Legislation – Gun Lawyer Podcast

Page – 1 – of 11

Gun Lawyer — Episode 311 Transcript

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

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

SPEAKERS

Teddy Nappen, Speaker 3, Evan Nappen

Evan Nappen 00:19

I’m Evan Nappen.

Teddy Nappen 00:20

And I’m Teddy Nappen.

Evan Nappen 00:23

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

Evan Nappen 01:43

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

Evan Nappen 02:57

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

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

Evan Nappen 04:16

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

Evan Nappen 05:19

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

Evan Nappen 07:11

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

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

Evan Nappen 09:20

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

Evan Nappen 09:52

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

Evan Nappen 11:57

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

Evan Nappen 13:18

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

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

Teddy Nappen 15:08

Yeah.

Evan Nappen 15:08

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

Teddy Nappen 15:12

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

Evan Nappen 16:33

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

Evan Nappen 17:23

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

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

Teddy Nappen 19:13

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

Evan Nappen 19:58

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

Evan Nappen 20:26

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

Evan Nappen 22:04

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

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

Teddy Nappen 23:55

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

Evan Nappen 24:10

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

Teddy Nappen 24:47

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

Evan Nappen 25:08

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

Teddy Nappen 25:37

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

Evan Nappen 25:49

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

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

Evan Nappen 27:47

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

Teddy Nappen 28:55

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

Evan Nappen 29:28

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

Evan Nappen 30:04

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

Evan Nappen 31:14

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

Evan Nappen 32:31

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

Teddy Nappen 33:56

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

Evan Nappen 35:06

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

Teddy Nappen 35:09

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

Evan Nappen 35:20

Imprisoning gun owners, incarcerating.

Teddy Nappen 35:22

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

Evan Nappen 36:45

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

Teddy Nappen 37:15

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

Evan Nappen 38:24

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

Teddy Nappen 38:28

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

Teddy Nappen 39:03

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

Teddy Nappen 40:05

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

Evan Nappen 40:11

Yeah, not the NAACP.

Teddy Nappen 40:13

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

Evan Nappen 40:23

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

Teddy Nappen 41:00

The only time the ACLU gets involved is involves marijuana.

Evan Nappen 41:04

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

Teddy Nappen 41:11

That was why. Page – 11 – of 11

Evan Nappen 41:12

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

Evan Nappen 41:26

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

Speaker 3 41:40

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

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

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

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

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

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

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

Page – 1 – of 12

Gun Lawyer — Episode 310 Transcript

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

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

SPEAKERS

Speaker 3, Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen

Evan Nappen 00:18

I’m Evan Nappen.

Teddy Nappen 00:20

And I’m Teddy Nappen.

Evan Nappen 00:22

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

Evan Nappen 01:29

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

Evan Nappen 02:40

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

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

Evan Nappen 03:54

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

Evan Nappen 05:12

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

Teddy Nappen 06:15

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

Evan Nappen 06:24

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

Evan Nappen 06:27

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

Teddy Nappen 06:35

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

Evan Nappen 06:43

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

Teddy Nappen 07:52

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

Evan Nappen 08:08

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

Evan Nappen 08:35

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

Teddy Nappen 09:36

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

Evan Nappen 09:43

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

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

Evan Nappen 10:55

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

Teddy Nappen 12:47

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

Evan Nappen 12:55

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

Evan Nappen 14:31

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

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

Evan Nappen 15:17

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

Evan Nappen 16:34

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

Evan Nappen 17:28

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

Evan Nappen 18:29

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

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

Teddy Nappen 20:29

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

Evan Nappen 20:43

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

Teddy Nappen 20:49

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

Evan Nappen 20:57

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

Teddy Nappen 21:24

Yes.

Evan Nappen 21:24

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

Teddy Nappen 22:22

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

Evan Nappen 22:42

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

Evan Nappen 23:57

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

Evan Nappen 25:36

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

Evan Nappen 26:32

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

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

Teddy Nappen 27:39

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

Evan Nappen 28:04

What is a “food desert”?

Teddy Nappen 28:15

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

Evan Nappen 28:35

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

Teddy Nappen 28:41

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

Evan Nappen 29:05

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

Teddy Nappen 29:18

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

Evan Nappen 29:29

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

Teddy Nappen 29:41

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

Evan Nappen 30:06

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

Teddy Nappen 30:25

and making it impossible to get firearms.

Evan Nappen 30:30

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

Teddy Nappen 31:04

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

Teddy Nappen 31:20

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

Teddy Nappen 31:22

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

Evan Nappen 32:20

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

Teddy Nappen 33:14

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

Evan Nappen 33:40

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

Teddy Nappen 33:48

There were ads for pistols.

Evan Nappen 33:52

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

Evan Nappen 35:59

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

Evan Nappen 36:27

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

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

Evan Nappen 37:49

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

Evan Nappen 39:13

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

Evan Nappen 39:53

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

Speaker 3 40:06

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

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

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

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

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

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

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

Page – 1 – of 10

Gun Lawyer — Episode 309 Transcript

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

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

SPEAKERS

Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen, Speaker 3

Evan Nappen 00:17

I’m Evan Nappen.

Teddy Nappen 00:20

And I’m Teddy Nappen.

Evan Nappen 00:21

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

Evan Nappen 01:16

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

Evan Nappen 02:25

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

Evan Nappen 03:43

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

Evan Nappen 04:55

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

Evan Nappen 05:58

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

Evan Nappen 07:10

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

Teddy Nappen 09:01

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

Evan Nappen 09:15

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

Evan Nappen 11:53

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

Evan Nappen 12:55

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

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

Evan Nappen 14:07

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

Evan Nappen 15:11

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

Teddy Nappen 16:44

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

Evan Nappen 17:18

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

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

Teddy Nappen 19:44

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

Evan Nappen 20:10

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

Evan Nappen 21:13

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

Evan Nappen 23:14

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

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

Evan Nappen 25:02

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

Evan Nappen 26:05

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

Teddy Nappen 26:40

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

Evan Nappen 26:43

I try.

Teddy Nappen 26:45

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

Evan Nappen 26:45

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

Teddy Nappen 27:48

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

Evan Nappen 29:04

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

Teddy Nappen 29:10

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

Evan Nappen 29:42

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

Teddy Nappen 30:15

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

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

Teddy Nappen 31:23

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

Evan Nappen 32:38

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

Teddy Nappen 34:22

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

Evan Nappen 34:37

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

Teddy Nappen 34:39

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

Evan Nappen 34:47

Yeah, he’s political now.

Teddy Nappen 34:48

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

Evan Nappen 35:51

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

Teddy Nappen 35:55

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

Evan Nappen 36:13

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

Evan Nappen 37:02

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

Evan Nappen 37:52

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

Evan Nappen 39:50

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

Speaker 3 40:02

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

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

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

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

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

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

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

Gun Lawyer Transcript – Episode 308

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

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

SPEAKERS

Speaker 2, Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen

Evan Nappen  00:17

I’m Evan Nappen.

Teddy Nappen  00:19

And I’m Teddy Nappen.

Evan Nappen  00:22

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

Evan Nappen  01:15

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

Evan Nappen  02:16

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

Evan Nappen  04:28

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

Evan Nappen  06:12

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

Evan Nappen  08:10

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

Teddy Nappen  09:18

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

Evan Nappen  09:28

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

Evan Nappen  10:56

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

Teddy Nappen  11:44

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

Evan Nappen  12:10

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

Evan Nappen  13:27

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

Teddy Nappen  14:47

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

Evan Nappen  14:57

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

Evan Nappen  16:48

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

Evan Nappen  18:01

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

Teddy Nappen  19:32

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

Evan Nappen  19:39

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

Teddy Nappen  21:24

Does it have, does it have the toothpick?

Evan Nappen  21:26

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

Teddy Nappen  22:59

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

Evan Nappen  23:04

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

Teddy Nappen  23:17

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

Evan Nappen  23:24

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

Evan Nappen  24:19

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

Evan Nappen  26:05

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

Evan Nappen  27:54

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

Evan Nappen  29:38

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

Evan Nappen  31:51

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

Evan Nappen  34:01

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

Evan Nappen  34:58

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

Evan Nappen  35:28

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

Evan Nappen  36:22

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

Teddy Nappen  37:15

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

Teddy Nappen  38:20

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

Evan Nappen  39:41

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

Teddy Nappen  40:49

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

Evan Nappen  41:21

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

Teddy Nappen  43:00

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

Evan Nappen  43:15

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

Evan Nappen  44:33

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

Evan Nappen  45:15

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

Evan Nappen  46:17

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

Evan Nappen  47:16

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

Teddy Nappen  48:07

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

Evan Nappen  48:16

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

Teddy Nappen  48:32

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

Evan Nappen  48:36

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

Teddy Nappen  48:52

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

Evan Nappen  48:57

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

Teddy Nappen  49:04

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

Evan Nappen  49:07

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

Teddy Nappen  49:10

Wouldn’t that be lack of.

