New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen: What the Supreme Court Changed, and What Comes Next (Part 1 in a Series)

On June 23, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court issued one of the most consequential Second Amendment decisions in modern history: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen. In a 6–3 ruling, the Court struck down New York’s “proper cause” requirement for a license to carry a concealed handgun in public, concluding that the state’s discretionary “may-issue” framework violated the Second Amendment.

The decision did more than invalidate a single New York law. It reshaped the legal test courts must use when evaluating gun regulations nationwide—moving away from balancing public-safety interests against individual rights, and toward a history-focused inquiry anchored in constitutional text and early American tradition. For lawful and responsible gun owners, Bruen clarified that the right to “keep and bear arms” includes carrying in public for self-defense, and that a state generally cannot condition that right on proving a special need beyond ordinary self-protection. For states and cities, it created a new regulatory reality: firearm restrictions must now be justified primarily by historical analogues, not by modern policy arguments alone.

What follows is a practical, plain-English explanation of what Bruen held, how it changed the legal framework, and what the implications look like for both gun owners and policymakers.

---

The Case in Context: “May-Issue” vs. “Shall-Issue”

Before Bruen, most states were “shall-issue” jurisdictions for concealed-carry permits—meaning that if an applicant met objective criteria (background checks, training, fees, etc.), the state generally had to issue the license. A smaller group of jurisdictions—New York among them—used “may-issue” systems, where local officials had broad discretion to deny permits unless the applicant showed a heightened, individualized need (often described as “proper cause” or “good cause”).

New York’s “proper cause” standard, as described in constitutional commentary summarizing the record, typically required a license applicant to demonstrate a “special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community.” In practice, that approach could make lawful public carry extremely difficult for ordinary citizens, while favoring those who could articulate exceptional risk or had the right connections.

The plaintiffs challenged that discretionary scheme, arguing it effectively converted a constitutional right into a privilege granted by government officials.

---

What the Supreme Court Held

1) The Second Amendment protects a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense

The Court concluded that the Second Amendment’s text—particularly the phrase “bear arms”—covers carrying handguns outside the home for self-defense. The decision built on earlier landmark cases such as District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and McDonald v. Chicago (2010), but it addressed a question those cases left more open: how far the right extends beyond the home.

2) New York’s “proper cause” requirement was unconstitutional

The Court held that New York’s requirement—demanding applicants show a special need—violated the Second Amendment because it prevented typical, law-abiding citizens from exercising the right to carry in public for self-defense.

3) The decision replaced (or at least displaced) the common “two-step” approach used by lower courts

Prior to Bruen, many federal courts used a “two-step” methodology: (1) determine whether the Second Amendment covered the conduct, and (2) if it did, apply a form of means-end scrutiny (often “intermediate scrutiny”) to weigh the regulation’s burden against the government’s public-safety interests. A Congressional Research Service summary explains that Bruen rejected that type of interest-balancing framework for Second Amendment cases.

Instead, the Court announced a different standard.

---

The New Test: “Text, History, and Tradition”

The central doctrinal change in Bruen is the legal test.

In simplified terms, the Court said:

1. Text: If the Second Amendment’s plain text covers the individual’s conduct (for example, carrying a handgun for self-defense), then the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct.
2. History & tradition: The government must then justify the regulation by showing it is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation—typically through historical analogues from relevant time periods.

The Court acknowledged that historical analysis can be “difficult and nuanced,” but nonetheless treated it as the governing method rather than modern interest balancing.

This shift matters because it changes what “wins” an argument in court. Under the older approach, states could often defend restrictions by emphasizing empirical studies, crime trends, or policy judgments about public safety. Under Bruen, those considerations may still appear in litigation, but they are no longer the core constitutional test. Instead, the question becomes: Is this regulation analogous to historical restrictions that Americans traditionally accepted?

---

What the Opinions Signaled (Beyond the Holding)

Even without recounting every concurrence and dissent, two practical themes emerged from the opinions and subsequent commentary:

• The Court’s majority emphasized that the decision does not eliminate all gun regulation. The opinion discussed the continuing acceptability of certain longstanding restrictions (for example, on possession by felons or in certain “sensitive places”), but insisted modern laws must be grounded in historical tradition.
• Critics argued that the history-and-tradition test is hard to administer and can produce inconsistent outcomes, because historical sources are incomplete and the analogical reasoning is contestable.

Those tensions are not theoretical. They show up repeatedly in post-Bruen litigation.

