This Week in Guns 469 – The NFA’s Potato Problems

Summary

This Week in Guns 469 – The NFA’s Potato Problems
Podcast: This Week in Guns | Host: Firearms Radio Network
Date: January 16, 2026

---

Episode Overview

In this lively and fast-paced episode, hosts Matthew Rosier and Ivan deliver their trademark mix of firearms industry news, legal commentary, and insider banter. The central theme revolves around the ATF's $0 NFA tax for suppressors, the resulting application surge (including tongue-in-cheek attempts to register potato suppressors), and a series of other hot-button gun law and industry updates—from NRA’s internal lawsuits to falling gun violence statistics and ongoing litigation in California.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. NFA $0 Tax and the Application Surge

• Context: The U.S. government waived the NFA (National Firearms Act) tax for suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, and AOWs, leading to a massive spike in applications.
• Numbers: The hosts estimate “about half of a million applications in five days” (01:38).
  • “We’re approaching the applications for many years combined in the period of a year… in a week.” – Matthew ([01:43])
• Potato Suppressors: Triggered by a viral campaign, the ATF received numerous applications attempting to register potatoes as suppressors. The agency rejected these, claiming serialization requirements cannot be met.

Notable Quotes

• “A billion people attempted to register potatoes thanks to our friend rk.” – Matthew ([02:13])
• “There’s an opinion letter… where the ATF said that, you know, sticking a potato on the end of your barrel would require the potato to be registered.” – Ivan ([03:02])
• On serialization: “You could reach a similar level of integral-ness, if you will, with the potato… just glue your serial number plate in there...” – Ivan ([04:45])

Fast Turnaround

• Tax stamp approvals are now happening in as little as 12 to 48 hours, a vast improvement from prior year-long waits ([06:26]).
• Implication: While faster approvals are great for owners, this may weaken one potential legal argument against the NFA (delays as infringement).

2. Reaction from Anti-Gun Groups and Media

• Advocacy groups and media are focusing their outrage on the surge in suppressor applications rather than short-barreled rifles/shotguns ([08:37]).
  • Suppressors “don’t look out of place for most people anymore” but are still a target because courts have ruled they are not “arms” under the Second Amendment ([10:04]).

Notable Stats

• ATF processed 150,000 online applications on January 1st alone (“a staggering 5,900% increase over the usual 2,500 daily” – quoting NSSF figures [10:04]).

3. Maduro’s NFA Charges

• The U.S. government indicted Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro in the Eastern District of New York, including an NFA violation for possession of machine guns and destructive devices ([12:03]).
  • Hosts question the logic: How can a U.S. law be applied extraterritorially?
  • Expectation: “This is all very weird... I don’t expect that this will be the final indictment… we’ll possibly see 81 superseding indictments in this case.” – Matthew ([13:52])

4. NRA Suing Itself

• NRA is suing its own charitable arm, the NRA Foundation, alleging unfair competition and unauthorized program activities ([14:46]).
  • “Let’s read some of the allegations… the foundation’s leadership intends to… conduct its own programmatic activities in competition with those of the nra.” – Matthew ([15:21])
  • Ivan speculates: The suit reflects fallout from the Wayne LaPierre ouster and leadership struggles.

5. Year-in-Review: Gun Violence Statistics

• The Trace, a gun control advocacy publication, released stats showing “lowest levels of gun violence on record since COVID.”
  • Hosts highlight editorial spin: The Trace frames this as a negative.
  • “California has generally speaking a blank check... yet they do not have the nation’s lowest rates of gun violence and are currently bucking a downward trend...” – Ivan ([19:46])
  • “Much of this is just a law of small numbers…” – Matthew ([20:17])

6. Rolling Stone & Large Magazine Panic

• Recent media stories decry proliferation of high-capacity magazines, historical context ignored or misrepresented ([22:59]).
  • “They want to turn and look at this as, ‘Well this is bad because developments in technology’... 30 round magazines did exist as far back as the 1800s.” – Ivan ([26:38])
  • “This ‘secret document’ they obtained is the NSSF publicly posting something on their website. Right. Secretly.” – Matthew ([27:10])

