanism and tactic for the anti-Second Amendment Left. And what happened in the Ninth Circuit is an Appellate Decision, after the trial court in the Ninth, and what it did was leave in place California’s 24/7 gun store surveillance law. Page – 3 – of 15 Evan Nappen 03:31 Now you may say, okay, well that’s just gun stores. Yes, but it’s very easy to expand this, and I’m going to show you why this should be of great concern. So, let’s take a look at what happened in the Ninth Circuit with California law, and then I’m going to discuss where I think the gun rights oppressors may see an opening for shenanigans. We’ve got to be prepared and recognize that this could be a potential area of penetration where they will probably strike and try to oppress us. So, California, requires licensed dealers to video record and audio record. By the way, interior video and audio, and retain all the recordings for at least one year. Now I’m getting this, by the way, from a great article in AmmoLand by one of our favorite authors, John Crump, and it’s called “Ninth Circuit Leaves California’s 24/7 Gun Store Surveillance Law in place”. (https://www.ammoland.com/2026/08/ninth-circuit-leaves-californias-24-7-gun-store-surveillance-law-in-place/?utm_source=Ammoland+Subscribers&utm_campaign=fb0c8bc3fc-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6f6fac3eaa-fb0c8bc3fc-21268623) Evan Nappen 05:02 The article discusses how a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld California’s controversial gun store monitoring law by a two-to-one margin. Now, the case is Richards v. Newsom. No shock that the defendant is Governor Newsom. And what happened in this case was brick and mortar FFLs, two home-based FFLs, gun rights groups, including GOA, GOC, CRPA, and SAF, and individual patrons of the shop, were all plaintiffs in this action. They challenged California’s law, which was enacted in 2024, that requires every California FFL to operate a 24/7 digital video system that also records audio inside the premises. Cameras must cover entries and exits, display areas, points of sale, and clearly identify people, and run at least 15 frames per second. They have to store footage for one year. In addition, dealers must post a conspicuous warning that says, in all bold, THESE PREMISES ARE UNDER VIDEO AND AUDIO SURVEILLANCE. YOUR IMAGE AND CONVERSATIONS MAY BE RECORDED.” Evan Nappen 06:49 At the District Court level, the level below the Appellate level, the law was found constitutional, and the plaintiffs then appealed to the Appeal Court in the ninth, which came out with this decision. It was a three-judge panel, and it was Judge (Lucy H.) Koh, Judge (Ana) de Alba, which were both appointed by Biden, and a Trump appointee, Judge Kenneth Lee. In this case, one of the claims they made was that this violates the Fourth Amendment. That’s the constitutional protection against illegal search and seizure, and the panel rejected the claim, saying that the dealers’ recordings are not themselves a Government search. There is no physical intrusion by the State, citing another case of Jones, and no government acquisition of data, citing two other cases of Carpenter and Chatrie. Dealers are not transformed into state actors by merely being required to keep cameras. Wow, let that sink in. And, of course, the two Biden judges rejected Judge Lee’s inspection theory on three grounds. And that is that the law doesn’t authorize inspections, though there are other penal code provisions that do, and that even if it did, the statute is facially valid under New York versus Burger because it limits who may inspect and what may be inspected. Page – 4 – of 15 Evan Nappen 08:45 The plaintiffs also claim that the law violated the Fifth Amendment takings clause. The Court said no good to that one as well. The majority, again, the two Biden appointees, said it’s not a physical taking. Dealers own and install the equipment, and the Government doesn’t occupy the premises. hey claimed it’s not a regulatory taking. That dealers in this heavily-regulated industry have reduced investment-backed expectations, and the alleged compliance costs, by the way, of $17,000, without a before and after value comparison, do not suffice. And the character of the action is a “public-safety regulation, not a physical invasion”. he Court also rejected the First Amendment claims, where the judge held that overbreadth fails because the statute doesn’t punish or regulate speech. The anonymity claim failed because one, no one must identify themselves, even though cameras must be positioned to identify customers easily. And the Association claim fails because membership is not compulsory, and it shot it all down. hen the majority also declined to adopt the dissent, you know, the good guys’ dissent of the right to receive and exchange information. They rejected that theory, claiming the plaintiffs didn’t raise it, and cited other cases that involved actual prohibitions. So, this is incredible. The one dissenting Judge Lee would have also held that inspection scheme violates the Fourth Amendment as applied to FFLs. There’s no time or place limits. So, agents could theoretically enter home at any hour to check the system, and they left the audio and visual surveillance requirement in place. Evan Nappen 11:08 Now this is California, granted, and this is, of course, on dealers. However, what are the requirements, constitutionally speaking, when it comes to firearm storage, and we’ll argue regulation? You see, we have heard rumors and things have been printed that one of the things that New Jersey is going to pass, particularly in response to the finding of unconstitutionality of both the assault firearm ban and the magazine ban is something having to do with storage. Well, I’m thinking that it probably isn’t simply going to be focused on storage, but may in fact try to utilize a visual and audio surveillance requirement as well, and place that upon anybody that possesses so-called assault firearms magazines, maybe even all guns. Who knows how far they’ll take it? Evan Nappen 12:20 If we take a step back and we look at the Heller decision, in (District of Columbia v.) Heller, the Supreme Court ruled, of course, that requiring lawfully-owned firearms in a home to be kept unloaded and disassembled, or bound by a trigger lock is a violation of the Second Amendment. The Heller Court found that this storage requirement was unconstitutional because it rendered firearms inoperable and prevented individuals from using them for immediate self-defense in the home. Scalia, when he wrote the majority opinion, said the Second Amendment protects the right to keep a working firearm ready for core lawful purpose of self-defense. Now, of course, if it’s surveillance, surveillance does not stop you from keeping the gun ready for lawful purpose of self-defense. t’s simply a surveillance and “security requirement”. Evan Nappen 13:36 Further, the court in Heller noted that the ruling did not cast out on certain other traditional regulations, stating that laws regulating the storage of firearms to prevent accidents under specific or different regulatory contexts were not necessarily invalidated by Heller. Scalia, when he wrote the Heller decisions, suggested that the Court’s analysis did not “suggest the invalidity of laws regulating storage Page – 5 – of 15 of firearms to prevent accidents”. When he talked about that distinguishing feature. He was drawing a sharp legal line. The Court did not say that all storage laws are unconstitutional. Instead, it distinguished between complete baseline disabling of a gun versus conditional safety rules. And you know how the Second Amendment oppressors always try to exploit to the max anything they’re given in any way, and this is an opening that I expect they’re going to attempt to. Evan Nappen 15:01 Let’s take a further look and elaborate. So, for example, the absence of a self-defense exception. ow, the fundamental flaw in the District of Columbia storage law was that it was an absolute 24/7 mandate. Well, in terms of the DC code, a firearm had to be unloaded and bound by a trigger lock, even if an intruder was actively breaking into the home. Now, Heller struck that absolute mandate down, but what Heller preserved was storage regulations that maintain a flexibility enough to allow a person to access and use their weapon dynamically when facing an immediate threat. So, it might still be able to require lock boxes that can instantly be opened. Let’s say with a fingerprint or something like that. This may be a direction they’ll go. Evan Nappen 16:11 There’s a distinguishing between immediate control and unattended storage. The lower courts heavily relied upon in the Heller quote to uphold secure storage and child access prevention, and New Jersey in fact has a law that says you can’t allow a minor to access a loaded firearm. But the crucial legal distinction is whether the gun is currently in use or whether it’s sitting unattended. One of the distinctions is the on-person distinction. In challenges that followed Heller, courts ruled that laws requiring guns to be locked up only when not under direct personal control of the owner are constitutional. So, they’re going to be exploiting that. f you’re awake and carrying a firearm or have it on your nightstand while home, that’s within your immediate control. But if you leave the house, if you well, if you leave the house and you go to sleep, and the children are present. The state has a valid interest in regulating the unattended storage to prevent an accidental discharge or theft. Teddy Nappen 17:30 So, my question would be, when it comes to, if they were trying to regulate, let’s say they force everyone to have, okay, you need to have X amount of storage. You need to have a safe in requiring of that. Could there be you’re putting the undue burden of saying, well, now you’re adding essentially a poll tax to a right? Evan Nappen 17:50 That may be one of the arguments about that. I’m not sure how that’ll play out. It’s interesting. Well, and the third thing to keep in mind in Scalia’s reference to “different regulatory contexts”, it means that certain storage laws can be tailored to high-risk environments and specific populations, and they’re historically and legally permissible. So, for example, commercial and public contexts, the Government can mandate strict storage requirements for commercial gun dealers, and California has completely exploited that. You know, usually to prevent like smash and grab robberies or public housing, military barracks, government workplaces, stuff like that. Then there’s preventing vulnerable access. And that’s laws specifically punishing gun owners if a child or legally prohibited person, like a convicted felon, can Page – 6 – of 15 gain access to an unsecured firearm and causes harm are widely considered valid under Heller. So, these do not ban self-defense. They penalize essentially negligence. Evan Nappen 19:04 This is the playing field that we’re going to see the antis try to exploit. And now you can combine that with possibly requiring 24/7 surveillance to the degree that it could be applied to an individual, even in their home. Because remember you had home-based dealers as well that were part of this that were trying to raise these claims. Now, granted, this is the Ninth Circuit’s view of it. New Jersey, frankly, has often taken a strong view when it comes to Fourth Amendment protections. But who knows whether their desire to have Second Amendment oppression will overcome their desire to have Fourth Amendment protection? We’ve got to be aware of this. Teddy Nappen 19:56 I would take it a step further, Dad. Now say, you need to have an AI program required for your camera, and now that AI can calculate and determine firearms, where they’re going, who has them, how many you have, and no longer need it. We’re always worried about Universal Background Check as the way of the national registration. Imagine an AI in every home, and it determines each firearm. There’s your national registration, and now they have their list to come collect them. Evan Nappen 20:26 And then it could be viewed at any time. You could see these things happen. I mean, it’s just outrageous the implications. This is very scary stuff when you combine the potential of a surveillance requirement and mandating alarm systems in a home. Cameras, audio, lighting-all these different things. To what degree can the Government extend its power in the name of public safety? Given what is apparently allowed and disallowed by way of Heller and subsequent courts’ rulings and determinations over those things. So, I see this as a new