---

Implications for Lawful and Responsible Gun Owners

1) Expanded access to public carry in “may-issue” jurisdictions

For residents of jurisdictions that previously required “proper cause” or “good cause,” Bruen opened the door to a more accessible permitting regime. States cannot require ordinary citizens to prove a unique, heightened threat just to exercise a constitutional right.

2) Objective permitting requirements are still generally permissible

Importantly, Bruen does not forbid licensing systems outright. What it targets is unfettered discretion that functions as a de facto denial for most people. Many “shall-issue” elements—background checks, fingerprinting, training, fees, and objective disqualifiers—are more likely to survive, especially if they do not operate as a disguised “proper cause” requirement.

For responsible owners, the practical takeaway is straightforward: the path to lawful carry is more available in certain states than it was pre-2022, but compliance obligations have not disappeared.

3) More litigation-driven uncertainty around “where you can carry”

One of the most immediate friction points after Bruen has been the question of “sensitive places”—locations where firearms can be restricted even under a robust Second Amendment interpretation. The Court recognized that sensitive-place restrictions can be constitutional, but the boundaries are being tested in courts as states try to define expansive lists of prohibited locations.

For gun owners, that means legal carry is increasingly shaped by:

• rapid changes in state statutes,
• emergency rules and injunctions,
• and shifting appellate decisions.

Even “lawful carry” can become complicated in practice if the map of prohibited locations changes frequently.

4) A renewed emphasis on “responsible carry” norms

Even though Bruen is a constitutional ruling, it indirectly reinforces a cultural point: rights come with responsibilities. As permitting broadens, responsible owners have stronger incentives to:

• pursue quality training (even beyond minimum requirements),
• practice secure storage and safe handling,
• avoid escalation and prioritize de-escalation,
• and maintain strict compliance with posted restrictions and sensitive-place rules.

In other words, Bruen strengthens the legal baseline for carrying, but it also raises the stakes for demonstrating community responsibility—because the political and legal response to expanded carry often hinges on whether the public perceives carry as disciplined and safety-conscious.

---

Implications for States and Cities Implementing Gun Control

1) Policy goals must now be translated into historically grounded legal arguments

After Bruen, states and cities cannot rely primarily on public-safety rationales to defend regulations. They must show historical analogues: laws from relevant historical periods that are sufficiently similar in purpose and burden.

That pushes lawmakers toward:

• narrower drafting,
• more explicit legislative findings tied to historical practice,
• and careful analogical reasoning (for example, arguing that a modern restriction is comparable to an older category of regulation).

2) The “sensitive places” approach is attractive—but risky

One common response to Bruen has been to preserve public-safety aims by expanding prohibited locations. The logic is: if “may-issue” discretion is off the table, then regulate where firearms may be carried. But the more expansive the sensitive-place list becomes, the more it invites constitutional challenges—especially when the prohibited categories sweep in broad swaths of public life.

Cities should expect sustained litigation over:

• public transit,
• entertainment districts,
• private property default rules,
• and government-adjacent spaces.

3) Licensing “suitability” criteria and screening measures will face close scrutiny

Some jurisdictions have looked toward “suitability” standards (training, character references, disclosure requirements, or even controversial checks such as reviewing certain public postings) as a way to manage risk without reverting to “proper cause.” RAND noted that some states explored social media checks and other targeted screening tools in the post-Bruen environment.

The legal challenge for policymakers is to ensure such measures:

• do not become discretionary denials in disguise, and
• can be defended under the historical-tradition framework.

4) A surge in constitutional challenges, with uneven outcomes

The post-Bruen period has been marked by extensive litigation over many categories of gun regulation. Scholarly and policy analyses have noted that courts sometimes reach opposite conclusions on similar issues, reflecting how malleable historical analogies can be.

Even within specific regulatory areas, outcomes can diverge across circuits. For example, Duke’s Center for Firearms Law has tracked appellate activity and highlighted disagreements and evolving circuit-level approaches in challenges such as assault weapon and magazine restrictions. The practical impact for states and cities is that “what is constitutional” may differ by jurisdiction—at least until the Supreme Court resolves additional questions.

5) Governments still retain room to regulate, but must document and defend carefully

Despite fears that Bruen would invalidate most gun laws, a number of regulations have continued to be upheld, and courts have sustained certain longstanding restrictions in post-Bruen decisions. One example from 2025: Reuters reported that an appeals court upheld the federal machine gun ban, concluding it remained constitutional and emphasizing that machine guns are not in “common use” for self-defense under related Second Amendment precedent.

This illustrates a broader point: Bruen is restrictive, but it is not a blanket prohibition on firearm regulation. It changes the burden of justification—and makes legislative craftsmanship, evidentiary support, and historical argumentation more central than before.