7. Rudy v. California: Attack on Ammo Background Checks

• Olympian Kim Rhode and the California Rifle and Pistol Association are challenging California's ammo purchase restrictions ([27:36]).
  • DOJ and 26 states filed briefs opposing California’s law.
  • Ivan gives a history of federal ammo regulation: background checks for ammo existed until the 1986 FOPA, which greatly liberalized ammo access.
  • “California is doing a laundry list of trying to violate the… spirit of what [FOPA] was trying to prevent.” ([29:52])

---

Memorable Moments & Quotes

• [05:50] French Fries Joke – “How long till you can eat it?” (Potato suppressors discussion, light-hearted hijinks)
• [14:46] NRA Lawsuit – “It’s less of a surprise for some other people, I guess. But, yeah, they’re suing its own charitable arm, the now.”
• [19:46] California’s Gun Violence Trend – “California… despite having every possible law the anti gunners could ever scheme up, [is] trending upwards [in violence]…”
• [26:38] Magazine Capacity History – “Ultimately, 30 round magazines did exist as far back as the 1800s.”
• [30:29] On DOJ Brief Against CA Ammo Law – “It's interesting that [DOJ’s] pick is this one about ammo background checks… [FOPA] fixed that at the federal level to make it so that ammo was not unregulated, but close to unregulated…”

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• [01:38] – Surge in NFA applications, $0 tax, and potato suppressors
• [05:10] – Serializing potatoes and ATF registration requirements
• [06:26] – Application approval times and possible legal implications
• [08:37] – Political/media response to silencer and SBR applications
• [12:03] – Indictment of Maduro on NFA charges
• [14:46] – NRA sues its own foundation
• [17:37] – The Trace: Gun violence statistics for 2025
• [22:59] – Magazine capacity discourse, Rolling Stone story
• [27:36] – Rudy v. California and ammo background checks
• [31:02] – Wrap-up and Patreon/community updates

---

Summary & Tone

This episode is rich with timely legal commentary, technical firearms nerdery, and the usual dry, irreverent wit that characterizes This Week in Guns. The hosts blend in-depth legislative and historical analysis with sharp asides and industry skepticism—whether lampooning the ATF’s logic, dissecting media narratives, or poking fun at intra-gun-community drama such as the NRA’s legal squabbles. Even the hottest legal developments are approached with a balance of deep knowledge and impish humor.

---

For more detailed analysis, check out the full episode or join the hosts’ Patreon and Discord communities for ongoing discussion.

Transcript

[A]

I tell you what, prices are getting high, but a fella still got to get his guns and ammo. We go hunting for all them good deals online every day. Go to Pew Deals. That's P E W.D E A L S in your Internet. Now back to your podcast.

[B]

Saving you money, don't you know.

[C]

Hello everyone. Welcome back to this week in Guns brought to you by Patriot Patch Co. FFL Payments, Traditional Arms and MAF Corporation. The show offers commentary on the latest firearms industry news, information and buzz. I'm your host Matthew Rosier and I'm joined against by. Against. I'm joined against. Opposite me, the Ivan.

[B]

Hello, it's me. And this time I'm coming to you live from Nuketown on the hit video game Call of Duty. Modern Warfare.

[C]

Yeah, I see that. And I recognize you're also using the Rottweiler.

[B]

Yeah, the Rottweiler.

[C]

So how's it been? It's been another month. So we have another month.

[B]

A week since the last episode.

[C]

Yeah. Sorry guys. Life is hard, but we're endeavoring. As you'll see. The digs have changed and I'm still getting set up. But anyway we were like, no, it's been too long. We've got to get a twig out. And some really interesting stuff happened this week and the first one I want to talk about just kind of freeform is the free tax thing, right. This, this week the government started officially its $0 NFA tax for suppressors and

[B]

short barreled rifles and short barreled shotguns and AOWs. Yes.