battlefield, a new front that we’re most likely going to have to be very much vigilant about and wary. I also can see this type of California law, at a minimum, applying to New Jersey dealers. At a minimum imposing and trying to create because New Jersey often follows California for their extreme gun rights oppression, and California often follows New Jersey for what they do. They work often hand in hand, and its extension to citizens is something we need to be very concerned about. Hey, Teddy. What do you have of interest in Press Checks? You had mentioned something that I thought was kind of fascinating, and it reminded me of the French Revolution. What is that you need to tell us about this? Teddy Nappen 22:24 As you know, Press Checks are always free, and this comes from the Capitol Police as they had to arrest. Evan Nappen 22:26 The Capitol in Washington D.C. Page – 7 – of 15 Teddy Nappen 22:34 Yeah. United States Capitol Police seized a guillotine, shot a man, and arrested him for carrying a dangerous weapon, for being in possession of a guillotine. (https://www.uscp.gov/media-center/press-releases/uscp-arrests-driver-guillotine-truckbed) Evan Nappen 22:48 Oh, a guillotine. How did he possess it? Teddy Nappen 22:51 In the back of his pickup truck. Evan Nappen 22:53 So, he’s driving around with the guillotine on the back of his pickup truck. Was he going to use it in a theatrical play or movie, or was he going to use it to make political speech, or did he actually want to start chopping heads? Teddy Nappen 23:09 There was no clarification, but he was just pulled over. There was this giant guillotine on the back of the truck. Evan Nappen 23:16 Could have been a Halloween display in advance. I mean, I don’t know. Well, you know, it’s an interesting kind of weird to say a guillotine is a weapon unless it’s being utilized as a weapon. I mean, what do, you know? What are you gonna say to somebody? You know, give me your wallet, or I’m gonna cut off your head. I mean, what? I don’t really see how. It’s not like it fires a projectile. It’s not like it’s easily carried in one’s pocket. How is it gonna qualify as a weapon unless it is somehow intentionally used as a weapon? Teddy Nappen 23:55 Here’s the problem, though, for the law. From what I was able to pull on DC. They have to prove that he’s able to carry the guillotine in order to charge him with that. Evan Nappen 24:09 Well, I guess it’s a vehicle-mounted weapon. I don’t know. But it’s not a weapon. It’s not firing anything. It’s not projecting anything. It’s harmless unless you actually get somebody to stick their head in it. Other than that, you know, it’s as much a weapon as somebody’s shoe is a weapon. You could take off your shoe and start beating somebody in the head. Now your shoe is a weapon, right? Otherwise, shoes just aren’t weapons. I don’t necessarily see how. If I was handling that case, I would immediately bring a motion that this doesn’t qualify as a weapon. Now, I don’t practice in D.C. So, I don’t know how broad their description of weapons are. But if we were to look at New Jersey, the best they could claim is that it falls under the “other weapons” section of N.J.S. 2C:39-5d. But even with that, the definition of weapon under New Jersey, I don’t even think it’s fitting it unless there’s some allegation that fits it under NJ’s definition of weapon and meets all the elements of it. Page – 8 – of 15 Teddy Nappen 25:33 I want to go a step further and just have someone drive a truck with like an electric chair on the back. Then have another one where he’s driving with the car, and it has the torture device that was used to stretch people. I’m just curious to like what does the extent of where do they can where do the line drawn is it just because it has a blade? Evan Nappen 26:03 Well, here’s where it gets odd, and it’s an interesting thing. Because New Jersey’s definition of weapon, which you’ll find under N.J.S. 2C:39-1r. says that a weapon means anything readily capable of lethal use or inflicting serious bodily injury. However, there are so many things out there. I mean, a kitchen knife, a chainsaw, a hammer, a golf club. I mean, it never ends because anything is readily capable of it. But you still have to fit into New Jersey’s other weapons. Because even before we go there, the term “weapon” under New Jersey law includes, but is not limited to firearms, even though not loaded or lacking a clip. They say a clip. Can you imagine this? I mean, magazine, but okay, or other component to render them immediately operable. Components which can be readily assembled into a weapon. I always hate a definition that tries to define it by using the term itself. That’s frickin’ useless. And then Teddy Nappen 27:30 Definition. Evan Nappen 27:30 And then, gravity knives, switchblade knives, daggers, dirks, stilettos, or other dangerous knives, billies, blackjacks, bludgeons, metal knuckles, sandclubs, slingshots, cesti, or similar leather bands studded with metal filings or razor blades embedded in wood. Well, that sure gives you a lot of great ideas. At least I give it credit there. But anyway, and stun guns or any weapon or other device which projects, releases, or emits tear gas or other substance intended to produce temporary physical comfort, discomfort, or permanent injury through being vaporized or otherwise dispensed into the air. But if you notice, all these things that they’re putting in this category of weapons require a person to use them in a way that an individual would be targeted for being struck or hit or cut. Evan Nappen 28:37 Whereas, a guillotine would require the person themselves putting their head into the guillotine, or being forced to put their head in a guillotine, and that seems like a bit of a challenge to still fit it under the definition of weapon. But even if it did fit under, just for argument’s sake, of being arguably a weapon because it’s capable of that lethal use, you’d have to say. But the definition of weapon isn’t the prohibition in New Jersey law. The prohibition for weapon you’ll find in the weapons prohibition statute, which is the 2C:39-5d. “Other weapons”. And 2C:39-5d. says other weapons. Any person who knowingly has in his possession any other weapon under circumstances not manifestly appropriate for such lawful uses as it may have is guilty of a crime of the fourth degree. It’s felony level offense, and it carries a year and a half max in State Prison. Evan Nappen 30:02 So, what would be circumstances not manifestly appropriate for such lawful uses as it may have? f you’re riding around with the guillotine, let’s say, for political speech purposes, which could be legit, or Page – 9 – of 15 you’re transporting it for making a movie, let’s say, or using it in a play or in a magic show. Okay, because there are magician guillotines. I personally have one called the Arm Chopper, where you do a whole routine where you get a volunteer, and you chop carrots with it. Then you put their arm in it, and it’s a whole fun thing. Of course, it doesn’t chop the person’s arm; it magically does not, and everything’s fine. en there’s another one. A guillotine version, magician, where when you chop it, it’s rigged so that the arm looks like it’s falling into the bag below, but of course it isn’t. Yet you can still lock it in place to cut carrots and demonstrate its effectiveness before you do the trick, you know. But there’s a legitimate, lawful purpose – a magician’s prop. Maybe you are into it for decorative purposes, for craftsmanship purposes. I mean. Teddy Nappen 30:03 You’re trying out a new thing. Teddy Nappen 30:03 You’re trying out a new Gallagher routine with watermelons. Evan Nappen 30:03 I don’t know, but this is intriguing to say the least. I’ve done a lot in almost 40 years of practicing this area of law, but I will have to say that I’ve yet to have anybody charged with possession of a guillotine as a weapon. But I’m ready to defend it; should it be necessary. But there you go. That’s a crazy, interesting story, Teddy. Thanks. Evan Nappen 30:03 Hey, I want to talk about our good friends at WeShoot. WeShoot is a range in Lakewood, New Jersey. That is a range where Teddy and I both shoot, and my family shoots, and my brother shoots. We love it. WeShoot is an awesome resource right there in Central Jersey, easily accessible right off the Parkway. You’ll love it at WeShoot. If you haven’t checked out WeShoot, you really need to. It is a great place, a special place. They have a fantastic state-of-the-art range, a great pro shop with awesome toys, and they can set you up whether you’re a beginner or advanced shooter. They can get you the right equipment, the right gear, the best ammo, best guns, right there at WeShoot, and the best people. They will help you and guide you so that you make the right choices for what your needs are. You need to go to WeShoot, try it out. You’ll see what I’m saying. Evan Nappen 30:03 You can check WeShoot out at weshootusa.com. They have a great website, beautiful photography. They pride themselves on their great photography. They have all kinds of great courses, not just courses, so you can get your CCARE and other certifications that you may need, and other courses for getting permits from even other states, but advanced training and other types of fun shoots and very Important advanced training, and if you are brand new, they can start you off right by learning the basics and beginning with proper instructions so that you don’t become a GOFU. It’s very important training and having a place to shoot. It’s critical in New Jersey, and WeShoot can give it all to you. So check out WeShoot at weshootusa.com. Page – 10 – of 15 Evan Nappen 30:03 Let me also shamelessly promote my book New Jersey Gun Law, the Bible of New Jersey Gun Law, used by, well, everybody that needs a gun law book. They’re using it, and you need to have one so that you don’t become a GOFU. I’ve taken great pains to explain the insane matrix called New Jersey gun law. It’s done in only five over 500 pages, but don’t let that intimidate you. It’s 120 topics all broken down in question and answer, so that you can even you can get an understanding of New Jersey’s insanity and so that you can protect yourself and stay legal. Go to evannappen.com, evannappen.com, and get your copy today. Evan Nappen 30:32 And, of course, we’re all very excited about the Federal Relief From Disabilities Program being reinvigorated by the Trump administration and the DOJ. It’s been 33 years since I’ve been able to help people regain their Second Amendment rights that may have federal disqualifiers. If you’d like to get a free evaluation of whether you qualify and what it can do for you, and what you need to know as its interplay with other states and Jersey law, and to see what it can do for you, go to evannappen.com, and you can fill out our little contact form there for getting federal relief. And if you need state relief, we do rights restoration, including New Jersey expungements, and getting rid of other disqualifiers that may be in your past, whether it’s old restraining orders or other things that create bars to the exercise of your Second Amendment rights. Go to evannappen.com and learn about those things. And feel free to get in contact with me. I’ll be happy to speak with you, or someone from my team will be happy to help you with your issues. And let me also mention that Teddy has other Press Checks. I’m sure. What else do you have? Teddy Nappen 36:34 This is the famous double Press Checks. I could not pass this one up. When I saw this article, I was shocked, and then reminded that the vast majority of the Left can’t be funny. If you go back to maybe the ’90s, and you’d have. Teddy Nappen 36:54 You laugh at them all the time, though, Teddy. Teddy Nappen 36:56 Yeah, we laugh at them. They try to be funny, and they try to joke on us. But they just come off as boring because comedy was always about pushing the envelope. The all-time favorite movies of comedy, like Blazing Saddles, or even like George Carlin’s bit, “Seven Things You Can’t Say on Television”. George Carlin. Evan Nappen 37:17 George Carlin. I saw him live twice. Yeah. Teddy Nappen 37:20 And you have, you know, Nick DePaolo, Norm Macdonald, people who would their whole idea was to push the envelope. Funniest man alive, Richard Pryor. These are all the ideas, and then comes to the Marxist Left. This is, you know, we’ve got to give it to The Trace, who decided to give them free Page – 11 – of 15 advertising. They decided to make a musical pushing to repeal the Second Amendment. (https://www.thetrace.org/2026/08/good-guy-with-a-gun-musical-interview/) Evan Nappen 37:48 Oh