Latest news with #GunOwnersofAmerica
USA Today
16-07-2025
- Politics
- USA Today
Gun groups want law reversed on mailing through postal service
Two gun organizations are challenging a 1927 federal law prohibiting mailing handguns through the U.S. Postal Service. Gun Owners of America and Gun Owners Foundation, together with Pennsylvania resident Bonita Shreve have filed a lawsuit in the Western District of Pennsylvania against the United States Postal Service. The Pennsylvania resident wants to mail her father a handgun as a gift, according to the filing, but is prohibited by federal law and Postal Service regulations. In their filing the plaintiffs argue that the Postal Service allows businesses and government officials to ship handgun and that individual Americans should have the same ability. Private shipping companies like UPS and FedEx have policies prohibiting shipping a handgun, the filing states. "The federal government's Prohibition-era ban on mailing handguns violates the Second Amendment," Erich Pratt, Senior Vice President of Gun Owners of America, said in a statement. Sam Paredes, with the Gun Owners Foundation, said in a statement that the law was passed in a different time. "Every day this ban remains in effect, it infringes on the rights of law-abiding Americans who are fully entitled to exercise all of their Second Amendment freedoms," Paredes said. Mailing a handgun is currently a Class E felony punishable by up to $250,000 fine and two years in prison. A spokesperson for the Postal Service did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Reuters
16-07-2025
- Politics
- Reuters
Gun group sues to end US Postal Service's ban on mailing handguns
July 15 (Reuters) - A gun rights lobbying group is suing the U.S. Postal Service in a bid to overturn its nearly 100-year-old ban on mailing handguns, arguing that the law wasn't contemplated when the country's founders drafted the 2nd Amendment in the U.S. Constitution. Gun Owners of America and the Gun Owners Foundation filed the lawsuit, opens new tab on Monday in federal court in Pennsylvania, seeking to bar enforcement of the law, which makes it a felony to mail pistols, revolvers and other firearms that can be concealed on a person. The lawsuit also seeks an order declaring the law violates the 2nd Amendment's right to bear arms. Pennsylvania resident Bonita Shreve sued along with the group, claiming the law is preventing her from mailing a handgun to her father in another part of the state. The ban comes with a fine of up to $250,000, a prison sentence of up to two years, or both, according to the statute. Erich Pratt, the senior vice president of Gun Owners of America, said in a statement that the group is 'committed to ending all anti-gun 'rules for me, but not for thee,' in any form they may take.' A spokesperson for the U.S. Postal Service said it is agency policy not to comment on pending litigation. The lawsuit is the latest to challenge a law regulating guns and gun ownership brought after a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2022 that expanded gun rights. In that case, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, the 6-3 conservative majority established a new test for assessing modern firearms laws, holding that modern gun restrictions were required to be "consistent with this nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation." The lawsuit against the U.S. Postal Service said that although the service itself has existed since 1775, the nation's founders did not contemplate a rule like the 1927 law banning the mailing of handguns. The law was enacted during a purported crime wave in the 1920s that some blamed on mail-order gun sales, according to the lawsuit. A number of laws regulating guns have been successfully challenged in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling. In January, the U.S. Appellate Court for the Fifth Circuit held that a U.S. government ban on federally licensed firearms dealers selling handguns to adults under the age of 21 is unconstitutional. Last year, the same appellate court held that a federal law prohibiting users of illegal drugs from owning firearms was unconstitutional as applied to the case of a marijuana user. The case is Shreve v. U.S. Postal Service, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, No. 3:25-cv-00214. For Shreve: Gilbert Ambler of Ambler Law Offices; and Stephen Stamboulieh of Stamboulieh Law For USPS: Not yet available
Newsweek
05-07-2025
- Politics
- Newsweek
Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' Sparks Gun Group Lawsuit Within Hours
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Several gun rights groups filed a lawsuit to dismantle what is left of the National Firearms Act (NFA) shortly after U.S. President Donald Trump signed his package of tax breaks and spending cuts into law on Friday. The legislation reduced the NFA's excise tax on suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns and any other weapons to $0. Gun Owners of America (GOA) and other plaintiffs argue in the lawsuit—which they have dubbed the "One Big Beautiful Lawsuit"—that the Supreme Court had upheld the NFA as a tax statute and the constitutional justification for it no longer applies once the tax is eliminated. Newsweek has contacted the Department of Justice and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives—which are listed as defendants in the lawsuit—for comment via a contact form on the DOJ's website and email. File photo: Donald Trump signs the One Big Beautiful Bill Act into law on the South Lawn of the White House on July 4, 2025 in Washington, D.C. File photo: Donald Trump signs the One Big Beautiful Bill Act into law on the South Lawn of the White House on July 4, 2025 in Washington, Context The National Firearms Act was first enacted in 1934 to regulates firearms considered the most dangerous and crack down on gangland crime in the Prohibition era. The law had imposed a $200 tax on machine guns and shotguns and rifles with barrels shorter than 18 inches, and also required the federal registration of these types of firearms. Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act eliminates the $200 fee that gun owners are charged when purchasing silencers and short-barreled rifles, but it remains in effect for machine guns and explosive devices. What To Know In a press release on Thursday, Gun Owners of America said its team had been "working behind the scenes" with lawmakers since the November election to repeal the NFA fully. The group said congressional Republicans had allowed "an unelected bureaucrat" to block the provision. GOA added that Congress ultimately "settled for reducing the NFA's $200 excise tax to $0 on suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, and any other weapons or AOWs—teeing up GOA's legal challenge." GOA also said it has also long argued that the NFA's registration mandates "violate the Second Amendment and are an unconstitutional overreach of federal power." The authors of the NFA "left no doubt that the NFA was an exercise of the taxing power, and the Supreme Court upheld it on that basis," says the lawsuit, which was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. "But the NFA no longer imposes any tax on the vast majority of firearms it purports to regulate. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which Congress and the President enacted on July 4, 2025, zeros the manufacture and transfer tax on nearly all NFA-regulated firearms. That means the constitutional foundation on which the NFA rested has dissolved. And the NFA cannot be upheld under any other Article I power. With respect to the untaxed firearms, the Act is now unconstitutional." What People Are Saying Erich Pratt, senior vice president of GOA, said in a statement: "This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to dismantle one of the most abusive federal gun control laws on the books. With the tax struck down by Congress, the rest of the NFA is standing on air. We're ready to take this fight to the courts and finally end the federal registry once and for all." Sam Paredes said in a statement on behalf of the board for Gun Owners Foundation: "The Supreme Court has made clear that the NFA survives only as a tax law. Once the President signs this bill and the tax disappears, the registry becomes an unconstitutional relic. GOF is prepared to go to court and challenge every remaining provision that violates the Second Amendment." Representative Mike Thompson, a Democrat and chairman of the House Gun Violence Prevention Task Force, wrote on X, formerly Twitter, on Wednesday: "Congressional Republicans are giving a handout to the gun lobby by eliminating the $200 tax on silencers and easily concealable short-barreled rifles and short-barreled shotguns. We've regulated silencers and these guns for 90+ years for a reason: to keep people safe." Emma Brown, the executive director of GIFFORDS, an organization focused on preventing gun violence, said in a statement this week: "Almost 100 years of precedent has kept silencers and short-barreled firearms out of easy reach for criminals. But with this bill, Republicans are laying the groundwork to gut safeguards that stopped criminals from getting these deadly weapons. This vote is proof that the 'law and order' rhetoric Donald Trump has pushed for years rings hollow. In siding with the gun industry CEOs, he has handed criminals a win, and communities will suffer the deadly consequences." What Happens Next The lawsuit asks the court to declare that the NFA's registration and transfer requirements pertaining to untaxed firearms "exceed Congress's enumerated powers" and block the defendants from "implementing, enforcing, or otherwise acting under the authority of the NFA with respect to untaxed firearms."
Yahoo
03-06-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Second Amendment groups file for summary judgment in bid to overturn Florida's open carry ban
Gun-rights groups are pursuing several strategies to win the right to openly carry firearms in Florida. (Photo by Matt Rourke/The Associated Press) A Palm Beach gun owner and two Second Amendment groups have filed a motion for summary judgement in their federal court challenge to Florida's law banning individuals from openly carrying firearms, claiming the law is unconstitutional. Gun Owners of America, the Gun Owners Foundation, and gun owner Richard Hughes originally filed their lawsuit in the Southern District of Florida last August, alleging that the law banning open carry violates the Second and Fourteenth amendments of the U.S. Constitution and places them, their members, and their supporters at risk of being arrested and prosecuted should they openly carry firearms in public. St. Lucie County Sheriff Richard Del Toro is the lone defendant in the case. In their lawsuit, Hughes and the two gun rights organizations list him because the St. Lucie County Sheriff's Office warned the public after the state legalized what is known as 'permitless carry' in 2023 that '[t]he law is not open carry; open carry is still illegal under most circumstances.' In 2017, the Florida Supreme Court upheld state restrictions on openly carrying a firearm, ruling in Norman v. State that the law did not violate citizens' Second Amendment rights in a case brought by Dale Lee Norman, a St. Lucie County resident who faced a second-degree misdemeanor charge after he walked down a road with handgun holstered to his hip, according to the Courthouse News Service. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX The federal lawsuit says that state Supreme Court ruling failed on a couple of fronts: for 'not once consulting contemporaneous authorities to discern the meaning of the Second Amendment's text' and for failure to conduct an historical analysis of the 'nation's early tradition as to open carry — or any tradition, for that matter.' 'This case is personal for me and millions of gun owners across the state,' said Luis Valdes, Florida state director for Gun Owners of America. 'Florida likes to brand itself as pro-Second Amendment, but this ban proves otherwise. We are fighting to restore a right that never should've been taken away — and we won't stop until every Floridian can carry openly, freely, and constitutionally.' 