[C]

And there has been a brick shitload of applications. It's, you know, going by the application numbers, we can estimate there's been about half of a million applications in five days. Which is really something because we're approaching like the applications for many years combined in the period of a, of a year.

[B]

And we're doing that in a week.

[C]

So that's wild. It'll be interesting to see the courts who are still defending this in various actions. But it was kind of, kind of like a little gift almost to see those numbers shoot up that way when they're like, oh, it's dangerous and unusual. It's a danger usual. And it's like really? Okay, you just approved a gillion of these, but there's been some really interesting ones. Right. Like a billion people attempted to register potatoes thanks to our friend rk. And ATF has been denying those registrations suggesting that there's no way they could meet the serialization requirements, which I don't agree with.

[B]

Yeah, I feel like. I feel like they're begging for a lawsuit with that.

[C]

Yeah, yeah.

[B]

There is an opinion letter that is still presumably good out there where the ATF said that, you know, sticking a potato on the end of your barrel would require the potato to be registered. So they seem to be of the opinion that a potato can be a suppressor.

[C]

Right.

[B]

If it is to be, you know, if you are to use it as one, if you intend to use it as one, then it would be. I don't think they can then turn around and say, well, it's impossible to serialize it to meet the requirements. Right. Because I guess now you sort of invoke this weird shadow realm of it's an NFA item that can't be made to meet the requirements of, you know, things outside the nfa. Certainly is where the marking requirements come from. But it's sort of like in a weird limbo zone there and.

[C]

Right.

[B]

I certainly don't think that anybody is like chomping at the bit to sue over a potato suppressor, but I don't

[C]

think as somebody who sells serialization plates, I'm like, why not?

[B]

Right? Because certainly.

[C]

Right.

[B]

There should. There ought to be a way to. Because what ATF's looking for is that the serial number be placed in metal and that metal needs to be placed into the object such that removing it would be destructive. And destructive doesn't necessarily mean the device can't work as intended. It means that it would be much harder than scratching the serial number off. Because the example that when people are having this confusion, the easiest thing to look at is Glocks. Right. There's millions of Glocks out there and the ATF has no problems with how they're marked. The Glock marking plate is a piece of steel which is not integral to the rest of the frame or the rails. And you could cut off the front dust cover of the frame or melt out the insert or do a number of other things that would take much more time than just grinding the serial number off. And the ATF is fine with Glocks. I think that you could reach a similar level of integral ness, if you will, with the potato, whereby you remove a bit of material from the potato, you then soak out a little bit of the water and then. Or you just use some sort of like marine grade glue that's meant to be, you know, stick to stuff that's wet and you just glue your serial number plate in there. Just digging it back out of there then would be much more difficult than A grinding a number off and then B, grinding. You know, digging it out of there is going to involve destroying your suppressor potato.

[C]

Right. As would shooting it. But that's neither here nor there. I do wonder if a potato would hold up to repeated use like on a 22 if you seem to be

[B]

like a very interesting machining thing. Right. Like you'd have to, you'd have to drill out plugs that you could then replace to be able to access internal cavities to machine them out. The thing that I am more interested in is how if you can get it to survive a shot. And maybe this, maybe this would require some amount of like reinforcing, like wrap it in carbon fiber tape or something. But okay, now you've wrapped it in tape. How many shots we need to put through it before you got french fries? That's Bob, just it in is like how long till you can eat it?

[C]

Really good. Yeah, yeah, I want to eat it, but yeah, so that's cool. Yeah, the sheer numbers and just. Yeah. So that's my observations on the $0 tax thing. It's. I think it's an overall positive. I don't think that anything that's come out of it is going to hamper our chances of defeating the NFA in any of the cases that that's going on. In fact, I think it's, if anything, and I think this is what I said before, it either does nothing or gently helps. That's my assessment of.

