My Right To Carry

Second Amendment

Kentucky Voters: Cast Your Ballot for Thomas Massie Today

My Right To Carry News Team

May 20, 2026

Kentucky voters are being urged to head to the polls today and support Rep. Thomas Massie. The message is straightforward: today is the day to vote, and Massie is the candidate being highlighted for Kentucky ballots.

The call to action comes from Gun Owners of America, which is directing attention to Kentucky’s election activity and encouraging turnout. Their post emphasizes immediacy, pointing readers to take action now rather than later.

Massie, a sitting member of Congress, is the focus of the organization’s appeal to voters in the state. The communication frames the choice as an important one for Kentuckians who prioritize constitutional limits, individual liberty, and the right to keep and bear arms.

Alongside the endorsement-style message, the central instruction remains clear: participate in today’s election and make sure your vote is counted. The overall thrust is aimed at mobilizing like-minded voters who align with a pro-Second Amendment and small-government outlook.

The organization’s post is published online through its website and distributed via its RSS feed, reinforcing that the purpose is timely voter engagement. For Kentucky residents eligible to vote today, the takeaway is to show up and cast a ballot for Thomas Massie.
Virginia Gov. Spanberger Enacts SB 749 Assault Weapons Ban, Prompting Two Rapid-Fire Legal Challenges

My Right To Carry News Team

May 18, 2026

Virginia has enacted a major new firearms restriction after Governor Abigail Spanberger signed Senate Bill 749 into law. The measure creates a statewide prohibition on what the statute labels “assault weapons” as well as a ban on “high-capacity” magazines.

The law is not immediate. Its effective date is set for July 1, 2026, giving residents, retailers, and law enforcement a defined timeline before the new rules take effect.

Even with that delayed start, opponents moved quickly to contest the policy in court. The signing was followed right away by two separate lawsuits, each taking a different route to challenge the legislation.

One case was filed in Virginia’s state courts by Gun Owners of America (GOA) and the Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL). Their approach relies on a distinctive argument grounded solely in the Virginia Constitution, aiming to keep the dispute framed as a state-law question rather than a federal one.

A second challenge was filed in federal court by the National Rifle Association (NRA) and the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC). That filing is structured to pursue a streamlined path that seeks to avoid review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and instead position the case to reach the U.S. Supreme Court as directly as possible.

Together, the paired lawsuits set up a two-front legal fight—one focusing on state constitutional claims and the other targeting federal review—over a law that bans specified firearms and magazines across Virginia beginning July 1, 2026.
Virginia Enacts “Assault Weapon” and Magazine Limits, Shifting the Fight to the Courts

My Right To Carry News Team

May 18, 2026

Virginia’s debate over restricting certain firearms and ammunition magazines has moved into a new phase. After a prolonged period of uncertainty, the proposals targeting so-called “assault weapons” and magazines are no longer merely pending ideas. They are now part of state law, closing out the immediate legislative contest.

With enactment complete, the next arena is the judiciary. The push to reverse these new limits is expected to take shape through lawsuits aimed at invalidating the bans. In other words, the political process has produced an outcome, and opponents are now preparing to challenge that outcome through legal claims.

From a conservative and libertarian standpoint, this transition matters because it changes what success looks like. Instead of persuading lawmakers or the governor, critics must now convince judges that the restrictions cannot stand under the relevant constitutional standards that govern firearms regulations.

The road ahead will likely be defined by procedural choices as much as headline issues: who brings the case, where it is filed, and what immediate relief is requested. The initial legal actions will shape the pace and direction of the broader effort to roll back the newly enacted hardware and magazine rules.

For supporters of robust Second Amendment protections, the immediate takeaway is straightforward: the policy fight has ended for now, but the contest over rights and limits is only beginning. The practical path forward runs through litigation intended to undo Virginia’s “assault weapon” and magazine bans now that they have become law.
NSSF Backs Lawsuit Challenging Virginia’s HB 217 and SB 749 Firearm Ban

My Right To Carry News Team

May 15, 2026

NSSF, the trade association representing the firearm industry, announced in Washington, D.C., that it is financing a newly filed lawsuit against the Commonwealth of Virginia. The organization says the case challenges state actions it believes conflict with both the U.S. Constitution and the Virginia Constitution.