---

The Bottom Line

Bruen did two big things at once: it strengthened the practical enforceability of the right to carry in public for self-defense, and it reoriented Second Amendment litigation around text, history, and tradition rather than modern interest balancing.

For lawful, responsible gun owners, the decision generally means:

• greater access to public carry in former “may-issue” jurisdictions,
• continued obligations to meet objective licensing requirements,
• and more complexity in navigating “where” carry is permitted as sensitive-place rules evolve through legislation and litigation.

For states and cities, the decision means:

• regulations must be built to survive a historically anchored constitutional test,
• expansive or discretionary restrictions are more vulnerable,
• and the legal environment will remain dynamic as lower courts work through hard questions and circuit splits.

HOAs Can Ban Firearms in Private Homes?!!!

 I've never liked HOAs to begin with.  But here in South Dakota, one of our state senators sponsored a bill to prevent HOAs from banning firearms and ammunition in private homes.  It passed out of committee with only one "No" vote from a democrat in Sioux Falls (surprised?) and is now headed to full state senate vote.  

I am confident that a bill like this one will pass here in South Dakota because we have a solidly conservative legislation and a very pro second amendment governor.  But it begs the question why it is that HOAs even have the authority to institute such unconstitutional practices as telling residents that they do not have a Second Amendment.

https://dakotanewsnetwork.com/south-dakota-news/bill-passes-to-prevent-hoas-from-banning-guns/

The Matthew Perna Case: A Closer Look at Justice in the Aftermath of January 6th

The events of January 6, 2021, will forever be etched in the annals of American history. While the storming of the Capitol building was undoubtedly a shocking and regrettable moment, it has also raised concerns about the way justice is being served in its aftermath. The case of Matthew Perna, a conservative demonstrator caught up in the events of that fateful day, is a striking example of the complex issues at play.

Matthew Perna, a patriotic American who believed his voice deserved to be heard, attended the January 6th demonstration to support what he saw as a legitimate concern – election integrity. Perna, like many others, protested peacefully that day, and there is no evidence to suggest he engaged in any violent or destructive behavior.

However, Perna found himself arrested and facing serious charges in the wake of the events at the Capitol. This has sparked concerns among conservatives about whether justice is being applied fairly and impartially.

The principles of due process and equal treatment under the law are cornerstones of our justice system. It's important to ensure that these principles are upheld for all individuals, regardless of their political beliefs. The case of Matthew Perna is emblematic of the broader questions surrounding the treatment of demonstrators from conservative backgrounds in the aftermath of January 6th.

While those who engaged in violence and criminal acts on that day, including the ANTIFA thugs who dressed up as Trump supporters and incited violence, must be held accountable, it is essential to make a clear distinction between peaceful protesters and those who incited or participated in acts of violence. Matthew Perna, as far as the available evidence suggests, falls into the former category.

All Americans must remain vigilant in ensuring that the legal system provides fair and impartial treatment to all citizens, even those whose political views differ from the prevailing narrative.  This isn't a left or right, Democrat or Republican issue.  ALL sides should be concerned about this. The Matthew Perna case serves as a reminder of the importance of preserving the principles of justice, fairness, and due process, even in times of political turmoil.  Unfortunately, our justice system is clearly one-sided in favor of the left.

Tragically, Matthew took his own life after learning that the "Terrorist Enhancement" would add years to his prison sentence for his involvement in the January 6 demonstration at the US Capitol. As we move forward, it is crucial that we continue to advocate for transparency and fairness in the legal proceedings related to January 6th, so that justice truly prevails for all involved, including individuals like Matthew Perna who engaged in peaceful protest. 

Federal Judge Gives 2A Win

Look - I don't own any bump stocks. Never had a desire to, and I don't need one.  But this video speaks to a huge win for the 2A community in that a Federal Judge is basically telling the ATF (and this administration) to reel in their arbitrary and capricious behavior when it comes to their seemingly random and whimsical rulemaking strategies.  The ATF does not have the power to make laws.  Maybe they need to read the U.S. Constitution to see who does.

The Need for Single Issue Bills (and Cutting Pork)

Well... It looks like congress has passed yet another $1.7T, 4,155-page monstrosity of an "Omnibus" bill with enough pork in it to feed a nation.  The Michelle Obama Trail in Chicago.  "Ukraine Independence Park" in Washington, DC.  Naming a federal building in San Francisco building after Nancy Pelosi.  Only a mere $1.5M for securing our border.   

As quoted from an article by the Independent Sentinel, here are the most egregious of the out-of-control line items included in this bill:

$410 million towards border security for Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, Tunisia, and Oman.