Evan Nappen  49:11

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

Teddy Nappen  49:15

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

Evan Nappen  49:20

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

Teddy Nappen  49:25

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

Evan Nappen  49:30

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

Evan Nappen  50:37

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

Evan Nappen  51:35

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

Speaker 2  51:48

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

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

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

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

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

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

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

Page – 1 – of 11

Gun Lawyer — Episode 307 Transcript

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

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

SPEAKERS

Speaker 2, Teddy Nappen, Evan Nappen

Evan Nappen 00:18

I’m Evan Nappen.

Teddy Nappen 00:20

And I’m Teddy Nappen.

Evan Nappen 00:22

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

Evan Nappen 01:41

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

Evan Nappen 03:38

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

Evan Nappen 05:18

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

Teddy Nappen 08:04

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

Evan Nappen 08:42

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

Evan Nappen 09:37

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

Teddy Nappen 12:46

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

Evan Nappen 13:05

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

Teddy Nappen 15:27

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

Evan Nappen 16:09

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

Teddy Nappen 17:37

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

Evan Nappen 18:15

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

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

Teddy Nappen 19:53

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

Evan Nappen 20:24

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

Evan Nappen 21:15

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

Evan Nappen 22:08

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

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

Teddy Nappen 24:37

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

Evan Nappen 24:49

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

Evan Nappen 26:44

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

Evan Nappen 27:36

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

Evan Nappen 28:25

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

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

Evan Nappen 30:02

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

Evan Nappen 30:39

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

Teddy Nappen 31:25

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

Teddy Nappen 32:03

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

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

Evan Nappen 33:12

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

Teddy Nappen 33:23

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

Evan Nappen 34:13

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

Teddy Nappen 36:09

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

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

Evan Nappen 36:33

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

Teddy Nappen 38:15

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

Evan Nappen 38:29

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

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

Evan Nappen 39:10

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

Evan Nappen 40:03

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

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

Evan Nappen 42:21

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

Evan Nappen 42:28

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

Evan Nappen 42:54

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

Speaker 2 43:05

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

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

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

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

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

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

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

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.

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

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

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

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

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

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

Page – 1 – of 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.

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

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

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

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

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

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

Page – 1 – of 12

Gun Lawyer — Episode 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.

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

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

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

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

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

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

Page – 1 – of 12

Gun Lawyer — Episode 302 Transcript

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

Gun Lawyer, New Jersey assault firearm law, Third Circuit Court, Supreme Court, stay granted, unconstitutional laws, Second Amendment, sensitive places, National Firearm Act, suppressors, Jordan Salinas, good guy with a gun, training, legal advice, gun rights.

SPEAKERS

Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen, Speaker 2

Evan Nappen 00:16

I’m Evan Nappen,.

Teddy Nappen 00:18

And I’m Teddy Nappen.

Evan Nappen 00:20

And welcome to Gun Lawyer. Well, my friends, the wins keep coming. These are great times. You know, we have suffered from the oppressors on our gun rights for decades upon decades, and now we are seeing the collapse of all their machinations over the years. It is great and getting greater. And so, just within this short period of time, we’ve had the spectacular win in New Jersey in the Third Circuit Court of Appeals and the full en banc panel, all the judges, of course, finding that New Jersey’s 36-year-old assault firearm law and magazine law is unconstitutional. It’s a fantastic decision, as we’ve discussed, written by a Biden-appointee judge who happened to be the first woman of color appointed to the Appellate bench. That is fantastic and has multi-dimensional impact, of course, having that great decision.

Evan Nappen 01:52

Now, with that having been said, yes, a stay has been granted in terms of the implementation of the finding of unconstitutionality. So, that stay is granted essentially because traditionally these kind of stays do get granted, especially when the Supreme Court itself of the United States has taken this issue and has granted certiorari over the assault weapon, what New Jersey calls assault firearm law under Viramontes and Grant. They’ll be deciding that. Essentially we’ll have a decision by next June on that issue affecting the nation. Now, New Jersey has got their stay because they’re requesting the Supreme Court of the United States to grant certiorari over New Jersey’s case, and the stay has been granted pending the final resolution, essentially, of these issues, or at least in good part, these issues by the United States Supreme Court. So, in the meantime,

Teddy Nappen 03:12

I don’t know if you caught what the AG Davenport wrote in their press release, Dad. Page – 2 – of 12

Evan Nappen 03:20

Well, they can continue to irreparably harm law-abiding, honest gun owners over these unconstitutional laws until that finally happens. But what exactly did Davenport say as they try to turn an utter defeat into some sort of short-term victory?

Teddy Nappen 03:45

We are thrilled that the Third Circuit this morning stayed its ruling on our assault weapon / large capacity magazine case while our petition to the U.S. Supreme Court proceeds. That ensures this 36-year law will remain in place. (https://www.njoag.gov/statement-from-attorney-general-jennifer-davenport-on-third-circuits-grant-of-a-stay-in-assault-weapons-large-capacity-magazines-case/) 36 years of going after people, putting them in jail, taking away their rights, providing ruining their lives.

Evan Nappen 04:07

Hey, wait, Teddy, are you reading from their news release?

Teddy Nappen 04:11

Oh, you know, I read their news release and then added the little context that they forgot.

Evan Nappen 04:16

Did they actually use the word “assault weapon”?

Teddy Nappen 04:20

Yes.

Evan Nappen 04:20

Or did they say “assault firearm”? What did they say?

Teddy Nappen 04:21

Assault weapon.

Evan Nappen 04:22

Davenport called it “assault weapon” law?

Teddy Nappen 04:26

Yes, assault weapons.

Evan Nappen 04:27

Okay, just so you know, this is the top law enforcement attorney for New Jersey who is calling their law something it is not. We do not have an “assault weapon” law. We have an “assault firearm” law. Now, granted, it’s a similar issue, and you know it’s the same idea of going after New Jersey’s version of semi-automatics. But you would think if you’re a lawyer, and you’re a lawyer for the State that has this case that you might want to refer to it as the actual name that your State utilizes, because that term “assault firearm” is the term embedded in New Jersey’s law. It is a defined term under N.J.S. 2C:39-1. Page – 3 – of 12

They are called “assault firearms” in New Jersey by law, by law. But you know, why would she bother actually using the correct legal term when discussing laws? That would be amazing, wouldn’t it?

Teddy Nappen 05:46

Well, Dad, I mean, just the abuse alone, just to give you the one-to-one. You’ve had many times where people have been charged with having a “assault firearm”, and it’s not. But they love to abuse it and just use whatever term they want. I mean that goes right back to Josh Sugarmann, and his whole idea of making that term “assault firearm” to confuse the public so they could pass their laws. I mean.

Evan Nappen 06:10

Yep, it’s exactly that. Well, Sugarmann wrote the manifesto “Assault Weapons and Accessories in America”. That’s what laid the groundwork for this issue. It finally has one foot in the grave, is bedridden, on its deathbed, and the Supreme Court will hopefully administer the coup de gras in June 2027. I believe the odds heavily, heavily favor us, virtually to the point of I would be shocked if we lose. I just don’t see that happening, and the antis know it as well. Those oppressors get it that they’re going to lose on this issue.

Teddy Nappen 06:54

It’s Viramontes and Grant.

Evan Nappen 06:58

Yeah. Those are the two cases that Supreme Court has granted certiorari on. Just so you know, one is a local law out of Cook County, Illinois, that bans assault weapons, and has incorporated into the definition, magazines into their definition of assault weapon. So, the Supreme Court might actually address the magazine issue because it’s actually part of Viramontes’ law itself. e may see that. The Grant case deals with Connecticut’s assault weapon ban, state law, and when they challenged in Connecticut, they didn’t challenge the magazine portion. They only challenged the so-called assault weapon portion. New Jersey’s case, in the Cheeseman v. Platkin case, that court addressed both assault firearms, aka assault weapons, and magazines. And now, with New Jersey requesting certiorari, meaning requesting the U.S. Supreme Court to take the case, it also opens up the magazine issue. So, the Supreme Court that can do anything it wants might choose to address the magazine issue in the Viramontes and Grant decision. They might even, arguably, they could even take up New Jersey’s case and make it part of that. They might, and what most likely they’re going to just have it in a holding pattern.

