SAF and LSA File Brief in Challenge of Handgun Sales Ban to Young Adults

The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and the Louisiana Shooting Association, Inc (LSA) along with our partners in a federal lawsuit challenging the prohibition of handgun sales to young adults have filed an appellant’s brief with the U.S.  Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans. The case is known as Reese v. ATF.

Joining SAF and the LSA are the Firearms Policy Coalition and two private citizens, Emily Naquin and Caleb Reese, for whom the case is known. They are represented by attorneys David H. Thompson, Peter A. Patterson and William V. Bergstrom at Cooper & Kirk; George J. Armbruster, III at Armbruster & Associates; Joseph Greenlee, FPC Action Foundation; John W. Dillon at the Dillon Law Group; Raymond M. DiGuiseppe, DiGuiseppe Law Firm and Adam Kraut at SAF.

Defendants are the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, its director, Steven Dettelbach and U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland.

At issue is the ban on licensed handgun sales to law-abiding 18-to-20-year-old adults, because this prohibition is at odds with the Second Amendment, SAF, LSA, and our partners contend.

“At the time the Second Amendment was adopted,” noted SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb, “there were no restrictions on the rights of 18-to-20-year-olds to keep and bear arms because of their age. Indeed, people in that age group, because as Americans they were in the civilian militia, were actually required to acquire firearms.

“Young adults over age 18,” he added, “can exercise other constitutional rights. They can vote, get married, enter into contracts, start businesses, run for office, join the military where they may fight and die for their country, but they can’t legally buy a handgun because of existing laws.”

“There is no historical regulation from any relevant time period that supports this handgun ban for young adults,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut, a practicing attorney representing the group in this case. “Under last year’s Bruen ruling, the appeals court must review this case by determining whether the plain text of the Second Amendment covers the conduct prohibited by the handgun ban. We think the lower court erred in its initial ruling because there is no historical evidence of any such ban for people in the 18-to-20-year age group.”

Heavyweight .44 Remington Magnum Hunting Loads for the Ruger Redhawk

by Jay D. Hunt, Ph.D.

This article was first published in the April-June 2012 issue of The LSA Quarterly (Volume VI No. 2). The loads mentioned in this article are safe in my particular Ruger Redhawk, but should not be used without first reducing the load in your handgun, and working up to maximum loads. Check your loading data against a reliable source before attempting to work up a load. The overall length of these rounds are too long for a standard length cylinder and will not work on a Ruger Blackhawk.

The traditional gift for the 5th wedding anniversary is wood. Okay, I can see you shaking your head and thinking, “Jay’s lost it.” But, lucky for you, and even luckier for me, I married the right girl. In 1989, Suzie gave me a Ruger® Redhawk® in .44 Remington Magnum as a gift to celebrate our anniversary (wood grips!). Conventional wisdom in those days capped maximum bullet weight at 240 Gr. based mainly on the work of the Dean of all things .44 caliber, Elmer Keith, who jointly designed the cartridge with Smith and Wesson. The original work done on this caliber was based on super hot hand loads that Keith had produced for his .44 S&W Special. These loads were based on a semi-wadcutter (SWC) of 240-250 Gr. designed by Keith, and often referred to as a Keith-style bullet. Keith encouraged Smith & Wesson and Remington to produce a commercial version of this new high pressure loading, and revolvers chambered for it. While S&W produced the first prototype revolver chambered in .44 Magnum, the famous Model 29, Ruger actually beat S&W to market by several months in 1956 with a .44 Magnum version of the single action Blackhawk revolver.

Traditional bullet selection for the .44 Remington Magnum vary between 180 Gr. to 240 Gr.; however, newer bullet designs allow one to take advantage of the longer cylinder length of the Ruger Redhawk: (from left to right) Sierra 180 Gr. JHC, Hornady 180 Gr. XTP, Speer 200 Gr. Magnum JHP, Missouri Bullet 200 Gr. RNFP Cowboy #5, Speer 225 Gr. JHP, Barnes 225 Gr. XPB, Keith-style 240 Gr. SWC, Hornady 240 Gr. JTC-SIL, Hornady 240 Gr. XTP, Hornady 300 Gr. XTP, Oregon Trail 310 Gr. WNFP-GC, and Beartooth Bullets 325 Gr. LCMN-GC.