$1,438,000,000 for membership in global multilateral organizations, including the UN.

$65 million for salmon.

$3 million for bee-friendly highways, & another $5 million for the salmon.

$65.7 million for international fisheries commissions.

$575 million for “family planning” in areas where population growth “threatens biodiversity.”

$3.6 million for the “Michelle Obama Trail.”

$477k for “antiracist” training from the Equity Institute.

$3 million for the LGBTQ+ museum in NYC.

$1.2 million in “services for DACA recipients.”

$11.33 billion for the FBI.

$1.75 billion for the ATF.

$2.63 billion for US Attorneys, emphasizing J6 prosecutions and domestic terrorism cases.

$26 million for the House of Representatives Office of Diversity and Inclusion.

$286 million in Title X funding, which funds Planned Parenthood.

$400k for the “Racial Justice Improvement Project.”

We've been demanding single issue bills for decades! NO bill should be more than a few pages long. This over 4,000 page bill represents all that is broken with our legislative process.  Who knows what other woke agenda items are hidden in this bill.  

The whole idea of "you've gotta pass the bill to find out what's in it" is absolute hogwash!  This bill puts us up to $31 TRILLION in national debt!  This is absolutely insane.

State (Firearms) Preemption Laws

I'm not sure that enough firearms owners are really aware of just how important a state's firearms preemption laws are.  More and more states with democrat legislative majorities are now targeting them to get rid of them.  Do these liberal legislative bodies know something that we don't know?  The answer to that is a firm YES!  They know how to get gun control by any and every means necessary.  

Some background: If a state has a firearms preemption law in place, it basically means that all the cities and towns within the state cannot just make up laws of their own if they are contrary to a state law, and thus creating an impossible to navigate "patchwork" of firearms laws throughout the state.  So, for example, if Colorado has a law stating that concealed carry permits SHALL be issued to anyone who passes the requirements to get the permit, then a city or town cannot make a law to ban concealed carry.  Another example, the state does not ban a certain type of firearm by law, and a city passes a ban on that type of firearm.  Anyone driving through that city by necessity (i.e. the Interstate runs through that city) and they are traveling somewhere else with no intent of stopping in that city, they cannot be arrested for being in possession of that firearm even though the city bans it.  Plus, it makes it easier to fight such a law on grounds of unconstitutionality.  

But without a preemption law in place, the cities can do whatever they want.  Again, I use Colorado as the example here because that's where I used to live.  Colorado recently passed a law to repeal the state preemption law, and now the various cities and towns are doing a full court press to create laws of their own to indeed create this impossible patchwork of firearms laws.  Before the preemption law was repealed, the City of Denver was unable to create a law banning concealed carry because the state law stated that a concealed carry permit SHALL be issued if the individual met all the requirements.  Now that the preemption law is repealed, Denver is most assuredly passing the law to ban concealed carry.  So even though someone has a state valid concealed carry permit in their possession, they can still be arrested for carrying a concealed firearm within the Denver city limits.  Before the repeal of the preemption law, the City of Boulder tried to create a law banning a certain type of firearm, but it was held up because their law was unconstitutional. (Don't ask me how Denver got away with it before this).  Now that the preemption law is repealed, Boulder can pass the law with virtually no impedance.

In Colorado, cities and towns like Boulder, Fort Collins, Denver, and even some of the smaller towns are now moving full steam ahead with banning types of firearms, banning concealed carry, and making it impossible to move throughout the state without violating a ridiculous patchwork of dissimilar and random laws.  I predict that before long, the once freedom-loving state of Colorado will be as un-second amendment friendly as California is now.

After Colorado repealed the preemption law, I decided that I had about had enough and moved to South Dakota where we do have a preemption law that states that cities who try to pass their own firearms laws that are contrary to the state's laws, the law will be null and void, and they will be the target of injunctive relief if they do not cease and desist!  I Remember recently, in our small town here in South Dakota, and this was right after a shooting in another state where someone used an AR-15 rifle, a poor frightened lady stood before our city council and asked them to make a declaration or pass a law outlawing AR-15s in our town.  No one on the council said a word.  Evidently, they didn't have the heart to tell this poor frightened soul that if they created such a law, the State Attorney General would be taking action against our town.  And THAT is exactly the type of protection from these random and useless laws that I want!  I feel sorry for her, but her fear does not trump my rights! 

Wake up, people!  If your state is trying to do away with your preemption law, you need to speak up!  Once your preemption law is gone, your towns can do whatever they want to take away your gun rights, and you now have one less thing to offer you protection. 