Evan Nappen 08:47

And we have the Duncan case that deals with magazines as well out of California, the Duncan v. Bonta case (25-198(. So, what it means is, if the Supreme Court doesn’t deal with magazines by next June, but just the guns, then they may very well take New Jersey’s case and Duncan with the split in the circuits there, and then deal with magazines. Like I said, they might do it all together. They might not. But New Jersey proceeding with this actually weirdly in the long run may present and give us a great opportunity because it presents magazines as a complete win by the court from our circuit. So, this may be one of those situations where you know the word to New Jersey is be careful what you wish for. This Page – 4 – of 12

is very interesting to follow. But I believe that all these laws are going to go to the dustbin of history. It’s just a matter of time.

Evan Nappen 09:59

But as I have advised listeners, even when this decision came out, not to do anything because of the ability to get a stay. To wait and see. Well, that’s proven correct. I’s been proven out to be the wise thing to do, and have our listeners not end up being GOFUs by obtaining the firearms and magazines that are not yet technically lawful. So, for these continuing months, New Jersey is still free to enforce the magazine and assault firearm laws. Of course, if you have such a case or such a charge, your attorney, if they’re anywhere competent, will raise these very important issues and hopefully get your matter, your criminal matter, stayed pending the outcome and preserve the constitutional issues on your behalf in fighting it. So, be careful. Don’t end up with a GOFU where you’re facing these charges and your current counsel isn’t doing anything about it. I’ve had a number of those cases coming to me from other attorneys, where the client is like, my attorney never raised the constitutionality on these issues. Well, that is a huge mistake because you need to raise these issues, preserve these issues, because ultimately your odds of success are so great here, and it is essentially, arguably, malpractice to not, especially now, raise the constitutional issues if someone is facing in New Jersey or in the Circuit that has decided that these laws are unconstitutional. So, it’s very important that you be aware of that.

Teddy Nappen 12:05

Would it be better if the Supreme Court does the other two cases and then take this one up as a mag separately, or is it better to do it all in one go?

Evan Nappen 12:13

The best for everyone would be complete victory as soon as possible. However, if they’re not going to do that, if they’re just going to address guns now and then we have these cases to address mags, fine. We’ll fight the fight, and there you go. But the important thing, honestly, is that they’re taking the cases. Remember, for years they did not take these cases, and instead, luckily, wisely, maybe by planning it correctly-I don’t know-maybe intentionally, the groundwork got laid for the challenges to ultimately be successful. Because look, way back in May of 1990, I was an attorney. I remember this horrible New Jersey assault firearm law and magazine law passing. It was disgusting. Of course, it also became the Evan Nappen Full Employment Act. But the fact is, they passed this ridiculous law, and I remember thinking at the time, yeah, you know, in my heart, I knew this has got to be contrary to the Second Amendment. But we did not have any of the cases at that time. We didn’t have Heller finding that the Second Amendment is an individual right. We didn’t have McDonald incorporating the Second Amendment to the states. We didn’t have Bruen laying out the test of constitutionality and what test is to be used to see if guns laws, if gun laws are proper and constitutional. We didn’t have any of that. We didn’t have the giant body of historical research that is critical in these wins. We didn’t have any of it.

Evan Nappen 14:08

And what the pro-second amendment gun rights side has done is nothing short of Herculean. All the forces together have built this fortress of the ability to defend and to fight and to take on the fight and to attack. Built this up so that we’re now in a position to have victory after victory. Yet, we see another Page – 5 – of 12

victory, another victory. Just determined in the Fifth Circuit, a nationwide injunction as applied to the members of the parties and their members, such as NRA and GOA and SAF, and FPC, etc. (https://www.nraila.org/articles/20260805/federal-court-strikes-down-nfa-registration-requirements-for-suppressors-short-barreled-rifles-and-short-barreled-shotguns-in-nra-case) All joining, attacking the National Firearms Act under a legal argument that was made possible by President Trump in the Big Beautiful Bill. Remember, the Big Beautiful Bill, which was a reconciliation bill, that was dealing with money, taxation, funding, money. When it’s done as a reconciliation, then what you have is no need or ability to run a filibuster. Since simple majorities can pass the reconciliation bills under the Senate rules, the Democrats, the anti-Second Amendment rights oppressors, could not stop its passage because they would. You know they would demand the 60, have the filibuster cloture, and the laws would die on the vine. But this did not, because it only needed simple majority. In that bill there was a specific repeal of the taxes. The taxes that get paid on suppressors, short barrel shotguns, short barrel rifles, on any other weapon, and silencers. The tax was eliminated to zero. And by doing that, it opened up the ability for the Big, Beautiful Lawsuit that was just a success in the Fifth Circuit, and how it worked was not based on Second Amendment arguments. It was based on jurisdictional arguments.

Evan Nappen 16:55

You see, the National Firearms Act is premised upon the federal power of taxation. It is not founded upon the federal power of interstate commerce. Nor is it founded upon the military power. The federal government’s powers are limited. And back in the ’30s, when the National Firearms Act passed, they did not have the insane expansion of the commerce powers under the federal government. Therefore, the first national gun laws, which the NFA was, was jurisdiction by taxation. They imposed a $200 tax on suppressors, short barrel rifles, etc. Now, $200 in 1934 was just a little bit under $5,000 in terms of it being adjusted for inflation. So, imagine today passing a law that said any semi-automatic firearm that you want to possess, you must pay a $5,000 tax to the federal government in order to obtain it.

Evan Nappen 18:26

You see how prohibitive that makes the possession, and then go through a registration scheme that is hidden in a pretext of taxation, which is blatantly excessive. And what has happened is by the elimination of the tax to zero, the court essentially said if there’s no tax, then there’s no law. Therefore, the NFA collapses in the enforcement proceedings regarding the paperwork, registration, printing. All the things that get done on the acquisition of NFA items. That law has been stayed for seven days, even though this is a permanent injunction. There’s been a seven-day stay to see if it progresses further, but that is a tremendous win on yet a different front of fighting for Second Amendment liberty. ‘ve had both of these great wins, and we have a lot to be proud of, and a lot to be optimistic about.

Teddy Nappen 19:39

Regarding the big win with the NFA, I always want to see what is the what are the gun rights oppressionists? What are they pushing on this one? The Trace didn’t bring up something. However, Giffords, they’re flipping out, and I love this. (https://giffords.org/press-release/2026/08/giffords-reacts-to-federal-court-striking-down-background-checks-for-firearm-silencers-short-barreled-rifles-and-shotguns/) They go right to the. Just laugh, just reading it. This came from Trump’s so-called Big Beautiful Bill. Remove the tax on these devices. The court has struck down the National Firearms Act, requiring background check and registration of firearm silencers, short barrel rifles, and shotguns. Page – 6 – of 12

Silencers and short barrel firearms, and other than handguns, are rarely used in crimes today because current laws have stopped them. Ding ding ding ding ding ding ding ding. Logical fallacy alert, everybody! Logical fallacy alert. Correlation does not equal causation. Saying that this will stop that these things have prevented crime does not make it so. What is your argument? Oh, they didn’t. They don’t have access. Even though prior to that, they weren’t used in crime. Generally speaking, as well. Number one is handguns on that front. But I love how they just try to toss that in every time. Just a red herring every single time, and they try to push it.

Evan Nappen 20:56

Yeah, they’re just propagandists, and they’re losing left and right. It’s going to end up, my friends. You can mark my words. It’s going to end up that their entire world of gun law schemes, machinations, all these things that they have hoisted upon us as they die. I am greatly enjoying watching these gun laws die. As they die off and are impossible to find workarounds that, as well, get killed and die off. That they’re simply going to be left with only one mission, and their one mission of the oppressors, the one mission of the Second Amendment rights haters, will be to repeal the Second Amendment. And that’s where a fight’s going to end up. A fight over the oppressors trying to remove the Second Amendment. Of course, they’ll push this through their socialist, communist political movement. Remember, they want to make all kinds of institutional, governmental, radical changes, including getting rid of the Senate, including ending the nine-person Supreme Court and expanding it, getting rid of the presidency being elected where it’s an appointed, et cetera, and going at all different constitutional rights and turning America into a communist nation, and in so doing, they will also push. And Teddy, I think they even are saying, even now, to get rid of the Second Amendment. And you’ll see them joining hands. You’ll see the anti-Second Amendment rights folks joining hands with the Communists, with the DSA, the Democrat Socialist Wing, as the Democrat Party in its civil war implodes over the monster that the Democrats have created themselves. This is their Frankenstein that is now running loose on them.