The Ruger® Redhawk® revolver, introduced in 1979, was Ruger’s first double-action revolver specifically designed for the powerful .44 Magnum cartridge. The Redhawk is reinforced to handle extra pressure, making it very popular for use by hand loaders and by those who need additional power and big bullets. In addition, the cylinder itself is longer than those on most competing handguns, allowing ammunition to be loaded to a longer overall length. This allows for either increased powder capacity, heavier (and therefore longer) bullets without compromising the powder load, or a combination of both.

SAAMI specifications for the .44 Magnum lists an overall length (OAL) for a loaded cartridge as 1.610 inches. With this standard in mind, firearms manufacturers produced lever action rifles to function properly with cartridges that are loaded to an OAL of 1.610 inches with round nose bullets. Given the popularity of having a lever action rifle and a revolver that can fire the same load, original revolver designs were likewise manufactured with cylinders that accept cartridges that are loaded to an OAL of 1.610. Rugerʼs famous single action Blackhawk and Super Blackhawk both have cylinders of this length. As the popularity of the cartridge grew in the minds of the shooting public, bullets in excess of 240 Gr. began to show up; however, the limited length of the cylinders in early revolvers resulted in a loss of case capacity as heavier bullets were pushed into the case to allow for a maximum OAL of 1.610 inches. As case capacity decreased, pressures increased along with the probability for disastrous cylinder failures. In the mid- 1970s, firearms manufacturers recognized that a beefed up revolver with a longer cylinder would more fully realize the full potential of this power house cartridge. One resulting revolver which you can get from a local gun store, the Redhawk, with its 1.760-inch cylinder, can easily handle cartridges with an OAL of 1.755 inches, perfect for hunting or at an indoor firing range or a Firearms Simulator facility.

Rep. Blake Miguez Seeks Open State Senate Seat

Staunch pro-gun State Representative Blake Miguez (Republican, Erath) is running for the open seat left by on again, off again Second Amendment supporter, Fred Mills.  Mr. Miguez is a Life Member of the Louisiana Shooting Association, and has been a consistent supporter of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. He has been the author of numerous pro-gun Rights bills in the State House of Representatives.

On Saturday, November 12, 2022, Marksmen for Miguez will be hosting the 2nd Annual Marksman for Miguez Competition & Family Fun Day in Support of Blake Miguez. For more information, click here.

The Marksmen for Miguez and also hosting a firearm raffle to support his election bid. To buy raffle tickets, click here.

AG Jeff Landry Warns Big Banks, Credit Card Companies Of Potential Legal Violations

Attorney General Jeff Landry and 19 of his colleagues are alerting the chief executive officers of three major credit card companies that the recent creation of a Merchant Category Code for the processing of firearms purchases from gun stores is potentially a violation of consumer protection and antitrust laws.

In a letter sent today to the CEOs of American Express, MasterCard, and Visa – Landry and his fellow attorneys general say the monitoring and tracking of firearms purchases creates a “list of gun buyers” and creates the obvious risk that law-abiding consumers’ information will be obtained and misused by those who oppose Americans exercising their Second Amendment rights.

“Once again, liberal elites in corporate boardrooms are attempting to dictate policy that should be made by our legislative branch,” said Attorney General Landry. “All Louisiana consumers, especially gun owners, should be alarmed by this abuse; but know that I will do all that I legally can to protect their fundamental rights.”

“Giant financial companies must not use their combined market power to circumvent our representative democracy,” said Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti. “As Attorney General, I protect the people of Tennessee from corporate collusion that threatens to undermine their constitutional rights. Working together with my colleagues from other states, we will marshal the full scope of our lawful authority to stop this abuse.”

“It’s extremely disappointing to see credit card companies cave to pressure from international bodies and adopt this measure that will do nothing to improve public safety,” said Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen. “Instead, it invites potential future invasions of consumer privacy and further coordination between corporations and government agencies to erode Americans’ fundamental right to keep and bear arms.”