At the center of the dispute is Virginia’s recently enacted legislation identified as HB 217 and SB 749. According to NSSF, the law is sweeping in scope and imposes a prohibition involving certain firearms.

NSSF states the statute bars the sale and transfer of firearms that, in its view, are specifically protected for private ownership under constitutional guarantees. The lawsuit, NSSF says, is aimed at stopping what it characterizes as unconstitutional restrictions embedded in the new measure.

By choosing to fund the litigation, the organization is positioning the courts as the venue to resolve whether Virginia’s approach aligns with constitutional limits. The filing signals that the debate over how far state government can go in regulating commonly owned firearms is likely to continue in courtroom proceedings.

NSSF’s announcement frames the legal challenge as a direct response to the enactment of HB 217 and SB 749 and the restrictions the organization says those bills impose on lawful commerce and private transfers. The case now turns on judicial review of the law’s compatibility with the federal and state constitutions cited in the complaint.
NRA Cuts Legal Spending and Builds Assets in 2025, Even as Membership Dues Keep Falling

My Right To Carry News Team

May 15, 2026

The National Rifle Association reported a stronger financial position in 2025, showing higher assets and a noticeable reduction in overall spending. The organization’s latest numbers indicate it managed to slow its financial slide compared with recent years, even as one key revenue stream continued to weaken.

A major driver of the improved cost picture was a sharp pullback in legal outlays. After years in which courtroom fights and related expenses weighed heavily on the NRA’s budget, 2025 reflected a year in which those legal costs were substantially reduced, helping the group bring total expenses down.

At the same time, the organization’s asset base increased during the year. That growth, paired with the spending cuts, suggests the NRA was able to stabilize operations and shore up its balance sheet, at least in the near term, despite operating in a challenging political and regulatory environment.

However, the numbers also show continuing softness in the group’s membership-driven income. Revenue from member dues declined again in 2025, indicating that the NRA’s ability to rely on grassroots financial support is still under pressure, even though the overall financial picture improved.

From a pro-Second Amendment and limited-government perspective, the report highlights the practical reality that major advocacy groups can be forced to divert significant resources into legal defense when targeted by political opponents or regulators. While the NRA’s reduced legal spending and higher assets mark a step toward financial steadiness in 2025, the continued drop in dues revenue shows the organization still faces the longer-term task of rebuilding and retaining its membership support.
Axelrod Interview Highlights AOC Comment Pointing to Criminal Misuse Over Lawful Gun Ownership

My Right To Carry News Team

May 14, 2026

David Axelrod, a senior fellow at the University of Chicago Institute of Politics and a longtime strategist associated with former President Barack Obama, recently held an extended conversation with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York. The discussion lasted about an hour and a half and touched on public policy issues, including the country’s ongoing debate over firearms and violence.

Ocasio-Cortez is widely known as a supporter of stricter gun regulations. In the course of the interview, however, she made an observation that aligns with a longstanding argument from gun-rights advocates: that lawful gun owners are not the driving force behind violent crime, and that the focus should remain on those who choose to break the law.

From a conservative and libertarian viewpoint, that distinction matters because it separates peaceful, legal conduct from criminal behavior. Treating firearm ownership itself as the central problem can shift attention away from accountability for offenders and away from policies aimed at preventing repeat crimes, targeting illegal possession, and enforcing existing laws against violent actors.

The exchange also underscores a basic point often missed in national discussions: millions of Americans own firearms without harming anyone, while a smaller number of individuals commit acts of violence. When policymakers frame solutions around broad restrictions on ordinary citizens, they risk burdening people who are already compliant with the law while leaving core drivers of violence—criminal intent and criminal actions—insufficiently addressed.

The interview, notable for its length and for Axelrod’s prominence in Democratic political circles, offered a moment where common ground briefly appeared in a polarized policy area. Even without changing her broader views, Ocasio-Cortez’s remark in that setting served as a reminder that the central issue in violent crime is the perpetrator—and that effective responses should prioritize public safety strategies that target criminals rather than sweeping limitations on lawful ownership.
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.