Current News

Florida AG Sues Jacksonville, Seeks $5 Million Over Alleged Firearm Check-In Records

My Right To Carry News Team

May 14, 2026

Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier has taken legal action against the city of Jacksonville, accusing city officials of keeping records that functioned as an unlawful gun registry. The lawsuit asks for a $5 million penalty and centers on how firearms were reportedly documented when brought into municipal buildings.

According to the complaint, Jacksonville maintained logs tracking guns checked in at city facilities from July 2023 through early 2025. The state contends those records crossed a legal line by creating a list of firearms tied to people entering government property, something Florida law prohibits.

The case also revisits a prior enforcement decision. While an investigation by the State Attorney’s Office found the registry-style logging violated state law, the city previously avoided criminal consequences despite that finding.

Uthmeier’s filing escalates the dispute from investigation and internal review into a direct court fight between the state and one of Florida’s largest cities. From a limited-government perspective, the lawsuit reflects a broader concern that local agencies can quietly expand surveillance-like recordkeeping beyond what voters and state law allow.

The legal challenge now puts Jacksonville’s practices during the July 2023 to early 2025 period under formal scrutiny, with the state seeking financial penalties and a court ruling on the city’s compliance. The outcome could influence how other Florida municipalities handle firearm check-in procedures at public buildings without creating prohibited registries.
Virginia Surges to No. 2 in U.S. Rifle Purchases as Possible AR-15 Sales Ban Nears

My Right To Carry News Team

May 13, 2026

Virginia has climbed to the second-highest spot nationally for rifle purchases as residents move quickly to buy firearms and standard-capacity magazines amid uncertainty over a potential state crackdown. The shift comes as lawmakers advance restrictions that could soon limit what can be sold, prompting many buyers to act before any new rules take effect.

The immediate driver is pending legislation that would prohibit the sale of commonly owned semi-automatic rifles, including AR-15-style firearms, along with the ammunition magazines typically sold with them. Rather than waiting for the governor’s decision, Virginians have been heading to gun shops now, treating the current window as possibly their last chance to purchase the affected items through normal retail channels.

This rush has reordered where Virginia sits compared with other states, pushing it near the top of the national rankings for rifle sales. The jump reflects a familiar pattern seen in other jurisdictions: when a ban is proposed or close to being signed, demand accelerates as citizens try to secure lawful products before the market changes.

From a conservative and libertarian perspective, the situation underscores how regulatory threats can distort consumer behavior and burden ordinary people who want to exercise a fundamental right without being forced into a last-minute scramble. It also highlights the practical reality that bans often push otherwise routine purchases into a time-sensitive decision driven by politics rather than personal readiness or long-term planning.

For now, the outcome hinges on whether the governor signs the measure. Until that decision is made, Virginia’s gun retailers and buyers are operating in a climate shaped by the possibility that sales of popular semi-automatic firearms and their standard magazines could soon be off-limits in the state.
Pennsylvania Senate Moves Constitutional Carry Bill Forward, Passes Measure to Enforce State Preemption

My Right To Carry News Team

May 13, 2026

Pennsylvania lawmakers took two notable steps on firearm policy in Harrisburg on Wednesday, May 6, 2026, advancing separate proposals that supporters say reinforce statewide protections for the right to keep and bear arms and curb local overreach.

One action centered on Senate Bill 357, commonly described as “constitutional carry.” The Senate Judiciary Committee voted to send SB 357 onward, moving it out of committee and positioning it for consideration by the full Senate.

If enacted, constitutional carry legislation is generally aimed at allowing eligible, law-abiding adults to carry a firearm without first obtaining a permit, reflecting the view that the right to self-defense should not hinge on navigating government licensing systems. The committee vote means the measure cleared a key procedural hurdle, but it still must be taken up by the Senate as a whole.

The second development occurred on the Senate floor, where the full chamber approved Senate Bill 822. That bill is designed to strengthen enforcement of Pennsylvania’s firearms preemption framework, which is intended to keep gun laws uniform statewide rather than varying from one municipality to the next.

SB 822 focuses on consequences for local governments that act contrary to state preemption rules. Supporters argue that when cities or counties attempt to set their own firearms regulations, it creates a confusing patchwork that undermines legal clarity for ordinary residents and invites selective enforcement. The Senate’s approval of SB 822 signals a commitment to ensuring local officials face penalties when they disregard state law.

Taken together, the movement of SB 357 out of the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Senate’s passage of SB 822 marked a significant day for Second Amendment policy in Pennsylvania, with one bill advancing toward a full Senate debate and the other clearing the chamber as a preemption-enforcement measure.
Delaware SB 304 Would Let Private Schools Arm Trained Staff Under “Safe Schools Sentry Act”

My Right To Carry News Team

May 12, 2026

Delaware lawmakers are considering a proposal that would give private schools a new option for campus protection by allowing certain employees to carry firearms at school, provided they are trained and authorized by the institution.