Teddy Nappen 23:27

Yeah, and quite frankly, just going back to them where they have pushed and pushed and pushed, where they said we don’t. They and there was a great video where this guy was basically trying to argue the socialist dilemma of the Second Amendment because it’s that catch 22 where they want to ban arms but they need arms for the revolution. For their great, you know, seize the means of production, but they cannot because they still push for red flag. They still push for universal background checks.

Evan Nappen 23:58

Teddy, it’s like the meme with the guy sweating as to which button to push, you know. Ban guns so that you get, you know, so they could disarm the populace, or don’t ban so that their radical, violent Left can have access to firearms. Right? You know, they’re conflicted over that choice. Yeah. But regardless of what politics may lay in the future, right now the wins in court and legislatively. Okay. Remember, this is a combination. The reconciliation bill, etc. That’s all an important legislative changes that open the door to the ability to win on the front of the NFA tax attack and the big beautiful lawsuit. We are making tremendous gains and wins. And it is absolutely a reason to be optimistic. Page – 7 – of 12

Evan Nappen 25:03

I’m looking forward to seeing the decision in Koons and Siegel cases. Those that’s the case that addresses New Jersey’s sensitive places. We’re waiting for that same full en banc panel of the Third Circuit. Now, this is the same court that just killed New Jersey’s assault firearm and magazine law. That same court will be rendering an opinion over the constitutional validity of New Jersey’s sensitive places in the very near future. We’re going to see it. We’re just a matter, any day they can come out with that decision. Keep in mind, it’s going to be very important in countering and destroying the Carry Killer bill that Murphy and company got enacted. They did it. How? They did it because of their hissy fit to the Bruen decision, mandating carry permits get issued. So, they tried to make it so that this insane matrix of sensitive places makes it so incredibly difficult to actually exercise that right. is same court that gave us this fantastic pro-Second Amendment decision will be coming out with the sensitive places decision shortly. I’m cautiously optimistic about that. Keep in mind that the vote of the judges on the assault firearm magazine case. That was a panel of 15 judges, and the vote was 10 on our side, and five against us. So, it was 15 judges. One of the judges that opted to stay in was a judge that had been on a temporary assignment in, and that judge was a known opponent to Second Amendment rights. So, of course he wanted to stay in, and of the votes of the 10 to five ruling, one of the five judges was the anti-Second Amendment judge, but that judge is not part of the decision that will come out of Koons and Siegel. Therefore, it’s a 14-judge panel. And if we see the same voting as occurred on assault firearms and magazines, we should see a 10 to 4 ruling. Keeping our fingers crossed here in favor of knocking out New Jersey’s sensitive places, which would be really fantastic. And so, hang in there, folks. We’ve suffered a long time, but our suffering is slowly but surely being relieved.

Evan Nappen 28:18

Hey, let me tell you about our good friends at WeShoot. WeShoot has some pretty cool offers and things happening. They’re offering the Bull Armory Ultralight Pro, and Bull is proudly recognized as North Jersey Friends of NRA Gun of the year for 2026. It’s lightweight. It’s exceptionally accurate, and it’s built for everyday carry. The pistol earned its title through outstanding performance, craftsmanship, and innovation. You can check out that Bull Armory Ultralight Pro at WeShoot. WeShoot is also offering Hornaday Critical Defense ammunition. Now, you know, Critical Defense and that Hornaday line of Critical Duty, as well, is one of the most trusted names in personal protection. That round is designed and engineered for reliable expansion, and dependable feeding, and confidence when it essentially matters most. And let me tell you, the Hornaday Critical Defense and Critical Duty, those are polymer-tipped rounds that perform arguably even better than hollow nose. But are not hollow nose bullets under New Jersey law because the nose is actually not hollow. It’s got an insert filling the hole. So, because of that, it is an ideal round for carry in New Jersey. You can’t carry, at the moment, actual hollow nose, but you can carry Critical Defense or Critical Duty. And frankly, it’s got advantages over hollow nose.

Evan Nappen 30:12

Not just because it performs as well or better, but also because of the nose having the polymer plug. It actually feeds even more reliably than hollow nose. So, it’s actually far superior, at least in these terms, to your normal hollow nose ammunition. So, check out Critical Defense at WeShoot. Also, WeShoot has the Ruger Mini-14 Ranch rifle. Now that Mini 14, that’s an American classic. It’s earned its reputation through decades of proven reliability, versatility, and timeless styling. And let me tell you Page – 8 – of 12

about the Ruger. The new Rugers are incredibly accurate. You know the old Ruger with the pencil barrels-they were called pencil barrels. They weren’t known for their accuracy. hey functioned well and sure looked cool when the A-team had them rolling, right? But accuracy-wise, not so much. However, the new Rugers are extremely accurate. The barrel is thickened toward the base, and it is a redesign that gives incredible tack driving accuracy to the new Ruger Mini-14s. The Ranch rifle will be able to deliver for you, and of course, it’s set so you can not only have the scope rings, the classic Ruger scope rings, but even a Picatinny rail that fits in where you could put the rings, and then you could Picatinny it up to whatever optics you like as well. So, Ruger has come a long way, and the new Mini-14 is something you need to check out. I really do love the new Mini. I have one myself and greatly appreciated having had the old ones as well. So, you can get yours at WeShoot. Weshootusa.com is their website.

Evan Nappen 32:26

I want to also remind you that if you want to get a New Jersey carry permit, you really should get it. Join our ranks of 100,000 or more here of permitted carry holders. The more folks we get with carries, the closer we get to constitutional carry. So, make sure you’re part of that. You can get your CCARE certification from WeShoot. They have all the great training there. It’s a fantastic facility. It’s a wonderful resource, conveniently off the Parkway in Lakewood, New Jersey. So, make sure you stop by and check out their website as well. weshootusa.com. You’ll be glad you did.

Evan Nappen 33:10

Let me also shamelessly plug my book, New Jersey Gun Law. The Bible of Jersey Gun Law. You need to have it. It’s over 500 pages, 120 topics, all question and answer, so that you don’t become a GOFU. Make sure you have that book. Go to EvanNappen.com. You’ll see the big orange cover right there. Click it, and you’ll have it in a matter of days. Go to EvanNappen.com to get your New Jersey Gun Law book. Hey, Teddy, what do you have for us today in Press Checks?

Teddy Nappen 33:48

Well, as you know, Press Checks are always free, and I imagine you’ve caught all about the In and Out shooting. What happened there?

Evan Nappen 33:59

Well, maybe our listeners aren’t aware of that. would be surprised, but they may not know there was a major shooting that took place at, at and outside of and around this In / Out Burger in Idaho. Hey, I don’t know if any of you’ve ever eaten at In / Out Burger. It’s a West Coast thing. I really do love In / Out Burger. Just a side note, by the way, guys. But anyway, I digress. So, I could have well seen myself ending up at In / Out Burger in Idaho if I was out there. And

Teddy Nappen 34:33

Isn’t there mustard on the burger that they do?

Evan Nappen 34:35

No, no, that’s Whataburger. Another great burger chain. Oh, listen, we’re gonna have to call this the Burger Show shortly, instead of the burger lawyer, hamburger lawyer. Page – 9 – of 12

Teddy Nappen 34:44

What’s the best at In / Out?

Evan Nappen 34:47

I like to get you know they have the secret menu and all that. I get the protein wrap where they take their In / Out Burger and they wrap it in lettuce. You know, I’ve lost over 200 pounds, and I avoid the carbs. I love the lettuce wrap, the protein. They call them the protein wrap. They wrap their In / Out burgers strictly in lettuce, so you have no carbs, and they’re delicious in-out burgers. So, that’s my favorite. But their stuff is really delicious. However, on this particular occasion, it was not so good. We had a bad guy going there with a gun and decided he was going to shoot up the place. And lo and behold, what happened, Teddy? What happened? A fellow by the name of Jordan Salinas. Go ahead.