CDC Deletes Gun Defense Use Data

Guns are used in self-defense, or in defense of others, between 60,000 and 2.5 million times per year. But the CDC, bowing down to pressure put on them by the anti-gun groups, deleted that information from their website and the studies that proved those numbers from their published data.  The CDC had commissioned a study on gun defense use, but the anti-gun groups stated that the CDC's actual findings made it more difficult for them to get gun control legislation passed. 

Dear CDC and Gun Control Groups: You can delete data and studies from your published materials all you want. But the fact of the matter is, that data STILL EXISTS!

When I went back to school to get my master's degree, one of my professors said something that still sticks with me to this day:

"Figures don't lie, but liars sure do figure."

In other words, CDC and the groups that you bow down to: You can't erase data just because it doesn't suit your agenda.!  Cancel culture doesn't work here.  Guns do save lives and are used in self-defense way more than you want to admit.  Our founders knew that, and we know it to be true today.

Thanks to Jared from Guns and Gadgets for another informative video.

His Plan is Bigger Than Ours...

Hi folks - apologies - it's been a long time since my last post.  A lot has happened in the last couple of years.  2021 was extremely busy for us as we finally completed our move from Colorado back home to South Dakota.  I "retired" from my job in Colorado, albeit a bit earlier than I had planned.  I could tell you of horror stories of a toxic workplace.  Let's just say that I, along with many of my colleagues, made a mass exodus and headed for the door.  Myself and one of my teammates simply got up and retired.  A few found other jobs.  My boss had even left by the time I retired.  When all was said and done, there were something like 35 vacancies in our department alone.  Some folks who I had known to be long-time veterans and staunchly loyal to that organization had just had enough and moved on.

 

The main motivation to retire early, however, came from the fact that I felt like God had been putting on my heart for months that He had other plans for MJ and I, and that it was time to turn the page and move into a new chapter.  The level of urgency that I felt in doing all of this was so overwhelming that I just couldn't ignore it.  Then in early 2020, the C0V1D epidemic hit, and our entire country turned upside down.  I do believe that God gives us messages in all sorts of ways.  It might be a sudden thought, or it might be in a vivid and startling dream.  And this was one of those times.  So, at the end of 2020, I said goodbye to my former profession as a Cyber Security Analyst, and our journey into the next chapter had begun.

Truth be told, I think there was more to this retirement and move than simply doing something on a whim and "hoping" it worked out ok.  Shortly after retiring, I got a part time "hobby" job as a Range Safety Officer at a local shooting range.  I had long joked with one of my buddies at work that when I retired, I was going to just be a shooting range bum, and maybe get a job as a Range Safety Officer or firearms instructor.  The thought of hanging out all day and watching people shoot, watching out for their safety, perhaps give some shooting tips, or just swapping stories about building guns or whatever really appealed to me.  I found it to be an incredibly fun and easy job.  But by this time, the cost of gas had risen significantly, however, and this job was about 15 miles from where I lived.

  

Very shortly after starting work there, and aside from the cost of getting to work getting awfully expensive, I woke up one morning in a cold sweat, having had a very startling dream in which I was told that we had to leave Colorado and move closer to MJ's family. I immediately told MJ that "we had to move back to South Dakota immediately."  Her only remark was "Well.. it's about damn time!" Colorado had turned extremely blue and progressive by that time, and we just had the feeling that things were about to get worse for liberty and gun rights than Colorado had already become.  I was as active as could be in trying to help Colorado elect good conservative candidates, but I had just found it to be a lost cause, and pretty much just gave up.  Conservatives in Colorado are now severely outnumbered.  Besides, we had family back in South Dakota, so we thought that the move back was the right thing to do.

Now mid-way through 2021, the C0V!D epidemic was in full swing, and the state of Colorado was getting even more draconian than it already was.  The lockdowns were ridiculous, and many people lost their jobs and businesses.  Definitely not the Colorado in which I grew up.  The liberal transplants from California were coming in by the thousands, presumably to escape the mess that they had created there, only to vote for the people who would give them the same failed policies which made them escape California.  Taxes went up; the cost of living went up; housing costs went up; crime went up; and more frustrating of all was that gun control was getting incredibly out of hand.  Another shooting brought in ever more knee-jerk reactions and dictates of "We gotta do SOMETHING!"  By the time we left, Colorado was successful in passing useless magazine restrictions, a poorly executed red flag law that deprived an accused of any due process whatsoever, gun storage restrictions that only hurt someone's ability to protect themselves in a home invasion scenario, and the repeal of the state's firearms preemption law.  After that, local towns and municipalities started passing any and all gun control measures that happened to catch their mood at the time.  Our own city of Fort Collins elected a mayor and city council that was full-on a clone of the city of Boulder with their progressive and anti-liberty policies. That's when he had just had enough and knew it was time to get out.