[B]

Just to be devil's advocate, I think the only way that it could harm us is, is in a way that I don't think many people expected because most folks figured once the first of the year hits, it's going to be taking you a month to get your forms approved and we're going to eventually get back like it'll take a year to get a form approved because there's such a long wait line and people are having these forms approved in like 12 hours. In some cases, like the longest one I think I've seen somebody do since the first of the year is 48 hours. So ATF is turning these things around at the same tempo. They were able to before only they had 500,000 of them hit their desk in a week, whereas before it was just like a couple thousand a week. So it's very interesting to see the efficiency they work with because you know, if they had lacked this efficiency, that would have been a strong argument against the NFA is that look, these things are so non dangerous, you let us have them for $0.

[C]

Right.

[B]

But because you're incompetent and slowing up the works, that otherwise would be an argument in our favor. Because they're denying you the right while they sit there and try to figure out what names and numbers and fingerprints mean. But they've become so efficient with it somehow that they're, they're churning through stuff very quickly. Which is great because people are getting their stuff sooner. But it does deny us an otherwise interesting argument that like, hey, they're taking forever. And if I remember correctly, back whenever, because it was the one good thing Dudelbach ever did for anybody was make it so that the form process went faster. I seem to recall it may have been something the ATF put out and it may have been just like an interview that somebody had with that Obak. But I seem to recall him saying that one of their motivations was that they were concerned about getting sued about long wait times and that's why they were like, hey, we need to fix this. Which is kind of funny. Right? It's like the one thing that would make them fix it is they're afraid about getting sued for how long they've historically taken. Yeah, yeah, it's interesting.

[C]

Yeah. Then moving on, we've got the. Well, oh, what is it? The, the smoking gun. The definitely not reject. The definitely not mega anti gun organization silencer applications surge after Trump's NFA tax cuts by Lichenbrock.

[B]

Yeah, this is just General malding are exceptionally mad. The number of things that have been submitted this way, it seems like, and probably numerically, this is the way that these applications are shaking out. Their big thing they're mad about is suppressors specifically. But this change affects a lot of other things too. And most of the opposition that I've been seeing from the anti gun side, they're very focused on suppressors and they don't care as much about short rifles. Short shotguns they don't even really mention at all anymore. And I guess you could sort of sit there and look at that. And it's probably too early to say now that that's an Overton Window sort of a thing.

[C]

Right.

[B]

But it might be insofar as how we saw the pistol brace thing go down. Is the 5th Circuit pretty full throatedly was like, okay, I know pistol braces aren't a problem. Also, if it had a stock, maybe it's not that big of a problem. Whether, you know, they're really willing to accept this form factor is constitutionally fine or protected by the second Amendment even. And anti gunners may have seen the writing on the wall there that they should shut the fuck up about that. And you know focusing on suppressors is something that anti gun side has historically had a lot of success with. Even post Bruin with most courts, even the 5th Circuit Court saying well suppressors aren't arms, they're just accessories.

[C]

But yeah, so this is wild. From, from their site in NFA applications that day the NSSF says the ATF process processed approximately 150,000 online applications on January 1st alone compared to a typical daily volume of 2,500 representing a staggering 5,900% increase. Well that's nice.

[B]

And yeah, they're probably just freaked out about suppressors more so than anything because they feel they can win on them. But I guess we'll remain to see how the rest of that goes in.

[C]

Like the public eye.

[B]

Yeah because short barrels and short rifles, the courts kind of told them that they're going to lose. And suppressors so far courts have told anti gunners they're going to win or that they have been winning. So maybe they feel that it's a stronger public messaging is like short rifle, short shotguns don't look like bad guy guns in the public eye so much as suppressors do. And I can do suppressors. John Wick gun bad. Short rifles and short shotguns don't look out of place for most people anymore.

[C]

You know what else doesn't look out of place? Zero compromise holsters and gears. Guys, that's Traditional Arms LLC going over to TraditionalArms.com use promotional code FUD BUSTERS or RAT man to get yourself a discount on a high quality, high end, high flying Florida made holsters. It's traditionalarms.com Next up I want to, I want to talk about Maduro. As you guys all know there was a very a very interesting that the US government did this week and just showed up to Venezuela and took their leader.

[B]

And the dictators in South America are free. You can just take them, you can

[C]

just take them home.