my God! A gun oppression musical. Teddy Nappen 37:53 A musical called “Good Guy with a Gun”. That is their comparison. Evan Nappen 37:57 That’s about as wokey as you can get. A musical doing this. Teddy Nappen 38:02 It’s gay. It’s really gay. Evan Nappen 38:05 Oh my G-d! Teddy Nappen 38:07 And going through this. By the way, you can go on Spotify. You go wherever they have the song list. You can listen to it if you want to. Evan Nappen 38:16 Oh, that’s it. I want to listen to anti-Second Amendment songs. Teddy Nappen 38:20 Yeah. Songs, yes. Evan Nappen 38:23 What are they trying to do this like the other play? What was it that going after or mocking Mormons? Teddy Nappen 38:30 Yeah, the Book of Mormon. It was. Evan Nappen 38:31 There you go. Right. This is the Left’s one of their tools of pushing their agenda is doing. Yeah, I know, real, Teddy Nappen 38:40 Real, real stunning and brave to mock Mormons and going after the Second Amendment. Now, do one on Sharia law and see how that goes. Evan Nappen 38:51 Oh yeah, right. Yeah, that’ll go over big. Sure. Yeah, that’ll be the yeah. Page – 12 – of 15 Teddy Nappen 38:57 Or what is the Chinese play where it’s China before communism, where Chinese have actually sent agents to attack their bus, and do stuff like that. But here. Evan Nappen 39:10 That’s really edgy. Teddy Nappen 39:12 Yeah, no kidding. Evan Nappen 39:13 You know, not this stuff. That’s just you know agenda driven with just another potential way of somehow getting their effed up message implanted. Teddy Nappen 39:27 Yeah. So, they got a bunch of F tier celebrities who wanted to show their virtue signal. They took a pay cut, so they would do this play out of Los Angeles, of course. It is a theatrical concept, billing it as the Book of Mormon for the NRA. The action satire swells on the day the Second Amendment is wiped away, and the numbers reminiscent to Les Misérables begins with the right winger singing, “The day that we’ve always feared the liberals have come to take our guns away. Then comes a brief monolog from a Cockney woman spiles into mania. They came in the night. They took the little ones, the Glocks, the small handguns you keep under your pillow. It was invasion of basement of ant and basement and antics violated antiques violated. Evan Nappen 40:15 Well, they think it’s really hilarious that they’re going to come for the little ones, the handguns”, and then build up from that. That’s so funny, Teddy. It’s just so funny the way they crush our rights. Teddy Nappen 40:29 Well, you have this. It’s the screeching Left who still believe in going after the little ones. Just look at Lindsey Clancy. But anyways. The whole and going I love how they like say this famous actor from “This Is Us” and this other lady from “Orange is the New Black” and the way there and George voice the voice of God was George on Seinfeld. Okay, cool. The whole plot is the character gets a magic gun that turns people conservative. His daughter gets a magic megaphone that turns people liberal, and the antics ensue. In the end, they go into the whole article about the whole point is to dispel the myth of the good guy with the gun. Evan Nappen 41:11 Oh, the myth of the good guy with the gun. Like all these folks that have made a difference in stopping crime, criminals, terrorism that are average citizens, that no longer want to be victims but have chosen to be defenders. And not just defenders of themselves, but defenders of others. As a matter of fact, Teddy, this goofy crap by them on the play, but weren’t you telling me about that very fact? About the difference being made by people that try to stop, for example, mass shootings? What were you telling Page – 13 – of 15 me about that? Let’s talk about good guy with a gun. What have we learned about good guys with a gun? Teddy Nappen 42:02 So, the CDC again have added the data showing that it’s two. Evan Nappen 42:06 And this is their data from the CDC? Teddy Nappen 42:08 Up to 2 million self-defense uses of a firearm. Self-defense uses. That doesn’t even mean pull the trigger. Defensive uses of a firearm. Evan Nappen 42:18 Right. Just the mere presence of a firearm. Teddy Nappen 42:19 So, if it saves one life . . . how about 2 million? Two million lives saved! That is from the CDC’s website. Also the fact that they are now including the FBI reports showing mass shootings. Now they’re showing civilian intervention and stopping the bad guy. Evan Nappen 42:35 You mean, good guys with a gun, or good guys no longer wanting or agreeing to be victims, and good guys making a difference, right? Teddy Nappen 42:47 Yeah. This is something to where they are. This is a logical fallacy right here. It’s called false premise. They’re starting with a false premise, believing that there’s never any good guy with a gun. Even though we can clearly debunk that immediately just by that argument. But going into this whole insanity of the play, I want to remind you all. This is what they’re about. This is what they try to do through propaganda, and yeah, it’s in the gayest way possible. And I’ll take the citizen vigilante that’ll probably sell out more than this play out of. Evan Nappen 43:21 Well, that’s the crazy thing because movies and other things that were not necessarily designed to be propaganda, but that have the message of individuals who fight back. I mean, you can look at “Red Dawn”, which is still considered a classic today, and what was that? Individuals fighting back. You can look at virtually the entire genre of westerns is the individual who fights back. I mean, that’s what we’re really about. Teddy Nappen 43:55 The funniest scene I ever saw for this as a pro gun argument was in the movie “Death Proof”. It’s rated as one of the worst for Quentin Tarantino. I happen to like it. Page – 14 – of 15 Evan Nappen 44:07 I enjoyed Death Proof. I like the music, too. Teddy Nappen 44:07 Oh yeah, it was good there. Just seeing Kurt Russell play a weird twisted serial. Evan Nappen 44:16 Oh my G-d, yeah, did he ever. Teddy Nappen 44:17 There’s one scene where it’s the four girls are sitting on the table. They’re having a discussion. That’s what Quinn Tarantino always does: is having table conversations. The one girl says, “You still carry a gun? Why do you do that? And it’s like, “Why not?” And goes into that whole argument of where, like, “Why you don’t you know you can risk that? You know what I want? I want to carry my gun. I want to go where I’m able to go. I want to be able to defend myself, and she makes and hits home every argument. Where then they say, “What about pepper spray? I don’t want to give them a rash. I want to put them down. Like that’s the whole. Like they’re trying to be satirical. They’re going to be showing it. Evan Nappen 44:55 Big spoiler is that’s what she uses. Yeah, saves the. Teddy Nappen 45:00 hoots it. Shoots at Kurt Russell to get him to go away to save the girls. So, it’s one of those demonstrations. But even I’ll even give it another way, just satirical. Always Sonny did the exact thing where you have two both sides, ones for pro, ones against, and the anti side is like it’s so easy to get a gun. Both of them get denied their background checks immediately. Then they try, and then immediately try to go to a gun show, and they’re trying to do under the table. And the gun dealer’s like, “No, I’m not going to do that. And finally, they try to do a deal to buy it from an illegal alley, and that falls through, and to the point where they’re arguing. They see like, wow, it really is hard to get a gun. Then we realize, and it’s satirical because they show it in a way. This one here in the whole article, they’re trying to like joke on the liberals by she shops at Trader Joe’s. If you’re using a bazooka on one side and a squirt on the other, it’s you’re not both sizing it very easily. Evan Nappen 46:00 Right. Well, that’s not their goal, but that is really interesting. But I don’t think that play will be coming to a playhouse nearby anytime soon. And if it is, it’ll be a financial failure. Teddy Nappen 46:12 Remember, this is the Left’s game, though. Do you remember when they did Julius Caesar? They dressed him as Donald Trump. This was in 2017. In the play where he’s killed. In the play where he’s violently stabbed to death. Evan Nappen 46:15 No, gee, what were they trying to say there? I wonder. Page – 15 – of 15 Teddy Nappen 46:31 Yeah, exactly. And then you have the New Yorker here trying to say, it’s hardly bears the point that art is not life. I love how they play that game every time. Oh, really? Okay. Now cast Ryan Reynolds, Ryan Gosling as Black Panther for in Wakanda. Then tell me it’s not that. No big deal. I love how they always bring that up when it comes to oh art takes that. Cut to the musical of assassins that they had to cancel after the first attempted assassination. Evan Nappen 47:06 Yeah. Teddy Nappen 47:06 Where it’s a musical about Evan Nappen 47:08 Yeah. This is part of their M.O., and it’s disgusting. Well, Teddy, thanks for bringing that to our attention, so we know what play we’re going to never get a playbill for or see. Now, I’ve got to tell you about this week’s GOFU. You know the GOFU is Gun Owner Fuck Up. It’s where gun owners make mistakes that can cost them their freedom, their firearm rights. It cost them a lot of money, and you get to learn for free, so you don’t become a GOFU. And this week’s GOFU is really basic. Some of you listening may say, “Really, seriously?” I’m telling you, why am I talking about this? Because my friends, I get the phone calls. I get the phone calls from the GOFUers. I get those calls. Evan Nappen 48:01 This week’s GOFU is real simple. Practice your draw. Know your firearm. Okay, simple. Practice drawing and firing if you’re carrying. Practice reholstering. Practice it with an empty firearm. Make sure you are proficient in how to handle your specific firearm and know your gun. Know how it operates. You know, some guns have manual safeties. Some guns do not. Know your gun. Know how to use it. Practice and train. Not just on shooting. Not just on hitting the target. But practice on understanding the function of your gun – the loading, the unloading, how to absolutely know it’s empty. How to work your gun and how to draw your gun. How to holster and unholster your gun. Make sure you’ve practiced that with a safe, empty firearm. That you’ve had the right training. That you’re doing it properly, and that you are proficient in that. Because if you’re not and you have a problem, if you have an A.D., if you have some issue, you’ll become the next GOFU, and I don’t want to see that. Evan Nappen 49:35 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 2 49:48 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. Downloadable PDF TranscriptGun Lawyer S5 E306_transcript About The HostEvan Nappen, Esq.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 Evan Your Comments and Questions [email protected] Join Evan’s InnerCircleHere’s your chance to join an elite group of the Savviest gun and knife owners in America. Membership is totally FREE and Strictly CONFIDENTIAL. Just enter your email to start receiving insider news, tips, and other valuable membership benefits. Email (required) *First Name *Select list(s) to subscribe toInnerCircle Membership Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)Constant Contact Use. Please leave this field blank.var ajaxurl = "https://gun.lawyer/wp-admin/admin-ajax.php";

   September 06, 2026·51min
   Play
4. 4
   Number 4: Episode 305-BACK TO BASICS