The measure was introduced by State Senator Eric Buckson. It is filed as Senate Bill 304 and is titled the “Safe Schools Sentry Act.” Under the bill, a private school could choose to permit designated staff members to be armed while on campus, rather than relying solely on outside security arrangements.

Supporters frame the concept as a practical response to the reality that threats can emerge quickly and that immediate on-site protection may matter in a crisis. From a conservative and libertarian perspective, the approach emphasizes local control—letting private institutions decide how best to safeguard their students and staff instead of forcing a one-size-fits-all security model.

A central argument behind SB 304 is cost. The bill is presented as a more budget-friendly alternative for smaller private schools that may not be able to afford full-time school resource officers (SROs), while still aiming to strengthen security through trained personnel already employed by the school.

As of May 6, 2026, SB 304 was assigned to the Delaware Senate Judiciary Committee, where it will be reviewed as part of the legislative process. The bill’s progress through the committee will determine whether it advances for further consideration in the Senate.
North Philadelphia Break-In Attempt Ends After Homeowner Shoots Intruder at Rear Window

My Right To Carry News Team

May 12, 2026

A fatal shooting in North Philadelphia on Sunday afternoon, May 3, 2026, followed what police describe as an attempted break-in at an occupied home. Authorities say the incident unfolded at the rear of the residence, where an adult woman was allegedly trying to force her way inside through a back window.

Philadelphia Police officials reported that the homeowner confronted the attempted entry as it was happening. The resident, whom police believe may be licensed to carry a firearm, reportedly addressed the intruder before any entry was completed.

According to investigators, the homeowner issued multiple verbal commands telling the woman to stop. Police say the warnings were ignored as the woman continued working to break through the rear window.

The situation ended when the homeowner fired a shot, striking the woman. Police stated the homeowner’s actions are being treated as self-defense based on the reported circumstances surrounding the attempted forced entry and the ignored warnings.

The woman died as a result of the gunshot, and the case remains tied to the claim that she was attempting to unlawfully enter an occupied property. The reported details underscore the principle that lawful residents have the right to defend themselves in their homes when confronted with an immediate, unlawful intrusion.
Public Comment Urged as ATF Faces Accusations of Building an Unlawful Gun Registry

My Right To Carry News Team

May 11, 2026

A new call is circulating among gun-rights advocates urging Americans to weigh in during a public-comment period over allegations that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is effectively constructing a firearms registry outside the limits set by federal law. Supporters of the effort argue that a centralized record of lawful gun ownership would be incompatible with privacy, due process, and the constitutional boundaries placed on executive agencies.

The push centers on encouraging individuals to submit comments aimed at stopping what critics describe as an “illegal registry.” In this view, the issue is not merely administrative recordkeeping, but the long-term consequences of government aggregation of sensitive personal data tied to lawful conduct. Advocates emphasize that even if records begin as routine paperwork, large-scale collection can become a de facto registry when data is preserved, organized, and made searchable.

From a conservative and libertarian perspective, the dispute reflects a broader concern about federal agencies expanding their reach through regulation and internal procedures rather than through clear authorization from Congress. Critics argue that policy choices with major implications for civil liberties should be made through the legislative process, not through administrative actions that are difficult for ordinary citizens to track and challenge.

Those promoting public participation say comments are a practical way for citizens to register opposition, create an official record of objections, and signal that voters are paying attention. They also argue that sustained public scrutiny can limit agency overreach by increasing political and legal accountability, especially when the subject involves constitutionally protected rights.

The organizing effort is being publicized by Gun Owners of America, which is directing readers to its post on the issue, titled “Comment Now To Stop the ATF’s Illegal Registry!” The group is using the moment to encourage immediate civic engagement and to frame the controversy as a timely decision point for anyone concerned about the growth of federal power and the protection of Second Amendment rights.
DOJ’s Colorado Gun Lawsuits Face a Tight Political Timeline

My Right To Carry News Team

May 10, 2026

The Justice Department’s latest move in Colorado has energized gun-rights supporters who want courts to strike down bans on AR-15-style rifles and limits on magazine capacity across the country. From a libertarian and conservative perspective, the development is notable not only for what it signals about federal enforcement priorities, but also for how quickly the window for meaningful progress could close.

At the center of the moment is timing. The Trump Administration’s action is being read by advocates as a fresh tailwind for challenges to restrictions that have become common in blue states. Still, even a favorable legal posture can be undermined if key decisions don’t arrive soon enough to matter, especially when political control and administrative direction can shift on an election cycle.

Colorado is now a focal point because the federal government has chosen to press its position through lawsuits in that state. Supporters of the effort see this as a chance to bring added legal pressure against policies they view as unconstitutional burdens on lawful ownership and self-defense. But the pace of litigation is rarely predictable, and that reality creates risk for any strategy dependent on fast-moving court schedules.

The broader stakes reach beyond Colorado. If bans on AR-15s and magazine limits can be defeated in court, the outcomes could influence similar laws elsewhere by shaping precedent and offering a roadmap for future challenges. Gun-rights groups have long argued that commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines should not be treated as exceptional or prohibited items, and they’re watching closely for signals that courts may be willing to take that position.