Teddy Nappen 35:35

Yes, good guy with a gun. Jordan Salinas, where he was with his girlfriend, and they had planned a quiet Saturday. You know, going horseback riding, so and you know, going out for a nice lunch in Twin Falls. And as the gunman Chad Williams has been identified, who was shooting up the In-N-Out, Jordan drew his holstered FN five seven semi-auto pistol with a suppressor to fire back and save the people inside. (https://www.ammoland.com/2026/08/armed-citizen-used-a-suppressed-pistol-to-save-lives-at-twin-falls-in-n-out/)

Evan Nappen 36:10

Okay, so first of all, that gun standard has a 20 round magazine, and it’s readily available to have a 30-round mag, so that gun with its standard capacity magazine, you would you would up until the recent case, and even though there’s a stay at the moment, you still can’t have that handgun with the standard capacity magazine. But I’m confident we will be able to. So, you couldn’t have that gun in New Jersey unless you had a lame 10-round magazine in it. Which what’s the point when you have an FN five seven that can hold 20 or even 30 of the five seven ammo? And then his gun has a silencer or suppressor on it, which is just great. Again, that is prohibited in New Jersey because New Jersey doesn’t allow silencers at all. So, here we have this crime being committed by this Chad fellow, and lo and behold, the hero, the good guy with the gun, breaks out his five seven with the suppressor and starts laying down fire on the bad guy. It was fantastic, and he was credited, wasn’t he, by law enforcement with saving lives, Who’s Crowder?

Teddy Nappen 39:28

Stephen Crowder, Gladworth Crowder. He did a full breakdown on it, where it’s about training, where you just do enough to where you can handle yourself in a situation. And what

Evan Nappen 39:36

did he? What did he say hasn’t been? Page – 10 – of 12

Teddy Nappen 39:39

So the one thing that caught is the fact that he’s has a suppressor attached to it, and it was identified in one of his other videos as he uses an FN five seven USG fitted Tactical Solutions Axiom suppressor, firing Vanguard 55 grain subsonic five sevens.

Evan Nappen 40:00

Nice.

Teddy Nappen 40:00

That was I so that may not now they may not be his exact rig at that moment, but that was what was reported to what he was practicing with. But that being said, this is one to one of what he was using in the and so

Evan Nappen 40:12

you know when you step back, Teddy, and look at this. Normally, when there is some bad guy shooting up soft target area, the antis just cheer because they get to do a blood dance to try to attack and oppress gun rights, because it’s the old saying of they never let a tragedy go to waste. However, here the entire thing was turned on its ear because we had an armed civilian who saved lives and did it with a 20 to 30 round capacity handgun with a suppressor, okay, and so this completely turned around this incident to be one of the greatest current examples of why citizens need to be armed and ready and trained, and so the antis can’t even respond because in their normal blood dance that they like to do, it just always goes back to well. Look, we had a good guy with a gun make the difference. That’s the key, and it’s so important, so great that Jordan Salinas was there to save the folks that he did. He rendered aid even to the injured after. He’s just a great person as well. It was amazing to see this, that, and it so turned it around that I’m going to put on my conspiracy hat the way we sometimes see happen with the shootings that they use to go against our gun rights, I’m going to put my conspiracy hat on and say I think this, given how the outcome was, that this was a false flag operation run by us, because it’s had such tremendous-I’m just kidding about that. Of course, it’s not run by us. We, but you know, yeah, Candace Owens might run with it. Oh yeah, it was-it was the pro-gun side that engineered the entire thing. To no, but the thing is, the impact has been tremendous, and it’s now iconic of Jordan Salinas in his position. It’s like as iconic as Sophie Cunningham pointing is Jordan Salinas in his perfect firing position with his suppressed five seven. Seeing

Teddy Nappen 42:57

the I’ve been seeing the citizen cowboy joke that’s been circling. Oh yeah,

Evan Nappen 43:02

as compared to Citizen Vigilante, it’s now Citizen Cowboy.

Teddy Nappen 43:06

Yeah, Citizen Cowboy because he has. But he’s Citizen Page – 11 – of 12

Evan Nappen 43:09

Defender. He’s not a vigilante. He’s a defender. He’s a defender at the moment. Being a man, imagine that being a man. Actually, is that your greatest example of so-called toxic masculinity, right there, called saving lives. I guess so. The

Teddy Nappen 43:25

the other thing is, and I want to take this step further. I see where we win in the argument of common use. I want this to be a common thing where people are using suppressors in self-defense shootings. I want people to start carrying and doing that. I think there’s a lot of advantages to

Evan Nappen 43:44

having them in self-defense shootings because

Teddy Nappen 43:46

if you go back to the old where it was like we’re using 45 for the stopping power or nine, this guy had a five-seven with the suppressor. We were putting out more rounds, and you’re protecting your hearing on that. So it’s definitely that new frame. It’s a very interesting

Evan Nappen 44:01

choice, and I’m sure on the technical side, people will can always debate what’s the best. But the bottom line is, well, someone

Teddy Nappen 44:09

was going to say like, but look, what’s really the best

Evan Nappen 44:11

is that a good guy with a gun helped save the day, and that’s what really matters.

Evan Nappen 44:17

And Teddy, I need to tell you about this week’s GOFU because I’ve been seeing a lot of it. GOFUs, as you know, are Gun Owner Fuck Ups. It’s where gun owners make expensive mistakes, costly mistakes, and you get to learn for free. I got to tell you, this week’s GOFU something I see. You know, when it comes to restoring rights, when it comes to getting an expungement, I have to say, do not do it yourself. Seek professionals that know how to do it. I’ve been getting more poorly, improperly done pro se, where the individual themselves tried to expunge their record. There’s too much to that law. Too many complications. Too many nuances. Too many things you have to know to do it right. And when you do it wrong, it’s 10 times more difficult to fix it, and it can end up costing you. If you expunge poorly, and then you apply to get your firearm because you think your rights are restored and they’re not, you end up with a denial. Now you end up with falsification of the application because you wrote no when you should have wrote yes. You wrote no because you thought you were expunged, but you didn’t do it properly. We see this all the time. There is an entire procedure. There are things you need to know. You need to go to a professional. Whether, you know, and I just don’t mean me. Like some attorney. We do them at my firm. We do plenty of expungements. We help people with that. It’s great. But you need to make sure whoever is doing your expungement really understands it, and especially does it Page – 12 – of 12

with gun ownership in mind. Because when it’s done poorly, it can absolutely come back and bite you in the behind.

Evan Nappen 45:54

Hey, 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 46:01

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

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

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

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

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

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

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

Page – 1 – of 12

Gun Lawyer — Episode 301 Transcript

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

loopholes, firearm law, NFA trust, switchblade knives, forced reset triggers, machine guns, assault firearm ban, Third Circuit Court, SCOTUS, New Jersey, Second Amendment, gun rights, expungement, surveillance technology, AI.

SPEAKERS

Speaker 3, Evan Nappen, Teddy Nappen

Evan Nappen 00:19

I’m Evan Nappen.

Teddy Nappen 00:20

and I’m Teddy Nappen.

Evan Nappen 00:22

And welcome to Gun Lawyer. One of the things that I’ve observed through my 40-plus years in the area of firearm law is how important loopholes are to our freedom. You see, loopholes are simply freedom finding a way. Loopholes have proven over and over again to be the penetrator to breaking freedom out of its imprisonment by the oppressive governments like the state of New Jersey that constantly work at oppressing our Second Amendment rights. We’ve seen loopholes have this effect in different areas, and I think we’re going to now see even more interesting approaches as we win on the various case law challenges. It opens the door for further challenges and things that get covered or not covered by way of various loopholes, end up getting the freedoms that we desire.