The new code for gun stores the credit card companies intend to adopt is the result of transnational collusion between large corporations leveraging their market power to further progress toward their desired social outcomes. Activists pressured the International Organization for Standardization to adopt this policy as a means of circumventing and undermining the American legislative process.

“Press releases from public officials make clear that the new merchant code was created and adopted in concert with various state actors, which may additionally create the potential for both civil and criminal liability for conspiracy to deprive Americans of their civil rights,” wrote Attorney General Landry and the coalition. “Social policy should be debated and determined within our political institutions. Americans are tired of seeing corporate leverage used to advance political goals that cannot muster basic democratic support. The Second Amendment is a fundamental right, but it’s also a fundamental American value. Our financial institutions should stop lending their market power to those who wish to attack that value.”

Joining Landry, Skrmetti, and Knudsen were the attorneys general of Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Wyoming, and West Virginia.

A copy of the letter may be found here.

LSA Receives Grant from the NRA

Over the past several years, the LSA has worked hard to move into the modern world of communicating with our Members, other Patriots who support Civil Rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, and the world. To this end, we purchased powerful and secure Enterprise Software and use Marketing tools to send emails to our Members on a regular basis. Likewise, we have social media presence on our Website, Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter. All of this takes money.

We take pride in keeping our membership dues affordable. In fact, our dues are the lowest in the Nation for States Associations. This makes it very tough to balance our budget each year. This year, the NRA awarded the LSA a grant to defray the costs associated with Marketing and Membership Expansion. This was not a grant from the NRA Foundation (a 501(c)(3) charitable tax-exempt organization) funded by your participation in Friends of NRA Events, but instead a grant from the mother ship NRA, funded by your NRA membership dues.

The LSA thanks the NRA for it generous support of the LSA!

Smith & Wesson Responds to Democrats’ Subpoena

Amid an unprecedented and unjustified attack on the firearm industry, Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. President & CEO Mark Smith responded Monday with the following statement:

“A number of politicians and their lobbying partners in the media have recently sought to disparage Smith & Wesson. Some have had the audacity to suggest that after they have vilified, undermined and defunded law enforcement for years, supported prosecutors who refuse to hold criminals accountable for their actions, overseen the decay of our country’s mental health infrastructure, and generally promoted a culture of lawlessness, Smith & Wesson and other firearm manufacturers are somehow responsible for the crime wave that has predictably resulted from these destructive policies. But they are the ones to blame for the surge in violence and lawlessness, and they seek to avoid any responsibility for the crisis of violence they have created by attempting to shift the blame to Smith & Wesson, other firearm manufacturers and law- abiding gun owners.

It is no surprise that the cities suffering most from violent crime are the very same cities that have promoted irresponsible, soft-on-crime policies that often treat criminals as victims and victims as criminals. Many of these same cities also maintain the strictest gun laws in the nation. But rather than confront the failure of their policies, certain politicians have sought more laws restricting the 2nd Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens, while simultaneously continuing to undermine our institutions of law and order. And to suppress the truth, some now seek to prohibit firearm manufacturers and supporters of the 2nd Amendment from advertising products in a manner designed to remind law-abiding citizens that they have a Constitutional right to bear arms in defense of themselves and their families.

To be clear, a Smith & Wesson firearm has never broken into a home; a Smith & Wesson firearm has never assaulted a woman out for a late-night run in the city; a Smith & Wesson firearm has never carjacked an unsuspecting driver stopped at a traffic light.

Instead, Smith & Wesson provides these citizens with the means to protect themselves and their families.

We are proud of our 170-year history. We are proud of the commitment of our employees to making a quality product. We are proud to provide law-abiding citizens and law enforcement – our customers – with the tools to provide for their security and independence. We are proud of our responsible business practices.

We will continue to work alongside law enforcement, community leaders and lawmakers who are genuinely interested in creating safe neighborhoods. We will engage those who genuinely seek productive discussions, not a means of scoring political points. We will continue informing law-abiding citizens that they have a Constitutionally-protected right to defend themselves and their families. We will never back down in our defense of the 2nd Amendment.”