   Episode 305-BACK TO BASICS Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode Transcript Page – 1 – of 9 Gun Lawyer — Episode 305 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS Gun laws, New Jersey, Machine guns, Handguns, Rifles, Shotguns, Assault firearms, Legal exemptions, Carry permits, Firearm ID, Second Amendment, Defensive use, CDC data, Gun rights, Application errors SPEAKERS Evan Nappen, Speaker 2 Evan Nappen 00:18 I’m Evan Nappen, and welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, my cohort in crime, Teddy, will not be joining us on the show today because Teddy is a brand new daddy. That’s right, he’s a father of a beautiful baby girl, which of course makes me a grandfather. Oh my God, I can’t even believe I’m saying that. She is just cute as a button, and I’m not just saying that because it’s my granddaughter. She really is. Her name is Alianna, and we are all so excited and happy about this. I can’t even begin to tell you. But Teddy has got his hands full with his beautiful wife and his beautiful new daughter, so I will be flying solo today with you. Evan Nappen 01:17 at I want to talk about is something important for gun owners in New Jersey to know, and even outside New Jersey. And that is the basics of how New Jersey bans all guns, and then creates a legal system that essentially allows and permits possession by exemption. I think this is why the entire foundation of New Jersey gun laws can eventually be completely wiped out because it takes what is a constitutional right and just reverses how that right is supposed to work. But nonetheless, the law is something you need to understand in New Jersey. And for those who don’t live in New Jersey, you want to understand this so you don’t ever see this happen in your jurisdiction. Evan Nappen 02:18 he place to begin is under New Jersey law, under N.J.S. 2C:39-5 (Unlawful possession of weapons.). Now, the 39-5. gun laws in New Jersey are where you see basically every firearm banned. Then the exemptions get created in two ways that essentially permit limited possession. It’s really insane when you think that a constitutional right is treated in this way, but yet it is. So, let’s take a look, beginning with 39-5., 2C:39-5. Now, subsection a. is a ban on machine guns, and what it says there is that any person who knowingly has in his possession any machine gun or any instrument or device adaptable for use as a machine gun, without being licensed to do so pursuant to (2C:)58-5, is guilty of a crime of the second degree. So, the only way to possess a machine gun in New Jersey is if you have a 58-5. machine gun license, and the machine gun license historically has been an impossibility to obtain. Page – 2 – of 9 Evan Nappen 03:51 But interestingly, I think we’re going to see some serious challenges because the way New Jersey structured this law, the machine gun license required you first to get a carry permit. At the time, virtually no one could get a (New Jersey permit to) carry. Now, over 100,000 Jerseyans and non-residents do have carry permits, and the standard that you’re left with the machine gun license is quite bizarre of having to show somehow it’s in the public interest for you to have it. And that’s absolutely contrary to Bruen, but for now, the number one thing to keep in mind is the machine gun prohibition does not have any other exemptions within New Jersey law. Only this license is the exemption. And when I say no other exemption, I’m talking about for an otherwise law-abiding citizen to possess. There are exemptions for certain military, police, etc. There’s exemptions even for dealers, but we’re not focused on that. We’re focused on other normal, law-abiding, average citizens. So, forget about it for machine guns. Evan Nappen 05:02 But let’s move now to the b. section of 39-5. Now that’s one that applies to a hell of a lot of folks in New Jersey. The b. section of 39-5 is handguns. Listen to how New Jersey bans handguns. New Jersey’s law says: Handguns. Any person who knowingly has in his possession any handgun, including any antique handgun, without having first obtained a permit to carry the same as provided in (2C:)58-4., is guilty of a crime of the second degree. Let that sink in, folks. The only way you can lawfully possess a handgun, possess. We’re not even talking about carry. The only way to lawfully possess that handgun on the face of the statute that prohibits the possession of a handgun is if you have a (New Jersey) permit to carry a handgun. Evan Nappen 06:06 Now I know there are a lot of folks out there that don’t have permits to carry that simply acquired a handgun with a permit to purchase a handgun. So, how can this be? How can you lawfully possess that handgun if you don’t have a carry permit when the statute requires you to have a carry permit? And if you don’t have a carry permit, you’re guilty of unlawful possession of a handgun right on the face of the statute, which is an extraordinarily serious offense. Unlawful possession of a handgun in New Jersey is a second-degree crime. New Jersey doesn’t use the term felony. They use the term crime, but it’s the equivalent of a felony. You can think of it in that way. It carries up to 10 years in State Prison, and it has a minimum mandatory three and a half years under what is called the Graves Act. Where if you’re convicted of unlawful possession of a handgun after a trial, a judge has absolutely zero discretion and must impose at least three and a half years as a minimum component of your sentence with no ability to be paroled. You do every day of that three and a half years before you’re even eligible for parole. Evan Nappen 07:31 So, since you have to have a carry to possess it, what about everyone who doesn’t? Well, the answer to that lies in the exemptions, and we’ll get to the exemptions in a moment because we’re going to talk about exemptions. But right now, we’re just talking about the statute itself that mandates a (New Jersey) carry permit in order to legally possess a handgun. Under subsection c., is rifles and shotguns, and there it says: any person who knowingly has in his possession any rifle or shotgun without having first obtained a firearm purchaser ID card in accordance with (2C:)58-3, is guilty of a crime of the third degree. So, that makes it a third degree crime, up to five years in State Prison, if you have a shotgun or Page – 3 – of 9 rifle without a firearm ID card. The law goes further to say, unless otherwise permitted by law, any person who knowingly has in his possession any loaded rifle or shotgun is guilty of a crime in third degree. So, what about those that possess rifles or shotguns without a firearms ID card? Well, on the face of this statute, you’re looking at up to five years in State Prison. However, we’re going to discuss the exemptions, and the exemptions are critical in understanding how these possessory laws actually work. Even though the exemptions are technically a defense that you, as a law-abiding citizen, can be put to the proofs where you have to prove the defense. Evan Nappen 09:03 Then there’s subsection d. of 39-5. Subsection d. is “other weapons”, and that says: any person who knowingly has in his possession any other weapon under circumstances not manifestly appropriate for such lawful uses as it may have, is guilty of a crime of the fourth degree. So, that’s up to a year and a half in State Prison for any “other weapon”, anything that may be construed as a weapon, if it’s possessed under circumstances not manifestly appropriate for such lawful uses as it may have. Look at that vague, ridiculous language there. So, anything that can be construed to be a weapon, and then the circumstances not manifestly appropriate become subject for a jury trial. So that 12 people who aren’t smart enough to avoid jury duty get to decide whether those circumstances were manifestly appropriate or not. Isn’t that cute? And you need to further know that New Jersey case law, through Kelly and Montalvo, they found that the so-called circumstance is not manifestly appropriate for such lawful uses as it may have. In Kelly, the court specifically found that self-defense was not a manifestly appropriate lawful use. Imagine that! You cannot preemptively arm yourself with a weapon under Kelly. Self-defense doesn’t cut it. But then Kelly got modified with Montalvo. If it’s in your home, if it’s in your home and you have it for self-defense, then the court actually finally came to its senses, at least on that, and said, yeah, self-defense possession in your home is manifestly appropriate circumstances, but not outside the home. So, we still need a case that says outside the home, where you’re lawfully allowed to use self-defense, where you have a right to self-defense. That even outside the home, it’s a manifestly appropriate use for any other weapon. We’ll talk more about that one in the future. Okay, but there you go. Those are the prohibitions. Evan Nappen 11:32 Then, of course, we have the infamous subsection f., and that’s where assault firearms are banned. It says: any person who knowingly has in his possession an assault firearm is guilty of a crime of the second degree. Again, that draconian Graves Act, up to 10 years, minimum mandatory three and a half. Except if the assault firearm is licensed pursuant to (2C:)58-5. And by the way, that’s the same license as a machine gun license, which virtually no one could ever get. Or rendered inoperable, and that render inoperable period went from May of ’90 to May of ’91. And you had to do a rendered inoperable form. If you didn’t do it then, you’re out of the box. You couldn’t do it. Or if it was registered. Again, that registration period expired back in ’90. It may have ’90 to ’91 as well. So, assault firearms became prohibited with no way of making them lawful after May of ’91, unless you could somehow get an assault firearm license, which was a de facto impossibility, a de facto ban. Evan Nappen 12:52 In fact, as determined in the federal court decision Coalition versus Florio that I brought, it was determined that it was a de facto ban. So, that license is known, you know, essentially it was viewed as Page – 4 – of 9 fake in so many words. You know, yeah, good luck. Like it was just structured to be an impossibility and even recognized as such by essentially by the court. So, if you had an assault firearm, there was nothing that could be done there. Exemptions that we’re going to discuss next do not apply to assault firearms. he exemptions only apply to B, C, and D. So remember, B. is the ban on handguns unless you have a (New Jersey) carry permit. C. is a ban on rifles and shotguns unless you have a firearms ID card, and D. is a ban on “other weapons” without manifest lawful purpose. Evan Nappen 13:52 However, what the statute in 39-5 does not reference, but you need to know, is that under N.J.S. 2C:39-6, you will find an entire host of exemptions. There’s exemptions for law enforcement, military, all kinds, tons of exemptions. But the exemptions that have the most bearing to the average, law-abiding citizen, they’re found in subsection e. and subsection f. of the exemptions. Let me read you what these exemptions say. The exemptions say that nothing in subsection b., c., and d. of 39-5, so that is handguns, rifles and shotguns, and other weapons under the 39-5 ban, shall be construed to prevent a person keeping or carrying about the person’s place of business, residence, premises or other land owned or possessed by the person, any firearm, or from carrying the same, in the manner specified in subsection g., which is unloaded and in a case or in the trunk, or in a securely wrapped package, from any place of purchase to the person’s residence or place of business, between the person’s dwelling and place of business, between one place of business or residence and another when moving, or between the person’s dwelling or place of business and place where the firearms are repaired, for the purpose of repair. For the purposes of this section, a place of business shall be deemed to be a fixed location. Evan Nappen 15:42 So, subsection e. of 39-6 exempts law-abiding citizens in New Jersey for possession of handguns, rifles and shotguns, and other weapons in their home, and you do not need a (New Jersey) carry permit. You do not need a firearms ID card. You do not need to have manifest lawful purpose, so-called. As long as you are simply possessing in your home, you are exempted from those requirements under 39-5. It is a law that allows possession by exemption unless one has licenses, and if you have licenses, then you’re exempt under the face of the statute. And if you have a license and you’re within exemption, you have double protection, essentially. And the exemption under subsection e. applies to home. It applies to place of business. Now that means a business you actually own. It’s not just the place you work. It’s got to be your place of business that you own. The courts have narrowly interpreted it to mean that. Not even a place you just manage. You’ve got to be an owner. It’s got to be your business. But if it is, then you have exemption there. You’re exempted for moving between your residences while moving, etc. That’s the exemption under subsection e. Evan Nappen 17:22 Then there’s an exemption under subsection f., and f. again exempts b., c., and d. of 39-5; handguns, rifles and shotguns, and other weapons under 39-5. ere the exemptions say that those prohibitions shall not apply to any member of a rifle or pistol club organized in accordance with the rules prescribed by the National Board for Promotion of Rifle Practice, in going to or from a place of target practice, carrying firearms necessary for target practice, provided the club has filed a copy of its charter with the