[B]

South American dictator, you just turn off

[C]

their power and and get to go home. And so he was brought into the Eastern District of New York.

[B]

Why?

[C]

Anyway, that's where they had him indicted. And this is all very weird, especially count three which literally possesses or charges a NFA violation, possession of machine guns and destructive devices and says right in it from at least in or about 1999 up to and including in or about 2025 in an offense begun and committed out of the jurisdiction of any particular straight or district of the United States. Says that he used a machine gun. Yeah. Knowingly possessed and aided and abetted the use, carrying and possessions of firearms, to wit, machine guns as well as destructive devices in violation of the National Firearms Act. I don't know how that works, especially because the NFA doesn't even apply in Puerto Rico. So how could you try to apply it to a completely extra territorial jurisdiction unless they, you know, and we don't have all of the documents leading up to the indictment. You know, maybe like, he, for five minutes was on US soil spraying with a Russian, you know, or Chinese ak, but.

[B]

Or maybe they. He sent someone here, one of his, like, drug mules or something, had one, and they're gonna say it's his gun that they had and he gave it to them or something, Right?

[C]

Yeah. But it says knowingly used and carried and in furtherance of such crimes, knowingly possessed. So this is weird.

[B]

So.

[C]

But I don't expect that this will be the final indictment. I expect we'll possibly see 81 superseding indictments in this case. So that's just something that I was like, why the hell would you charge that? Literally doesn't make any sense. In other news, on things that are not really making any sense, the NRA is suing itself. Which this is kind of a surprise for me, but it's less of a surprise for some other people, I guess. But, yeah, they're suing its own charitable arm, the now. So the main nra, and is arguing that its foundation was taken over by a disgruntled faction.

[B]

Interesting. I guess I wasn't aware that there was a third nra.

[C]

I think there's a lot of them. Yeah, it's the NRA Foundation. So this is nra, National Rifle association of America versus the NRA Foundation. Say, let's. Let's read some of the allegations. On information and belief the foundation's leadership intends to withdraw grant and other funding of the nra, except for grants required by the terms of express restrictions to undertake fundraising activities in competition with the NRA and to conduct its own programmatic activities in competition with those of the nra. They're asking for, you know, basically injective relief that a. That the judge stop the foundation from engaging in what it calls unfair competition, including promoting or advertising the foundation's associations with the NRA under the NRA's logo. So this is very funny. NRA foundation is sought to be enjoined from engaging in conduct or like, advertising that leads people to believe that its activities are sponsored, endorsed, or authorized by or associated or connected with the nra. That's really funny.

[B]

And presumably this is all just sort of fallout from, you know, lapierre's outing and then the lawsuit that oust him in the manner that it did. Of course, I have no inside knowledge about this, but my assumption would be that I know that the NRA and the NRA foundation and NRA ILA aren't necessarily. They don't necessarily have like arrows, straight guidance, what that whole thing happening. So it certainly seems that somewhere along the line, one hand stopped knowing what the other hand was doing. And I guess the people who felt that the NRA was being ran poorly fled to the NRA foundation where they

[C]

tried to, I mean, who really knows,

[B]

Tried to carry on the mission in a particular way that now the main nra, to the extent that it now has another director who, but by the last account I heard was something of a la PR crony, it seems like they're now failing to have learned from the lesson they're doing. They're going to continue seeing if it is at all possible to continue to clutch defeat from the jaws of victory. Or at least doing better. Right?

[C]

Yeah, it's. It's sad to see really. I'm not sure what's going on internally there. It's not really my monkey or circus, but they have been doing some really good work. It's hard to get around that. In any event, there's always some good news and it's that Math Corp has a brand new website. Guys, check this out.

[B]

Wow.

[C]

So much stuff. It's a beautiful website, guys. Be sure to go and give it a browse and use promotional code FUD Busters or Ratman to grab whatever it is you want to grab. Just check it out. That's maf-arms.com and don't forget your codes. The best, cheapest parts. That's. That's true. Yeah. So now we have the Trace. With their year in review, just like all of like, you know, Spotify or whatever does that. Gun violence by the numbers in 2025 and they say with gritted teeth, the United States shows some of the lowest level of gun violence of record. This is bad.