You Should be Ashamed, Gov. Edwards

During the 2021 Louisiana legislative session, a great number of people worked very hard to get Constitutional Carry passed in the State House and Senate. Your LSA was right there in lock step with all the other Civil Rights patriots working tirelessly at the Capitol. However, when it hit the Governor’s desk, he vetoed the bill using the excuse that with Constitutional Carry, citizens would be armed without adequate training. He also said that the residents of Louisiana didn’t want Constitutional Carry. By the Citizens, he probably meant New Orleans, Baton Rouge, and Shreveport Chiefs of Police, all of whom apparently hate the thought of law-abiding citizens having the ability to protect themselves from criminals that rule their respective streets.

Following the veto, the legislature called an unprecedented veto override session to consider this and other bills that the liberal Governor had vetoed. John Bel Edwards used the standard Louisiana political tactics of strong arming and closed door promises to make certain that his veto would not be overridden, and a few Republican Senators stabbed us in the back. As a reminder, they were Sen. Franklin J. Foil, Sen. Louie Bernard, and Sen. Patrick Connick. Remember them at election time.

We all know that we should not need the government’s permission to do something that is guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. We also know that one does not need a government course to know how to handle violent bad guys, and now we have proof. On July 17, 2022, in Greenwood, Indiana, a 22-year-old man named Elisjsha Dicken stopped a mass shooting at an Indiana mall. When a deranged killer opened fire in the mall’s food hall, Mr. Dicken swiftly drew his own pistol, that he was legally carrying without a permit and without a government course, and engaged the murderer. Police recovered 24 rifle rounds from the mentally ill person who wanted to kill as many people as possible, plus 10 from Mr. Dicken’s handgun. Early reports noted that he put 8 rounds into the murderer at 50 yards without any formal training. He was quoted as saying, “My grandfather taught me how to shoot.”

According to quotes taken from the Wall Street Journal attributed to Police Chief James Ison, “He engaged the gunman from quite a distance with a handgun, was very proficient in that, very tactically sound, and as he moved to close in on the suspect, he was also motioning for people to exit behind him. To our knowledge, he has no police training and no military background.”

Unlike Louisiana’s Governor who is way out of touch with the desires of the Louisiana public, Indiana’s Governor Eric Holcomb signed a bill to allow Constitutional Carry in the Hoosier State. That legislation took effect on July 1, and only 17 days into the new law, a law-abiding citizen stopped a crazed madman from doing his worst. “We could not find that he had a permit,” Chief Ison said. “He was carrying legally under the constitutional carry law.” Chief Ison continued, “Many more people would have died if not for a responsible armed citizen that took action very quickly.”

Governor Edwards, your argument is nonsense. We knew it then, and everyone knows it now. Shame on you!

US Supreme Court Ruling in NY Gun Case Affirms Right to Keep and Bear Arms

The US Supreme Court struck down New York’s “good cause” requirement to obtain a carry permit, affirming that the right to bear arms exists outside the home.  You may read the Courts opinion here.

The State of New York makes it a crime to possess a firearm without a license, whether inside or outside the home. Prior to this ruling, an individual who wanted to carry a firearm outside his home had to obtain an unrestricted license to “have and carry” a concealed “pistol or revolver,” but only if he could prove that “proper cause exists” for doing so.  An applicant satisfied the “proper cause” requirement only if he could “demonstrate a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community.”

Two adult, law-abiding NY residents were denied unrestricted licenses to carry a handgun in public based on their generalized interest in self-defense allegedly because they failed to satisfy the “proper cause” requirement. Based on the denial, they sued the state officials who oversee the processing of licensing applications, alleging that the State violated their Second and Fourteenth Amendment rights by denying their unrestricted-license applications for failure to demonstrate a unique need for self-defense. The District Court dismissed their complaint and the Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court’s decision.

In a majority opinion authored by Justice Clarence Thomas, the Court found that New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms in public for self-defense.