Even so, the underlying question is whether the Justice Department’s effort can clear major procedural hurdles before the political calendar reshuffles the incentives and priorities in Washington. A change in administration can alter litigation strategy, settlement posture, and the intensity with which the federal government pursues a case. That uncertainty is why observers describe the situation as a race: the legal arguments may be strong, but the clock can be just as decisive.
Fix Our Forests Act Moves Forward in Congress to Tackle Wildfire Risk and Restore Habitat

My Right To Carry News Team

May 9, 2026

A major federal effort to address worsening conditions in America’s forests is gaining momentum on Capitol Hill, as lawmakers advance bipartisan legislation aimed at improving forest health. Supporters say the problem has been building for years and has been repeatedly highlighted by people who live and work closest to the land, including hunters, conservation advocates, rural residents, and forest managers.

Earlier this session, the U.S. House of Representatives approved H.R. 471, known as the Fix Our Forests Act. The measure is a stated priority of the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), which has been urging action to confront what it describes as a forest health crisis affecting habitat and increasing wildfire danger.

The bill is sponsored by Rep. Bruce Westerman of Arkansas, the chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee. Backers emphasize that Westerman’s role as committee chair places him at the center of congressional work on public lands and forest policy, and they argue that his leadership reflects an on-the-ground understanding of the challenges that have been accumulating across many forested regions.

Proponents frame the legislation as a practical response focused on restoring habitat while also lowering the likelihood and severity of catastrophic wildfires. The argument behind the push is that delaying action has real consequences for communities near forested areas and for those who rely on healthy habitat for wildlife and outdoor recreation.

From a limited-government perspective, supporters also point to the value of timely, targeted management decisions that reduce risks before disasters occur, rather than relying on costly emergency responses after fires break out. With House passage completed, advocates are pressing for continued progress as Congress considers next steps for the Fix Our Forests Act.
ATF Pushes New “Streamlined” Gun Purchase Process, Raising Privacy and Due-Process Concerns

My Right To Carry News Team

May 9, 2026

A federal effort now underway could reshape how many Americans complete a firearm purchase, with changes likely to be noticeable at the gun counter. The initiative centers on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) and its push to make the buying process faster and more uniform.

The ATF’s approach is being framed as a modernization and efficiency move—an attempt to reduce friction in the steps between selecting a firearm and finalizing a lawful transfer. Supporters of streamlining often argue that customers and dealers alike benefit when paperwork and delays are reduced.

From a conservative and libertarian perspective, however, “streamlining” from Washington frequently comes with tradeoffs that deserve close scrutiny. When federal agencies redesign systems that touch constitutional rights, the details matter: how information is collected, how long it is retained, who can access it, and what new compliance burdens are quietly placed on lawful gun owners and small businesses.

Another concern is that procedural changes can function like policy changes, even when Congress never votes on them. A shift in how purchases are processed can influence how easily people can exercise a fundamental right, and it can also expand the practical reach of federal oversight without transparent debate.

The article from The Reload describes the effort as one that could alter the purchasing experience for most Americans in significant, visible ways. As this develops, gun owners and Second Amendment advocates are likely to watch whether the promised efficiency is achieved without building new back-end infrastructure that can be repurposed later for broader monitoring or restrictions.

At minimum, any federal attempt to redesign the buying process should be judged by clear standards: protecting due process, preventing the creation of de facto registries, minimizing unnecessary data collection, and ensuring that lawful commerce is not choked by shifting administrative rules. If the ATF proceeds, the agency should be pressed to explain exactly what will change, why it is necessary, and how it will be constrained to avoid undermining the rights of ordinary Americans.
Vermont Senate Moves S. 329 Forward to Ban Firearms in Bars and Alcohol-Serving Restaurants

My Right To Carry News Team

May 8, 2026

A proposal in Montpelier is gaining traction that would create a uniform statewide rule limiting where firearms may be carried. The Vermont Senate has advanced S. 329, a measure aimed at prohibiting firearms inside bars and in restaurants that serve alcohol.

Supporters of the bill argue that the state should set one consistent policy rather than leaving the issue to piecemeal local action. In practice, S. 329 is intended to replace a separate effort tied to Burlington—an attempted charter change that has remained stuck for an extended period—by establishing a single standard across Vermont.

The Senate’s initial approval came through a vote split along party lines. While the bill is moving ahead legislatively, it is already heading toward a major obstacle at the executive level.

Governor Phil Scott is widely expected to reject the measure if it reaches his desk. He has previously indicated doubts about whether such a prohibition can be effectively enforced, raising questions about how the policy would work in real-world settings.

For Vermonters who prioritize individual liberty and consistent statewide rules, the debate is likely to center on whether restricting lawful carry in specific public venues improves safety or mainly creates new compliance issues for responsible citizens. As S. 329 continues through the process, the prospects for enactment appear tied not only to legislative votes, but also to the likelihood of a gubernatorial veto.