[B]

Let's find reasons that it's bad.

[C]

Yeah, this is actually bad. Here's a graph.

[B]

It's just lots of bullets.

[C]

Yeah. Since COVID 19, it's been falling. 2025 marked a milestone. Shooting deaths and injuries plummeting to some of their lowest levels on record, which is good. Yet gun violence remains endemic. At least 40,000 people were shot. The Majority of them by themselves or involved in, you know, some business. Yeah, they're saying the 40,000 doesn't include suicides.

[B]

So that's I guess 40,000 doesn't necessarily mean killed. Right. It's 40,000 people shot.

[C]

Oh, they always have to weasel.

[B]

Yeah, it's always weaseling.

[C]

14% decrease. Yeah, there's, there's the result of locking us all in cages and then we're back. Yeah. It says 16,000 self harms in the first seven months of this year, minus 5,500 shooting injuries. States where non self harm gun deaths declined 41. Yeah. Florida, we're down 17.4%.

[B]

That's pretty impressive.

[C]

And who's up? Wow. California.

[B]

Yeah, that was, that was one that I had noticed that really stood out to me is you know, California has generally speaking a blank check when it comes to gun laws. Like it's the, it's the nation's laboratory for passing quote unquote innovative gun laws. And they, they do not have the nation's lowest rates of gun violence and are currently bucking a substantial downward trend that the rest of the country is seeing as they trend upwards despite their having every possible law the anti gunners could have ever schemed up. Right.

[C]

And then a lot of this is just a law of small numbers. Like the change in Rhode island was 1 between 24 and 25 and so that's a 5% increase. Just like Alaska change of 3, 7% increase. So a lot of this stuff is not real. Unlike California's which is a distinct actual measurable change. Yeah. Arizona, Idaho is a, you know, it's a small numbers thing but it's a big amount of small number. Same thing with Wyoming. So that's interesting. I'm sure there's reasons at least 25 incidents at sporting events. And so what does incident mean? Why do you have to use these words? 19% decrease in notable Las Vegas's according to these lines.

[B]

Yeah, according to their made up Las Vegas number where it's like if there's like four people that get injured because of shrapnel or because of crowd crush or whatever. And then this also includes situations where you can characterize gang violence however you want. Consensual combat would be a way to characterize it.

[C]

Right.

[B]

And somehow that's. They're going to conflate that with like a lunatic or a couple of lunatics go to go and hurt school children is in their eyes the exact same as soundcloud rapper1 and his drug buddies versus soundcloud rapper2 and his drug buddies agree to meet up and have a dance battle. Yeah.

[C]

14.7 million guns purchased, dealers sold fewer. So yeah, I mean interesting, like just kind of interesting to see the numbers. You know the editorialization is infuriating but it kind of is what it is, right.

[B]

Even, even with as much editorialization as they can pull off.

[C]

Right.

[B]

The, the, you know, the through line is pretty clear. There's been a decrease in this gun violence. Despite all of the bellyaching from every anti gunner imaginable. Like Bruin was going to be the end.

[C]

And then waiting to see the, the showdowns at every street corner.

[B]

The bloody streets. Where's our bloody streets?

[C]

The street blood. I'm thirsty. Speaking of thirst guys. FFLPaymentProcessing.com this is FFL payments by FFLS for FFLS and other related businesses. If you are looking for credit card processing, you have to give them a shout, let them know we sent you. That's fflpaymentprocessing.com now we'll move on. This is, this is the Trace now molding about magazines because why not? It's 2005 again, right?

[B]

It's the meme, right. Flipping back the calendar it's like oh, it's 2005 again. The magazine capacities come to get us.

[C]

All newly obtained documents show how gun manufacturers swamped the market with large capacity magazines. 717 million devices like they used in the Brown University event have been produced and distributed in 30 years. Including a decade when they were banned. Yeah, no, the little, the little law enforcement government use only stamp was shockingly effective.