Evan Nappen 01:49

So, let me give you some examples that have previously occurred, just to show you not necessarily New Jersey itself, but how loopholes can get freedom. For example, at one point under the National Firearms Act, there was a requirement that Chief Law Enforcement (CLE) officers had to approve applications. And if the chief law enforcement officer did not sign off on it, you could not then possess whatever you were going for under the National Firearms Act, whether it was a suppressor or machine gun or shortbow rifle. Whatever it was, the forms needed this CLE sign off, and for any reason they could deny it. There was no way to even appeal it, and you were stuck. It got realized that if you formed what was called an NFA Trust, there was no sign-off on trusts. There was no CLE sign-off on trusts. And that became the preferred method of acquiring NFA. Because not only was there no Chief Law Enforcement officer sign off, but also, you maintained privacy even further from doing it by way of a trust. So, 10,000 trusts were later filed with the federal government, and they finally put forward Rule 41P that got rid of the requirement for having a Chief Law Enforcement officer sign off at all. Whereas prior to that, they wouldn’t get rid of it, but the loophole paved the way. So, when it comes to NFA, they’re simply given notice, but there’s no requirement that they approve it. Page – 2 – of 12

Evan Nappen 04:07

And you see again, for example, prohibitions nationally throughout various states that existed on switchblades. Switchblade knives being a knife in which the blade comes out automatically because of a button or other device in the handle of the knife. The assisted opener was invented, where there’s no button in the handle but merely pushing the blade, and the blade still opens automatically. But with no button or other device in the handle of the knife. So, you could, in fact, open the knife automatically, just not without that button. It got around the federal switchblade laws and State laws. Even now you can have an assisted opener in New Jersey, even though there’s technically a prohibition on switchblades. And what we saw was many states, after these knives have become so prolific out there and commonly owned, that the switchblade laws have been repealed in the overwhelming majority of states. Now, New Jersey has not yet repealed their switchblade law, but it is on death’s door, frankly, as well. We have Second Amendment challenges, and nationally, there’s so many actual automatic knives now out there, due to the understanding of the loopholes to the Federal Switchblade Act as to how they could still be produced, how they could still be sold. Not in states that have specific bans, but they’re prolific. And that challenge is underway as well. Again, loopholes paving the way.

Evan Nappen 06:11

I think what we’re looking at now is another battleground of loopholes that are going to come in very much in our fight for legalizing, eventually, machine guns. As you know, we’re all very excited about New Jersey’s assault firearm ban going down in flames as unconstitutional, and magazines going down as well with it. With that fantastic decision out of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals that we’ve discussed. Of course, that now opens the door for further challenge. The U.S. Supreme Court, SCOTUS, have granted certiorari on the issue of assault firearms under the Viramontes and Grant cases. So, by next June or so, we’ll have federal case law on it. I’m extremely optimistically looking forward to that decision, and I think the stars have really lined up. Even New Jersey’s decision is going to aid the U.S. Supreme Court in its decision. And, in all likelihood, I mean, nothing’s ever certain, but it seems to be extremely in our favor. The antis are crying about it and essentially throwing the towel in for the most part, realizing that their entire gambit of banning semi-autos is going to die, and thank God it will. But of course, that now opens up including when you.

Teddy Nappen 07:48

I will say.

Evan Nappen 07:52

Go ahead.

Teddy Nappen 07:56

Well, what I was going to say is that I think we need to take a page out of the antis and a lot of the progressive movement. We need to push further and further. Like, don’t give up the ground because now we’ve won the battle on the assault firearms.

Evan Nappen 08:12

Oh, we’re not giving up. Page – 3 – of 12

Teddy Nappen 08:12

Keep pushing to that extent.

Evan Nappen 08:14

Plow forward hard, and we’re going to. One of the ways that we’re going to do this, I also believe, is with incremental important fights and with loopholes on our side. Loopholes. Again it’s that freedom finding a way. One of the most interesting loopholes out there when it comes to machine guns. Now keep in mind. We have a separate fight going on from the Big Beautiful Bill that eliminated the tax on NFA items of suppressors, short barrel rifles, any other weapon, etc. Now, they did not remove the tax yet on machine guns. But in the Big Beautiful Lawsuit, we’re challenging, as we’ve discussed in other shows, the very jurisdiction of the NFA. If there’s no tax, there should be no law. If we’re successful there, then the machine gun ban can die federally by simply in a reconciliation bill removing the tax on machine guns. You don’t have to even repeal machine gun law to simply get rid of the tax. So, that’s what can happen. And that can avoid the filibuster in and of itself because that can just be done in a reconciliation bill because that’s directly on taxation.

Evan Nappen 09:33

But in a separate attack that we have, in a separate way of going at this, is the idea of the incrementalism that loopholes create. One of these great loopholes that exists when it comes to machine guns is what is called Forced Reset Triggers (FRTs), and these have really come a long way. Now. FRTs, as they’re known, make it so that the trigger is reset with force, so that you can very quickly fire again your shot, in which a shot is still required to be pressed for each pull of the trigger, but the forcing of the reset makes it so that you can fire extremely fast. So fast that, for all intents and purposes, it duplicates the speed of fully-automatic fire. But speed of fire is not the federal law. It is based upon having to pull the trigger for each shot.

Evan Nappen 10:54

And in the Fifth Circuit, FRTs, in the case out of the Fifth Circuit were found not to be machine guns. They do not make semi-automatic firearms machine guns. So, under federal law, you see that FRTs are very popular now in many, many states. They have evolved to where, for example, FRTs on AR-15 platforms are now created in what are called three-position safety FRTs. The three-position safety, for those of you familiar with how an AR-15 works, the safety on ARs will rotate to three positions. You have the “fire”, then you have “safe”, and then you have what’s called the “happy switch”, where on the complete roll around, it will go full auto. Well, they now have FRTs that, in the third position, will put the AR in a forced reset trigger position. You can then fire at that very rapid rate of fire. Essentially making it indistinguishable from fully automatic fire in effect, but mechanically, the trigger is in fact being pulled technically for each shot. These FRTs have developed to where they’re extremely reliable. It’s quite an amazing innovation, so that you can have an AR-15 that essentially functions like a fully automatic AR-15, but it’s not fully automatic. It utilizes the three position that an M16 would in fact use or an M4 that’s fully auto type AR would use. But it doesn’t technically fire fully automatic because each shot is being pulled for every shot being fired. Even though it’s done by way of this forced reset. Page – 4 – of 12

Evan Nappen 13:26

So, the interesting question is: are forced reset triggers legal in New Jersey? Let’s explore that question right now. When you look at New Jersey’s ban on machine guns, New Jersey prohibits machine guns under N.J.S. 2C:39-5, specifically under subsection a., which says: Any person who knowingly has in his possession a machine gun or any instrument or device adaptable for use as a machine gun, without being licensed to do so as provided under 58-5, which is the machine gun license, is guilty of a crime of the second degree. Now that 58-5 license actually is license to carry and possess machine guns and assault firearms. Oh, wait a minute! If the assault firearm law is unconstitutional, and the license for an assault firearm is the same license for a machine gun, oh my! Look what door has just opened in New Jersey when it comes to getting a machine gun / assault firearm license. There’s a path to be taken there, but that’s a discussion for another day.

Evan Nappen 14:59

Let’s stay focused on FRTs. The machine gun is defined in New Jersey under N.J.S. 2C:39-1. section i. Under the 39-1.i definition of machine gun, it says. “Machine gun means any firearm, mechanism or instrument not requiring that the trigger be pressed for each shot and having a reservoir, belt or other means for storing and carrying ammunition which can be loaded into the firearm, mechanism or instrument and fired therefrom. A machine gun also shall include, without limitation, any firearm with a trigger crank attached.” Okay, well pressed for each shot. Well, guess what? With a Forced Reset Trigger, you are pressing the trigger for each shot. Now, before you get too excited about that, New Jersey, of course, has taken a position, which we’ll discuss in a moment, about how they’re viewing that definition. However, the fight is on. The fight is on.

Evan Nappen 16:12

But let’s continue. First of all, is an FRT a trigger crank? Well, a trigger crank is defined under section ff. of 39-1. It says a trigger crank means any device or instrument to be attached to a firearm that repeatedly activates the trigger of the firearm through the use of a lever or other part that is turned in a circular motion. It does not include any weapon initially designed and manufactured to fire through the use of a crank or lever. So, Gatling guns are legal in New Jersey because they’re designed from the beginning with a crank. A crank that you attach to a semi-automatic firearm is specifically banned and placed within the machine gun definition. But an FRT is not a crank.