'Florida's open carry ban is an outdated and unconstitutional relic,' Sam Parades said in a statement on behalf of the board of directors for Gun Owners Foundation. 'The right to bear arms means exactly that — to carry arms, not just to keep them locked away.' Florida remains one of only five states in the nation that bans the open carrying of a firearm, the others being Illinois, Connecticut, New York, and California — a list of blue states that Florida does not usually share an alliance with. Gov. Ron DeSantis has said on several occasions that he supports open carry, and First Lady Casey DeSantis weighed in as well earlier this year, writing on X that, 'It's time for the Free State of Florida to join other states in enacting open carry! Sounds like a great priority for our GOP supermajority. This is the year.' But it wasn't the year for open carry in Florida's GOP-dominated state Legislature. Senate President Ben Albritton stated his opposition to overturning the ban in his first day as leader while meeting with reporters last November. A trial date has been set for November 3, 2025. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
15-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Weighing run for governor, David Jolly proposes gun liability insurance to reduce violence
When it comes to guns, doing nothing can be an accomplishment for the Florida Legislature. Now, David Jolly is asking voters if they are OK with that. Jolly is a former Republican congressman from St. Petersburg introducing himself to voters elsewhere as a potential Democratic candidate for governor. He's holding a series of town halls; among the things he's talking about is gun violence. At an April 30 town hall in Broward County, he said lawmakers should look into requiring liability insurance for firearms as a way to reduce gun violence. The idea is to leverage the profit motives of insurance companies as part of a responsible gun ownership framework. One catch: The idea is under challenge in the courts. Nonetheless, a change in approach is needed, according to Jolly: Florida witnessed six mass shootings – defined as an incident involving four people injured or killed, not including the shooter – in the first four months of 2025. The shootings claimed 10 lives and injured 20. There have been 19 mass shootings in the state since 1987, when lawmakers began a spree of repealing gun control measures to make firearms more easily accessible. According to information from the Statista data company, combined with the Gun Violence Archive daily totals, Florida is third in the number of mass shootings since 1982, behind California with 35 and Texas with 29. In a follow-up conversation with the Democrat, Jolly said a major obstacle to reducing gun violence is that the 'Republican majority in Tallahassee won't even consider talking about gun safety measures.' While Luis Valdes of Gun Owners of America calls liability insurance for firearms a violation of civil liberties – 'We don't force insurance on free speech. Why guns?' Valdes said – he probably doesn't need to worry about the conversation Jolly wants to have. The GOP supermajority at the Capitol, backed by a base of Second Amendment absolutists, rarely allow such a proposal or any gun safety measure to see the light of a committee hearing. For seven years straight, Sen. Tina Polsky, D-Boca Raton, has filed bills to strengthen background checks for firearms purchases and require safe storage requirements to no avail. None of her bills have ever been scheduled for a hearing. Polsky said legislative leaders do not want to expose their members in a discussion or recorded vote about public safety and the Second Amendment. 'If they vote for gun safety, then the people on the right go nuts. If they vote against gun safety, then people in the middle and on the left go nuts. So, they kind of feel like there's no winning, and we do nothing,' Polsky said. This year, when a proposal to lower the minimum age to purchase a rifle was defeated, advocates for gun safety, Democrats and Republicans all declared victory – albeit behind closed doors. Nothing was done to make the state's gun laws worse, Polsky said, but lawmakers 'certainly are not making them any better.' Jolly says he does not know if leveraging insurance companies' profit motives to vet potential gun owners as responsible adults would be any more effective than relying on the political motivations of elected officials to do it. Jolly responded to two Florida mass shootings as a member of Congress, explaining Florida's gun culture and laws to reporters, including after the Pulse nightclub killings in Orlando, the second worst mass shooting in U.S. history. And he served as an MSNBC commentator during coverage of eight more Florida shootings after he left Congress in 2017. The idea of liability insurance for firearms dates to the 2012 shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, where 20 children and six staff members died. In 2022, the San Jose City Commission approved a Gun Harm Reduction Ordinance that requires gun owners to obtain an insurance policy to cover any damages created by a shooting. New Jersey requires a $300,000 liability policy to carry a handgun in public. Both laws are currently tied up in lawsuits. It's a conversation Jolly wonders whether Floridians are interested in having as he weighs a decision to enter the 2026 gubernatorial contest. 'I do know we're not doing enough, and everything should be on the table,' Jolly said about gun safety. If the goal, as Jolly says, its to construct "an architecture around gun ownership that increases the level of responsibility," then Valdes has an idea for the table to discuss. "Let's make the (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission's) hunter safety course part of the high school curriculum so that every student learns responsible firearm use and graduates smarter – and safer," Valdes said. James Call can be reached at jcall@ and is on X as @CallTallahassee. This article originally appeared on Tallahassee Democrat: Liability insurance for guns? David Jolly's plan to curb violence