[B]

Yeah.

[C]

So this is just like the most bizarrely reverse engineered story produced, you know, alongside the Rolling Stones to turn the idea that firearms magazines went up when guns got, you know, lighter and we figured out how to make them, make them hold the rounds we always wanted them to hold. And the fact that this happened was clearly a huge conspiracy on the part of the gun industry.

[B]

That was the gun industry in the years following the assault weapons ban that really tried to move the needle on this. Which is just a. It's an incredible head scratcher. Especially when you go and look at like if they had drawn the line at 31. Right. 31 is what now makes it high capacity.

[C]

Right.

[B]

I think they'd have an argument because you didn't. You don't see a lot of more than 31 round capacity magazines in any sort of generalized use much prior to very recently. Of course there's standard exceptions like The Galil has a 35 round mag or whatever.

[C]

Right, okay, well, and like all every European submachine gun, like 32 rounds was very common.

[B]

But like generally because their ammo came,

[C]

their ammo was based on 8 because they were obsessed with the 1911. And so they're like, oh, what's the package we can put these in? They came in 32 round packs. So that's why that.

[B]

And so you've got like 20 and 30 round magazines, pretty darn common. By the 50s and 60s, and maybe not as common in civilian use, but certainly in the ramp up to the assault weapons ban, they had become much more common. And it shouldn't be a surprise that the sort of weapons the assault weapons ban targeted took these 20 and 30 round magazines. And that by the end of the assault weapons ban, people just wanted them more. Or in fact the case of the more popular ones, they people just found ways to make ban compliant versions of them and that, you know, ultimately then whenever that ban expired and the magazines could be made and sold to the public, people wanted these magazines because these rifles were designed around a 20 or 30 round magazine and that's how they're weighted best or balanced best or how you reach the most. The effect, effectivity that these guns were designed around came in the form of these magazines. And so anti gunners want to turn and look at this as well. This is bad because developments in technology have made it so that firearms are what, lighter or more capable or more effective or more deadly or have more capacity or use magazines that have more capacity or just generally compatible with a wider range of magazines in the first place. And of course they'll try and point to anything. Like the unstoppable march of technology touches everything, including firearms. And they will point to this and say, well, it's bad when it happens here because yesteryear you didn't have a lot of handguns that could take a 17 round magazine or a 30 round magazine interchangeably like a Glock can. But to them this is somehow evil, despite the fact that ultimately, ultimately, if you're going to look at it, 30 round magazines did exist as far back as the 1800s.

[C]

Right?

[B]

Maybe these were in the form of like feeding a Gatling gun. Yet they existed.

[C]

Right.

[B]

It's not like this was impossible to conceive that hey, that technology is eventually going to find its way into something man portable.

[C]

No, definitely. It's all deeply disingenuous. Like you know this, this quote obtained the documents for a series called the Secret Files of the Gun and uses a trove of records to reveal the industry's inner working. You know what those are that it really doesn't. They don't talk to each other and stuff just kind of happens.

[B]

And the funniest thing is, like, this secret document they obtained is the NSSF publicly posting something on their website. Right. Secretly. Yeah.

[C]

It's idiotic. So let's move on. Breaking the. Yeah. 26 states and the DOJ have filed amicus briefs in road, which is pretty cool. Ivan, you put this one in. What do you got to say about it?

[B]