superintendent and annually submits its list of members to the superintendent, and provided further that Page – 5 – of 9 the firearms are carried in a manner specified in subsection g., which is, of course, cased and unloaded. Evan Nappen 18:08 Here’s another exemption under f. under subsection (2). A person carrying a firearm or knife in the woods or fields, or upon the waters of the state for the purpose of hunting, target practice, or fishing, provided that the firearm is or knife is legal and appropriate for hunting and fishing purposes in the state, and the person has in the person’s possession a valid hunting license, or with respect to freshwater fishing, a valid fishing license. Number three, a person transporting any firearm or knife while traveling directly to or from place for purpose of hunting, fishing, provided you have a valid license, or directly to or from the target range, or other authorized place, for the purpose of practice match target trap skeet shooting expeditions. Provided during that whole time you’re transporting, you’re transporting pursuant to subsection g. Evan Nappen 19:18 So, the takeaway here is how New Jersey bans essentially all guns, and how the matrix is set up so that there are exemptions. Exemptions that we’ve just talked about. But keep in mind that the exemptions are a defense. The burden becomes on the defendant to have to prove that you’re within those exemptions. Otherwise you see bans. Bans that have only exemptions by way of licensing, unless you fall within those specific statutory exemptions. I think that structure is frankly disgusting as to how a constitutional right is and has been treated by New Jersey. But because of that structure, I also believe that we have a fantastic opportunity now as we see the empowerment of the Second Amendment to finally take out and take down the very foundation of New Jersey’s oppressive gun laws. Evan Nappen 20:36 By the way, I want to give you just a little heads up about a threat that is apparently lurking. This is weird and odd. I can’t hammer it down any more than what I’m going to tell you right now. But the news aggregate source called the Daily Caller, some of you may be aware of it, had an article that says “Anti-2A Group Plots New Gun Ban in New Jersey”. (https://dailycaller.com/2026/08/26/anti-2a-group-plots-new-gun-ban-in-blue-state/) This is August 26, 2026, by Harold Hutchison, who is a Second Amendment reporter that says the gun-control organization March for Our Lives, that’s the group headed up by that A one a hole of David Hogg. His group sent out an email fundraiser announcing plans to pass a weapons ban in New Jersey. And reading this is just bizarro. Remember Hogg has made his entire life and career over being a perpetual victim from the Parkland atrocity, and he’s an insane Left wing activist. By the way, if you’ve ever seen the stuff that he puts out. But anyway, this group uses this term “weapons of war”, “weapons of war”, and says, “The proposed weapons ban in New Jersey is a vital step toward getting weapons off our streets and protecting our neighborhoods from preventable tragedy.” This is a fundraiser being done by this group. Evan Nappen 22:49 When you look at the actual screenshot here from March for Our Lives, here’s what this screenshot says. From March for Our Lives. “We’re bumping this to the top of your inbox because we have a genuine, high-impact opportunity to push real gun safety forward — and we can’t afford to miss it. Right now, New Jersey lawmakers have a chance to pass critical legislation banning weapons of war from Page – 6 – of 9 our communities. When our generation first marched in 2018, people told us we were just angry kids who didn’t understand how politics worked. But together, we’ve proved that hope isn’t just a feeling — it’s an action.” And then it goes on to say, “From helping establish first-ever White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention to passing landmark federal legislation, we’ve seen what happens when young people organize and demand a better future. Passing this weapons ban in New Jersey isn’t just about one state — it sets a benchmark for the entire nation and proves that progress is unstoppable when we stand together.” Then it all says, “Will you take 10 seconds to add your name and show support for the NJ weapons ban today?” Evan Nappen 24:19 Okay. I’ve got to tell you, folks. I have no clue what the hell they’re talking about. First of all, New Jersey already has the most egregious assault firearm ban on the books and that has just taken a death punch by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals en banc with the magnificent decision wiping it out under the Second Amendment with both mags and guns. Now, granted, it is stayed at the moment because the Supreme Court has also taken up this issue. But what the hell are they talking about? New Jersey’s law is on its deathbed. It’s on life support, barely. Soon to die, and they’re talking about legislators in New Jersey promoting some weapons ban that they’re fundraising on. This is either complete fraud, which who knows with those people, or absolute mistake that they’ve confused states, I guess. Or maybe, just maybe, something else is cooking up in the New Jersey legislature. Maybe they’re tipped off to it, and I can’t find it anywhere. Maybe they’re going to try doing a kicking and screaming routine, just like they did after Bruen permitted carry and made it so New Jersey had to issue carry permits. And maybe now we’re going to see some evil plan after New Jersey’s assault firearm law bites the dust. So, this is maybe a load of B.S. nonsense. But then again, maybe it’s something out there, and we should be ready. hey may be trying to pull another Carry Killeresque maneuver on us. I don’t know, but stay tuned. As soon as we hear about anything that we can pin down, we’ll be sure in letting you know about it on the show. Evan Nappen 26:36 Hey, I want to tell you about our good friends at WeShoot. WeShoot is an indoor range in Lakewood, New Jersey. It’s the range where Teddy and I shoot, and where we train. You’ll love it at WeShoot. It is the greatest range in New Jersey. We just can’t get enough of WeShoot. I know you will really appreciate having a tremendous resource right there in Lakewood, where you can get your training, get your certificates, practice, have state-of-the-art range facilities, a great pro shop, awesome deals on guns and gear. As a matter of fact, they are offering, as we speak, the Canik Mete MC9LS, which is the 2026 Signature Series called “Drip”. It’s pretty cool. You’ve got to see the graphics on the Drip. They also have a Mossberg Silver Reserve Field. Now this is Mossberg’s over and under, very cool, and it’s a great way to get into an over and under shotgun. They also have Precision Firearms, PF15F. That’s your AR-type platform right there at WeShoot. You can go there, check out these guns and so many others. They’re also running their great programs. They have their range safety officers. They’re there with amazing skilled trainers. I’ve got to tell you, folks, make sure you check out WeShoot. You can find them online at weshootusa.com. weshootusa.com. And I know you’re gonna love their website. They’ve got beautiful photography. They really do take extra pride in what they post and how they make their website. You need to check it out and see what I’m what I’m talking about. And their instructors are just fantastic. I have always admired just the unbelievably great professionalism, courtesy, just the way they Page – 7 – of 9 treat their customers. You will be treated like gold at WeShoot. WeShoot is the best. o to WeShootUSA.com. Evan Nappen 29:22 Hey, I also want to not only shamelessly plug my book, which is New Jersey Gun Law, the Bible of Jersey Gun Law. The indispensable guidebook to helping you navigate New Jersey’s insane matrix of gun laws. It’s all set up in a question and answer format. I also want folks to know that the DOJ has opened up the Federal Relief from Disabilities Program. I’ve been waiting 33 years to be able to do this again, and that is be able to get people’s gun rights restored. That have had federal firearm prohibitors. This will restore your federal gun rights, and it is great. We really owe it to the Trump administration for reopening this program that was killed in ’93 by Chuck Schumer. For 33 years, people have been unable to regain their Second Amendment rights under federal law, if they had prohibitors. o, if you or anyone you know might be eligible, go to my website, go to EvanNappen.com. You can buy my book there. You can also read about the federal relief from disabilities. This is very hot, big stuff going on because the online portal is going to open shortly, and you want to be ready. You want to have counsel, and there’s a lot that has to get done so that we can get you in. They’re talking about probably a million people needing to get their rights restored, and it’s going to be quite a logjam. So, the sooner you’re in, the sooner you can get your rights back. I’d highly, highly recommend taking action and checking it out. Go to evannappen.com, and I’ll be happy to speak to you about your specific situation and if it’s applicable for you. Evan Nappen 31:40 Hey, I have some good news, and the good news is that the CDC, you know, the CDC, who’s currently headed by Robert Kennedy, and CDC that is now under the Trump administration. Well, guess what they did, folks? They restored defensive gun use data after Biden scrubbed it and covered it up because they didn’t want that really great important information being out there about how many lives guns save, so the corrupt Biden administration just said we’re not going to talk about it. We’re going to wipe it out. We’re not going to put that out there anymore. We’re only going to talk about guns are bad, and not ever talk about why guns are good. Well, it’s a new day. It’s a new administration, and that information has now been put back. I’m talking about an article here from Ammo and. (https://www.ammoland.com/2026/08/cdc-restores-defensive-gun-use-data/?utm_source=Ammoland+Subscribers&utm_campaign=b4aea4936c-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6f6fac3eaa-b4aea4936c-21268623) Evan Nappen 32:56 We love AmmoLand, and this article is by John Crump, who is also one of my favorite authors at AmmoLand. John says that under the Biden administration they had removed the data, and the studies have shown that guns were used in self-defense between 60,000 times and 2.5 million times each year. Think about that, folks. 60,000 to 2.5 million times each year, guns are used in self-defense. So, even at the low range, that dwarfs the number of guns used in murders, which is approximately 15,000. Okay, dwarfs it at the lowest numbers. It approaches or exceeds the total number of gun deaths per year, which is around 40,000, according to Pew. The wide range of estimates is because of different methodologies used. So, the lower figure is drawn on the National Crime Victimization Survey, while the higher figures primarily stem from surveys conducted by criminologist Gary Kleck in the 1990s. Page – 8 – of 9 Evan Nappen 34:41 Now, a National Academies of Sciences report commissioned by the CDC itself in 2013, this is a CDC commission study. Referenced this range of 60,000 to 2.5 million defensive gun uses annually. But in 2022, with pressure from anti-gun groups such as the Gun Violence Archive, the Newtown Action Alliance, and GVPedia, in a private meeting, the CDC scrubbed the website of defensive gun use information. Through a Freedom of Information Act, they revealed that the removal was purely political, folks, and this is all according to emails that Senator Grassley obtained. One of these things here argued, and this is quoting from that email in the article by Mr. Crump, and it says. Get a load of this. This is from the antis here. “That 2.5 million number needs to be killed, buried, dug up, killed again, and buried again.” Mark Bryant, executive director of Gun Violence Archives, wrote to the CDC in one of his emails. See that? They don’t like it, man, when you’re showing that guns save lives. We can’t have truth out there. We can’t have the actual information about how people don’t want to be victims but would prefer to be defenders and live. Right? That’s Biden’s administration for you. That’s the corrupt, evil Biden administration for you, removing that information. Trump and his administration have put that data back public so you can see it and you can read it. Keep in mind that’s the CDC removing specific numeral range and the link from their own