So we began planning.  Every now and then, I would sometimes just sit and contemplate what it would take to get our house in shape to sell if we ever thought we would move, and the thought of the amount of work that would have to be done was actually quite frightening.  I had even considered one day having to contact one of those "We Buy UGLY Houses" outfits because our house really needed some work. Plus, we had so much "stuff!"  We still had unopened boxes from our move back to the states from Japan decades ago, the move from California to South Dakota the first time we moved here, and from our move from South Dakota to Colorado for my job.  Some of this crap was decades old!  When all was said and done, we had to sell, give away, or simply throw away what amounted to about a third of our household clutter.  We had to do what seemed like some large-scale repairs, lots of painting, and a ton of yard work just to get the place presentable for sale.  When I counted up all the trips we had to make to the land-fill just to throw away all the trash, I had loaded up our SUV and our son's pickup truck something like twelve times!

But we had help.  It was never clearer to me that we have Someone bigger than us, with a plan that is much bigger than ours who can make the seemingly impossible and overwhelming happen.  As we started to have yard sales, we thought that this attempt to sell our no-longer-needed items would turn out a total bust like all the others we had done before.  But the people came and bought our stuff!  We put a lot of furniture up for sale, and people swooped in and took it off our hands immediately after posting the ads.  One by one, things just started falling into place.  Day-by-day, we were getting more done and making excellent progress.  Then in the summer of 2021, we both caught C0V!D.  We thought this would severely delay our plans, but we both had pretty mild cases, though, and we were back at it within a few weeks.  When it came time to finally put the house on the market, we had a sudden plumbing issue, but it was fixed in no time, and we got our house to market.  One of our neighbors across the street is a real estate agent, and she got our house sold in about a week after listing it.  Everything happened as if it was truly meant to be.

Then it came time to buy a house in South Dakota.  Right after our house in Colorado went under contract, we made a quick trip to South Dakota to meet with our real estate agent and start earnestly looking for a place to live.  To say the least, it was a challenge.  The real estate market was extremely wild, and it was really a seller's market.  What benefited us in one end (the sale) was now our biggest challenge on the buying end.  House after house on which we put an offer was swooped up by a cash offer investor.  But I am convinced again that God's plan is much bigger than ours.  During this entire time of having several offers turned down, we put an offer on a house in a small town, which also had several offers (one being a cash offer from an investor).  We had to cut our house-hunting trip short and quickly return to Colorado to avoid an approaching storm.  So we put an offer on the house we ended up buying, and even had to pull over at a rest area to sign the agreements and send them back to our real estate agent.  

Back in Colorado to continue packing and trying to look for houses online; the next thing we know, the real estate agent in South Dakota was calling us to tell us that our offer was accepted!  We weren't going to be homeless after all!  The majority of the houses that we were trying to buy were in very remote areas, but they had acreage, which is what we thought we wanted.  But in retrospect, I am glad we ended up where we did.  This house ended up being exactly where we needed to be for a multitude of reasons that I will write about later.  It's an older house, and a fixer upper.  But we love it and are extremely comfortable here.

At the end of November 2021, our house that we sold in Colorado finally closed, the movers had come to take all of our stuff, and MJ and I hit the road to make our final trip to South Dakota.  Since we had two vehicles, MJ's car, and me towing a U-Haul trailer with our immediate need items, we used walkie-talkies to communicate during the almost 700 miles drive to our final destination.  We departed very early in the morning, and I joked to MJ over the radio that "...it feels like we're sneaking out in the the middle of the night to escape a communist country..." A little exaggeration, perhaps.  But Colorado had gotten so bad that we feel like we just had to leave.  We felt like we were indeed "escaping" something.

Here it is the end of 2022, and we have been here exactly one year.  We love it here.  South Dakota has a wonderful Governor, and we absolutely love our new neighbors.  South Dakota is deep red, and very much in line with our own political ideas.  We live in an older neighborhood in a small town with a large veteran population.  The VFW and American Legion are mainstays in this community, as is avid support for the local schools and students.  We no longer live under draconian gun laws, and we live with people who clearly support our values of pro God, pro-life, pro-family, and pro liberty.  We feel like we are truly home again.

You will be hearing a lot more from me now.  Even though we are living in a deep red state (and I intend to help keep it that way), the rest of our country is still going to hell in a hand basket!  Must be bad, even the traditional Democrats are losing their own members!  The progressives have taken hold of our country and are doing unspeakable things to the values we once held dear.  I am bound and determined to speak out against these atrocities and try to help get our country back to the principles on which we were founded.