So we talked a lot about Rudy before. It was the Olympian woman who's really good at shooting shotguns, and she's a cool person, but she's suing along with crpa, the state of California, over state of California's ammo background checks, which of course require you to do a background check to buy ammo in person, which sucks. It also makes buying ammo online virtually impossible. You have to do it through an FFL in the state, which just ramps up costs. Right. But it further prevents you from legally buying ammo in another state and coming back home. So as an Olympian, that's pretty tricky because you're going to have ammo in other states as you go around to travel, to compete. And it has no exceptions or exemptions for competitors or anything. Right. It's California's worst offenses against the Second Amendment. And so thus far, the lawsuit against the ban has gone quite well. But in typical California fashion, if it's not already en banc, it's going to go en banc and they're going to reverse it. Because the Ninth Circuit never found a gun law that was unconstituted, that was unconstitutional, except for one time. There's one time they've ever done it, I think. So that's probably the direction it's headed. But it's interesting that, you know, DOJ has been filing amicus briefs here and there across the country, various gun rights battles. This is the first time that they've done so in California. And it's interesting that the case that they pick is this one about ammo background checks. Of course, ammo back. No, not a lot. Not a lot of people know that ammo background checks were the way things worked federally up until the 1986 Firearm Owner Protection Act. Of course, background checks, the way we have them today didn't exist then. Right. You had to go and you had to go and fill out the form and say, hey, I'm not a bad guy, and my signature and the date and I think maybe in some cases had to Include your address. Right. So you had to like be accountable for every time you bought ammo. Every single time you bought ammo. If it was 10 bullets, if it was a thousand, you had to do effectively about, you know, that the 1986 version of a background check, Fopa fixed that at the federal level to make it so that ammo was not unregulated, but close to unregulated. Prior to 1986, you could not have ammo shipped to you in the mail because you had to do a back very similar to California. Right. And FOPA prevented the feds from having, you know, doing that. It didn't bind the hands of the state. So it would have been cool if they did like supremacy clause, that one. But they didn't. So California's trying to get away with it for all the same that FOPA was important. You know, then California is like doing a laundry list of trying to violate the, if not the actual black letter of what FOPA was trying to prevent, the spirit of what it was trying to prevent insofar as giving the government agencies a way to harass lawful gun owners who aren't doing anything wrong. Just trying to reasons to arrest people for doing things that aren't criminal. No malice involved in it. But while it would be nice to see the government, you know, fully restrain California from behaving in this way, you know, what with if it takes legislation or whatever, it's at least nice to see DOJ stick its neck out and say this is really messed up. And it's, hey, you guys are being silly. Interesting to see 26 other states say, hey California, you know, go stuff it.

[C]

Right? Yeah. So that's awesome. And hey, progress is progress, as we often say on the show. Last up, Patriot Patch co longest time supporter of the show. These are custom design patches, apparel and accessory for any freedom loving individual. Guys, we got. That's really funny. Actually, I haven't seen this one yet. It's like a snow beast Cookie Monster eating bones.

[B]

It's the abominable Snowman. Who doesn't like cookies But Cookie Monster, I don't know.

[C]

It's a good one. It's really something. But yeah, it's cool to just get that in the mail. It's neat, but yeah, go guys. Go on. Use promotional code TWIG10. That's TWIG10. Get yourself a discount on your order. Thank you to Patriot Patch for supporting us for the longest time. And that is it. It's a short one this time because things are, it's, it's Crunchy right now, but thank you guys for bearing with us. We're gonna, you know, do our best to keep you better up to date. My. My goal is to not let it go more than a month. You know, I'm. I'm trying to get back to every two weeks, and then maybe once everything's settled down, we can do. We can do this weekend Guns Weekly again. But we just uploaded a video on FUD Blasters, so be sure to check that out. We've got another one ready to go on FUD Blasters. It's gonna be coming up in the next week or two, so please check that out. And as always, thank you so much to you guys for supporting both of us on Patreon. It's a huge, huge, huge source of support that, you know, we really rely on to be able to keep doing the work that we're doing. Ivan and I. Not sure everyone knows Ivan and I work together on a lot of. A lot of the stuff that gets done. So it's, you know, supporting the both of us is the best way to support our work. So Patreon links are in the description, at least to mine, and Ivan's Patreon is linked to mine as well. And joining there gets you access to the discord where we're chatting all the time and there are hazards. But in any event, guys, thank you again so much for bearing with us. Ivan, do you have any words of wisdom?

[B]

No, I try not to be smart.

[C]

That's good. Anyways, thanks again, guys, and as always, we will see you next time. Sa. Ra. This podcast has been a production of the Firearms Radio Network. For more, visit firearmsradio. Net.