research, folks. But now, under Trump and Secretary Kennedy, the CDC is returning the statistics to its firearm injury and death page. The restored language again makes it clear, points it out that defensive gun use varies by studies, and it ranges from 60,000 to 2.5 million per year. That is awesome, and that information belongs out there. Evan Nappen 37:43 Hey, let me tell you about this week’s GOFU. GOFUs, as you know, are Gun Owner Fuck Ups. It’s where gun owners make expensive mistakes, real mistakes that I hear about and try to help them. But it’s a chance where you can avoid them for free, and this week’s GOFU has to do with references on your gun application. When you need references, please clear your references in advance. Make sure your references know you’re going to use them as a reference. I’ll tell you, we may have mentioned this before in the past, but it can’t hurt to mention it again. They’re going to get an email requesting to know how long they’ve known you and whether they have any issues with you owning guns. I get cases where people don’t bother to clear it, don’t realize the person is anti-gun and doesn’t think anyone should have a gun, or has some problem being a reference. You don’t want to have that problem. Evan Nappen 38:48 Yet recently, I’ve heard of even a worse problem, and this one is just mind-boggling. I’m still going to put it out there as a GOFU for folks because don’t ever do this. Don’t make up false references. Yeah, I’m not kidding. Do not fill out a gun application with fake references. I can’t believe I even have to say this. But do not fill out a gun application and make up phony references because your phony references are going to be contacted, and that’s called falsification of the application. It’s a crime to do that. Third degree. You’re looking at five years in State Prison. Plus, it’s really stupid, and you’ll get denied your gun license. I mean, okay, do you have to write that one down? Not to put fake references on your application? I hope not, but it’s a GOFU. Make sure you’re good about your references and clear them in advance. Only put real ones down, folks. Page – 9 – of 9 Evan Nappen 39:54 This is Evan Nappen reminding you that gun laws don’t protect honest citizens from criminals. They protect criminals from honest citizens. Speaker 2 40:05 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 [email protected]. The information and opinions in this broadcast do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state. Downloadable PDF TranscriptGun Lawyer S5 E305_Transcript About The HostEvan Nappen, Esq.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 Evan Your Comments and Questions [email protected] Join Evan’s InnerCircleHere’s your chance to join an elite group of the Savviest gun and knife owners in America. Membership is totally FREE and Strictly CONFIDENTIAL. Just enter your email to start receiving insider news, tips, and other valuable membership benefits. Email (required) *First Name *Select list(s) to subscribe toInnerCircle Membership Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)Constant Contact Use. Please leave this field blank.var ajaxurl = "https://gun.lawyer/wp-admin/admin-ajax.php";

   August 30, 2026·41min
   Play
5. 5
   Number 5: Episode 303-NFA “No F’ing Approval”

   Episode 303-NFA “No F’ing Approval” Also Available OnSearchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer — Episode Transcript Page – 1 – of 12 Gun Lawyer — Episode 303 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS NFA, Silencers, Lawsuit, Injunction, Taxation, Firearms, Suppressors, AOWs, New Jersey, Gun rights, Second Amendment, Luger, Confiscation, Safety, Litigation SPEAKERS Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen, Speaker 2 Evan Nappen 00:17 I’m Evan Nappen. Teddy Nappen 00:19 and I’m Teddy Nappen. Evan Nappen 00:21 And welcome to Gun Lawyer. So, we are right on the breaking news as we record this show, and that is the spectacular win on the National Firearms Act. It is the outcome of the Big Beautiful Bill removing the taxes on silencers, short barrel rifles, short barrel shotguns, and AOWs that translated into the Big Beautiful Lawsuit. There were actually two lawsuits, which essentially put forward that if there is no tax, there can be no law, because the NFA is based on tax law as the jurisdictional basis for the federal government. If there’s no tax, then you can’t have a tax law, and hence the silliness, which is really just kind of funny, is the tax stamp says zero. So, how you get a tax stamp that says zero when there’s no tax? Leave it to the Government to create a tax stamp of zero. But now that’s changed. Evan Nappen 01:37 This is the most exciting change in, what is it? Ninety-six (96) years, to a challenge to the NFA. And it has very exciting ramifications. I’ll talk about how those specifically relate to New Jersey in a moment, but there’s lots of questions and lots of speculation and issues surrounding what this decision means. So, what happened was we had two lawsuits that were brought. One is the Silencer Shop Foundation versus ATF. There were other plaintiffs as well. The parties in the SSF lawsuit included B&T USA, Firearms Regulatory Accountability Coalition, Gun Owners Foundation, Gun Owners of America, Palmetto State Armory, Silencerco Weapons Research, Silencer Shop Foundation, the state of Alaska, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, and Wyoming, and several individuals. Evan Nappen 02:56 Then there is Jensen versus ATF. In Jensen, the parties were the Texas State Rifle Association, which is NRA’s Texas affiliate, Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, FPC Action Foundation, Hot Shots Custom, and several individuals. The court in these cases applied an injunction to the parties, quote, where applicable, the parties, agencies, political subdivisions, members, and Page – 2 – of 12 customers, both current and future. This means that the protections of the injunction generally flow downstream in that chain of commerce. And by the way, I am gleaning this information from the NRA-ILA in their article, “What Does the Texas NFA Decision Mean for You?”(https://www.nraila.org/articles/20260812/what-does-the-texas-nfa-decision-mean-for-you) They’ve done a good job of essentially the preliminary breakdown here. NRA partnered with the TSRA to provide joint membership for those that are interested. Evan Nappen 04:02 So, what got enjoined? What statutes themselves got enjoined? Well, it was the NFA’s registration and approval requirements. Those were what were enjoined, and they were enjoined as to silencers, short barrel rifles, short barrel shotguns for covered parties. The injunction also includes AOWs, Any Other Weapons for the SSF parties only. o, as far as AOWs are concerned, only parties, people that are parties to the SSF, which is going to mean members essentially of GOA and such, and the companies that joined in it, and possibly as well, including those states. Certain marking requirements are enjoined with respect to the Jensen case, while the effect of this portion of the injunction is going to take clarification from the Government. So, we’re going to have to wait and see on that. Evan Nappen 05:11 The further impact is that, which is perhaps more important than the statutes that are covered, are those that are not covered. So, under Title 18, it makes it unlawful for licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, licensed collector to sell or deliver to any person any short barrel shotgun, short barrel rifle, except as specifically authorized by the Attorney General, consistent with public safety and necessity. Now, in the past, that compliance was considered authorized or was considered authorization when there was an NFA compliance done itself. o, without further action by the Government, compliance with the former NFA procedures will likely still be required before transferring a short-barreled shotgun or short-barreled rifle. Then it goes on to explain that the analogous requirement for transportation of short-barreled rifles, short-barrel shotguns, was also not enjoined. So, authorization for interstate travel is still required. That’s where you have to get permission from ATF before you move with any of those firearms. Evan Nappen 06:31 However, ATF has proposed streamlining this process by currently pending regulations. Those are the regulations that we’ve discussed in the past that are looking to change by changing it in the CFR, which is the Code of Federal Regulations. The injunction also does not apply to existing SOTs, which is the Special Occupational Tax for dealers in NFA firearms. Now, it’s technically possible for non-SOT dealers to receive firearms from a distributor or manufacturer on an ATF Form Four. ATF will need to clarify if an SOT is required for dealers who engage in the business of dealing in these firearms. So there are still to be considered state laws, and that’s going to be an individual basis of each state’s laws about how they individually view these NFA items. And we’re going to talk about New Jersey specifically in a moment. Evan Nappen 07:33 NRA says moving forward, the Jensen case is one of three supported by NRA in their litigation partners with American Suppressor Association, the FPC, which is Foreign Policy Coalition, and Second Page – 3 – of 12 Amendment Foundation. Those cases, by the way, are Brown versus ATF and Roberts versus ATF. Judge Clark in Missouri heard motion for summary judgment in Brown, and they remain committed to expanding the injunction secured in Jensen. In those other cases, as NRA says, taking action under an injunction is not without risk. An injunction can be dissolved or stayed with very little notice. Please check regularly back for updates. While much remains uncertain with the injunction, the monumental nature of this cannot be overstated. This is the biggest win against the unconstitutional NFA in its 92 sorry math was off 92 year history, and it serves as a great example that the fight for our rights is never over. So, if we want to see some practical applications as to what’s going on when it comes to suppressors, it’s really fascinating. Evan Nappen 08:54 Now, of course, suppressors, silencers, are banned in New Jersey by state law. We are currently looking at challenges to New Jersey’s state suppressor ban, constitutional challenges to that. But for now, unfortunately, New Jersey citizens cannot take advantage of the changes if they are residents of New Jersey because of the state law prohibition that New Jersey still maintains. However, if you live in a free state, if you live in a state that is covered by this injunction, specifically through Silencer Shop, you can look at Silencer Shop’s website, (silencershop.com), which is very good, and it lays out the states that are good to go. Evan Nappen 08:55 If you live in a good to go state that is now covered by this injunction, for example, if you live in New Hampshire or if you live in Alabama, there’s the whole list of states that respect and understand this. If you live in any of those states, you can now order your suppressor and pick it up from the dealer locally, and when you go to the dealer to pick it up, there’s no form four. There’s no federal registration that needs approval anymore. There is no fingerprinting. There’s no notice given to local police of your acquisition. All that’s gone. All that gets done is a 4473. You know the same form you fill out for the federal government to buy a gun, and a NICS check gets done, an instant check. So, what it means is you’ll be able to go to your dealer, do the 4473, just like you’re buying a gun, and the NICS check gets done, the instant check. You get your approval, ad you walk out the door with your suppressor that easily. That is great, and it’s paving the way to finally get a full legal change to suppressors to make that, of course, eventually the nationwide standard. But for now, there is a boom, an explosion of silencer purchases. This will make it even easier, more convenient, more private, less of a hassle than ever before. This is extremely exciting. Teddy Nappen 11:17 There’s something very important to this fact. Going back to the, and I’m kind of extrapolating it to the assault firearm cases. One of the biggest things that is winning, that helped us fight, win that fight was the idea of common use. Where the AR-15 and all forms of their “assault firearms” were so popular that it was so much common use that it fell under the grounds of the Second Amendment. Evan Nappen 11:45 Right. This is going to explode even more common use, even though there’s millions of