Evan Nappen 17:13

What else does New Jersey prohibit? It prohibits a “bump stock”. What’s a “bump stock”? Well, that’s any device or instrument for a firearm that increases the rate of fire achievable with the firearm by using energy from the recoil of the firearm to generate a reciprocating action that facilitates repeated activation of the trigger. And as you know, bump stocks are stocks, and they utilize the recoil in that way. A Forced Reset Trigger isn’t working in that mechanism either, and that can be demonstrated as well. So, cranks or bump stocks themselves, mere possession of them, are prohibited under N.J.S. 2C:39-3, subsection l. You have separate prohibitions on those items. Furthermore, the law states that a conviction for possessing them doesn’t merge with a conviction for possession of an assault firearm. However, possession of an assault firearm is unconstitutionally going to go down the tubes, as we know, from that great decision out of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. So, we’re simply dealing with cranks and bump stocks as standalone prohibited items, but not assault firearms. Page – 5 – of 12

Evan Nappen 18:35

But the question becomes: Does New Jersey still ban Forced Reset Triggers? Interestingly, when AI is asked about this, when AI is questioned, for fun, I thought I’d ask AI about it. And what AI says, particularly Gemini, if you’re interested, it says the state prohibits them by treating them as machine guns and machine gun conversions under New Jersey statutes 39-1 and 39-5. Then it goes to cite New Jersey’s machine gun classification and statutory provisions and enforcement position. Okay, let’s look at each one. Machine gun classification. New Jersey law enforcement and the Attorney General’s office classify FRTs as illegal machine gun conversion devices because they enable semi-automatic weapons to fire multiple rounds continuously with a single function of the trigger. Okay, guess what? We have a fight on our hands with that. That is their position. Keep that in mind. If you’re caught with one in New Jersey, the state will make that claim. However, as you can see from the actual definition, we have excellent grounds for arguing that they are wrong. We don’t have case law establishing it yet, but loopholes help find the way.

Evan Nappen 20:07

Statutory provisions. They’re claiming that 39-5 prohibits possession of machine gun or any device that converts a firearm to a machine gun. Well, we just determined that it’s about pressing a trigger, and the trigger still is pressed with an FRT. So, that part of AI seems to be no good. I brought that up in my continuing conversation with AI, and AI responded. You point out, which I am pointing out, that a central distinction that gun rights advocate and federal courts have leveraged to argue FRTs are not machine guns under the Federal Firearms Act, a machine gun is defined as a weapon that fires automatically by a single function of the trigger. Because an FRT physically resets and forces a shooter to apply distinct pressure for each shot, federal courts like the Fifth Circuit have ruled FRTs require a separate trigger function per round and thus fall outside the federal definition.

Evan Nappen 21:09

However, New Jersey law applies a different statutory standard and circumvents the single function trigger loophole. Really? I thought it just said distinct pressure for each shot. What the hell is AI even talking about? Well, they’re claiming that New Jersey has different statutory language. They’re saying machine gun means any firing mechanism, not requiring that the trigger be pressed for each shot. AI makes that bold. Yet we know that it does. So, where are they coming from with this? Well, they’re giving a legal interpretation that the state’s legal argument tries to distinguish between pressed and pulled. The state’s position is that the New Jersey Attorney General and state prosecutors argue that with an FRT, the shooter applies one continuous undivided downward pressure with their finger. Because the firearm’s internal recoil energy forcibly resets the trigger against the finger, the shooter does not deliberately release and consciously press the trigger again for each shot.

Evan Nappen 22:21

However, they’re saying, and again, it says conclusion. Therefore, the state views the continuous rearward pressure of a single finger squeeze as a single continuous act, meaning the shooter is not actively pressing the trigger for each individual shot. Even though what’s happening is what? The trigger is being pressed for each shot. Ha! Battleground, right there, my friends. Battleground. Not determined yet. I don’t think you want to be the test case, but the fight is there to be had. Page – 6 – of 12

Evan Nappen 22:54

Aggressive multi-state litigation. New Jersey actively defends this strict interpretation, and yes, they will. The state led a coalition of 16 states urging that the Fifth Circuit reverse federal rollbacks on FRT bans. Explicitly stating that FRTs are new, but mechanical principles which they operate are not. They say the state maintains FRTs are fundamentally designed to evade automatic weapon restrictions and fall squarely within the state’s sweeping definition of rapid fire modification. Well, you’re right. They do evade it. They evade it by following what the law requires and finding the loophole that finds the freedom. The argument is there.

Evan Nappen 23:42

Then, in my questioning of AI, it said you said, “Does New Jersey ban FRTs, and if so, how? They say yes. New Jersey bans FTRs. The state prohibits them by treating them as machine guns. We’ve gone through again in this loophole of a loop, how and why. Then AI puts forward Senate Bill 2097 specifically bans binary triggers as well. Well, guess what? That didn’t pass. Ah, but they claim that binary triggers falls under the same legal arguments because you’re releasing, not pressing. You can see the battle. What makes this so fascinating, my friends, is that this is now going to become a hotter topic for New Jersey. As we see the death of the 36-year-old assault firearm ban and semi-automatics not being treated in any different way. We then see these fronts, these battlefronts opening up for challenging New Jersey’s machine gun definition, which can occur through their still existing licensing law, and can occur through the battle of the loopholes under FRTs and binary triggers. We are seeing glorious opportunities before us to destroy New Jersey’s gun rights oppression. And that is the power of loopholes. Let me also. Go ahead, Teddy.

Teddy Nappen 25:41

What I was going to say is, what’s going to come next is basically once we achieved it, where machine guns are legalized and we’ve basically knocked all their laws out. This is goes back to what the the Democrat Socialists put out, and then they’re gonna go for trying to abolish the Second Amendment.

Evan Nappen 26:02

That’s right.

Teddy Nappen 26:04

But that’s the whole idea. The whole argument of how we won on dealing with the assault weapon ban was the “common use”. So, I think just continuing to flood the market and to make sure guns outpace the population is the only way we’re going to ever protect the rights. Just manufacturing and outpacing them.

Evan Nappen 26:05

The more commonly owned, the better.

Evan Nappen 26:29

Hey, I want to tell you about our good friends at WeShoot. They have something really cool. They have the Civilian Shoot House Training, and that will be taking place on Friday, August 14, eight a.m. to Page – 7 – of 12

noon. This is something new at WeShoot. This is not a beginner class. This is where training becomes real. WeShoot’s Civilian Shoot House Training is built for people who understand one thing: real situations don’t happen standing still on a lane. You’ll learn how to move through your home, how to clear rooms, how to make decisions under pressure the right way. What you’ll learn in the Civilian Shoot House Training is room clearing fundamentals, shooting while moving, target identification under stress, proper use of light and positioning, operating solo or as a team. Now, this is the kind of training that helps you protect your family and avoid tragic, life-changing mistakes.

Evan Nappen 27:44

This training is ideal for homeowners and parents, houses of worship security teams, armed guards, civilian groups, anyone serious about real-world defense. And you’ll be training with the real deal. You’ll be training with Jim Weinberg, who’s got 30 years of law enforcement experience with SWAT, USERT, and Todd Friedman, retired detective lieutenant, special operations. He’s led 500 tactical entries, over 500. Scott Benito, a 25-year veteran, former lieutenant, tactical team leader. Ryan Benito, an Army combat veteran, 173rd Airborne, CQB instructor, master breacher. Andy Tkach, retired captain, firearm instructor, city SRT team member, instructor, police academy instructor, and municipal counterterrorism coordinator.

Evan Nappen 28:40

This is the kind of quality training you will receive from WeShoot in their Civilian Shoot House Training. These are instructors who have done it in real life, and they will teach you how to do it right. Listen, folks, the bottom line is this. Shooting is one skill; moving safely through your home is another. If you’re serious about protecting what matters, this is your next step. Keep in mind, spots are limited. Secure yours now. Go to weshootusa.com. Check out their fantastic website. It’s the greatest range. Teddy and I shoot there. We love it. Wwe get our trainings, where we get our certifications, and you can too. Whether you’re a beginner or advanced, WeShoot is a place for you. Conveniently located in Lakewood, right off the Parkway. Easy to get to, and a great resource. Take advantage of this resource at WeShootUSA.com. That’s the range you need to go to in New Jersey.

Evan Nappen 29:49

Let me also tell you about New Jersey Gun Law. That’s my book. The Bible of New Jersey Gun Law. Everybody needs a copy. Get your copy at EvanNappen.com. It is a question and answer goldmine to fill you in and make it so you don’t become a GOFU. If you want to avoid that, you need the book. That’ll help you do it. Hey Teddy, what do you have for us in Press Checks?

Teddy Nappen 30:17

Well, as you know, Press Checks are always free. We always like to check out our friends at AmmoLand, and they point out something that’s again very scary. If you’ve seen the news, all the big talk is about Flock Cameras. (https://www.ammoland.com/2026/07/flocks-flying-cameras-how-300-million-drone-deal-turns-america-into-an-always-on-surveillance-grid/) Typically, there’s a bill aiming to stop.