In Liberty - "The Gonz"

Epilogue:  In 2022, the U.S. economy went to crap.  Inflation rose to historical levels.  Interest rates were at a high not seen in decades.  The real estate market became a nightmare for both buyers and sellers, as it became more difficult to sell a home, and the amount of home that the average person could afford had shrunk significantly due to the higher interest rates.  I honestly believe that if God had not put the thought in my mind to retire early, we would not have decided to move back to South Dakota much earlier than we had originally planned.  Had He not planted these thoughts with us, I firmly believe we would not have been able to sell our house in Colorado or afford a mortgage even in South Dakota on my small retirement pay.  Within mere weeks of us obtaining a mortgage interest rate on our new house that was extremely affordable, the interest rates shot up and are now more than twice what they were when we made our move. But God is good all the time.  And all the time, God is good.  He had a plan for us which was much bigger than our own plan, and I passionately believe with all my heart that he put us where we needed to be.

Congratulations President Elect Biden!

As we are preparing for the upcoming inauguration to install a new President and his administration, I wanted to take some time to make sure that I am clear on a few things.  I am having a hard time understanding what my own behavior should look like, so wanted to ask so as to be sure that I get this right.

Actually - I stole this from a friend on another social media post.  But it was so "to-the-point" that I had to post it here.  You see, we seem to be experiencing a great deal of, shall we say, "hypocrisy" and some severe "forgetfulness" when it comes to various sentiments regarding who gets into power in any given election cycle.

So... Congratulations President-Elect Biden and soon to be President Biden (or is it Harris?)!  With that said, I’m going to need some help from my Democratic Liberal/Progressive friends understanding how I should be acting for the next few years.  So, here are my questions:

1. Can I borrow the #NotMyPresident hashtag or was that reserved for President Trump?

2.  Who do I contact to see if Republicans are boycotting the Inauguration like the Democrats did for President Trump?

3. Do I have to accept the election results, or can I cry for four years, claiming election interference?

4. Am I entitled to see Biden’s tax returns to learn how his income jumped dramatically in one year (I mean, we all know how and why. Just show the proof)?

5. Am I allowed to trash anything that Biden says, without repercussion, because I’m just expressing myself?

6. Is there a sign-up somewhere for riots? Do organizers call me, or how does that work, since I didn’t get my way?

7. Are businesses targeted because they supported Biden, or do I just pick a business that has something I want to take home?

8. Were the thousands of businesses that boarded up for fear of riots, for Conservatives or Liberals? If they were for Conservatives, did I miss the riots already???

9. Where are the safe spaces at? Is there a map or something? I may need to go cry for a little while (because of how stupid our country has become).

10. Does all the free stuff your party has promised, just come or do I have to quit my job first?

11. What is the address you guys have been sending all that extra tax money to, since you think people aren’t paying enough in taxes? I’m sure you have been voluntarily sending in more than required...

12. When my 401K crashes, will the President Elect make up for that in give-a-ways, or am I just screwed?

13. Since Socialism is what you just voted in, if my neighbor has something I want, do I just take it or do I have to let him know I’m taking it (Personally, I have had my eye on the brand NEW Mercedes SUV, a couple of doors down ... Biden sign in yard.).

14. When gas gets unaffordable, is there an EBT card for that?

15. I have seen the gatherings of Conservatives protesting the election results, but something is wrong, nothing is getting destroyed. Did you guys go to a class for that, or could you provide some pointers on how to do it right, please?

16. The Conservative gatherings were dubbed super-spreader events, yet the protests and now election gatherings by Liberals, are not. Did you guys secretly come out with the vaccine?

17. Funny how the CDC has come up with a vaccine, soon after you were pronounced the President-Elect. Can you, all your family, and colleagues take it first, to ensure it works?

18. So, now you are the President Elect and soon to be President Biden, Is every death now on you, or is it still President Trump's responsibility, just at your convenience?

19.  During Biden's State of the Union Address, is Nancy Pelosi going to tear up the speech on national television, or did she only do that with President Trump?

20.  Since you are already a millionaire, are you going to donate all of your presidential salary like President Trump did?

I’m sorry for all the questions, this is all new to me. I want to make sure I get it right!  I mean on one hand, if a certain group doesn't get their way, they scream, throw tantrums, burn down cities, and destroy property, but that seems to be acceptable.  But on the other, another group feels disenfranchised and cheated, but then they go back to work and try to make things better next time.  Where do I fit in? 