suppressors already, but it will absolutely aid to that. Now, interestingly, in New Jersey, sawed-off shotguns are a problem. Same with rifles; they’re a problem. However, Any Other Weapon, there are Any Other Page – 4 – of 12 Weapons, what we call AOWs, that are technically New Jersey legal, and this will change the game in New Jersey on AOWs. But we still need more clarification on how the feds are going to work it on AOWs. We don’t have that right now, but let me explain AOWs. Evan Nappen 12:32 Let me show you some common examples of AOWs. For example, pistol grip only shotguns. Now, don’t confuse AOW, which is Any Other Weapon, as an “Other”. Some of you may have Shockwaves in New Jersey, which are “Others”. Shockwaves are not AOWs. They’re Shock Waves. They’re “Others”. Others are different. But a pistol grip only shotgun is a short, non-face style scatter gun, right? But is reduced in overall length under 26 inches. Now, as you know, or should know, with a Shockwave, it’s not under the 26 inches. If it’s under 26 inches with only a grip, such as a custom compact 12 gauge, then we’re looking at that now. How those applied to New Jersey law become model specific. Of course, you still can have sort of shotgun, but State Police have approved for others. Vertical four grip pistols are also considered AOWs. So, a standard semi-automatic handgun or pistol format firearm equipped with a vertical front hand grip is considered an AOW. And AOWs have coverage under this, but how that’s going to apply now so that you don’t have to do the NFA and can simply operate under the injunction. We’re going to fill you in with more information as we get it. Evan Nappen 14:08 Smooth bore handguns. Those are AOWs. Classic examples of that, such as the H&R handy gun or the Ithaca auto and burglar gun. So, those custom smooth bores, it may very well now open up that category. Certain smooth bore pistols can, depending on their configuration, be New Jersey legal still. And if they’re even though they’re AOWs, if the injunction has its due effect, that’ll be easier in New Jersey on those. Also coming under AOWs are disguised or improvised firearms, concealable multi-projectile or single-shot devices disguised as everyday items like cane guns, pen guns, flashlights, or wallet guns, and of course those. Are all banned under New Jersey state law as covert firearms. So, even though you may seek relief federally in terms of the AOWs under the NFA, you’re not going to be able to acquire those because New Jersey has a specific ban on those in state law. Then there’s combination guns, certain compact over and under firearms with rifle and shotgun barrels, between 12 and 18 inches long, intended for single shots without reloading. These two can fall under categories of AOWs, specific models with specific determinations, and how this victory will apply, we’re still going to have to iron out the details since this is so fresh and so new. But there is going to be some relief that Jerseyans will be able to take advantage of, and in the long run, this is great for everybody as we keep the fight going on, battling the NFA. It’s a great victory, and it is definitely going to shake things up. Evan Nappen 16:10 And it has, though, some things to keep in mind that really require us to change this law permanently forever, and what I’m talking about is how we got to this point is something that still has a vulnerability to be changed back. Let me explain why. The reason for the injunction is because there is no tax, and because there’s no tax, then the legal logic opinion is with no tax, then a law based, premised, on the power of taxation can’t exist anymore or have its effect. This was used as a vehicle in the ’30s for the National Firearms Act. That’s what it was jurisdictioned upon. That’s what has been now eviscerated by the Big Beautiful Bill removing the tax on these four categories. he tax on machine guns still exists. We’ll get to that in a moment. Page – 5 – of 12 Evan Nappen 17:12 So, that’s what was the victory, but that was passed legislatively by what? By way of a reconciliation bill. A reconciliation bill deals with taxation and finance. Those bills can pass Congress with simple majorities. That is how the Republicans got it through, and by removing the tax on the NFA items with simple majorities, they did not face the challenge of a filibuster. Because they couldn’t filibuster. They being the communists. Oh, I’m sorry, the Democrats. Well, it’s the same thing. They couldn’t stop it. Teddy Nappen 17:51 Democrat Socialists. Evan Nappen 17:53 Right! Communist authoritarian nutbags could not stop this because of the filibuster being inapplicable to a reconciliation bill. That’s how we got to this point. But keep in mind, should the commies take power again, and you can substitute Democrats, socialists, whatever for commies, they’re interchangeable anyway. When and if that happens, then it would be at the moment within their power to reinstitute in a reconciliation bill that they do, assuming they have power through the Congress and the Executive who would sign such a thing. Keep in mind. If the Democrat, Socialist, Communists control both houses, and even with a Republican president, but a reconciliation bill that’s chock full of other things financially needed, they might even force the hand of an otherwise friendly executive. You know, President Trump, to still sign a reconciliation bill. A reconciliation bill that does what? Reimplements the tax. They may make the tax not $200, but maybe $200,000 or $5,000, or even if they just make it $200 again, or even $1 again, guess what? Now we’re back to a jurisdictional argument that the NFA is now applicable again. So, it matters who you vote for. Elections matter. They matter. They make a difference. Teddy Nappen 19:42 On the off chance, just on the extreme end, let’s say, you know, the pendulum swings, the Socialists take over and run it. Could they do what the ATF was doing prior with what was it the when going after people with like the forced restart trigger? Evan Nappen 19:59 We don’t know. We don’t know. They could do it. They could. Depending on what are they going to go and then try to round up suppressors that may have been acquired when there was no tax. If the law is suddenly back, or does it make it so that there’s an ex post facto argument to argue that it was legal at the time, but now any of these new ones need tax stamps, but old ones don’t. And then they’re going to be kind of like the way they ran magazines. It was before a certain period of time, and will they then be grandfathered or not? Because NFA didn’t grandfather. It had a new period of registration. But there is no new period ability unless the Secretary has the power to have a new registration period. So, I would assume if they do it, the Secretary would say, “Okay, there’s now an open registration period of ones you previously purchased. You’re going to have to register and pay the tax.” Remember that. So, this all can happen in the future. Page – 6 – of 12 Evan Nappen 20:57 But look, it doesn’t mean our behavior has to be based upon, especially you live in a free state, worrying about what communists might do in the future. But keep in mind, it still could happen. This is a great victory, but we need to take it further, and this will empower us to take it further, because it can help on the Second Amendment argument to knock these laws out. It can assist in that greatly. It can assist in legislative change once it’s done and out there, and people are purchasing them in this way. It makes it easier to pass federal laws to just make it the law and not just rely on the judicial action. So, there’s also potential future consequences that can run for us, not just against us. Regardless, it’s a great victory, but keep in mind these potential dangers that lurk. And unfortunately, if you live in New Jersey, there isn’t much here for you to take advantage of at the moment, but in the big picture, it’s working to protect our rights. Teddy Nappen 22:06 This is just a side note. I was thinking. I heard this term where just because you put a word in front of the other word, it doesn’t always change the definition. So, if I say Democrat murderer, that doesn’t change the definition of murderer. So, for them trying to rebrand the Socialists, like no, no, no, we’re not like that. We’re Democrat Socialists, not to every other socialist government that has failed. No, no, we’re different. We just want to abolish prisons and abolish police. Evan Nappen 22:35 Well, I love when they talk about ow communism, look communism just wasn’t done right, you know. It just hasn’t been done right. Well, I guess they’ll probably make the same argument for Nazism. Oh, Nazism just hasn’t been done right yet. Okay, so that’s all. That’s all. Just hasn’t been done right. I mean, no. We’ve experienced and seen what history has to say about these stupid ideas of Socialism and Communism and Nazism. We’ve seen it, and it doesn’t fly. As a matter of fact, look at what’s going on in Central America right now with the enormous economic change. They’ve been getting rid of their Socialist systems. Teddy Nappen 23:21 So, maybe that’s what happens when you defund USAID. Evan Nappen 23:23 Yeah, isn’t that amazing how these countries are suddenly doing great? I mean, you think about USAID. We were actually promoting Socialism to our central and southern Central American neighbors. It’s just nuts. It’s nuts that we would be doing this. Not to mention that the Democrat Party suddenly, coincidentally, is now 2 million in debt after USAID was folded up and shuttered. Teddy Nappen 23:52 The one I always laugh at is, I think it was the like it’s like something crazy, like $7 million to LGBTQAI plus in Serbia, which I guess worked because they’re like a lesbian, but it’s like it’s so oh my god, like and then well like it was like Sesame Street in Afghanistan, which okay. Page – 7 – of 12 Evan Nappen 24:14 Right and promoting DEI everywhere, which just is hardly a national interest, or for our national security, or what America’s founding principles are all about. But let me tell you about our friends at WeShoot. his week WeShoot is offering OA Defense 2311 Pro Elite, and that is a modern focus platform that blends the familiar 1911 style characteristics with contemporary design, premium construction, and competition-inspired features. There’s also the Special Ops Tactical STX 15. Now that’s an AR platform rifle with unmistakable SOT attitude, combining distinctive styling with purpose-built modern sporting rifle platform. Then there’s the Mossberg 990 Aftershock. Mossberg takes that unmistakable Aftershock concept into semi-auto territory, thereby creating a bold new addition to its defensive lineup. WeShoot has cutting-edge guns. They’re there for you. Make sure you check out WeShoot, which is an indoor range and phenomenal pro shop with great training. Located in Lakewood, New Jersey. Very easily accessible off the Parkway. They are a fantastic resource. It’s where Teddy and I both shoot. It’s where we got our training. It’s where we got our certifications. And if you go on the website, you can check out WeShoot. They have fantastic photos and just great photography. You can check out the latest from the father-daughter shoot and other great events that they’re running. And what is their many faces of two-way, where you know two ways for everybody, and they are pushing as well some really cool stuff, including being part of their photo shoots. You can reach out to social media at weshootusa.com for that. For any of the photo shoots that you do, this is a great place. They love their customers, and their customers love them. Go to weshootusa.com. WeShootUSA.com. And check out WeShoot right there in Lakewood. It’s a phenomenal research resource, and you’ll be glad that you did. Evan Nappen 26:53 Hey, let me also shamelessly promote my book, which is New Jersey Gun Law. The Bible of Jersey gun law. It’s over 500 pages, 120 topics, all question and answer. It’ll help you from becoming a GOFU. You want to avoid that at all costs in New Jersey. They are there to oppress our rights and turn law-abiding gun owners into criminals. Beware, protect yourself. Get a copy of New Jersey Gun Law. Go to EvanNappen.com today. EvanNappen.com. You’ll be able to get your copy of New Jersey Gun Law. And by the way, while you’re on my website, you can also check out the latest link to The Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs newsletter. They have featured yours truly, and my dear colleague Dan Schmutter and Scott Bach on the cover, and they have hilariously called us