Evan Nappen 30:37

What is a “Flock Camera”, Teddy? What is it? Page – 8 – of 12

Teddy Nappen 30:42

It is basically a highly advanced surveillance system that tracks, uses facial recognition, biometric identifications, and any other . It uses high level technology of capturing, analyzing, retaining.

Evan Nappen 31:00

So, what are these cameras that are put all over the place?

Teddy Nappen 31:03

So, they’re looking to. Right now the network has surpassed 100,000 cameras. They are operating more than 500,000.

Evan Nappen 31:10

One hundred thousand cameras doing facial recognition, tracking, surveillance. Is this like Big Brother happening?

Teddy Nappen 31:18

It is. And unfortunately, the Big Brother is very retarded. There have been many issues, including the fact that they’ve had the network be exposed, where you can get live feeds of the flock cameras. It’s amazing what you can find at a bunch of cameras pointed at, oh, you know, schools, playgrounds. That’s not going to be abused, and also it makes mistakes and false.

Evan Nappen 31:44

And people are hacking into them, aren’t they?

Teddy Nappen 31:46

Repeatedly, yes. And they’ve had.

Evan Nappen 31:48

Well, wait a minute. If you’re not doing anything wrong, what do you have to worry about?

Teddy Nappen 31:53

Well, it was pointed out in the article that this is important for the Second Amendment because it’s tracking license plates where it’s logging in, arriving and departing gun stores and gun shows and shooting ranges.

Evan Nappen 32:08

Oh, New Jersey would never do that. Oh wait, they did. They did it at gun shows, even in out-of-state gun shows. Oh my.

Teddy Nappen 32:16

Correct. Page – 9 – of 12

Evan Nappen 32:16

Oh my. And that’s without the aid of Flock Cameras.

Teddy Nappen 32:20

Correct. And apply that now to not only building profiles where they’re going to determine oh this person’s a gun owner. So that obviously means they’re going to make the calculations think you’re carrying, and they’re going to wait until a moment when you’re in a “sensitive place” and try to bust you then. Doing this data tracking.

Evan Nappen 32:41

Well, you’re not supposed to be in a “sensitive place”, Teddy.

Teddy Nappen 32:44

Yeah, I know. It’s almost like you know things happen.

Evan Nappen 32:46

And not only that, they use Wi-Fi to determine if you have a gun.

Teddy Nappen 32:51

Correct. And then marry this with AI with a new thing called Signal Trace. It comes by the Leonardo USA Cybersecurity Company. So, this company, they use the Signal Trace. It’s a software system for identifying groups of consumers using multiples of the electronic devices. So, say that you have a smartwatch and a phone, or even your car, and all of that is accessible through the Signal Trace, where they develop large-scale profiles of individuals that they are tracking on these cameras. Now they understand. Oh, this person’s a gun owner. This person carries. This person’s going to have a whatever carry package.

Evan Nappen 33:37

Wait a minute. I’ve got a question. I see, but are there any like countries that might be like authoritarian and really mean to their people that might be using technology like this? There isn’t any countries doing that now, is there?

Teddy Nappen 33:54

China, Russia.

Evan Nappen 33:56

China and Russia.

Teddy Nappen 33:57

UK.

Evan Nappen 33:58

I see, and the UK, of course, of course. Page – 10 – of 12

Teddy Nappen 34:03

These are various nations for that they’re going to abuse it. And by the way, they’ve come out and said they’re not talking about combining the two systems of Signal Trace. There’s no official contract, but let’s be real. The fact remains AI.

Evan Nappen 34:19

Anything Government can abuse, they will abuse. That’s an iron law of Government abuse. Who’s kidding who? And by the way, if you’re not doing anything wrong, you’re not doing anything wrong till somebody decides that what you’re doing is wrong, and now it’s wrong in their book.

Teddy Nappen 34:36

I’ll give you a one example. Well, they bought Aerodome, which is a drone package. So, now it’s going to be a mobile Flock Camera, calling it the Alpha.

Evan Nappen 34:51

Oh, wow! Everywhere! Flying overhead. Anywhere, everywhere, constant surveillance. That’s just lovely, lovely.

Teddy Nappen 35:02

Yes.

Evan Nappen 35:02

Who wants to live like that?

Teddy Nappen 35:05

Yes. So, Big Brother is out there, and I’m pretty sure there are a few videos on how to do drone hunting. So that’s going to be fun. Yeah. You know, when Amazon was doing that, it was skeet shooting with prizes.

Evan Nappen 35:20

Ha, ha! Well, you know, there’s a federal bill I understand to try to ban these.

Teddy Nappen 35:27

Correct. It’s the Protection Against Mass Surveillance Act (H.R. 980). (https://www.ammoland.com/2026/07/burchett-bill-flock-cameras-gun-owners/)

Evan Nappen 35:33

Well, damn, we need that bill.

Teddy Nappen 35:35

Yeah, no, no kidding.

Evan Nappen 35:37

It’ll be a federal prohibition on this nonsense? Page – 11 – of 12

Teddy Nappen 35:40

All federal agencies will be prohibited from using automated surveillance system to identify, track, or record individuals.

Evan Nappen 35:46

Oh, I’m sure the state of New Jersey will happily do it, though. It sounds right up their line.

Teddy Nappen 35:52

Yeah.

Evan Nappen 35:53

But at least if we get the feds to maybe even make it preemptive. It should be a federal law that preempts the area, so that’s nationwide and preemptive. So, you kill it for the whole country.

Teddy Nappen 36:06

Yeah, and this is where. Again, this is the marrying of what will come because we can have all these fights and win and get all the loopholes, but this combined with AI of what they’re going to do, they will just track, and they know how many guns without even having to do the right process.

Evan Nappen 36:24

It’s scary. It’s scary stuff.

Teddy Nappen 36:26

They won’t even need to do the paperwork even. It’ll just have an AI.

Evan Nappen 36:29

You know, technology is advancing so fast with all this. You’re combining AI and drones and Flock cameras and this targeting ability. I mean, you know, we’re not too far from RoboCop. And that also includes actual robots coming our way. Then you combine robots with Flock and drone and AI, and you see we’re entering into a sci-fi horror show here.

Teddy Nappen 37:03

Yeah.

Evan Nappen 37:04

They better get the federal laws on this stuff, man. It’s spooky. It’s scary. It is not how I grew up. I’ll tell you that. It’s bad news. Bad news.

Evan Nappen 37:17

Well, I want to tell you about this week’s GOFU, which is of course the Gun Owner Fuck Up. It’s important. We always study GOFUs. You don’t want to become a GOFU. GOFUs are expensive lessons that others have learned that you get to learn for free, so you don’t repeat them. And let me tell you, these are actual cases, clients and real scenarios. I’ll tell you something I’ve seen a lot of lately. Page – 12 – of 12

Folks that are doing their own expungements. If you have a record that needs to be cleared, I absolutely do not advise doing it yourself. You need a professional to get your expungement done right. There’s a lot of nuances to getting expungements done right, and when they are done wrong, it is a nightmare. It is a nightmare to fix it, and it creates escalating problems.

Evan Nappen 38:11

Let me give you an example. You get an expungement, and you don’t clear all your records. You think you have. Next thing you know, you’re jammed up on your gun application for lying on the form. You’re looking at five years in State Prison for lying on the form because you wrote “no” when you should have wrote “yes”. You thought you were expunged and you weren’t. You get an expungement. You actually get everything cleared, but you didn’t realize that you had to wait for the State Police to also scrub the record. No one told you that. You thought it got done, but the database comes up that you have a record. You’ve said “no”. Now the entire system comes down on you for lying. License denial, gun forfeiture, revocation. You’ve got to fight it all off. Again, giant problem.

Evan Nappen 39:03

Even if you get the expungement order, you don’t realize the record hasn’t been scrubbed. Your local issuing authority recognizes the expungement, and grants you the license or permit. You then go to the dealer to buy, but get denied on the NICS check because the database still has it in it. Now the feds are on your ass, and the entire escalation comes down on you for that. We see these scenarios over and over again. If you or anybody you know needs an expungement, get it done professionally. There’s too many pitfalls, problems, and nuances in doing it properly and correctly. Believe me, we see that downside. Don’t be a GOFU.

Evan Nappen 39:57

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

Speaker 3 40:08

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

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

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

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

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

[email protected]

Email (required) *

First Name *

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