HUGE WikiLeaks Dump

 The Guns and Gadgets channel has just reported that a HUGE WikiLeaks dump has just taken place.  View this video before it is taken down.

Stay tuned....

2021 Will Not Be Good For the 2nd Amendment

 Welcome to 2021, and Happy New Year.  I have been away for a while.  I was in a very difficult situation at work and had absolutely NO motivation to do anything else.  But I have forever left that toxic situation and walked into the sunset of semi-retirement.  To be honest, I think it was put on my heart to walk away from that place for a reason.  Now that the election is over, and a new, radical administration is about to take office, I will now be free to do some of the work that I think it's going to take to recruit good political candidates, and help spread the word about things in the news.

We are facing a difficult time for gun owners and supporters of the Second Amendment.  The new administration means to pass some draconian anti-gun legislation, and they're not wasting any time...

One good bill, The Hearing Protection Act, seeks to take suppressors off of NFA.  But many other pre-filed bills are going to be horrible if passed.  Sheila Jackson Lee and Al Green have gotten really bold in submitting a lot of these.  There is no doubt in my mind that Biden et al are going to immediately seek to disarm citizens.

The most anti-gun agenda in history is coming at us like a freight train.

Stay tuned...

Using the 25th Amendment Right Before Inaguration?

Ever since President Trump was elected in 2016, the Democrats have been trying to find any way possible to get rid of him.  They have tried (and failed) impeachment, they have perpetrated various hoaxes, rigged more elections, and they have even tried intimidating others into doing their bidding with violence.

Pelosi has now demanded that President Trump be removed through the 25th Amendment.

Schumer has now demanded that President Trump be removed through the 25th Amendment.

Others are now demanding that President Trump is removed through the 25th Amendment.

Why would they be doing this just days away from Biden taking office?

I'll tell you why:

It's a test of limits. It's a test of what they can get away with. If they can get away with rigging elections to get their candidate elected and ALSO get away with having him removed right before the transfer of power, what do you think they'll get away with when they try to do things to US?  Each success brings a new level of boldness.  When they do succeed with one of their tricks, and no one pushes back, that gives them the incentive to take the next step to see what else they can do.

Tomorrow, it will be more gun control, more taxes, and more suppression of First Amendment exercises.  If they aren't afraid of being resisted, then they will push their agenda farther to the left.

President Trump was right. They weren't after him all along. They are after US!

COVID 19 and the Government Response

So I went to see my doctor yesterday (not disclosing his name so as to protect him). He told me basically what we have known for quite some time now. When it comes to this COVID response, the government has spun everyone up to be ridiculously afraid of a relatively low-risk threat.  I'm an older guy, but he said that because of my good health, I am still a pretty low risk for this virus.  But the powers that be are ignoring obvious risk factors, and have spun people up to be so afraid.  People are now afraid of being near others that churches have drastically decreased attendance, restaurants are losing their businesses, gyms are closing, and we can't do our normal activities without huge amounts of hassle and inconvenience.

We are seeing more and more instances of people even getting downright nasty and violent when they see other people not wearing masks, having people over at their house, or even out walking their dogs without wearing a mask.  They have been taught, through all the government and media fear-mongering, how to comply, and even that they should be turning in others who are not complying the way they think they should be.  Don't believe me?  Go take a look at some of these extremely liberal social media platforms, such as Nextdoor, where we see daily messages from the neighborhood busybodies complaining about others.

My doctor said something that really hit the nail on the head: Our families are everything right now.  We should not be avoiding them.  Just use some common sense.  If you're not feeling well, don't visit them.  But if you're feeling well, have no symptoms, and if they are well also, then go see them.  Wash your hands more often, don't share food and drink, and just use common sense!  As we saw from some folks in a Greeley, CO assisted care facility not too long ago, those folks said that they would rather die of COVID than die of loneliness.

We've been through pandemics before.  We'll have pandemics again.  But God created us with this wonderful thing called an immune system, and our immune systems are not doing their job if we stay isolated from each other.  Look, it's not my place to tell you what or what not to do in all of this.  Just don't tell me what I should or should not be doing.

 

Welcome to The Gonzo Report!

A lot going on in the world and in our country right now. I decided to reinvent the old "Gonzo Politics" blog to provide a forum for news and opinion.  This blog will be on a variety of topics ranging from current political topics, to what is relevant and important to maintaining liberty, to topics related to the Second Amendment, and things that you need to know to stay on top of what affects you as an American.

The majority of the posts in this blog will be short and probably a single topic per post.  Perhaps a consolidated update from time to time to aggregate all the issues going on.  But mainly I just wanted to have a platform for short updates and opinions about emergent topics.

Stay tuned.