Second Amendment Heroes. And I’m assuming they’re talking about like submarine sandwiches when they did that. But regardless, you can check out their newsletter and check out the Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs. (anjrpc.org) You all should be a member of association. It is our state affiliate of the NRA by tied in with the great fights that NRA, as we’re talking about in Jensen, the NRA is like the new NRA, and they’re out in the forefront doing what NRA has done brilliantly in the past. They’re doing it again, and they’re working hand in hand with the other great gun rights organizations in our country. And it’s great to see the unity in these cases of us banding together to fight the good fight for what we all know and love and believe in, and that’s the Second Amendment. Teddy, what do you have for us in Press Checks? Teddy Nappen 29:16 Well, as everyone knows, Press Checks are always free. I thought I’d do something a little different, where I find, you know, a crazy article that I just could not pass up. It was too funny. This was coming Page – 8 – of 12 right out of the New York Post. Adolf Hitler’s $42 million Luger, the most valuable pistol in the world is at the center of a sensational court battle. Well, that’s one hell of a grabber of a title. Evan Nappen 29:49 And what do they say it’s worth? Teddy Nappen 29:51 $42 million. Evan Nappen 29:54 I wonder how they came up with that number. Teddy Nappen 29:56 So, this involves a court battle between an appliance repairman and a cop in Argentina. Evan Nappen 30:01 Arrrgentina. Teddy Nappen 30:04 Yeah, I know. You know, one of them said he was from the boys of Brazil, and I’m just joking. Evan Nappen 30:11 Uh huh. Well, it would make sense that it would end up in Argentina, wouldn’t it? Teddy Nappen 30:16 Yeah. The what is it? The what was the one guy they caught in Argentina? Evan Nappen 30:22 There’s been number of Nazis found there. Teddy Nappen 30:26 The famous one is the two Mossad agents scooped him up, got him drunk and put him on a plane. Then they ended up just hanging him. Evan Nappen 30:35 Right. Teddy Nappen 30:36 It was the, but it was one of if you go through it. It’s actually kind of crazy. So, it began where, if you caught the previous article of Adolf Hitler’s former home transformed into police station. Evan Nappen 30:39 How do they know? Oh, that was his former home when he visited. Page – 9 – of 12 Teddy Nappen 30:55 No, this is this is this is Australia. Evan Nappen 30:58 Austria. Austria. Yeah. Yeah, yeah, that’s his former home in Austria. Yeah, well, he was from Austria originally. Teddy Nappen 31:06 So, going to that was Austrian authorities Wednesday open police station building where Adolf Hitler was born amid years of controversies. This is a renovation to send a message that they will not appeal to extremist groups. Yes. Evan Nappen 31:21 So, you can visit Hitler’s birthplace if you chose to? Teddy Nappen 31:24 If you ever get arrested in Austria. But to get to the it going off of that, where it was the weapon that described the holy grail of firearms was allegedly swiped during a SWAT style raid by a masked officer at repairman Juan Pablo Rupel’s home in Buenos Aires province in 2016. To go into more details, he inherited the haunting historic ghost of the Third Reich from his German great uncle and former Hitler bodyguard Hans Rupel, who is accused of stealing minor items such as plate, glasses, cutlery at the time of the raid. Evan Nappen 32:09 So, the claim is that this guy stole it from Hitler. Teddy Nappen 32:14 No, the claim is that he had committed some minor stealing in Argentina, but he had that was his pistol. So, he was never charged the over the allegations, mind you. But still, the gun that is a Luger Parabellum .45 ACP caliber. Number five of only five. Evan Nappen 32:37 It’s a .45 caliber Luger? Teddy Nappen 32:39 Yeah, yes. Only five in existence of the 1907 prototype forged by the late famed George Luger. Evan Nappen 32:48 Yeah, George Luger. So, Hitler’s Luger was one of the rare .45 caliber Lugers. Teddy Nappen 32:56 Correct. And this was only for Hitler’s provinces. That would make them invaluable. The guns there’s 1979 firearm owner license in Argentina National Registry, so they register firearms. It was marked as Nazi Angel of Death who lived for more than two years before fleeing the so the 1905. Page – 10 – of 12 Evan Nappen 33:25 So, what happened to the gun now? It got seized by the police? Teddy Nappen 33:30 Correct. How did that happen? So, from what it was said that Hans it said now again this is not Hans says it belonged to Hitler and he was taken when he and he took it when he went to Argentina in 1948. So, from when from that point where it was stolen after the quote unquote raid, it is now gone “missing”. Evan Nappen 33:53 Okay. Who stole it in the raid? What police raid? Teddy Nappen 33:57 One of the police. One of the police officers. Evan Nappen 33:59 So, this is essentially gun confiscation by police, and supposedly the most valuable handgun in the world is missing once the police got their hands on it. Right? Teddy Nappen 34:09 Buenos Aires Ministry of Security for and has demanding lawsuit for the compensation for the firearm. The court held by the agency liable for 15,000 plus interest, which also 15,000 just for the raid itself, for the actual unjustified raid. However, the lawsuit also adds in the 42 million where two cops who had led the raid on the home due to the quote-unquote trial prior. Rupert told the post of great uncles that the Luger was taken from him. Evan Nappen 34:48 Well, I’ll tell you what. This is a common thing in New Jersey. I’ve had many gun confiscations by law enforcement in which it always seemed that the most valuable firearm that the client possessed. I had a case where one was a rifle given by Theodore Roosevelt to a cabinet member that disappeared. I had another case where there was a trapdoor Springfield trapdoor carbine that was documented to Custer’s last stand, and was an Indian capture gun that oh that that that was sent to the crusher supposedly and destroyed. You see, and I’ve had many different gun seizures that have taken place, and for some crazy reason, it’s that really valuable gun that ends up not being accounted for, and I don’t know why I seem to see that pattern. Teddy Nappen 35:58 Yeah, and then just for clarification on the individual Hans Zurpel, he was the SS Division Labest Start. He was Hitler’s personal bodyguard unit during the Second World War, to which he later fled to Argentina in 1945. This has been confirmed. So it is confirmed that this guy was a bodyguard, and he was a pistol to Hitler and registered the gun under it, so it shows proof of documentation to the actual firearm that existed. So we know the gun existed. We know the guy has the credentials, so that proved that point as to who swiped it. Well, it’s one of the members of the ministry, as what the suit is being led to. Again, that’s what they’re alleging in their suit. Page – 11 – of 12 Evan Nappen 36:40 Yeah. Well, like I said, I’ve seen this done Jersey side where folks, what you want to do with your guns is make sure you have photos, and you have recorded your information about your guns. Do not keep your data with the guns. Because if they seize your guns, they’re going to seize your books and data. And it’s not unusual as well for them to take computers and such as well. So, if you’re going to have this and recordings of it and photos and all, you know, keep it on a thumb drive hidden somewhere, so you can access it. So, you can prove and document the guns that you had and what they were, because I’ve had the missing guns after a seizure more times than I can count. It is common. Teddy Nappen 37:38 I also recall wasn’t one of these pistols also had like the early idea of a tactical light, like where if you held the pistol, it was. Evan Nappen 37:46 Yeah, that was a very special Luger. They made too that had early lighting attached to the gun. Yeah, that was a German invention, so to speak. You know, they did have those way back. Yep, yep. So, these are, yeah. Well, there’s a lot of valuable firearms out there, and a lot that have providence to make them even more valuable. And I don’t know if this truly is worth $42 million for a handgun, but it’s definitely way up there as a very valuable historic piece. It is something where you need to take steps if you have any firearms at all to make sure that you’ve documented so you can prove ownership. And if guns do get stolen, either by criminals or police or both, then you need to know and be able to have that information to try to recover them. Teddy Nappen 38:52 If anyone is related to anybody who served as a Soviet Union soldier who hit the Berlin and may or may not have picked up a Walter PPK next to a dead Hitler, call us. Evan Nappen 39:07 Yeah, I think that gun is not accounted for. This so-called Hitler suicide gun. If, in fact, he did kill himself, which now there’s speculation that the skull they thought was his was actually a woman’s. There’s all kinds of who knows, and did he actually escape? And, you know, we could find about as many theories about whether Hitler’s alive as whether you know Elvis is alive and whether Bigfoot exists. I mean, this is one of the favorite topics of conspiracy theorists and what have you. But bottom line is, folks, you need to protect yourselves. Protect your property. Don’t be a GOFU. As a matter of fact, Teddy, what do you have this week for us for GOFUs? Teddy Nappen 39:49 Well, this comes from Not the Bee. Influencer shoots self in leg while filming instructional video outside a gun shop. Evan Nappen 39:57 Oh, an instructional video on how to shoot yourself in the leg. Page – 12 – of 12 Teddy Nappen 40:01 Well, how to properly, properly rack the slide, and while doing so, when he was going through showing it off, he racked it. He broke every rule – from treat every gun like it’s loaded, know where you’re pointing, keep your finger off the trigger. And bang! Shot the artery in his leg and almost died. Always a good idea. Evan Nappen 40:25 Oh, yeah. He came close to bleeding out because it hit the key artery there. And that’s because he wanted to do an instructional video on how to properly handle a firearm, where he proceeded to utterly and completely improperly handle a firearm. Similar to the law enforcement guy way back, you know, lecturing to the students how he’s the only one trained and safe enough to handle this gun properly. And right after he said that, he had an AD into his foot. I believe it was. Teddy Nappen 40:58 Yeah. He was a DEA agent, if I remember. Evan Nappen 41:02 Yeah, right. A DEA agent. Teddy Nappen 41:03 Yeah, and then he picks up the gun. Evan Nappen 41:04 So, this GOFU is a very practical and fundamental one, folks. Don’t forget the basic rules of gun safety. They’re there for a reason. They’re proven. Obey those rules. Don’t take it for granted. Follow the gun safety rules. If you don’t know guns and don’t know gun safety, you need to take a gun safety course. Let this hit home. You don’t want to be a GOFU, a Gun Owner Fuck Up. This has not only almost cost him his life. And in New Jersey, it would cost you your gun rights at a minimum under their Accidental Discharge law, because it was done without lawful purpose. You didn’t intend to fire it. It was in the 100 yards of a dwelling, which even a car constitutes as a dwelling. Leave it to New Jersey to do that. You’d be looking at a felony charge for shooting yourself in the leg. So, don’t be a GOFU. Be extra conscientious. We want you to be safe. You need to always be safe using the number one safety device ever invented, your brain. Keep that safety engaged at all times. Evan Nappen 42:30 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 42:41 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. Downloadable PDF TranscriptGun Lawyer S5 E303_Transcript About The HostEvan Nappen, Esq.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 Evan Your Comments and Questions [email protected] Join Evan’s InnerCircleHere’s your chance to join an elite group of the Savviest gun and knife owners in America. Membership is totally FREE and Strictly CONFIDENTIAL. Just enter your email to start receiving insider news, tips, and other valuable membership benefits. Email (required) *First Name *Select list(s) to subscribe toInnerCircle Membership Yes, I would like to receive emails from Gun Lawyer Podcast. (You can unsubscribe anytime)Constant Contact Use. Please leave this field blank.var ajaxurl = "https://gun.lawyer/wp-admin/admin-ajax.php";

   August 16, 2026·44min
   Play