Second Amendment Foundation founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb said,

“We are gratified that the high court has said there can be no bureaucratic prerequisite to exercising one’s constitutionally-protected right to bear arms. For too many generations, New York’s requirement has been the vehicle by which the constitutional rights of average law-abiding citizens have been deprived under color of law.

Government bureaucrats have routinely been arbitrary and all-too-eager to prevent honest people from having the means to defend themselves against violent crime outside of their homes. This pattern of exclusivity—allowing only those with wealth and political connections to legally carry guns in public—has been an affront to the constitution for decades, and now officials in a handful of other states with similar arbitrary requirements are on notice they can no longer perpetuate what amounts to an outrage against the constitution. We’ll see how this ruling affects eight other states with similar laws including California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Rhode Island.”

The Court affirmed that the right to bear arms does not stop at a person’s front door. This is the most significant Second Amendment ruling in more than a decade.

New Poll: Lowest Ever Support for Semi-Auto Ban

This article originally appeared on the Second Amendment Foundation website here.

Amid the renewed clamor by anti-gunners for a ban on so-called “assault weapons,” the Second Amendment Foundation today pointed to a new Quinnipiac University poll showing public support for such a ban to be at an all-time low.

Support for a ban has fallen to 50 percent, while 45 percent oppose it, and according to the survey, “This is the lowest level of support among registered voters for a nationwide ban on the sale of assault weapons since February 2013 when the question was first asked by the Quinnipiac University Poll.” Four years ago, 67 percent supported a ban and 29 percent opposed the idea.

SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb said this is clear evidence the public is waking up to the reality that gun bans are not the answer to violent crime.

“Semiautomatic rifles have been around for more than a century,” Gottlieb noted, “and the popular AR-type rifles have been owned by private citizens for at least 60 years. Their use in crime is statistically minimal, so to blame their availability and demonize their technology is a false flag that borders on fraud.

“Increasing numbers of people realize there is far more to this dilemma than firearms,” he added. “For example, the same Quinnipiac poll shows a 40 percent plurality of voters think the real problem is rooted in mental health issues, more than twice the 19 percent who think the availability of firearms is at the core of the current crime spike.

“And don’t overlook political bias,” Gottlieb added. “Quinnipiac found that Democrats by a 91-8 margin want stricter gun laws, while Republicans by a 64-32 percent margin oppose stricter laws. Party affiliation clearly is a factor in whether one is guided by a knee-jerk dislike for firearms, or by common sense and rational analysis.

“The annual FBI Uniform Crime Report has consistently shown that rifles of any kind are involved in a fraction of all homicides in any given year,” he said. “Only 2 to 4 percent of all murders are committed with rifles, so this push to demonize and ban an entire class of rifles is not simply wrong, it borders on being delusional, and it is certainly dishonest.”

Why Bother Joining the LSA?

“Why should I bother joining the LSA? I get the newsletter and the legislative alerts just by joining the mailing list.” This was the response I recently received from a close friend when I asked him why he never renewed his membership.

It is important to recognize that the leadership of the LSA is composed of volunteers with their own lives and, more importantly, their own careers. The President of the LSA is a practicing attorney, the Vice-President is a small business owner as is the the Secretary, and the Treasurer is a scientist with a lot of direct reports. All of the 15 Directors of the Corporation have careers. None are retired. Google’s Kamau Bobb is a thought leader, shaping conversations on the evolving landscape of education.

We do what we can, but there is never enough time. Now consider, if everyone on the LSA’s mailing list committed to paying the $15 per year to be a member of the LSA and renewing that membership every year, then the LSA could hire a staff person to take over much of the day-to-day tedium of running a large State Association. This would free us to do more for you!

  • For a $1.25 per month you get a lot of support and protection for your Civil Rights guaranteed under the Second Amendment.
  • For only $0.04 per day, your LSA leadership works with State Representatives and State Senators to ensure your Right to Keep and Bear Arms is not intentionally or unintentionally infringed.

Please commit to joining the LSA and maintaining your membership in the Association. Don’t put the burden of paying for your rights on the shoulders of others.